Killzone 2 VS Gears of War 2 through the eyes of a programmer

[jetrii]

mibuokami said:

jetrii said:

mibuokami said:
Sounds fair and reasonable mostly, but... forgive my lack of technical savy, but what is the relevance in the hypothetical scenario of 'switching game engine' for the two game and running the result as a comparable?

The author mention this twice I didn't see where he went with it... :(

It was to try and take the technology out of the discussion. A lot of people attribute Killzone 2's graphics to the Cell processor. Although it does play an important role, I wanted to emphasize the important of the art direction. Killzone 2's art direction and level design lends itself to techniques which make the game look good but don't require as much power as a game such as Gears or Resistance.

 

Ah I understand, I actually thought that was just common sense but I guess some people might not get it, I know that a great deal of KZ2's look can be attributed to optical illusion and is not 'superior graphic' in the sense of 'I own you and you baby monkey' Crysis, but I still think that GG has done an amazing job. Magicians after all, are just superior charlatans.

 

Guerilla Games did use a lot of tricks in Killzone 2. However, I really like the fact that they did as It squeezes more visual out. There is an image in which the character is climbing a staircase with a mirror behind it. Guerilla Games forgot about the mirror because the staircase didn't show up and the back of the staircase wasn't textured. As you walk around, it gains the texture before you see it. In games like Crysis, everything is real. Games like Killzone 2 take more time to develop because these tricks take time to do.

I am not saying it's cheap or anything, it's just another way to develop games.