Killzone 2 (E3 2005) vs ShadowFall

[Scoobes]

CGI-Quality said:

Scoobes said:
ShadowFall looks a lot better. The level of detail in the textures is much better not to mention the texture resolution. The effects on the skin looks a lot more realistic in ShadowFall too, not to mention the sheer number of objects on screen during explosions or the superior view distances. I suspect the texture filtering in ShadowFall is is also better because the textures in the KZ2 tech demo look slightly blurred to me. The most impressive thing in the KZ2 demo is the smoke, but overall the techniques they've used appear less advanced.

Eh, the character models in the CGI still haven't been reached by ShadowFall. Yes, the resolution looks higher in it, with a more robust lighting system, and solid draw distance. However, I disagree regarding textures (just look closely at the skin on the faces in the CGI render). Even the environments look better, detail-for-detail, in the target.

Still, while we won't completely pass that CGI with launch PS4 games, end-of-gen titles may take it.

I was looking at the textures but they don't look particularly impressive to me. There's less detail on screen than in ShadowFall and the texture quality varies greatly depending on what you're looking at. Some of the walls just look low res whilst the road looks slightly more impressive.

If you look at the character faces in the CGI, they're good but pastelly whereas the in ShadowFall it looks like they've carefully used shader effects to give a more realistic look.

What really does it for me though is the fact the CGI looks relatively empty whereas ShadowFall is very busy with numerous characters, debris, particles and detailed distant objects. For me, ShadowFall has already surpassed the tech demo, let alone the PC games that are now coming out.