By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Graphics: Killzone 2 or Gears of War II?

BrayanA on 02 August 2008
Million said:
BrayanA said:
Ghast said:


IGN rates E3


Best Graphics Technology:
Gears of War 2

Developer: Epic Games
Publisher: Microsoft
Release Date: November 2008
Shown at E3 on: X360
Also Coming to: N/A

There were a lot of beautiful looking games at E3 2008, but none held our eye as long as Gears of War 2. Some very deserving titles made our short list, but at the end of the day, it was Epic's uncanny ability to squeeze magic out of the (upgraded) Unreal Engine 3 that wowed us most.

From the updated soft-body physics to the fantastic water effects and realistic cover destruction, Gears 2 reminded us why Tim Sweeney and the tech team at Epic are some of the best in the business. Not only does Gears 2 look pretty in pictures and HD videos, it also runs like a dream. In our lengthy time playing the Horde co-op mode at a Microsoft event at E3, we saw no slowdown, tearing, crashes or hiccups whatsoever. Here's hoping the finished product looks as good on launch day as it did in L.A

Runner(s)-Up:

Crysis: Warhead (PC - Electronic Arts)
Fallout 3 (X360 - Bethesda Softworks)
Killzone 2 (PS3 - Sony Computer Entertainment)

I will go with this!

IGN > 1000 PS3 fanboys opinions

 

IGN = An Opinion

Therfore it cannot be greater than 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000 PS3 Fanboys

You get a technical expert with in depth understanding of graphics in games then it'll mean something.

 

At least IGN people saw both games live. I doubt you have such a chance.



Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 02 August 2008
kn said:
One important thing that I think people are missing here: Guerrilla Games is a wholly owned first party developer for Sony is it not? Epic is wholly third party. It is amazing to me that we are comparing a first and third party game. You read into that what you want.

 

Get over it yourself, it's still exclusive to Microsoft Game Stuios. Microsoft publishes the game. Epic games is an independant third party studio, fully financed by Microsoft to make this game. If you want to talk about a third party title thats exclusive to Sony, you should be talking to about MGS4, which is published by Konami, and has remained close to Sony out of loyalty, rather than financially or being in control of rights. Gears of War is a 2nd party project, in which Microsoft owns the rights to. The truth hurts.



S.T.A.G.E. on 02 August 2008
MakoInfused said:
I'm sorry GeOW lovers, but there is Nothing to defend here :

Sure, gears is pretty, but killzone creams it.

 

 Sure...you're right KZ has better graphics. Thats all it has over gears. Gears has it's own style though that is really awesome. KZ is common.



Insanestalker2 on 02 August 2008

Does Gears 2 have deferred rendering or lens flare?



Bobo012893 on 02 August 2008
S.T.A.G.E. said:
MakoInfused said:
I'm sorry GeOW lovers, but there is Nothing to defend here :

Sure, gears is pretty, but killzone creams it.

 

 Sure...you're right KZ has better graphics. Thats all it has over gears. Gears has it's own style though that is really awesome. KZ is common.

 

 Have you played it?



Feel free to add me as your friend-PSN ID: Bobo012893

Around the Network
brute on 02 August 2008

thats pretty close to call



tag:"reviews only matter for the real hardcore gamer"

MakoInfused on 02 August 2008
NJ5 said:
thekitchensink said:
MakoInfused said:
IMO, i don't care if a game runs at .5 FPS, as long as it looks,runs good.

The human eye doesn't even detect the FPS..so why bother...

Ummm... mind telling me how it's possible for a .5fps game to run good? XD  The framerate IS how good it runs.

 

Lol, that's a slide-show. This post just goes to show how much most people really know about graphics, let alone enough to do a comparison of two games.

 

 

Lol, it was hypothetical, I know it isn't possible :P  

What i ment was that as long as the game runs good, you won't notice a thing...or you mean to tell me that when you play a game you can tell how many FPS it's running just by playing it ?




NJ5 on 02 August 2008
MakoInfused said:
NJ5 said:
thekitchensink said:
MakoInfused said:
IMO, i don't care if a game runs at .5 FPS, as long as it looks,runs good.

The human eye doesn't even detect the FPS..so why bother...

Ummm... mind telling me how it's possible for a .5fps game to run good? XD  The framerate IS how good it runs.

 

Lol, that's a slide-show. This post just goes to show how much most people really know about graphics, let alone enough to do a comparison of two games.

 

 

Lol, it was hypothetical, I know it isn't possible :P  

What i ment was that as long as the game runs good, you won't notice a thing...or you mean to tell me that when you play a game you can tell how many FPS it's running just by playing it ?

I can definitely tell when there's slowdown and it drops. And in some genres, I can tell if it's 30 fps or 60 fps (although some clever tricks like motion blur can make 30 fps look much better; incidentally, the same reason why movies are fine at just 24 fps).

 



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

reptile168 on 02 August 2008
NJ5 said:
MakoInfused said:
NJ5 said:
thekitchensink said:
MakoInfused said:
IMO, i don't care if a game runs at .5 FPS, as long as it looks,runs good.

The human eye doesn't even detect the FPS..so why bother...

Ummm... mind telling me how it's possible for a .5fps game to run good? XD The framerate IS how good it runs.

 

Lol, that's a slide-show. This post just goes to show how much most people really know about graphics, let alone enough to do a comparison of two games.

 

 

Lol, it was hypothetical, I know it isn't possible :P

What i ment was that as long as the game runs good, you won't notice a thing...or you mean to tell me that when you play a game you can tell how many FPS it's running just by playing it ?

I can definitely tell when there's slowdown and it drops. And in some genres, I can tell if it's 30 fps or 60 fps (although some clever tricks like motion blur can make 30 fps look much better; incidentally, the same reason why movies are fine at just 24 fps).

 

 

Motion blur, exactly what all PS3 games have compared to their 360 counterpart.

 

Back to the point, asking K2 or GOW2 graphics is like asking fanboys PS3 or 360. You will just get fanboys supporting their games. As we speak, in terms of real gameplay, Gears of War 2 seems to be the leader. Killzone 2, just like every thing PS3, seems to bet on potential. Potential potential potential. I wouldn't put my eggs in Sony's basket for this.



Rainbird on 02 August 2008
NJ5 said:

@RainBird:

Resolution is a big "shrug" for me... With my 32'' TV, I honestly don't see any difference between true-HD and upscaled-HD games such as Halo 3 and Ninja Gaiden 2.

I want good framerate above all (after gameplay and all the other non-technical stuff of course). If KZ2 or Gears of War 2 have to slightly lower resolution to maintain a stable 30 fps, so be it!

 

I know it doesn't make that big a difference, but if one game runs at 686p/30fps and the other at 712p/30fps then I think it should make a difference, if only to show a difference in something that seems completely subjective with these two contenders.