Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 14,081
- Location
- Between Realities
Edz said:Rubbish, another fps with shiny graphics and no substance
Great just what I don't want....
lol, Not a FPS fan i take it?
-
Notice regarding image hosts and attachments. See here.
Killzone 2 - NEW - Confirmed picture
- Thread starter TurnipHead
- Start date
lol, Not a FPS fan i take it?
wannabedamned said:lol, Not a FPS fan i take it?
Nope, they completely saturated the market tbh. I used to love FPS's on the PC but now IMO it's just gone to far, next we'll have pipe fitters running around with their welding gear on?
Oh no sorry we have Halo 3 is on it's way
Edz said:Nope, they completely saturated the market tbh. I used to love FPS's on the PC but now IMO it's just gone to far, next we'll have pipe fitters running around with their welding gear on?
Oh no sorry we have Halo 3 is on it's way
No that will be Mario Vs Halo
ok so here is a comparison with the CGI trailer, sorry i mean target render, what looks better??
http://generationdreamteam.free.fr/afrika/killzone2/KillZone2compa.jpg
Personally i think it is a lot closer than some give it credit for.
http://generationdreamteam.free.fr/afrika/killzone2/KillZone2compa.jpg
Personally i think it is a lot closer than some give it credit for.
I think the real one looks better, looks more...real....
Josh
EDIT - http://www.gametrailers.com/player/21637.html
Proper gameplay one.
Josh
EDIT - http://www.gametrailers.com/player/21637.html
Proper gameplay one.
Last edited:
The lighting seems... well surprisingly, better in the "real" shots. Particle effects, fire smoke etc look better in the CGI but that's to be expected.
If i had to choose between the two graphical styles i would pick the real game. Dark dank battlefields with uber lightning > open dusty streets.
If i had to choose between the two graphical styles i would pick the real game. Dark dank battlefields with uber lightning > open dusty streets.
Based on those comparisons it does look quite close, but c'mon those CGI grabs are low quality, what a CON... go play the original CGI trailer in HD, then the real trailer, and there is a much more pronounced difference.
However, not taking that much away from the real thing, it's still quite impressive..
One thing that does have me on the fence is the lighting, it does 'look' very good, but considering most of it is from the deferred rendering techniques and not 'dynamic', sometimes it's clear that it's just made up and looks very odd, but then at other times, it's been done very very well and looks much better then you could get dynamically.. overall I'd say it's a success though, if they could have higher res textures, that would really make it truly breathtaking..
However, not taking that much away from the real thing, it's still quite impressive..
One thing that does have me on the fence is the lighting, it does 'look' very good, but considering most of it is from the deferred rendering techniques and not 'dynamic', sometimes it's clear that it's just made up and looks very odd, but then at other times, it's been done very very well and looks much better then you could get dynamically.. overall I'd say it's a success though, if they could have higher res textures, that would really make it truly breathtaking..
