IGN believes that Killzone 2 is quite choice

[sieanr]

ssj12 said:

sieanr said:

Wojtas said:

Cadence said:
The textures aren't really that impressive, but I find the character models to be quite appealing. Graphically, I mean.

Just as Cadence said, the enviromental textures don't really look like the deal, it almost seems like most of the horsepower is going into character models, animation, lighting....I'll laugh my ass off if it turns out that the PS3 can't do better than 720p, 30 fps with this game. Next, i wonder just how much space will the game take. They should learn how to compress data instead of just throwing everything on an expensive disc.

 

About the textures...

This game is using a deferred rendering; basically this means they can have tons of lightsources, shadows, motion blurr and other effects without as much of a performance penalty as you would get through a more standard rendering technique. On of the big disadvantages to this technique is it severly limits the texture fill rate, that is the number and size of textures that can be used - so, don't expect the textures to get significantly better unless they come up with a majore technical or artistic workaround.

Its actually pretty cool stuff; http://www.develop-conference.com/developconference/downloads/vwsection/Deferred%20Rendering%20in%20Killzone.pdf

 well they are the ones who made their engine so they might be able to figure a way to make their engine handle bigger textures. 

Its not that simple. The texture fill rate is limited by the hardware, and the method of rendering inherintly limits the texture fill rate. The only way they could partically overcome this is to give everything near the player nice textures, and everything above/beyond invisible walls fairly low rez textures. The fact is, they knew about this limit when development started and either assumed textures wouldn't be high enough rez to make a difference this gen, or thought the advantages were worth it.

It's not as simple as flipping a switch.