The 2005 render had a LOT more detail at a greater draw distance. That is what was impressive with it. Now, the current build does look real good, but doesn't have the same draw distance awe the 2005 render did.

And if people insist on going down this path, go ahead and hype up Motorstorm the way Sony did back then. Anyone want to argue that Motorstorm is close to the render they did in 2005?

Shoot, go through a bulk of the 2005 render stuff Sony did and try to argue the PS3 is close to that now. Want to know why Sony has slipped? Well, because of stuff like this. It was effective at dealing with Sega, but Microsoft stood up to it this time, and it drove Microsoft to up its game. Now, we have a wash here this generation.

Review build looks far better, but how do they compare in motion?

doesn't really matter, they both look great. the CGI uses a warmer tone so it's hard to tell. I'm looking forward to seeing single player because it's looking even better than the beta (which is expected since that was multiplayer)

That's not the problem. The problem lies in the fact that the CGI sequence is much grander in scope and finer in detail - it's not as smooth, not as visually consistent, not as gritty, but the scale of the areas and draw distance is enormous, comparable to an area in Halo. Killzone 2's actual review build is prettier in many ways, but its visual consistency comes at the cost of being able to move in especially large environments.

The review build is prettier, but the CGI looks grander and potentially more fun.

I agree.

the back grounds scenarios looks waaaay better in the CGI. The lighting and the frames per seconds looks better in the final product.

I was never very impressed with the CG version even back in 05. The stuff I have seen from the review copy blows the CG trailer away in all but texture quality, and partical effects. Videos of the review build have had much better animations, lighting, coloring, and motion blur that really set it apart. But as I have said in previous posts about rating graphics, it is all about the whole package. In the case of these subjects I would have to say they come out nearly even when all things are put into perspective. Though I preffer the review build more.

On those pictures review build looks better.

Where be those that cried it was impossible, sure on the other consoles no chance in hell. But reality B smacks the many of them like always.

Cant wait to test it out on the 5th.

Really? I highly doubt this is the review build, I would say that the gameplay images are from around early 2008 to E3 2008. In fact, I think I remember seeing these exact same images last year.

For those that need to see it again,

The only footage available of the 2005 trailer is in SD, there is no HD version of it to compare it with actual gameplay. Still, make sure to right click on the image in the OP and view it in a new window/tab so it doesn't look all squished.

Personally, I'm getting tired of the CG vs gameplay comparisons. If the game didn't look as good as it did, perhaps this would be more interesting, but I don't even care anymore. I would say they've met their target, but I'm not focusing soley on the graphics. For example, take the crash landing at the start of the Corinith River level.