You just summed up the internet. We might aswell shut it down now.
Pachter was right about PS4 graphics
- Thread starter dragonfart28
- Start date
You just summed up the internet. We might aswell shut it down now.
The game looks splendid when modded. And criticizing it for animations is unfair considering the wide variety of creatures (and their different body types), Killzone has only humans.
That said, I agree that Killzone 4 looks fantastic and PS4 is a proper next-gen leap.
It's not mind blowing, of course, but seeing it in motion proves that it far exceeds anything we could have seen on PS3. Did you not see the physics simulation and incredibly advanced lighting model?
Yeah, as it is, Crysis 3 rapes my system at the highest details. At Very High, the first scene of the game struggles to hold 20 fps on a GTX580 + i5-3570k @ 4.5 GHz. It's terribly sluggish (though the first level seems to be more demanding than later portions of the game).
Oh, I know, but I'm only criticizing it as it was held up as an example of something that exceeds anything we've seen on PS4 when I don't think it comes close.
Jedeye Sniv
Banned
No not quite, you made a big leap in saying "meaning they are indeed fully aware of how good our visuals already are on PS3 and PC". I don't think this is true at all - these folks complaining now seem to be the same as the people who complain about current gen releases too. I mean that the detractors seem unaware of how good they have it now compared to previous gens and so when complaining that the jump is not so big they're missing just how amazing both current and next gen games actually look. Thus they are impossible to please and it feels like they're bitching for the sake of it.
But my original point still stands - what would a massive leap in graphics tech actually look like? We're now in the era of refinements, not so much quantum leaps.
I think these new games look impressive. But then I'm still impressed by 360 games so I am, by contrast, much too easy to please I guess,
God of War 2 on PS2 looked far, far worse than in that screen image quality-wise.
But you don't get it...
Whether or not there really were PS3 launch titles that looked that good is irrelevant. It's the perception that's the problem. Diminishing returns is all about perception. False memories is part of it.
The fact that many people aren't seeing enough of a difference is the issue. Whether that is merely their inability to appreciate finer visual details or not doesn't matter.
Always-honest
Banned
Yes, i wish i had horrible untrained eyes.
There is no solution for ignorance, I'm afraid.
eBay Huckster
Member
i recognize your username well enough to say you're probably backing sony
...which is actually a good thing, considering the competition
CadetMahoney
Member
Not gameplay for sure, but as long as it's using in-game assets it's ok. I guess.
DEMO... keyword DEMO. You saw scripted events at 30 frames per second. Deep down was target footage with a pasted on Hud. Hopefully they can target somewhere near that for the final game but don't be shocked that pc gamers are not impressed. They've been gaming at this resolution and at a higher framerate for years. The one game that really impressed me because it was really the game being played was watchdogs, and that was being run on a pc....
If someone said they were from a Wii U game a bunch of people would post them as evidence that the Wii U is not next-gen.
Edit: Those Krank (?) screenshots are not in any way impressive. Not aesthetically and not technically.
Of course, but if it's an indication of where things are going, I'm thrilled.
They are at least targeting visuals I have never seen before and that is exciting.
You must have lost your damn mind. That KZ vid must have hurt your brain somehow. Dude I have a very beefy PC and I fucking jaw dropped when they showed that f'ing game.
I really doubt it, but I think better features in software and hardware such as more enemies on screen and better AI, or new ways to play. Sony really impressed me the most with their social features for this new console. The streaming function along with allowing a friend to watch is amazing for a closed console. It seems the Gaikai purchase was a very smart move. I can't wait to see how MS responds.
Nice HD antialiased picture of GoW 2 there.
Projectjustice
Banned
This is why I wasnt really impressed by it.
lazer_bean
Member
i was saying what i thought and i still mean it. those screenshots look bad (again that's my opinion). To answer your question i think the Resistance screenshot posted on the same page as my previous post looks better or equal to the ones i posted.
and when i say that it simply means that i'd be more interested in playing Resistance than Knack upon seeing these screenshots
Also when you reply you could do without attacking me by calling me "too blind or too ignorant" and prove your point instead
forget it though..
see above (the last three lines)
Did you not see the game in motion, though? That's where the difference really shines through.
The lighting and physics are far beyond what we've seen on current consoles.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAjUK6GP3Dk
Just look at the way everything moves and interacts, the use of CG-like motion blur, physics, and lighting. It looks and moves like a CG movie.
lazer_bean
Member
yeah i agree with that
also i guess the art style has a lot to do with what i said before (i hate it).
but yeah, i know that, in the trailer, when Knack crushes the floor and explodes into countless litlle pieces this cuold never be done on ps3 for example
UncleSporky
Member
Again, is anyone ready to admit that there won't be any leap at all with the next-next gen? Can you find fault with these PS4 visuals that you expect to be corrected by power and not manpower?
Conciliator
Banned
I was pretty amazed by how Killzone 4 looked, but I guess my expectations were way lower. Not sure what a person who was disappointed in the visuals from that was expecting. Incidentally it also looked like a boring fucking game.
If that Deep Down thing is real-time, that was amazing. That's a big if.
If that Deep Down thing is real-time, that was amazing. That's a big if.
Did you scream countless times like a school girl? Because I did.
I will say, its very very close. Parts of that KZ demo looked better than Crysis thanks to the aesthetics and sense of scale, but the gunplay early on looked much worse.
Here's the thing fellas.
One of those two games isn't even close to completion yet ;-)
Yeah overall the visuals of the actual realtime gameplay demos they DID show (Knack, KZ, CD, and WD) varied from meh to pc-level wowzers, but again...
...everything is super early and only represents the start of what's to come. So please think logically when posting on the topic, and stop fronting ;-) We should all be thrilled about what was demonstrated last night.
I'm happy.
pretty much this. Although it will look a bit worse blown up to 1080p. Little .gif's make things always look more impressive.
That said. Play on the PC until the PS4 comes out. Then try to play on the PS3 again. When everyone was saying how amazing UNcharted looked. I played it on the PS3, and it was honestly ugly as fuck. Tons of jaggies all over, textures were not even high resolution. The difference between current gen PC's and games on consoles is gigantic. I can't express how gigantic unless you sit down with a high end PC and play games maxed out yourself. I could never play a current gen console again, and I have felt this way a few years now.
It's much like DVD to VHS, or even SD to HD. People did not notice the difference right away. They noticed the difference when they went back to the hold format and asked themselves "how the fuck did I ever watch this garbage".
Here is a video of PLanetside 2 on ULTRA - http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=VaYNzn8PTl8#t=32s . Watch it in HD. Keep in mind this is with 2000 people all facing eachother on a massive open, non-instanced world. Phsyx is not even enabled in this video, and his render resolution is only 1 out of I believe 5. No card can do more than 2 currently (triple 680's).
The 360 and PS3 would blown up the moment you loaded in the starting gates. particles on the jump pad alone would lock up the system. PS4 and I assume 720 will be capable of doing stuff like this easily and BETTER looking with less players. Especially considering console games are always optimized 10 times better than PC games and optimization is Planetsides major fault.
Pachterballs
Banned
they went for a toony look. it looks like a kids tv show and an almost cg one. And the artstyle is somewhat unappealing.
ps3 launch game?
FYI....
kameo
think I threw up in my mouth a little just looking at kameo.
Exactly. I was playing Ninja Gaiden Black on my launch 360, and not once did I feel the new gen launch titles were blowing it out of the water. I had PDZ, NHL 2K6, and PGR3 at launch for comparisons sake. It wasn't until Oblivion, Ghost Recon, and Gears that I went "ok here we go"
AstroNut325
Member
If you aren't noticing a huge jump in visuals then:
1. You game on a small screen while sitting 10+ feet away.
2. You base your game buying decisions on tiny screenshots on the back of the box.
3. You're legally blind and should see an optometrist ASAP.
In all of these cases you're likely to not tell the difference between 480p DVD and 1080p Blu-Ray.
1. You game on a small screen while sitting 10+ feet away.
2. You base your game buying decisions on tiny screenshots on the back of the box.
3. You're legally blind and should see an optometrist ASAP.
In all of these cases you're likely to not tell the difference between 480p DVD and 1080p Blu-Ray.
Knack looked really cool imo.
Felt like something you would have seen out of Sony on PS1-PS2, I'm super interested to see more of that game!
StreetsAhead
Member
they went for a toony look. it looks like a kids tv show and an almost cg one. And the artstyle is somewhat unappealing.
ps3 launch game?
FYI....
kameo
think I threw up in my mouth a little just looking at kameo.
Kameo started off as a N64 game and had three subsequent platform shifts, though.
We're reaching the point where the subject matter, presentation and artistry matter as much as the technology. We reached that point in 2D graphics around the Saturn IMO - not that the Saturn was the pinnacle of 2D graphics technology but at that point what made games look good or bad was more down to the creators than the technical limitations.
In motion Knack has a lot of stuff going on. Yes, it has nice physics and lighting. Unfortunately the human characters look more like Dreamworks stuff than Pixar and things that should look cool, like the red animal bear thing, just kinda don't. It's cool that he has a lot of individually moving parts but the whole is less than the sum of the parts.
If you compare Knack to PS3 Ratchet and Clank then Knack clearly looks better technically but IMO Ratchet looks like the more attractive game. The content being expressed in Knack is just bland by comparison, and Ratchet looks good enough to not come off as deficient.
These games have to compete with people's idealized memories of the games they've played, not just via technically-oriented side-by-side analysis.
In the end Killzone still looks to me pretty much what Killzone looks like in my brain already.
In motion Knack has a lot of stuff going on. Yes, it has nice physics and lighting. Unfortunately the human characters look more like Dreamworks stuff than Pixar and things that should look cool, like the red animal bear thing, just kinda don't. It's cool that he has a lot of individually moving parts but the whole is less than the sum of the parts.
If you compare Knack to PS3 Ratchet and Clank then Knack clearly looks better technically but IMO Ratchet looks like the more attractive game. The content being expressed in Knack is just bland by comparison, and Ratchet looks good enough to not come off as deficient.
These games have to compete with people's idealized memories of the games they've played, not just via technically-oriented side-by-side analysis.
In the end Killzone still looks to me pretty much what Killzone looks like in my brain already.
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
Gah. I love a decent argument!
If I see a launch title for PS3 that looks remotely close to what Sony showed yesterday then I would agree and say "Yeah, you're right."
Now comparing it with current PC games? That's a different notion. I am willing to admit that it doesn't look like any graphical leap than what other companies have shown this year but how sure can you be that those games are running in current-gen hardware?
I guess it's best to wait for games like Watch Dogs to release so Digital Foundry can compare the shit outta it.
Some of you at GAF are obviously trolling or cray (take your pick). Those of you judging KZ based off of the Stream have to be seriously determined to bash the console to think that's not a next generation leap. My opinion...
Visual Fidelity
I think it was apparent after the "last gen" (already) that the "wow" factor will lessen as games move from lesser polygon gaming architecture into seamless CG visual quality. I have seen CryEngine 2 modded beyond belief to look close to what I saw yesterday (but not yet there). However, the stuff that I've seen for KZ4 blew my mind outright, and why is that? It's because of...
Art Direction
I don't like Crysis and it's art direction and that's that. If you're jaw didn't drop yesterday, you're just being in denial or defensive because it was truly next generation tech, the amount of things happening at once were phenomenal. Subjectively, you may have not liked the art direction, the game mechanics or even the game franchise itself with a pre-conceived notion of generic and "underwhelming". But calling it generic and boring is anything but lunacy... that too a launch title. But as far as graphic whore's who are kidding themselves not being impressed, let's move onto the...
Gameplay
Why is it generic? Why is it boring? It's your own god damned perception and opinion. The wheel does not have to be reinvented every single time (and with the franchise and it's history, why should it?), rather you're the one who should re-invent the wheel. For example, I see a Helghast... I have options to bring down his demise, what do I do? You HAVE options. The point of gaming is to write your own story, the way you want it. Why do you expect the player, playing the game, to play in your way?
I don't see people crying about gunplay in Battlefield 3 as an example, why should the concept of the FPS Change? When they do change it, half the people don't buy it or dismiss it as a gimmick in the game. DECIDE WHAT YOU WANT! I also remember how people made a big deal out of the swearing that Rico and Garza ditched out in KZ2, but when Battlefield 3 MP hit with every single swear in the English language, it was fun and rainbows. The console gamer and haters really don't deserve anything seriously. Bunch of haters. Also, what were you expecting? This?
Visual Fidelity
I think it was apparent after the "last gen" (already) that the "wow" factor will lessen as games move from lesser polygon gaming architecture into seamless CG visual quality. I have seen CryEngine 2 modded beyond belief to look close to what I saw yesterday (but not yet there). However, the stuff that I've seen for KZ4 blew my mind outright, and why is that? It's because of...
Art Direction
I don't like Crysis and it's art direction and that's that. If you're jaw didn't drop yesterday, you're just being in denial or defensive because it was truly next generation tech, the amount of things happening at once were phenomenal. Subjectively, you may have not liked the art direction, the game mechanics or even the game franchise itself with a pre-conceived notion of generic and "underwhelming". But calling it generic and boring is anything but lunacy... that too a launch title. But as far as graphic whore's who are kidding themselves not being impressed, let's move onto the...
Gameplay
Why is it generic? Why is it boring? It's your own god damned perception and opinion. The wheel does not have to be reinvented every single time (and with the franchise and it's history, why should it?), rather you're the one who should re-invent the wheel. For example, I see a Helghast... I have options to bring down his demise, what do I do? You HAVE options. The point of gaming is to write your own story, the way you want it. Why do you expect the player, playing the game, to play in your way?
I don't see people crying about gunplay in Battlefield 3 as an example, why should the concept of the FPS Change? When they do change it, half the people don't buy it or dismiss it as a gimmick in the game. DECIDE WHAT YOU WANT! I also remember how people made a big deal out of the swearing that Rico and Garza ditched out in KZ2, but when Battlefield 3 MP hit with every single swear in the English language, it was fun and rainbows. The console gamer and haters really don't deserve anything seriously. Bunch of haters. Also, what were you expecting? This?
I would not. That looks close to a CGI kids movie. The shaders are beyond the scope of current gen.
Barack Lesnar
Banned
That's funny because last month someone said the exact opposite:
There's actually people out there that like them both equally, a crazy thought I know.
the argument by some, that a greater understanding of technical terminology would lead to a greater understanding of this "graphical leap" is fucking idiotic
you see with your eyes, and as far as i can tell killzone 4 wasn't leaps and bounds beyond killzone 3. Hell the crysis games on PC are comparable as far as i can tell
your asking people to jettison all of their ps3/360 games for a smaller selection of samey looking games which look a bit nicer
good luck with that
you see with your eyes, and as far as i can tell killzone 4 wasn't leaps and bounds beyond killzone 3. Hell the crysis games on PC are comparable as far as i can tell
your asking people to jettison all of their ps3/360 games for a smaller selection of samey looking games which look a bit nicer
good luck with that
Jibbajabbawockky
Member
And we haven't seen that game in real gameplay yet either. Sure, that was supposedly in engine footage, but with all of these next gen games I want to see what the game is going to look like with a guy handling a controller with normal camera controls, not what is basically a cutscene with the camera swooping around.
The other thing is that its not like a PC couldn't do those visuals. It's just that very few developers have been trying to push PC hardware since they're stuck trying to simultaneously release console versions.
If people need training to tell that the next gen looks better than current gen... doesn't that prove that we have, in fact, entered the period of diminishing returns?
Almost every gen, there's been a clear leap. From NES to SNES, from PS1 to PS2, from PS2 to PS3 - clear advantages that didn't need training or an understanding of what's going on under the hood to be impressed by what you saw on the screen.
I mean, if you want to make that argument, go ahead - you'll find good company with the people who are trying to argue that the Wii U's visuals are super impressive for how many watts it draws.
None of this is to say the games don't look awesome. They do! They're awesome looking! But the problem is, games were already pretty awesome looking on the 360 and PS3. So, while they look undoubtedly better on the PS4, they don't look PS3 to PS2 better, let alone PS2 to PS1 better.
Looks like its time to go see your optometrist.
That's not what I said at all. The point was to compare late era Xbox titles to early era 360 games.
I'm a little amused how everyone skipped right over the DOA:U to 4 comparison though.
Portugeezer
Member
And currently in Alpha stages, so I was impressed.
But yes, I do expect some diminishing returns, we won't get PSX to PS2 or PS2 to PS3 leaps, but from what we saw it is still a noticeable leap.
Pachterballs
Banned
doing some screen grabs of knack of the video.
uploading now. post will have 6 pics. PS3?
Pffft
DOF. Its obviously tooney of course.
advanced shaders. bloom. DOF
Volumetric cloud.
volumetric smoke/cloud. motion blur. particle based explosion. DOF. motion blur.
I'm actually now kind of impressed with Knack. Still don't really like the artstyle but that's different from tech
uploading now. post will have 6 pics. PS3?
Pffft
DOF. Its obviously tooney of course.
advanced shaders. bloom. DOF
Volumetric cloud.
volumetric smoke/cloud. motion blur. particle based explosion. DOF. motion blur.
I'm actually now kind of impressed with Knack. Still don't really like the artstyle but that's different from tech
Deadly Cyclone
Pride of Iowa State
Not sure what stream you were watching. Killzone alone blows the PS3 out of the water. Also, compare Killzone to a 2006 launch game and get back to me.
UncleSporky
Member
Sony to millions of average Joe PS3 owners who didn't upgrade due to not seeing the difference.
The really funny thing here is that the vast majority of Gaffers who like to claim that game X is doing something technically advanced and therefore looks better than game Y have absolutely no understanding of computer graphics whatsoever. They probably can't even multiple a matrix by a vector correctly or tell you what a dot product is.
Whenever I try to engage someone on Gaf about actual computer graphics they throw out "GI" and "SSS" then stop posting. "The lighting model in this game is so advanced!" - says a guy who has no idea what a "lighting model" even is.
Whenever I try to engage someone on Gaf about actual computer graphics they throw out "GI" and "SSS" then stop posting. "The lighting model in this game is so advanced!" - says a guy who has no idea what a "lighting model" even is.
Let's see when they'll watch the game running on a big hdtv in their local store then.
What? At least talk about what the hell you're referring to bro? If you're comparing 7-8 year tech to the current gen PC, it's still shameful for the fact, that besides Crysis and a few exceptions, there was still not anything quite like the KZ's and UC's in digital lovin'.