By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Zekkyou on 06 October 2014
Edit Thread
Hynad said:
Zekkyou said:

It's why i believe Ryse and Killzone are graphically equal, despite knowing that Killzone is the much more demanding title. Ryse simply uses its resources much more efficiently than Killzone. Which of course begs the question, what would an equally efficient Killzone look like? We'll have to wait and see ^^

If Ryse used its ressources much more efficiently, the performance would be... more efficient.

But it struggles to keep a smooth 30fps. Killzone doesn't.

I'm talking purely about visual impact. That's why i said Killzone was so much more demanding, yet i consider it Ryse's visual equal. Sorry if i wasn't clear, it's like 4am so my writing capabilities are a tad limited :p

Performance wise Killzone of course wins by a landslide. Linearly, 1080p/30 - 40fps requires an awful lot more resources than 900p/26 - 32fps. However, when talking about efficiency (the most visual bang for your buck) Ryse is the more effective. Imagine if Killzone ran at the same performance rate, and concentrated all those new resources on in-game graphics. The visual difference between the two would be significantly larger than it is now, despite there being no change in actual resources.

I'd personally rather they stick to 1080p etc, but when talking about linear comparison (which are unfortunately the most effective method of comparing hardware in this context), Killzone's approach is visually wasteful.