Anyway...all this consoles are doing is cheating and taking shortcuts for better graphics.They are maxed out.You can't expect more from 500mb of ram and 2005 design GPU.They should just release new console next E3 and get over with it...
This is why killzone 3 is untouchable in console graphics!
This topic is locked from further discussion.
I disagree, it still has the KZ weightiness, and I think they did a good job balancing speed and weight. Besides, what choice did GG have but to speed it up after everyone cried after KZ2? *sigh*, it's obvious GG can't win no matter what they do.It has weight, just not the same feel KZ2 had. Feels too much like CoD if you ask me, only CoD still has far superior controls. Whatev.. it feels more like COD than 2 did, but it still has enough to seperate it from COD and make it distinct. I still have way more fun with KZ3 than I ever did with COD.[QUOTE="Deathtransit"][QUOTE="StealthMonkey4"]
The game is ruined, the guns fly around so fast, there's no recoil or vibration, you sprint so fast you don't feel like you're playing as a real person, you feel like you're just watching someone as they zoom around. The graphics look exactly the same as the first too.
Doolz2024
[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]
yep, it sure is. best technical graphics on the consoles + a fantastic art direction = a feast for the eyes. :D
still, many pc titles beat it in the technical area.
Bus-A-Bus
I would not agree on that though but thats just me :) I think that GG "packaged" it nicelly but its definitely not best technically on consoles,at least its not pushing the most.It does not have HDR,does not have SSAO,volumetric sun shafts are not volumetric but pre baked,quite a few pre baked shadows and lights etc.It still is probably most impressive looking game on consoles and most because they packed it beautifully in beatiful package,along with nice lighting,textures and MLAA :)
I think that technically both,GOW III and C2 surprass it.Especially Crysis 2...It may not look the hottest for more jaggies or worse artstyle but that game clearly pushes consoles to max.There is nothing pre rendered in Crysis 2.Everything from lighting to shadows,to volumetric sun shafts to interactive water,everything real time.There is also some superb quality of post processing and lighting thats IMO best yet on consoles...Plus you have real time GI,SSAO and HDR.There is nothing that this game lacks bar better AA.Same goes for GOW III.
I agree with you mostly but still need to point out that Killzone 3 may actually rendering a lot more polygons than Crysis 2. From the recent PC footage I've noticed on High setting the game is pushing out on average 600k - 1.2million polys per frame, medium setting is less than half of that. Now since kz2 is already pumping out well over 1million polys and kz3 is touted to be rendering 3x as much so that makes it about 3.5 - 4 million in total. Now comparing that to Crysis 2 is quite drastic and certainly favors kz3's engine technicality. Plus, kz3 also does a lot of things C2 lacks such as muzzle flash shadows, colliding particles, more particles on screen, more dynamic lights, MLAA, full 1280 x 720p, much better texture filtering, more higher res textures streamed, minimal pop ins and what appears to be better framerate. Being most technical means a lot more than just better lighting effect you know;), it's the whole package that will be rated on which coincide to the end result like you admited yourself.Crysis 2 looks a bit better if the beta it to be believed.
[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"][QUOTE="theuncharted34"]
yep, it sure is. best technical graphics on the consoles + a fantastic art direction = a feast for the eyes. :D
still, many pc titles beat it in the technical area.
gpuking
I would not agree on that though but thats just me :) I think that GG "packaged" it nicelly but its definitely not best technically on consoles,at least its not pushing the most.It does not have HDR,does not have SSAO,volumetric sun shafts are not volumetric but pre baked,quite a few pre baked shadows and lights etc.It still is probably most impressive looking game on consoles and most because they packed it beautifully in beatiful package,along with nice lighting,textures and MLAA :)
I think that technically both,GOW III and C2 surprass it.Especially Crysis 2...It may not look the hottest for more jaggies or worse artstyle but that game clearly pushes consoles to max.There is nothing pre rendered in Crysis 2.Everything from lighting to shadows,to volumetric sun shafts to interactive water,everything real time.There is also some superb quality of post processing and lighting thats IMO best yet on consoles...Plus you have real time GI,SSAO and HDR.There is nothing that this game lacks bar better AA.Same goes for GOW III.
I agree with you mostly but still need to point out that Killzone 3 may actually rendering a lot more polygons than Crysis 2. From the recent PC footage I've noticed on High setting the game is pushing out on average 600k - 1.2million polys per frame, medium setting is less than half of that. Now since kz2 is already pumping out well over 1million polys and kz3 is touted to be rendering 3x as much so that makes it about 3.5 - 4 million in total. Now comparing that to Crysis 2 is quite drastic and certainly favors kz3's engine technicality. Plus, kz3 also does a lot of things C2 lacks such as muzzle flash shadows, colliding particles, more particles on screen, more dynamic lights, MLAA, full 1280 x 720p, much better texture filtering, more higher res textures streamed, minimal pop ins and what appears to be better framerate. Being most technical means a lot more than just better lighting effect you know;), it's the whole package that will be rated on which coincide to the end result like you admited yourself.I've seen the editor from CE3 and it appears that they now separated polygons and shadows and they don't count them together,so its usually twice less polys than it is in reality.I doubt that KZ3 pushes more than 1.5 mil per frame,at least judging by screens that show alot of stuff in background are actually 2D or 3D boxes,UC2 pushed 1.2 If I remember correctly.Anyway,I think that Crysis 2 has better lighting than KZ3.Probably because Crytek always had thing for it...I like how water reflects HDR flare from sun in Crysis 2.Like the lens flare effect and their motion blur which is very nice...
Yea Its lot more than just better lighting but Crysis 2 on purelly technical level pushes more than KZ3.Are their choices the right one or not I would say maybe they got little overboard but it will still be a techical marvel and only one thing holds them from the top and thats that pop in and AA.Textures look very good from SP footage latest released,just looking at those KZ3 shots for sec I can spot hell of alot lower res textures.Anyway,there is a game,Gears of War 3 that technically is quite advanced.From their real time lighting and shadowing improvements,to HDR,SSAO,volumetric sun shafts and now motion blur improvements but most of all it has nice artstyle and really good textures(you can see from gif).I bet alot of people would in the end put it before KZ3 when asked...It would probably look just as good in IQ department and most of all artstyle :)
I still think KZ3 is nicer looking game,more so if you are looking at screenshots but once I look at them in motion I would give Crysis 2 advantage.KZ3 also has IMO very neat artstyle but its also much more scripted in way.Crysis 2 seems more scripted and linear than Crysis 1 but there are still couple routes you can take and more open spaces like for example first mission(dunno if you saw it).Its not that I care really,in the end,I game mostly on PC since consoles are really starting to get old and I hope that after the good 2011 we get new consoles by the end of the 2012 :)
I agree, hell, I'm playing PC games more because of how dated they are.XDAnyway...all this consoles are doing is cheating and taking shortcuts for better graphics.They are maxed out.You can't expect more from 500mb of ram and 2005 design GPU.They should just release new console next E3 and get over with it...
Bus-A-Bus
What's the point of posting a PC screenshot again? The 360 shots are too ugly for you? haha, that is the exact reason.and wow didnt see bigger version of crisis vid the jaggies and ghosting lol.[QUOTE="SAGE_OF_FIRE"]
[QUOTE="gpuking"]The level of hate to this game is ridiculous. Blurry textures compared to what exactly? Now this is the very definition of blurry, low res, jaggy mess.gpuking
screenshots simply don't capture the amazing visuals of kz3. You have to see the game in motion on your own tv to see what all the buzz is about.
I played the demo on my brothers ps3 and I really don't think any other game looks even close to it. Uncharted 2 is the only other game I can think of that's even at all comparable.
I agree with you mostly but still need to point out that Killzone 3 may actually rendering a lot more polygons than Crysis 2. From the recent PC footage I've noticed on High setting the game is pushing out on average 600k - 1.2million polys per frame, medium setting is less than half of that. Now since kz2 is already pumping out well over 1million polys and kz3 is touted to be rendering 3x as much so that makes it about 3.5 - 4 million in total. Now comparing that to Crysis 2 is quite drastic and certainly favors kz3's engine technicality. Plus, kz3 also does a lot of things C2 lacks such as muzzle flash shadows, colliding particles, more particles on screen, more dynamic lights, MLAA, full 1280 x 720p, much better texture filtering, more higher res textures streamed, minimal pop ins and what appears to be better framerate. Being most technical means a lot more than just better lighting effect you know;), it's the whole package that will be rated on which coincide to the end result like you admited yourself.[QUOTE="gpuking"][QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]
I would not agree on that though but thats just me :) I think that GG "packaged" it nicelly but its definitely not best technically on consoles,at least its not pushing the most.It does not have HDR,does not have SSAO,volumetric sun shafts are not volumetric but pre baked,quite a few pre baked shadows and lights etc.It still is probably most impressive looking game on consoles and most because they packed it beautifully in beatiful package,along with nice lighting,textures and MLAA :)
I think that technically both,GOW III and C2 surprass it.Especially Crysis 2...It may not look the hottest for more jaggies or worse artstyle but that game clearly pushes consoles to max.There is nothing pre rendered in Crysis 2.Everything from lighting to shadows,to volumetric sun shafts to interactive water,everything real time.There is also some superb quality of post processing and lighting thats IMO best yet on consoles...Plus you have real time GI,SSAO and HDR.There is nothing that this game lacks bar better AA.Same goes for GOW III.
Bus-A-Bus
I've seen the editor from CE3 and it appears that they now separated polygons and shadows and they don't count them together,so its usually twice less polys than it is in reality.I doubt that KZ3 pushes more than 1.5 mil per frame,at least judging by screens that show alot of stuff in background are actually 2D or 3D boxes,UC2 pushed 1.2 If I remember correctly.Anyway,I think that Crysis 2 has better lighting than KZ3.Probably because Crytek always had thing for it...I like how water reflects HDR flare from sun in Crysis 2.Like the lens flare effect and their motion blur which is very nice...
Yea Its lot more than just better lighting but Crysis 2 on purelly technical level pushes more than KZ3.Are their choices the right one or not I would say maybe they got little overboard but it will still be a techical marvel and only one thing holds them from the top and thats that pop in and AA.Textures look very good from SP footage latest released,just looking at those KZ3 shots for sec I can spot hell of alot lower res textures.Anyway,there is a game,Gears of War 3 that technically is quite advanced.From their real time lighting and shadowing improvements,to HDR,SSAO,volumetric sun shafts and now motion blur improvements but most of all it has nice artstyle and really good textures(you can see from gif).I bet alot of people would in the end put it before KZ3 when asked...It would probably look just as good in IQ department and most of all artstyle :)
I still think KZ3 is nicer looking game,more so if you are looking at screenshots but once I look at them in motion I would give Crysis 2 advantage.KZ3 also has IMO very neat artstyle but its also much more scripted in way.Crysis 2 seems more scripted and linear than Crysis 1 but there are still couple routes you can take and more open spaces like for example first mission(dunno if you saw it).Its not that I care really,in the end,I game mostly on PC since consoles are really starting to get old and I hope that after the good 2011 we get new consoles by the end of the 2012 :)
KZ3 environment does look more denser to me and with the 3x increase in draw distance it's entirely believable for the polycount to exceed 3m per frame. If you think crysis 2 looks better in motion then the effect is amplified even more for kz3 in motion, screenshots are no where near doing it justice especially for all the particles and dynamic lights in kz3. Anyway both have pros and cons like you said, it's all down to personal preference in regard to the tradeoffs they made so it's all cool. I do also hope nextgen consoles should roll out sooner than later.BTW I don't think Gears 3 has HDR from the footage I've seen, could you link me to a credible source for that? I honestly can't go back to a game not using deferred rendering these days since the visual advantage is just too big for having hundreds of dynamic lights on screen, a feature sorely missing from Gears.
Anyway...all this consoles are doing is cheating and taking shortcuts for better graphics.They are maxed out.You can't expect more from 500mb of ram and 2005 design GPU.They should just release new console next E3 and get over with it...
Bus-A-Bus
Doesn't that make them more impressive in a way. That they can push so much out of such old hardware. If GG were PC dev's im sure they would have phenomenal looking games. I think if KZ3 was on PC as well then all these people would love it
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment