oops i quoted the wrong person again. Grrr VG!

From the footage I've seen, KZ2 wins in background textures and particle/explosion effects and Gears currently has an advantage with the foreground textures and character models. Still, with 3 months until Gears comes out and nearly 6 1/2 months before KZ, there's obviously more than enough time to improve both games noticably. Right now, they are virtually tied with a slight edge going to Gears, but since KZ has quite a bit more time for the devs to work on it, it will probably end up looking better than Gears imho.

too lazy to source it, but if you look at image comparison, PS3 graphics always look blurrier and lighter tonation, and 360 seems to have much more color and contrast.

I think GOW3 definately wins when it comes out in another 2 years time! xD

KZ2,,but I love gears of war 2 aswell

let it load first:

I posted this thread, after watching E3 2008 GOW 2 trailer. I thought the textures were really good, but the characters seemed very artificial, in terms of both animation and models.

I have seen about 5 killzone gameplay videos, and everything seems great, specially the animations, but the thing that doesn't convince me are fire effects and some of the environment's textures.

But as some of you have said, until the games actually come out, we can only see some screenshots and a few gameplay videos, so we can't do anything more but to speculate which one will display the most impressive graphics.

I just wanted to know your opinion and compliment my viewpoint with someone else's

To help people compare, here's two videos, both HD from gametrailers, both demoing the latest build of each game.

Gears 2.

Killzone 2.


Killzone 2 looks better to me. Here's my reasoning:

-- Gears 2's framerate is all over the place. Whenever something dramatic or cool happens, it drops painfully. Whenever I watch this gameplay video, I tend to feel slightly nausious in places because of this.

-- Does no one else notice the way the dead bodies in Gears 2 disapear whilst on screen (they simply pop out of existance)? I haven't seen anything like that in Killzone 2.

-- Check out the graphics on the guns in Killzone 2. Looks nothing short of amazing.

-- Lighting is much better in Killzone 2. Look at the way it shines through the windows.

-- I notice more 'active enemies' in Killzone 2. By 'active enemies', I means ones you actually fight. The horde of Locust you see at the end of the Gears 2 video strike me as rather unimpressive: you see a bunch of them from a distance (and so are presumably at a lower res than normal enemies), and they only seem to have a single AI directive (run forwards, no matter what). In the above video, you never see more than two 'active' enemies on the screen at any given time.

-- Animations, especially the death animations, are far more impressive in Killzone 2. The Locust are either cut apart in a predetermined, canned manner, or else simply slump to the floor when shot. The mixture of rag doll, canned animation and environmental reaction in Killzone 2's death animation are far more impressive (notice, too, how blood leaks out of the Helghast after they've died).

-- The explosions look more impressive in Killzone 2. Explosions are important to me.


In favour of Gears 2, I have:

-- A larger draw distance. I really love this, and I think it's the game's main advantage over Killzone 2. It gives the level above a truly epic feel. In all the videos I've watched of Killzone 2, I haven't seen it show off such an impressive draw distance.

-- Killzone 2 has a fair number of low-res textures. Check out the textures on the mounted gun at the begining of the video, for example. There's no textures quite so unpolished in Gears 2.

-- The character models in Gears 2 feel slightly more 'solid' than the Killzone 2 ones.


Both games look awesome, and both have their fair share of problems. At the moment, Killzone 2 really does look noticeably better than Gears 2, but with plenty of time left to polish each game, I'll hold off making an absolutely final decision until both games have been released.

No offense to everybody here, but this argument isn't going anywhere.


You can't convince a person that object A looks better than object B because of so and so......quality of an image is all in the person's eye....especially when they both have sooo much detail in it. The only thing I can tell is that one has a lot of brown while the other has a lot of gray (guess which one is which =P).


Picking and comparing games from opposing consoles is only going to invite bickering and favoritism over one's console, no matter what the intentions were. A better comparison would be which one is better, killzone 2 vs. resistance 2 or Bioshock vs. Gears of War.....


And better yet, why not compare them based on which one is more fun....like AFTER they are actually released? Of course, that is just a naive dream of mine.....

Gears 2's character models have similar low polygon counts.  They just use textures to make them look more detailed, like in these shots:

http://xbox360media.ign.com/xbox360/image/article/886/886455/gears-of-war-2-20080707034715802.jpg

http://xbox360media.ign.com/xbox360/image/article/884/884154/gears-of-war-2-20080625074315142.jpg

The main difference is that Geurrilla went with solid gray textures, and tried to provide detail via polyons.  The futurisitic armor of the marines in Gears allow textures that provide detail through 2D locks, clasps, etc.  It's more a difference in artstyle than anything else.

Epic also specializes in making engines.  It's their main money maker, and you can guarantee that they are 10x better with their own engine than any of their licensees.

GG was bought by Sony only a year and a half ago.  I find it funny that at the time, people would've been like, "Geurrilla vs Epic?  lulz," and yet now people are saying, "Geurrilla is first party.  It SHOULD look better," despite the fact that Epic are some of the best engine developers in the industry.  Honestly, show me a first party game on Microsoft's own console that matches Gears.

Of course, I'm not saying that being first party doesn't effect things, as it certainly does.  I just wish more people would realize that being first party will help Geurrilla improve the Killzone franchise in more ways than just graphics...