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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Killzone 2 VS Gears of War 2 through the eyes of a programmer

Zizzla_Rachet said:

Here are the numbers as reported by our very own VG Charts..
Kill Zone 2        1.37m
Gears Of War 2         4.77m
What is the point of this argument, oh now I remember....I'm supposed to pick..I have played both...KZ2 on my little brother's PS3 and GoW2 on my 360...GoW2 wins because the elements in it's campaign are way more complex to develop...also...KZ2 is a completely new engine and was in development way longer so why is it only marginally better?? (if it is..I don't think it is.) any way....I would like for all Sony fans to stop it...just stop your charge to console war victory and start buying games...and Call of Duty 4 does not count...I mean seriously!!! Lost Planet was not worth your time?...and thank you for a great comparison and unbiased..only thing i hated was the the first GoW2 pic you chose was the redux of the old multiplayer GridLock Stage but you apologize for that...


I can tell you don't even know what you're saying, so I won't even touch the technical differences. Just look at the side by side Youtube video (in HD) "Lens of Truth: Gears of War 2 vs Killzone 2 engine". If that's what you consider "marginally better", there is no hope for you. BTW, Gears 2 leverages the tech created since BEFORE Gears 1 came out. Killzone 2 was in development for 3.5 years (just outside the average development time).

Around the Network
Ascended_Saiyan3 said:
Zizzla_Rachet said:

Here are the numbers as reported by our very own VG Charts..
Kill Zone 2        1.37m
Gears Of War 2         4.77m
What is the point of this argument, oh now I remember....I'm supposed to pick..I have played both...KZ2 on my little brother's PS3 and GoW2 on my 360...GoW2 wins because the elements in it's campaign are way more complex to develop...also...KZ2 is a completely new engine and was in development way longer so why is it only marginally better?? (if it is..I don't think it is.) any way....I would like for all Sony fans to stop it...just stop your charge to console war victory and start buying games...and Call of Duty 4 does not count...I mean seriously!!! Lost Planet was not worth your time?...and thank you for a great comparison and unbiased..only thing i hated was the the first GoW2 pic you chose was the redux of the old multiplayer GridLock Stage but you apologize for that...


 

I can tell you don't even know what you're saying, so I won't even touch the technical differences. Just look at the side by side Youtube video (in HD) "Lens of Truth: Gears of War 2 vs Killzone 2 engine". If that's what you consider "marginally better", there is no hope for you. BTW, Gears 2 leverages the tech created since BEFORE Gears 1 came out. Killzone 2 was in development for 3.5 years (just outside the average development time).

 

In the end KillZone 2 looks better than Gears....I can accept that I played both games...but the Unreal 3 is relatively new...and im sure developers get to look before things get told to the public.....



 



Zizzla_Rachet said:
Ascended_Saiyan3 said:
Zizzla_Rachet said:

Here are the numbers as reported by our very own VG Charts..
Kill Zone 2        1.37m
Gears Of War 2         4.77m
What is the point of this argument, oh now I remember....I'm supposed to pick..I have played both...KZ2 on my little brother's PS3 and GoW2 on my 360...GoW2 wins because the elements in it's campaign are way more complex to develop...also...KZ2 is a completely new engine and was in development way longer so why is it only marginally better?? (if it is..I don't think it is.) any way....I would like for all Sony fans to stop it...just stop your charge to console war victory and start buying games...and Call of Duty 4 does not count...I mean seriously!!! Lost Planet was not worth your time?...and thank you for a great comparison and unbiased..only thing i hated was the the first GoW2 pic you chose was the redux of the old multiplayer GridLock Stage but you apologize for that...


 

I can tell you don't even know what you're saying, so I won't even touch the technical differences. Just look at the side by side Youtube video (in HD) "Lens of Truth: Gears of War 2 vs Killzone 2 engine". If that's what you consider "marginally better", there is no hope for you. BTW, Gears 2 leverages the tech created since BEFORE Gears 1 came out. Killzone 2 was in development for 3.5 years (just outside the average development time).

 

In the end KillZone 2 looks better than Gears....I can accept that I played both games...but the Unreal 3 is relatively new...and im sure developers get to look before things get told to the public.....

I can't believe you made that statement.  The Unreal Engine 3 has been around for a long time.  Dude, they're working on the Unreal Engine 4, now.

 



when Did they start programming K2? and when did they start programming GOW?...

(unreal 3 was "develloped" in about 2006 on a PC I suppose, so Epic had to fit it on the 360 (I know, its not a big diffrence, but it is a diffrence..)

so, they had 3.5 years (at least) for K2, and about 3.5 Years for GOW1 and GOW2...

now, of Epic would have only conentrated on one GOW game, and would have brought it out when K2 came out, what would it have looked like...., I think it would have kicked K2 to the moon (and back)....

while as K2 now can campare to GOW2, that's it......(whow about a few more enemies on spot in K2, not just in the "backround"?......, whow bout a few better (and colorfull) textures on the enemies? and how aout better gameplay...

it semms like as if the people behind K2 where so obsessed on making better grafix than GOW (1 or 2), it finally took them 3.5 years to come up with something good looking, and so obsessed on the grafix, that they seemed to have forgoten the gameplay (its just a mix of COD4 and GOW, wow....) or just didnt have the resources (all working on the grafix), the whole team HAD to save sonys face...

and Im starting to get the impression that Ascended_Saiyan3 is just as obsessed about K2's grafix....



Zizzla_Rachet said:
Call of Duty 4 sales as reported by VG charts
PS3 4.19m
360 7.25m

I guess all those other Ps3 owners use it as a BlueRay movie watcher...

Kill Zone 2 should of sold way more by now..even if the end result is that most people think KZ2 is better looking game the numbers don't add up...

But...but...Killzone 2 is teh Call of Duty Killah!!!!!!1111one 

:P



GOTY Contestants this year: Dead Space 2, Dark Souls, Tales of Graces f. Everything else can suck it.

Around the Network

Hahaha.. why troll up a dead thread of 400+ whatever post. Zzzz!



Ive read all 33 pages in this topic and i can say that this forum has attracted many fanboys, dreamers and idiots.
most of them who refrain from reading the whole story.
10-20 people "introduced" the idea of comparing tps to tps(uncharted)
some of them created came out initially as arrogant angry people but actually became nice.
and there were some stupid ones, Ascended_saiyan3. The man thinks a red hit is a fire, he's never played the said games (gears 2, killzone 2,even crysis) in 1080p. most importantly he thinks killzone 2 is better than crysis in graphics. and in a funny turn, he shows little gifs of killzone and crysis animations. the appaling and hilarious fact about his actions is that the crysis animations are in game-as they will be played, killzone's looked like its from a tech demo or a cutscene.
ps. cosoloid was bang on about killzone, its like a tech demo with minimal gameplay.

also the lighting had many people impressed, which is the same for me.
however an important part of display is colour,tone and contrast. Killzone has loads of 3these(colour palettes, etc) but the fact is its basically the same as it was 2-3 years ago bar the addition of new colour palettes, brighter tone and high contrast.

contrast can make anything look more realistic, dont believe me= go play cod 4 campaign with supercontrast cheat on, youll see.

gears 2 has decent lighting(better than the 1st one), i think it does have particles(quite alot of em) but its got the better textures and higher upscaling(but thats the console anyway).

killzone 2 has awesome lighting, acceptable textures( which is covered by darkness), loads of 'visible' particles (its fps , duh) but it would frankly suck when upscaled.

crysis has all of them + a big mansion with a range of playboy bunnies.

crysis is simply the epiphany of realsitic gaming but the its gameplay is no better than doom 3(a great title but with stubborn enemies). NO SERIOUSLY! i hit a guy right in the face and thought that was it but he turned around and killed me. lol
restarted from the last checkpoint and spent two clips trying to kill 4 guys. tho you do have the option of superstrength(mellee all of them), superspeed( run away!), invisibility(stab their backs) and other stuff.(i only use these most of the time and i havent played crysis in a while). it is a very good game though.

killzone two's a similar story however it is a combo of development and controllers which is the cause of the problems, eg, over-walking/running(usually) this is when your chracter keeps on running when you let go of l3 or the run button. this ,i think, was gg's attempt to make the physics and the game more realistic( your velocity cant go from 1000m/s to 0m/s in a split second, it usually takes 1+seconds). that's what happens in k2. when you'r playing body count and then suddenly you realise that there are 4 enemy players( okay helghasts) waiting for you at the other end, but wait normally you stop instantaneously and turn around but in k2 its: wait , its too late to go back- oh s*** these f**k*rs are gonna kill me. you get to their mellee range and you run back like a rabbit runnig away from a wolf that hasnt eaten in 47 days. a clip is gone and the scoreboards helghast-xx isa-0.
also playing killzone with sixaxis controller is playing motorstorm with sixaxis controls, the focus(motorstorm: player vehicle, killzone 2: targeting reticule) sways like hell.

gears 2, ill just say that the number of glitches in the game is worth giving it an award- the most exploitable game of the decade belongs to ________ you know,.
the controls and gameplay is seamless and it is a fair game, all depends on your ability.

however, (even though i sounded a little fanboyish) i have played all of the games mentioned and have throughly enjoyed them and frankly, they have become boring.#
i ranted about the gameplay mechanics because they are an essential part of the engine( lack of precision- killzone 2, lack of patches- gears 2, lack of realism- crysis,im talking gameplay here not graphics)

funnily enough we are talking about the most overhyped games for their dedicated consoles here.

this forum has been quite entertaining and educational.

ps any person who thinks that a console (including and outlining all of its parts) is better than a pc is an idiot.all the things you see, have been programmed or designed on a computer. and what is a computer? its anything that can say 1+1=2.in that sense you are a computer lol and the people who think a computer is worse than the ps3 thinks that a person is inferior to a ps3. oh, yeah to address that thing that everyone has at their homes and offices, where 'we' play our games like crysis, they are called 'personal computers'.please indicate your hardware specs so that the reader can compare.

this might aswell be the last post of this forum so thanks to all who have commented, if you read this after going through all 33 pages you are a star
if you didnt you are smart.

last thing, dont take the bullsh*t Ascended_Sayian3 gave about crysis, its got the best models youll every find and the weapons and their animation is worth the cost of the game. *secret= last time i went hmv they had crisis for £9.99*

 

as i said before i have enjoyed all of the games mentioned above and im still glad of my investment: £120.99

cod 4: £29.99

gears 2: £32.00

killzone 2: £44.50

crysis: £14.50(found it on clearance sale lol)

i really thought i should've bought a wii instead tho

lol

byeeeeeeeeeeee