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.

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!

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

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!!!

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

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.

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.

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