Wow, killzone was realtime sorta.

The real question is whether or not they can get it running at 30 or 60Hz. It seems a lot of Sony stuff was full frame captures of stuff that was running too slow.
 
Wow. More lies. At this rate, in a few months magazines will be claiming it was running on a PS3 alpha kit with someone actually playing it at 5 fps. :lol
 
- The alpha devkit was using 2 Geforce 6800GT in SLI, the new one uses the G70
- Killzone was in-game engine running at 5fps on the alpha devkit
- I-8 and Warhawk were realtime on the alpha devkit
- GT vision was just a hi-res GT4 engine, its just a tech demo not the final game
- They were forced to change controller because of the copyright lawsuit

Killzone
Running at LESS than 5 FPS on the PS3 alpha kit
It was sped up to 60 FPS in post production.

*A couple of trailers were simply pre rendered using textures and other visual elements intended for the final game.
*the final PS3 dev kits will ship in October

79.jpg


Not a mag scan it's art by the guy who does all the art stuff for Killzone
 
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...

So it's either dropping details and textures or optimizing the hell out of it for Guerilla.
 
Doom_Bringer said:
Killzone
Running at LESS than 5 FPS on the PS3 alpha kit
It was sped up to 60 FPS in post production.

*A couple of trailers were simply pre rendered using textures and other visual elements intended for the final game.


79.jpg


Not a mag scan it's art by the guy who does all the art stuff for Killzone
Wow, that looks so killer. Hope the game looks that good.

With optimization and the more powerful RSX and cell plus coding to use spes, I can see the game hitting at least 30fps. I wonder will they have to do 720 though vs. 1080.

Wished they would say how Motorstorm was made. I was more impressed by that than killzone.
 
Matlock said:
paging dark10x to this thread...paging dark10x!
He's on a flight from Japan right now. I'll fill in for him.

[Dark10x]

At best, we could hope that the PS3 hardware, alpha or no, rendered each of those Killzone 2 frames itself; however the idea that the hardware could generate all those frames in realtime is ludicrous.
Also ludicrous, would be to place enough faith in the developer, Guerilla, that they could pull off gameplay like in that trailer. I have played Killzone and AI was especially lacking. The scenes from the trailer were pure script, even more than Call of Duty scenes. It wasn't gameplay, and I think that kind of gameplay is beyond Guerrilla anyway.


Here's some screens!

Killzone 1

Look at the average draw distance in these four shots.
918762_20041103_screen013.jpg

918762_20041103_screen018.jpg

918762_20040915_screen001.jpg

918762_20040915_screen006.jpg


Weak explosion effect
918762_20040915_screen026.jpg


Finally, no fog.
918762_20040915_screen042.jpg


I always liked the lighting in this shot.
918762_20040507_screen012.jpg




Killzone 2

928377_20050516_screen001.jpg

928377_20050516_screen002.jpg

928377_20050516_screen003.jpg


The disparity between the screen shots is just too great to put any faith in. Not for the game, not for the developer, and not even for the hardware. It's just too soon, and that trailer was too faked.


[/Dark10x]
 
solarplexus said:
Aren't scans of magazines like PSM against the TOS and forbidden?

It's not a scan but artwork from the artist's official website. The stuff that was shown at E3 appears to be for Killzone 3 but SCEE and Guerilla aren't really saying or confirming much. Killzone 2 could either be a late PS2 release or a PSP title as noted in this concept art:
1107nn.jpg
 
928377_20050516_screen001.jpg

HELLO THERE SOLDIER, YOU'LL BE SEEING ME FOR THE NEXT POINT TWO ZERO SECONDS
IT WILL GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO KNOW ME BEFORE WE START TO RUN INTO THE SHIT IN THE NEXT POINT TWO ZERO SECONDS

ANY QUESTIONS?

*frame advances*
 
People with no technical knowledge having a technical discussion... Yep, I'm definitely at GAF. No offense, but leave the tech to the guys working on the game. I'm sure they know what they're doing.
 
Wasn't the same said about Heavenly Sword? That the game engine was running at whatever frames per second, and the presentation video was made from the game engine and put together to run at full speed?
 
OmniGamer said:
Wasn't the same said about Heavenly Sword? That the game engine was running at whatever frames per second, and the presentation video was made from the game engine and put together to run at full speed?

Yes, but not 5fps.

If you split the demo into 2 sections (interior and exterior), the interior runs real-time quite happily at 1080p. The exterior struggles a bit but more because we just kept adding more and more till it looked right without going through various optimisation passes then anything else (i.e. the flags are really expensive at the moment due to a quick implementation).
 
I don't fucking care if it's ingame stuff or not, after all the fanboy flaming and pr nosense I just don't want to be over here by the time the preview code hits the websites :lol
 
Man, I don't know about you guys, but I've learned some new lying tactics from Sony, which will be especially useful during confrontations with the wife.

I sure I haven't heard them all from these threads and other sites on the net, but I've heard enough to surely buy a book containing them upon release date.

Sony: Learn to lie like a pro™
 
MAKE IT STOP . . . DEAR GOD IN HEAVEN . . . I SHALL SUBMIT MY GAYNESS TO THE DEPTHS OF HELL IF ONLY THE KILLZONE BS WILL STOP . . . PLEASE DEAR JESUS!!!!!!!!
 
Well let me do some crappy math

Assuming SAME EXACT graphical IQ:

60fps = 5 x 12 = 12x = 1200% speed boost needed from 25% upgraded hardware
30fps = 5 x 6 = 6x = 600% speed boost needed from 25% HW upgrade

With current 75% alpha hardware hitting 5fps... (if infact K2 was "realtime") Boost the CPU 25% and boost the 7800....

60fps is DEFINITELY NOT possible with the exact same graphical quality. You could take all the optimizations in the world and you can't make a 1200% speed boost possible. 30fps is more realistic, but somehow I still doubt it'll come out with the exact same image quality as the video....

It'd be an amazing feat if they did, but realistically, it's not gonna happen..
 
ArcadeStickMonk said:
He's on a flight from Japan right now. I'll fill in for him.

[Dark10x]

At best, we could hope that the PS3 hardware, alpha or no, rendered each of those Killzone 2 frames itself; however the idea that the hardware could generate all those frames in realtime is ludicrous.
Also ludicrous, would be to place enough faith in the developer, Guerilla, that they could pull off gameplay like in that trailer. I have played Killzone and AI was especially lacking. The scenes from the trailer were pure script, even more than Call of Duty scenes. It wasn't gameplay, and I think that kind of gameplay is beyond Guerrilla anyway.


Here's some screens!

Killzone 1

Look at the average draw distance in these four shots.
918762_20041103_screen013.jpg

918762_20041103_screen018.jpg

918762_20040915_screen001.jpg

918762_20040915_screen006.jpg


Weak explosion effect
918762_20040915_screen026.jpg


Finally, no fog.
918762_20040915_screen042.jpg


I always liked the lighting in this shot.
918762_20040507_screen012.jpg




Killzone 2

928377_20050516_screen001.jpg

928377_20050516_screen002.jpg

928377_20050516_screen003.jpg


The disparity between the screen shots is just too great to put any faith in. Not for the game, not for the developer, and not even for the hardware. It's just too soon, and that trailer was too faked.


[/Dark10x]



ArcadeStickMonk: I agree 100% with your post.


my guess: reduced scene complexity and GREALY reduced image quality @ 30fps seems possible for actual PS3 game / game-play.
 
Tenacious-V said:
Well let me do some crappy math

Assuming SAME EXACT graphical IQ:

60fps = 5 x 12 = 12x = 1200% speed boost needed from 25% upgraded hardware
30fps = 5 x 6 = 6x = 600% speed boost needed from 25% HW upgrade

With current 75% alpha hardware hitting 5fps... (if infact K2 was "realtime") Boost the CPU 25% and boost the 7800....

60fps is DEFINITELY NOT possible with the exact same graphical quality. You could take all the optimizations in the world and you can't make a 1200% speed boost possible. 30fps is more realistic, but somehow I still doubt it'll come out with the exact same image quality as the video....

It'd be an amazing feal if they did, but realistically, it's not gonna happen..
This whole post assumes that the engine is completely static and won't be improved or optimized as better development tools come along. So that's a lotta typing for nothing ;)
 
Matlock said:
928377_20050516_screen001.jpg

HELLO THERE SOLDIER, YOU'LL BE SEEING ME FOR THE NEXT POINT TWO ZERO SECONDS
IT WILL GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO KNOW ME BEFORE WE START TO RUN INTO THE SHIT IN THE NEXT POINT TWO ZERO SECONDS

ANY QUESTIONS?

*frame advances*
:lol :lol :lol
 
border said:
This whole post assumes that the engine is completely static and won't be improved or optimized as better development tools come along. So that's a lotta typing for nothing ;)

I said crappy math!! :D :D No effort in crappy math!!

But I did state about optimizations in that same post you quoted. And I made an assessment about those optimizations as well. Don't be so quick to shut me down....
 
Tenacious-V said:
I said crappy math!! :D :D No effort in crappy math!!

But I did state about optimizations in that same post you quoted. And I made an assessment about those optimizations as well. Don't be so quick to shut me down....

I agree with Border. There's no real way to assess the potential impact of future optimization on that code yet. We don't know what state it's in now (aside from the fact that it does run, however slowly), or what tricks and shortcuts to optimize performance might be possible on the final hardware that can't be duplicated on the current devkits. Not saying that the actual game's going to look consistently that good throughout, but I'm willing to allow for the possibility of them achieving something close (though more than likely locked at 30 fps, IMO--I suspect they'll trade off framerate for geometry and fx on this one).
 
ArcadeStickMonk said:
Here's some screens!....

What point are you trying to make with putting PS2 screens next to PS3 screens? What other PS2 FPS has better explosions, drawdistance, ect?

This makes about as much sense of trying to put Gran Turismo screens next to GT3 screens.
 
Tenacious-V said:
But I did state about optimizations in that same post you quoted. And I made an assessment about those optimizations as well. Don't be so quick to shut me down....
Your assessment was just simply dismissing the possibility of drastic. Are you saying that it's not possible for any game to go from 5 FPS to 30 or 60, over the course of development....and that no previous game has ever done it?
 
border said:
Your assessment was just simply dismissing the possibility of drastic. Are you saying that it's not possible for any game to go from 5 FPS to 30 or 60, over the course of development....and that no previous game has ever done it?

In the case of the 1200% increase from 5 to 60 I DEFINITELY dismiss it. I can see the 30fps happening, but no way in hell for 60. Do you honestly believe you can have a 1200% boost in performance (including optimizations) from a 25% increase in hardware speed? I'm not being pessimistic here, I'm being realistic. This is all under the assumption of SAME exact IQ, no degredation of any kind.

Tellaerin said:
I agree with Border. There's no real way to assess the potential impact of future optimization on that code yet. We don't know what state it's in now (aside from the fact that it does run, however slowly), or what tricks and shortcuts to optimize performance might be possible on the final hardware that can't be duplicated on the current devkits. Not saying that the actual game's going to look consistently that good throughout, but I'm willing to allow for the possibility of them achieving something close (though more than likely locked at 30 fps, IMO--I suspect they'll trade off framerate for geometry and fx on this one).

That's exactly what I stated above............
 
depending when its out, the developers may well have just thrown a bunch of high poly CG figures into the engine, not caring if it chokes because it'll be sorted out in editing.

So I'd expect the models to change. Doesn't mean it won't look similar/the same, but as Shog pointed out, some of those models just have too much geometry in them.

I'm quietly confident we'll see something like that from Guerilla.

Might still have shit AI and wobbly framerate....





BTW, how can you judge gameplay from that preview footage? Its clearly scripted to look good over 30 seconds at E3. kind of like the Halo 2 on earth footage. I wouldn't expect me to be playing exactly that, although I would think the 'arrival on flying car' thing could happen - kind of like a oneupmanship thing to Bungie and the Cartographer level in halo 1.
 
5 to 60 can work:

get this and lower the poly count from 5 million per character to a more reasonable 500K and you should be hitting 30 without any other optimizations
 
Tenacious-V said:
In the case of 5 to 60 I DEFINITELY dismiss it. I can see the 30fps happening, but no way in hell for 60. Do you honestly believe you can have a 1200% boost in performance (including optimizations) from a 25% increase in hardware speed?
I don't think they'll shoot for 60 because almost no Western development houses care about framerate anymore =(

I believe you can see huge boosts if you write really shitty high-level code just to get the job done quick, and then go back and fix things. We never really get to see such improvements since nobody is dumb enough to show off their game when it's running at 5 FPS (though there was pretty good performance improvement between the leaked Doom 3 Alpha and the final).
 
Tenacious-V said:
That's exactly what I stated above............

Sorry, must've misunderstood. I was under the impression that you felt they'd have to scale back the geometry and/or draw distance noticeably and drop the framerate to 30 fps.
 
Lets assume it is true that they achived 5fps with models extremely detailed without any shading techniques used to make it look more detailed than it necessary is, and they have applied several samples of FSAA, awesome lighting etc... that would mean that the PS3 alpha kit or not is extremely powerful even doing these things 5fps.. not to mention un optimized code most likely... And where did the original author get this info from? It would be interesting to hear more about it..
 
Why, why are people spouting these lies? How can they claim to be journalists when they blatantly lie?
 
border said:
I don't think they'll shoot for 60 because almost no Western development houses care about framerate anymore =(

I believe you can see huge boosts if you write really shitty high-level code just to get the job done quick, and then go back and fix things. We never really get to see such improvements since nobody is dumb enough to show off their game when it's running at 5 FPS (though there was pretty good performance improvement between the leaked Doom 3 Alpha and the final).

That's true, I think you can make huge strides towards speed if you begin with crappy code. In the Killzone 2 case I believe it was crappy code as well, rushed to make a showdown for X360. In which case I do believe they can get 30fps for it, but what I don't believe is that it'll be to that detail.

In the case from Sony stating they'll get that type of visuals (if you take into context this video, meaning they will get these visuals at 60fps due to this video being at 60) then Sony blatantly lied. They straight up lied to everyone. It would have been more believable if the video was 30fps. There's no way you can have a game look like that, pushing that poly count, and that detail, at 60fps, this generation.... And that goes for X360 as well.
 
Since the PS3 will play Blu-ray movies, the Fast Forward controls will probably pop up on the screen when you press select on the Dual Shock 3 :D
 
Top Bottom