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

Forums - Gaming - Killzone 2 surpasses Crysis

Zim on 10 January 2009
Slimebeast said:
NJ5 said:
Slimebeast said:
Killzone has nuffin on Crysis. It looks good, but not impressive because it's a corridor shooter and a master of one thousand shades of grey.

Technically Crisis beats everything, but personally I'm not very fond of Crisis grafix - I'm annoyed by how grainy and pixelated the graphics look, I hate it!

Gears of War 2 grafix are overrated as well. Simply another corridor shooter without colors.

Far Cry 2 - at least on PC - have better grafix than Crysis, Killzone, Gears 2 IMO. Even Uncharted and Fable 2 look better.

KZ2 doesn't look much like a corridor shooter. I haven't played Gears of War 2, but the first one was certainly not a corridor shooter either.

 

Well, they're not corridor shooters in the strict, traditional sense á la Doom and Quake, but the areas are still very limited compared to more "modern" shooters like Battlefield, Crysis and Far Cry 2.

 

How pixelated Crysis looks? erm wha?

Also calling GoW2 a corridor shooter is crazy. The scale of it is ridiculously impressive. In fact I doubt you have actually played GoW2. There is quite a lot of colour in it, from bright glowing foilage underground a lot of levels taking place in broad daylight.

I actually think KZ2 is going to struggle against GoW2. While yes in small areas KZ2 is more impressive I think it is never going to get close to the scale of GoW2.
*spoilers*
Is KZ2 going to manage anything like the brumak attacking the building you are in with a hundred or so enemies running beneath it? Or the ridiculously fast moving reaver rides? Riding the Brumak and destroying towers with it? Riding the rigs with helicopters getting destroyed above, killing corpsers, brumaks, hundreds of enemies etc.
*end spoilers*
Perhaps there are still some surprises and there will be sections where there will be bigger sections though. Certainly possible, I remember before RE4 was released we basically only ever saw the village part which turned out to be a very small part of the game.

 Watching KZ2 I wonder if Guerilla are actually putting some tributes to gears in though. The train section and part where you get into a pot used for carrying molten metal look like they are taken directly from gears.

I think realistically it's Crysis>>>GoW2>>uncharted. KZ2 looks like it will be just ahead of GoW2 but way way behind crysis still.



Turkish says and I'm allowed to quote that: Uncharted 3 and God Of War 3 look better than Unreal Engine 4 games will or the tech demo does. Also the Naughty Dog PS3 ENGINE PLAYS better than the UE4 ENGINE.

Around the Network
Dgc1808 on 10 January 2009
BengaBenga said:
It's exactly this kind of over-hyping that always leads to dissapointment.

 

I agree.



4 ≈ One

jpespinal on 10 January 2009
NiKKoM said:
SleepWaking said:
-_- I'm not going to bother......

I'll get the popcorn...

 

haters

 




bobobologna on 10 January 2009
headshot91 said:
Fishie said:
haxxiy said:

Physics is better (what else you could expect, Cell vs Pentium 4) but graphics wise hell no. I mean, even on 720p Crysis need what, 500 megatexels per frame...

Still looks as good as a console game can be.

 

 Watch this then talk again:

 

A few things.Why is everybody getting so emotional? Does it matter really that much that crysis is being compared to kz2. I am just going to base my opinions on gameplay. Furthermore @ fishie, while the physics in crysis are great you do realise that is being rendered frame by frame as it runs at less than 2 fps in real time? Just wanted you to know...

 

 

Not even 2 FPS in real time.  0.2 FPS in some parts according to the video.  Meaning that it takes 5 seconds to render a single frame.  Very bad example of how Crysis phsyics are "better" than Killzone 2's.  I'm sure Killzone 2 could just add a ton of physics objects (even if they have to use the HDD to cache things from which would slow things down even further) and get shitty framerates and show it off to demonstrate the "power" of their engine.

Anyways, IMO, Killzone 2 looks like the best console game to date, but not as good as Crysis.  Beats out Gears of War 2/Far Cry 2/MGS4/Uncharted handily IMO.  The particle system and lighting look especially nice.



frybread on 10 January 2009

Okami is the best looking game.

PC pushes the most pixels, shaders, and has the highest fill rate.  But does that matter without a coherent art style?  Nope.



PC + Wii owners unite.  Our last-gen dying platforms have access to nearly every 90+ rated game this gen.  Building a PC that visually outperforms PS360 is cheap and easy.    Oct 7th 2010 predictions (made Dec 17th '08)
PC: 10^9
Wii: 10^8

Around the Network
disolitude on 10 January 2009

Reading this one can realize how dumb people can be, getting caught in an argument like this.

Anyone that has played it knows that Crysis a very mediocre game despite its looks. Why are people using it as a benchmark?

Halo 3 >>>>>> Crysis in everything but graphics which is what matters.

So what if Killzone 2 looks better than Crysis. (which it doesnt) Doesn't make it a good game at all...



bobobologna on 10 January 2009
Zim said:
Slimebeast said:
NJ5 said:
Slimebeast said:
Killzone has nuffin on Crysis. It looks good, but not impressive because it's a corridor shooter and a master of one thousand shades of grey.

Technically Crisis beats everything, but personally I'm not very fond of Crisis grafix - I'm annoyed by how grainy and pixelated the graphics look, I hate it!

Gears of War 2 grafix are overrated as well. Simply another corridor shooter without colors.

Far Cry 2 - at least on PC - have better grafix than Crysis, Killzone, Gears 2 IMO. Even Uncharted and Fable 2 look better.

KZ2 doesn't look much like a corridor shooter. I haven't played Gears of War 2, but the first one was certainly not a corridor shooter either.

 

Well, they're not corridor shooters in the strict, traditional sense á la Doom and Quake, but the areas are still very limited compared to more "modern" shooters like Battlefield, Crysis and Far Cry 2.

 

How pixelated Crysis looks? erm wha?

Also calling GoW2 a corridor shooter is crazy. The scale of it is ridiculously impressive. In fact I doubt you have actually played GoW2. There is quite a lot of colour in it, from bright glowing foilage underground a lot of levels taking place in broad daylight.

I actually think KZ2 is going to struggle against GoW2. While yes in small areas KZ2 is more impressive I think it is never going to get close to the scale of GoW2.
*spoilers*
Is KZ2 going to manage anything like the brumak attacking the building you are in with a hundred or so enemies running beneath it? Or the ridiculously fast moving reaver rides? Riding the Brumak and destroying towers with it? Riding the rigs with helicopters getting destroyed above, killing corpsers, brumaks, hundreds of enemies etc.
*end spoilers*
Perhaps there are still some surprises and there will be sections where there will be bigger sections though. Certainly possible, I remember before RE4 was released we basically only ever saw the village part which turned out to be a very small part of the game.

 Watching KZ2 I wonder if Guerilla are actually putting some tributes to gears in though. The train section and part where you get into a pot used for carrying molten metal look like they are taken directly from gears.

I think realistically it's Crysis>>>GoW2>>uncharted. KZ2 looks like it will be just ahead of GoW2 but way way behind crysis still.

 

Wow, I got the exact same vibe from the train level.  Disagree about the molten level though.



Seraphic_Sixaxis on 10 January 2009
Zim said:
Slimebeast said:
NJ5 said:
Slimebeast said:
Killzone has nuffin on Crysis. It looks good, but not impressive because it's a corridor shooter and a master of one thousand shades of grey.

Technically Crisis beats everything, but personally I'm not very fond of Crisis grafix - I'm annoyed by how grainy and pixelated the graphics look, I hate it!

Gears of War 2 grafix are overrated as well. Simply another corridor shooter without colors.

Far Cry 2 - at least on PC - have better grafix than Crysis, Killzone, Gears 2 IMO. Even Uncharted and Fable 2 look better.

KZ2 doesn't look much like a corridor shooter. I haven't played Gears of War 2, but the first one was certainly not a corridor shooter either.

 

Well, they're not corridor shooters in the strict, traditional sense á la Doom and Quake, but the areas are still very limited compared to more "modern" shooters like Battlefield, Crysis and Far Cry 2.

 

How pixelated Crysis looks? erm wha?

Also calling GoW2 a corridor shooter is crazy. The scale of it is ridiculously impressive. In fact I doubt you have actually played GoW2. There is quite a lot of colour in it, from bright glowing foilage underground a lot of levels taking place in broad daylight.

I actually think KZ2 is going to struggle against GoW2. While yes in small areas KZ2 is more impressive I think it is never going to get close to the scale of GoW2.
*spoilers*
Is KZ2 going to manage anything like the brumak attacking the building you are in with a hundred or so enemies running beneath it? Or the ridiculously fast moving reaver rides? Riding the Brumak and destroying towers with it? Riding the rigs with helicopters getting destroyed above, killing corpsers, brumaks, hundreds of enemies etc.
*end spoilers*
Perhaps there are still some surprises and there will be sections where there will be bigger sections though. Certainly possible, I remember before RE4 was released we basically only ever saw the village part which turned out to be a very small part of the game.

 Watching KZ2 I wonder if Guerilla are actually putting some tributes to gears in though. The train section and part where you get into a pot used for carrying molten metal look like they are taken directly from gears.

I think realistically it's Crysis>>>GoW2>>uncharted. KZ2 looks like it will be just ahead of GoW2 but way way behind crysis still.

@Bolded- 

 



Genderless Hooker on 10 January 2009
disolitude said:
Reading this one can realize how dumb people can be, getting caught in an argument like this.

Anyone that has played it knows that Crysis a very mediocre game despite its looks. Why are people using it as a benchmark?

Halo 3 >>>>>> Crysis in everything but graphics which is what matters.

So what if Killzone 2 looks better than Crysis. (which it doesnt) Doesn't make it a good game at all...

 

Really, because I remember enjoying it a lot.



JaggedSac on 10 January 2009
disolitude said:
Reading this one can realize how dumb people can be, getting caught in an argument like this.

Anyone that has played it knows that Crysis a very mediocre game despite its looks. Why are people using it as a benchmark?

Halo 3 >>>>>> Crysis in everything but graphics which is what matters.

So what if Killzone 2 looks better than Crysis. (which it doesnt) Doesn't make it a good game at all...

 

I agree.