New Killzone screens (page 8)

They look a lot more like human beings than the dude on your avatar imo.

They dont!


They are pushing more polygons but are more cartoon inspired than the models in Gears of War.

Oh my, I think the Gears characters look plenty more cartoonish than those in Killzone.

Anyways, I' m eagerly awaiting that coverage by Adam. Perhaps this game will justify me byuing back a Ps3, since Heavenly Sword seems like a game I CAN wait to play.

I think both games have cartoon characters in them.

Wii DSLite
Nintendo
Playing = Believing

Oh my, I think the Gears characters look plenty more cartoonish than those in Killzone.

Anyways, I' m eagerly awaiting that coverage by Adam. Perhaps this game will justify me byuing back a Ps3, since Heavenly Sword seems like a game I CAN wait to play.

I dont care what you think!


I' m right!

Look at the faces of Baird, Cole, Hoffman or Dom and tell me they look like a cartoon.

Now im not talking about BMI of the characters.

The faces in GoW look more real human than Killzone.







It doesnt really matter, though Dom looks more like an actual person than the Killzone dude, might be personal taste, iv seen people closer to Doms appearance in real life than i have the Killzone dude, he kinda look slike he is made of plastic!


I' m not much in favor of the " style" of the characters in the game.

That Killzone pic is from the old CGI trailer and the pic of Dom isn' t in-game as far as I can see. Go find some better pics fool!

Wii DSLite
Nintendo
Playing = Believing

This are real Gears pics





Cute aren' t they?

And here is what I think are real Killzone 2 pics


This Killzone pic is REALLY cartooney


Gears art > Killzone 2 art IMO
Killzone is still good but not as good as Gears

Wii DSLite
Nintendo
Playing = Believing

Ah well, i didnt realize the pic was from the first killzone trailer, its all that shows up when you look around.

The screen of dom, is as far as i know, in engine, but not ingame, but it doesnt really matter if you look at what i posted and what you posted, the art style holds true.

The faces in Killzone are exagerated in a differnet way than gears of war, which to me seems more cartony, both your killzone shoots show it nicely!

I think your pic of Dom is a touched up in-game pic they used before the release of Gears. But I' m not sure about it at all, it' s just that it looks too nice to be running in an in-game cut-scene.

Ah, here it is from IGN


Definitely touched up!!!

Wii DSLite
Nintendo
Playing = Believing

Yeah, Gears definitely look more realistic, I think I saw a guy just like this in my neighbourhood yesterday

Wii DSLite
Nintendo
Playing = Believing

Yeah your probably right, though it was the art direction i was after.

The models in Killzone just Oozes high poly count, but it doesnt look as if they are utilizing them that well!

I agree. The facial animations in Killzone seem to be better than those in Gears though.

Wii DSLite
Nintendo
Playing = Believing

I love the Killzone art direction, as it reminds me of the Aliens film. But we all know that art is something that isn' t really possible to judge on other standards than ones own personal preferences. It' s just like judging a painting, I' m a big fan of Klimt but fail to see the charms of a Pollock painting... Now I might not like Pollocks art, but I really cannot say that they are " bad" art.

Also, I didn' t have any idea that the Killzone characters where higher in poly count than Gears, but I do think they are using them, jsut the right way. I also like how Killzone is lacking beautifully architectured buildings, and actually the biggest problem I have with Killzone graphics isn' t in the art, rather I think the textures fail to impress after having played Gears of War.

Also, the explosions still look like crap.

That said, I think the military gear, weapons and character models are all more realistic than those in gears, even though (like in all Sci-Fi shooters) sometimes " logical" design gets lesser priority than stuff that looks " cool" ... Like why they are sitting on top of the flying machines, without cover and without seatbelts... In Sweden, that veichle would get the WORSE safety score in Auto, Motor & Sport.

And my little sister looks exactly like this: I love the Killzone art direction, as it reminds me of the Aliens film. But we all know that art is something that isn' t really possible to judge on other standards than ones own personal preferences. It' s just like judging a painting, I' m a big fan of Klimt but fail to see the charms of a Pollock painting... Now I might not like Pollocks art, but I really cannot say that they are " bad" art.

Also, I didn' t have any idea that the Killzone characters where higher in poly count than Gears, but I do think they are using them, jsut the right way. I also like how Killzone is lacking beautifully architectured buildings, and actually the biggest problem I have with Killzone graphics isn' t in the art, rather I think the textures fail to impress after having played Gears of War.

Also, the explosions still look like crap.

That said, I think the military gear, weapons and character models are all more realistic than those in gears, even though (like in all Sci-Fi shooters) sometimes " logical" design gets lesser priority than stuff that looks " cool" ... Like why they are sitting on top of the flying machines, without cover and without seatbelts... In Sweden, that veichle would get the WORSE safety score in Auto, Motor & Sport.

And my little sister looks exactly like this: [image]I love the Killzone art direction, as it reminds me of the Aliens film. But we all know that art is something that isn' t really possible to judge on other standards than ones own personal preferences. It' s just like judging a painting, I' m a big fan of Klimt but fail to see the charms of a Pollock painting... Now I might not like Pollocks art, but I really cannot say that they are " bad" art.

Also, I didn' t have any idea that the Killzone characters where higher in poly count than Gears, but I do think they are using them, jsut the right way. I also like how Killzone is lacking beautifully architectured buildings, and actually the biggest problem I have with Killzone graphics isn' t in the art, rather I think the textures fail to impress after having played Gears of War.

Also, the explosions still look like crap.

That said, I think the military gear, weapons and character models are all more realistic than those in gears, even though (like in all Sci-Fi shooters) sometimes " logical" design gets lesser priority than stuff that looks " cool" ... Like why they are sitting on top of the flying machines, without cover and without seatbelts... In Sweden, that veichle would get the WORSE safety score in Auto, Motor & Sport.

And my little sister looks exactly like this:

Edit:

However, once again. It' s a personal preference wether one likes stylized graphics ore more realistic. For me it differs depending on mode, I can enjoy boring realisitc graphics ala S.T.A.L.K.E.R just as much as highly stylized graphics like those in Okami

< Message edited by dionysius -- 27 Aug 07 20:45:51 >

Neither Gears nor Killzone look cartoony, not in the slightest.

Now this is cartoony:

Killzone has higher polycounts, better animations, better particle effects, better lighting and shadowing but " worse" textures.

Art direction is a matter of opinion but both games have it in abundance.

Neither feature cartoony characters and you can' t judge facial animations from stills.

It' s worth noting that Killzone is an 08 title and by the time it launches Gears will be at least 18 months old...

ORIGINAL: Nitro

Killzone has higher polycounts, better animations, better particle effects, better lighting and shadowing but " worse" textures.

Art direction is a matter of opinion but both games have it in abundance.

Neither feature cartoony characters and you can' t judge facial animations from stills.

It' s worth noting that Killzone is an 08 title and by the time it launches Gears will be at least 18 months old...

Don' t take the word cartoony literally in this case fool. It was just a way of explaining the difference of what kind of visual impression some of us experience when watching Killzone or Gears.
I judged the facial animations from the videos. You did watch the videos didn' t you? You are aware that there are videos of both Killzone 2 and Gears, right? Have you played Gears? You do know that you can right? When you do, take a look at the facial animations.
About the age of the games, it' s irrelevant as we' re talking about art direction and animations which aren' t really affected by how old a game is.

Wii DSLite
Nintendo
Playing = Believing

Don' t animations get affected by age and technology? Although I do think there are some old goodies out there with anomations that outclass most new games.



That big dude in the middle looks like Dom without a beard!

Is it just me or does that Killzone character look like Adam Doree?

Killzone has higher polycounts, better animations, better particle effects, better lighting and shadowing but " worse" textures.

Art direction is a matter of opinion but both games have it in abundance.

Neither feature cartoony characters and you can' t judge facial animations from stills.

It' s worth noting that Killzone is an 08 title and by the time it launches Gears will be at least 18 months old...

This is completely relevant, as we are comparing an 08 released game, to a game that was released in 06. Bottomline, I think that it shows just how nice looking of a game Gears of War is that we can compare it to a AAA 2008 title.

You can just hear Cliffy B laughing right now.

I still compare games physics and AI with Hl2 and wonder why there is as of yet not a single game that has this game beaten in those departments, to this day.

I think in the physics department its because no other game has used the enviroment as much as in HL2, so there hasnt been a need to yet.

Maybe Force Unleashed could be sick with great physics.

I felt the AI in HL1 was better in the second, but Valve none the less, is expert in AI programming

Cellfactor seems to use physics in various ways, but I haven' t heard much about it lately.
I was really, really impressed when I saw the first trailer of it. Awesome!

http://www.gametrailers.com/game/2510.aspx

Wii DSLite
Nintendo
Playing = Believing

Wasnt Cellfactor released for free?

or was that some other Phys game?

So it appears and it seems it was crap
http://pc.ign.com/articles/791/791158p1.aspx
Too bad, it looked cool. Waaaay cooler than Blue Dragon anyway....

You can download it here if you feel like it
http://www.gamershell.com/download_19042.shtml

Wii DSLite
Nintendo
Playing = Believing

ORIGINAL: canadagamer


This is completely relevant, as we are comparing an 08 released game, to a game that was released in 06. Bottomline, I think that it shows just how nice looking of a game Gears of War is that we can compare it to a AAA 2008 title.

You can just hear Cliffy B laughing right now.

Well, in all fairness Killzone 2 pre [pre(?)] alpha shits all over Gears of Wars, Gears has high res textures, what else?

I have a physX card, it was only 150$ CAD new. I bought one a few weeks ago and having one unlocks the full Cell Factor game. I' ve only played in a few levels and I' m not impressed by the game. However the physics are pretty sweet. One thing that' s really cool about the game is that there is this super jump ability and jumping 200 feet in the air really feels like you' re jumping 200 feet in the air.

Before I bought the card I' ve seen a few people say that Cell Factor is the reason to buy the card. I can' t agree with that, UT III will be the reason to buy one. In a recent interview someone from EPIC was expressing that they were looking for ways to use the card as they said they would have support for it a while back. I think I read it at Gamespot.

Well, in all fairness Killzone 2 pre [pre(?)] alpha shits all over Gears of Wars, Gears has high res textures, what else?

Did you get special PS3 periphial glasses with your console?


Shits all over it, is an exageration.

the amount of detail and the quality of the animations are not even close between the two games, besides, in killzone 2 you get real polygonal detail, not just high resolution textures, KZ2 uses a mo cap/hand animated/ragdoll system that blends and changes dynamically to get real life movement, i believe everyone can realize the difference in the amount of light sources, the sound its 7.1 and the number of post processing effects they are adding is just ridiculous.
Have you seen the IGN insider videos??? i stand to the facts, what everyone can see, take a look at the killzone level they showed (when they turn off the post processing effects) and compare it to any of Gears corridor-like levels, the difference is enormous, not to mentions this is supposed to be pre pre alpha, they still have alot of effects planned before release.

But you dont have to take my word for it, download the good quality videos and judge for yourself.


http://files.filefront.com/killzone2.../fileinfo.aspx
http://files.filefront.com/killzone2.../fileinfo.aspx

Sigh, all the pretty animations wont stop it from being garbage.

I dont want to celebrate, I want to sell you hate.

RE: First Killzone PS3 screen... (in reply to Vx Chemical)
Sigh, all the pretty animations wont stop it from being garbage.

And apparently all the lolipops and sunshine the universe has to offer still wouldn' t stop you from being overly cynical.

ORIGINAL: immortaldanmx

Sigh, all the pretty animations wont stop it from being garbage.

Im not talking about quality, im talking about the visual effects, please try to keep up.

lolipops and sunshine? When did we start discussing Nintendo

I dont want to celebrate, I want to sell you hate.

lolipops and sunshine? When did we start discussing Nintendo

It just felt like the right thing to say. After all, you just bought a Wii.

We' ll see when its released. It looks great, but its not aeons infront of anything really.

And it amounts to nothing if its as bad as the first Killzone!

? And you play FF, but I dont say hair gel and spandex, do I?

On a related note: RE4make sucks, cant move and fire at the same time, WTF!?

I dont want to celebrate, I want to sell you hate.

ORIGINAL: Vx Chemical

We' ll see when its released. It looks great, but its not aeons infront of anything really.

First off let me say something, i didnt like the first killzone, i loved the art style it had but to me it wasnt an enjoyable game, however im not talking about that right now, im talking about the incredible piece of technology that Killzone 2 IS, leaps and bounds above everything else in consoles, you ask why??? is it because GG is such an amazing development house???, *** no, its because of the huge budget they have and the access to the tec of some of the best development teams in the world, for instance they shared code with Naughty Dog, with Factor 5 and such, clearly the game has to be stunning and in my opinion, comparing it to GeoW in the tech side is quite a disservice to the work guerrilla has put on this game, for fuks sakes compare the lightning system, the size of the environments, the seamless transitions between ingame cutscenes and actual gameplay, the post processing effects (which they can turn on/off dynamically), the quality in the animations, the sound effects they are using, for gods sakes theres almost no point of comparison.

On a related note: RE4make sucks, cant move and fire at the same time, WTF!?

I like that. Makes the game much more scary.

BTW, Adam Doree said that Killzone 2 looks better than any other console game out there so it' s a fact now. Killzone 2 kicks ass!

Wii DSLite
Nintendo
Playing = Believing

? And you play FF, but I dont say hair gel and spandex, do I?

Actually, I' ve only played about half of the FF' s, and while I own FF 12, I still have yet to put in anything over an hour on it.

Also, it was a joke. Except the cynical part, because you are overly cynical, and that' s a fact.

First off let me say something, i didnt like the first killzone, i loved the art style it had but to me it wasnt an enjoyable game, however im not talking about that right now, im talking about the incredible piece of technology that Killzone 2 IS, leaps and bounds above everything else in consoles, you ask why??? is it because GG is such an amazing development house???, *** no, its because of the huge budget they have and the access to the tec of some of the best development teams in the world, for instance they shared code with Naughty Dog, with Factor 5 and such, clearly the game has to be stunning and in my opinion, comparing it to GeoW in the tech side is quite a disservice to the work guerrilla has put on this game, for fuks sakes compare the lightning system, the size of the environments, the seamless transitions between ingame cutscenes and actual gameplay, the post processing effects (which they can turn on/off dynamically), the quality in the animations, the sound effects they are using, for gods sakes theres almost no point of comparison.

Im clearly not as overly impressed as you, granted im might be more sceptical than i should be.

People are allowed to be, after all your not going to be playing it on your dual hdmi PS3 with 7 friends co-op.

Im not overly cynical, I just dont masturbate to the sequal of a terrible shooter just because it has nice animation. And animation doesnt fix low-res textures.

CoD4>Halo3>Bioshock>Metroid>HelloKitty>Killzone

I dont want to celebrate, I want to sell you hate.

I guess Killzone and Gears both make really good arguments for holy-poly models and super detailed texture maps respectively.

I wouldn' t worry about Killzone being more impressive than Gears as there will be at least 18 months, possibly 2 years between the two releases.

Also, Gears was still using placeholder textures just 3 months before release so cut illzone some slack. I' m not confident they' ll drastically improve but even in their current state they look as good as those in CoD4.

I think the main difference between Gears and Killzone 2 is the amount of stuff going on in the same scene. Killzone is taking adantage of multiple post processing effects and appears to have far nicer lighting, ...the the two exact reasons why i fond GRAW2 (360) to be more visually impressive than Gears.

If you want to compare Gears with anything, compare it with the PS3 version of UTIII. It' s out in 2 months, uses the same engine, is coded by the same devs and like Gears will also run at 30fps (unless Rein has changed his mind since last week) ...

I think its worriying that MS isnt showing off titles thats going to release next year, slowly its seems like there wont be any exclusives to keep an eye out for.

Why is Banjo being kept under wraps?

I think it was wrong to cancel X07