I thought the real KZ2 looked a lot poorer than the fake one. Textures/polygon counts looked well below something like Gears, but yet KZ2 still has the small linear areas of Gears, nothing like the open battlefields and vast draw distances we saw in the fake trailer. Still looked a decent game though.KNiVES said:I think people definitely need to be pointed at the Killzone 2 E3 trailer (2007 that is). That looks amazing, and eerily close to the 2005 trailer in terms of graphical fidelity. One of the biggest surprises this year, Killzone 2 actually standing up to expectations in terms of visuals.
How can PS3 run UT3?
- Thread starter jubei
- Start date
fish99 said:
Ok, it was never gonna look like the cgi, but its as close as it was ever gonna be. Textures wise yeah gears wins for the minute, but improvements can be made. Geometry wise kz2 is superior, this area is where ps3 has the advantage, gears is generally a low poly game where textures and effects disguise this, kz2 has a far higher poly count and a far superior lighting / animation system. As for your assumption in regards to the loss of open battlefields etc, you got this info from the video whichs the intro and a short snippet of gameplay from one level.
IMO, bioshock on 360 is superior to Gears and as a game geow is not the be all and all of games, and it will be surpassed by other games on both systems very soon.
And for the record neither console use direct x, 360 uses xna and ps3 uses an opengl system. UT3 will look excellent on both consoles and it will require a significantly more expensive PC to match either console, and playing the game on a sofa infront of a large screen hdtv seals the deal for the console versions over the pc.
Yes I did, because if they had something better to show they would show it. The sort of open environments showed in the CGI at the detail shown is pretty much impossible on the PS3, just as it woud be on the 360 (neither console has enough ram), and pretty difficult on a high end PC. Also I've done plenty of 3D modelling and IMO the poly counts on the character meshes in KZ2 look poor.Needles said:
Yes, and therefore disguising that the character model is made up of a low poly count by wrapping it in an image ( so to speak ) of higher poly model. I think the excellent animation of kz2 models hints to the fact that the characters have a high poly count. The scene in the trailer were a chumk of the pillar is destroyed and the helgast soldiers shoulder actually fits into the depression when he leans against it, would to me display a game world with a lot of geometry. Also gears animation, while smooth is rather basic, giving away the fact the model is very limited in terms of geometry, giving animators less to work with, while some of the animation displayed in kz2 is very lifelike, it seems to have weight behind it and the high poly models seem to help with this illusion, good example is when the helgast trooper jumps over the railings in the trailer.
After just watching the KZ2 gameplay video Knives kindly posted I am more than confident that UT3 will run and look great on the PS3, and that games like the The Darkness are suffering due to it being a bad/lazy port rather than the PS3's capabilities.
Of course whether KZ2 is actually any good as a game is another matter.
Of course whether KZ2 is actually any good as a game is another matter.
Don't base your conclusions on a game like The Darkness, it is just a badly done port, if I look at movies of GT5 and Jack and Daxter on the PS3 it looks a lot better.
Also a comparison between PC and PS3 isn't really fair as said before, consoles have dedicated hardware and the developers can code to make use of the advantages without the disadvantages, in a game like The Darkness this isn't done as it is a port.
Also a comparison between PC and PS3 isn't really fair as said before, consoles have dedicated hardware and the developers can code to make use of the advantages without the disadvantages, in a game like The Darkness this isn't done as it is a port.
I thought Heavenly Sword looked quite amazing graphically, only Gears of War on 360 looks as good in my opinion. There's also the obvious graphical comparisions of GT:HD to Forza 2, and some other opposing games.
While I used to be a very vocal critic of the PS3 when it first came out in Europe (I am sure people will remember), I feel that right now, people are being too harsh on the console - especially when ports are concerned. People need to realize that such games were built especially for 360 hardware, and being ported to a completely alien technological environment will obviously have implications. We have people here thinking the PS3 is no longer capable of the simplest things such as AA or HDR, or that it cannot even run games like UT3, all because of a widespread belief that ports is an indicator of a console's true capability. The record needs to be set straight now, there are games that launched with the PS3 that has decent AA, HDR and even a combination of both.
While I used to be a very vocal critic of the PS3 when it first came out in Europe (I am sure people will remember), I feel that right now, people are being too harsh on the console - especially when ports are concerned. People need to realize that such games were built especially for 360 hardware, and being ported to a completely alien technological environment will obviously have implications. We have people here thinking the PS3 is no longer capable of the simplest things such as AA or HDR, or that it cannot even run games like UT3, all because of a widespread belief that ports is an indicator of a console's true capability. The record needs to be set straight now, there are games that launched with the PS3 that has decent AA, HDR and even a combination of both.
Last edited:
KNiVES said:
I thought the cutscenes in HS looked amazing; the gameplay looked ok. As I've said previously GT:HD from the screen shots looked superb but listenting to Nokkon etc. it played like a dog and didn't look anywhere near as good.
smcshaw said:
Dont get confused with GT HD, basically a graphical update of GT4, to GT5 or GT5 prologue. GT5 is a new game engine, new physics, new AI etc. GT5 prologue is all that has been shown lately, not even GT5, so expect GT5 to look and play even better than GT5 prologue (going with GT4 and prologue), find out in a couple of months i guess.
I think only Live Arcade games are likely to use XNA. XNA is not an alternative to DirectX, it is an additional layer on top of it. To get the most performance out of the 360, you wouldn't use XNA as it adds extra overhead. I don't know what graphics API the 360 uses, but I imagine it's pretty close to DirectX. The PS3 does use something similar to OpenGL I believe, but it is a bit different.Needles said:
I'm assuming you actually mean 300k, not just 300msmalls74 said: