Thread open for trolls. oh look we already have two.

The original games look pretty good. At the smallness of the pictures involved, the details aren't that pronounced. It wasn't like a WOAH! and I was blown away.

Jee Zen.... harsh...

At anyrate yeah its obvious the devs are taking advantage of what the PS3 can do, no matter what anyone says negatively about it in this thread or any other, its a fact that can not be ignored anymore.

Infact I just recently choose Killzone 2 over SO4 for more then a few reasons, to bad the release dates are so close to each other.

Most of the improvements, of course, come from demand and time. When the PS3 first came out, you could release anything on it and people who never had a 360 would assume it was awesome. Now that everyone has seen that and been there, the bar is higher. And devs have more time to develop now because they're not rushing to get to market right with the system.

You can see a very similar improvement for the 360 so far.

However, I'd say the Wii has come the furthest graphically. There are still tons of bad examples on the system, but if you compare a lot of even the better launch games to the better games now, the better games now are insanely better.

Some of these comparisons (Resistance vs. Killzone 2, Ridge Racer 5 vs. Gran Turismo 5 Prologue, Virtua Fighter 5 vs. Soul Calibur IV, Marvel Ultimate Alliance vs. God Of War III, and Sonic The Hedgehog vs. Ratchet & Clank Quest For Booty) are remarkably unfair because the difference between the quality of graphics can be attributed to the difference in quality of developers or the difference in scale of the budget and not necessarily on developments in understanding of the PS3.

let me do one:

here is resistance in dark environment:

here is KZ2 in dark environment:

now ,,,what do you think about that?

@SpartanFX

Wouldn't a comparison of Resistance to Resistance 2 be a far more fair comparison?

Edit: On top of that, isn't the Resistance shot a picture from multiplayer? Don't a lot of developers keep their multiplayer environments a lot less demanding in order to ensure decent performance regardless of the number of players?

Why? KZ 2 is more recent.

Because you can isolate the difference in quality of graphics to a growth in understanding of the hardware because the developer, development time, and budget remain (roughly) the same ... Essentially, this comparison is a lot like taking a game like Medal of Honor Heroes 2 and comparing it to The Conduit as a way of demonstrating how understanding the hardware makes a difference in the quailty of visuals without considering other factors (like Medal of honor Heroes 2 was originally a PSP game).

Found some better pics of RFoM and KZ2 to compare, its up to you guys to decide how much the graphics have increased in two years.