Resistance 2 info OMG!!! ( if true)
- Thread starter msmalls74
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 6,497
- Location
- West Sussex
well i'll be buying, loved the 1st
I have to agree with you on this one Nokkon, whilst some aspects of that second pic do look like they are game rendered the background, planes, sky and the walker in the distance all look like they have a hand drawn feel about them. If they are not hand drawn from scratch then maybe they went overboard on photoshop in the touching up process!
according to jstevenson* those shots are ingame from what i gather to be the one pretty much done (probably for the demo) level with adjusted gamma and some extra AA for magazine pages.
from the podcast (fullmoon) the game is playable beginning to end in a rough form and looking good for a october-ish release
theres a nice thread on the gaf at the moment with trolls not realising they are arguing with the devs as to what the pictures are.
* insomniac guy
''Every image gets some level adjustment just to match what's actually on our TVs. That's what you're seeing there - nothing sinister about it at all.''
''all the shots are from SP. Not co-op''
reminds me of when the first screens of ratchet and clank came out and all the trolls were running around screaming 'bullshots! i can tell by the pixels becuase iam a pixel engineer!' and then the game came out and looked pretty much identical.
from the podcast (fullmoon) the game is playable beginning to end in a rough form and looking good for a october-ish release
theres a nice thread on the gaf at the moment with trolls not realising they are arguing with the devs as to what the pictures are.
* insomniac guy
''Every image gets some level adjustment just to match what's actually on our TVs. That's what you're seeing there - nothing sinister about it at all.''
''all the shots are from SP. Not co-op''
reminds me of when the first screens of ratchet and clank came out and all the trolls were running around screaming 'bullshots! i can tell by the pixels becuase iam a pixel engineer!' and then the game came out and looked pretty much identical.
Yep. The mud path, wooden fences and tanks also look like that way.
Either way, as I've said before, and I'm sure people have forgotten this, I'm really looking forward to its release.
It is obviously very post-processed to hell - at an educated guess, I would say the images were taken at an extremely high resolution to begin with, then downscaled to achieve near-total lack of aliasing, as well as being taken with something like 32x anisotropic filtering. Depth of field and deferred rendering shaders add to the soft touches in the background and distant objects. I know the cloud and skies are done with procedural shading instead of being a flat texture-based skybox. All sorts of tricks happening there, and I would bet that in the final build, it would all be drastically reduced - I would say the draw distance stays, the MSAA stays at 4 samples just like the last game, anisotropic filtering to completely disappear (just like every single console game ever released) and depth of field to go as well. That's a realistic view. Insomniac claims to have made massive strides in their engine and PS3 work, so it could be closer than we think. Who knows? Games like Killzone 2 shows there can be surprises in store.
One thing is for sure, you just simply cannot expect that same image quality to be in the final game. It is just not possible to see something that smooth and defined.
One thing is for sure, you just simply cannot expect that same image quality to be in the final game. It is just not possible to see something that smooth and defined.
Tbh I have never noticed a performance hit when having 16xAF as opposed to 0, I think the hit is very small most likely.
PC games of course.
I really have no idea why nobody bothers with AF, at a guess I would say it's because despite the focus on HD, developers don't feel the need to include it if the vast majority are still on SDTV sets (the image quality would make it difficult to see sharp textures in the distance anyway). The consoles are more than capable of using at least 4xAF. It doesn't affect performance that much, but can use up some video memory as you are seeing more and more fully rendered textures after all.
The only surprise with Killzone 2 was for the uneducated that believed the lies at e3 '05. It looks pretty good, but not spectacular. It does look like an enjoyable game though.
PGR4 definitely utilises AF, it's very clear.
oO
We'll just have to agree to disagree I think. Out of curiosity, what games do you think packs a more graphical punch?
http://uk.media.ps3.ign.com/media/748/748475/img_5105584.html
Screens like these aren't even doctored in any way at all, we have all seen the gameplay trailers and seen it run in-real time. It takes a lot to say it's not spectacular.
Last edited:
Does it?
Does the full version differ a lot graphically from the demo version?
I was playing is last night, and again just now, and I honestly can't see how people can even compare it to GT5p
The level of detail, and framerate are lower.
I've had a mate here with me all afternoon, and I asked his opinion too, to make sure I wasn't being biased.
We tried Forza 2 (full versoin) PGR4 demo, and GT5p.
He laughed in the end when I asked him which he thought looked better.
He also thought the PS3 version was better, no comparison.
Sorry for dragging OT there, was just referring to the AF comment.
Does it?
Does the full version differ a lot graphically from the demo version?
I was playing is last night, and again just now, and I honestly can't see how people can even compare it to GT5p
The level of detail, and framerate are lower.
I've had a mate here with me all afternoon, and I asked his opinion too, to make sure I wasn't being biased.
We tried Forza 2 (full versoin) PGR4 demo, and GT5p.
He laughed in the end when I asked him which he thought looked better.
He also thought the PS3 version was better, no comparison.
Sorry for dragging OT there, was just referring to the AF comment.
All of what you said has nothing to do with anisotropic filtering at all
You've somehow pulled console wars into the fray too.Yeah, I was playing it and AF is especially obvious, unless you're getting confused with AA?
As for comparing it to GT5P, the cars are a lot better in Gran Turismo 5, especially the interiors which are stunning, but the tracks, London for example which is a great example being that it's in both, is a lot better in Project Gotham Racing 4 in my opinion (by quite a way).
I agree that both look better than Forza 2 though which was disappointing.
As for comparing it to GT5P, the cars are a lot better in Gran Turismo 5, especially the interiors which are stunning, but the tracks, London for example which is a great example being that it's in both, is a lot better in Project Gotham Racing 4 in my opinion (by quite a way).
I agree that both look better than Forza 2 though which was disappointing.
All of what you said has nothing to do with anisotropic filtering at all
I'm sorry.
Not I wasn't meaning to do that.
I was just looking at the detail, and found it lacking.
I'm not going to start a console war, I apologise.
Back on topic.
