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

Forums - Gaming - Graphics: Resident Evil 5 360 > Killzone 2?

MikeB on 14 April 2009
Mendicate Bias said:
MikeB said:
Mendicate Bias said:
Oh hi Mike, how is you 140 million LTD for PS3 sales going?

Still on track with my anticipations of doing ~10 million sales per year, hopefully a cheaper slimline product gets released this year so it can do my anticipated ~15 million on average sales per year. Let's wait for 2016 before coming to conclusions, ok?

BTW, I said I expected going beyond 100 million should be no problem assuming Sony's 10 year lifecycle. If somebody would have said in the first half of 1997 the Playstation 1 would sell over 100 million, maybe people would have frowned as well (was only about 14 million shipped taking equal timeframes). So let's not get pre-emptively childish and off topic, ok?

 

 

So even though its currently tracking well below what it was last year you still won't concede.

 

The funny thing is, despite no cut on entry pricing for over 1 and a half years it isn't.



Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

PS3 vs 360 sales

Around the Network
1337 Gamer on 14 April 2009

nope KZ2 or Gears 2 are the best looking console games to date. Which one is better is very debatable but RE5 is no where close to these games.



Long Live SHIO!

Ascended_Saiyan3 on 14 April 2009
MikeB said:
Jeronimo66 said:

I have been watching him play and I knew Resident Evil 5 would have really good graphics, from the movies and screenshots I saw before even the demo came out, and when I saw the demo it was all but confirmed, Resident Evil 5 showed that the 360 can pull of Uncharted: Drakes Fortune, a game Sony claimed could not be done on 360 without Blu-ray and Resident Evil 5 also proves 360 can even pull of Metal Gear Solid 4

IMO Metal Gear Solid 4, Uncharted: Drake's Fortune and Killzone 2 could all be done on the 360, but with sacrifices.

- Metal Gear Solid 4 would need to be scaled down in terms of assets, such as its 7.1 audio and textures. It would still need to be supplied on multiple discs.

- Uncharted: Drake's Fortune would also need to be similarly scaled down and it would have to settle for less impressive HDR, like FP10 on the 360.

- Killzone 2 would also need to be scaled down in terms of assets and on the 360 would have to do with fewer light sources and effects.

But yes, IMO these games could be done on the 360 with some cutting here and there (like older PCs are able to run new games with sub-recommended configurations). However these developers don't need to worry about such things, as these games will remain exclusive to the PS3, instead of trying to shoehorn their games within the 360 architecture they can now focus on pushing the PS3 even much further with Metal Gear 5, Uncharted 2 and Killzone 3.

 

 

If I may add to that, the dev slides also said they were using 560MB for textures for Uncharted. That was due to their stream engine. So, I believe the texture resolution would need to be dropped in places or they would need to reuse textures.

For Killzone 2, the dynamic lights would have to be dropped (like in Gears 2). So, that would be a drop from 350 dynamic lights to 0 or near 0. The "God rays" or volumetric lighting would have to be dropped or baked due to the amount of time it takes the GPU alone to render that effect. I doesn't render in frame.

THAT would just be the beginning of the compromising. Physics, particle effects, ray-tracing every bullet hole, the animations, amount of characters on screen, audio quality and effects, etc would have to be decreased or faked in some way.



VGSpain on 14 April 2009

Killzone 2 >>>>>>> any console game in terms of graphics...

Particles effects, lightning, smoke, explosions, etc... are amazing.

So, you played Killzone 2 and still thinking RE5 looks better? You fail!

All PS3 games  could be done on X360 but they wouldn't be the same. They don't look as good as in PS3.

But... you know... you must have enough space in your room.. http://360.kombo.com/images/content/news/blurb_mgs4xbox360oj1_20080826.png

(I was joking )

Watch this:

http://www.gamekings.tv/index/videos/minidocu-the-company-behind-killzone-2-full-version-subbed/

 



Reasonable on 14 April 2009

I'll answer simply. Playing both RE5 on 360 does not surpass the graphics of KZ2. The engine is very good, and looks great, but its lighting, effects, etc. are not as good graphically and the engine is clearly more limited in function (which is fine as it works great for RE5).

Right now I'd say KZ2 graphically is probably the most impressive game on a console right now, closely followed by Gears 2 and Uncharted and MGS4. I'd place RE5 slightly below those games so it's close, but not better.

IMHO.



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

Around the Network
zordiark on 14 April 2009

Graphics? KZ2 is better than RE5... the character model is about good on RE5
(maybe your just looking at Chris Buffness muscle...wahahahahaha,)

the colors on uncharted is still better on RE5... but the character models are a bit greater...

KZ2 however is much more graphically impressive than RE5...

 

but the characters looks good on RE5(although not that great IMO)

HDMI is better than VGA... come on... digital signals is always greater than analog signals

 

@ to the person that has a 500 games...

-man that cost alot of fortune...



PLAYSTATION®2 is the yesterday.....NOW.......still......A_L_I_V_E

Consoles own:

Nintendo: Famicom(japanese NES, Family Computer), GBC, GBA, DS, Wii

Sony: PS1, PS2, PSP, PS3

Microsoft: future 360 owner

MyBrute

iron_megalith on 14 April 2009

Hmmm... RE 5 looks great but I still stand by my decision that KZ2 is the best looking game on a console for now.



MikeB on 14 April 2009
kowenicki said:
MikeB said:
Mendicate Bias said:
MikeB said:
Mendicate Bias said:
Oh hi Mike, how is you 140 million LTD for PS3 sales going?

Still on track with my anticipations of doing ~10 million sales per year, hopefully a cheaper slimline product gets released this year so it can do my anticipated ~15 million on average sales per year. Let's wait for 2016 before coming to conclusions, ok?

BTW, I said I expected going beyond 100 million should be no problem assuming Sony's 10 year lifecycle. If somebody would have said in the first half of 1997 the Playstation 1 would sell over 100 million, maybe people would have frowned as well (was only about 14 million shipped taking equal timeframes). So let's not get pre-emptively childish and off topic, ok?

 

 

So even though its currently tracking well below what it was last year you still won't concede.

 

The funny thing is, despite no cut on entry pricing for over 1 and a half years it isn't.

wrong again mike.

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=67490

And yes I'm referring to vgchartz numbers... not "im mikeb - tracking god" figures.

LOL, and what do you think VGChartz' error margin for "Other" regions is?

Even those figures don't show "well below", but "just below" instead.

Even taking the VGChartz data you used, the gap between PS3 data last year this month vs the PS3 data this year this month is less than 10% apart. Well less than error margins here.

If VGchartz says a game sold 50 thousand while in fact another source says 55 thousands, people usually applaud this as being very accurate. IMO at least such people should not use double standards, either the estimation error was small and the PS3 based on even VGChartz data is very similar. Or 10% error margin is huge, in which case VGChartz cannot be used as a reliable source. We know VGChartz has been off quite a bit from time in the past, let's be realistic.

Understand?

 



Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

PS3 vs 360 sales

Feylic on 14 April 2009
yo_john117 said:
Feylic said:
yo_john117 said:
Feylic said:
yo_john117 said:
Megadude said:

First off the omg it looks better on 360 is BS. RE5 is a beautiful game on both systems and you will only notice if you hook up some fuggin machine that counts fps and licks Bill Gates butt at the same time. I have seen both versions and they look the SAME baby. "OH MY GOD YOU CAN SEE TWO EXTRA pixels on Chris Redfields nut bulge OMG!!!!" No you cant you don't notice that trash at all.

DEAR GOD LOOK HOW MUCH BETTER IT LOOKS ON 360! More then makes up for not being able to play bluray with extra quality like that that's why the 360 version is selling better!

With that said Killzone 2 will SPOIL you and make even the most amazing games (like RE5) look dated. It's not a diss to RE5, just a complement to Killpwn 2. It's not hype, the visuals on the game are STUNNING.

I really wish X-Bots would stop. NOTHING on 360 looks as good as Killzone 2...YET. Let's wait for E3 and hope MS will drop a new IP that will outperform KZ2. Untill then ;)

Damn!!! I don't think anyone said that RE5 is better on one system than the other. Soooo where did this lil trollish post pop up from??

You know what assuming makes out of you and me ;)

 

uhm.... read the OP again. Assuming just makes things out of you...

 

Show me exactly where it says in the original post that RE5 is better on the 360 than the PS3.

Cause he said nothing of the sort.  Learn to read thoroughly my friend.

 

You first

 

 

 

Instead of saying a stupid statement like that, how bout you back up your first comment directed towards me with proof.  So show me exactly where the OP said that RE5 is better on the 360 then. Because i read it and he said nothing about one being better than the other.

 

Well seeing how you've already gotten enough things wrong in this thread, I'll explain. What would be the point of making a thread like this if you thought RE5 on both platforms was exactly the same? Why would RE5 on the 360 looking better than KZ2 be a big deal if RE5 on the PS3 looked better than KZ2 as well? If RE5 on both platforms looked better than KZ2, why would you compare the 360 version, to KZ2, why not compare both versions of RE5. It seems to me that the post insinuates that the 360 version is better, only then does it make sense.

 



yo_john117 on 14 April 2009
Feylic said:
yo_john117 said:
Feylic said:
yo_john117 said:
Feylic said:
yo_john117 said:
Megadude said:

First off the omg it looks better on 360 is BS. RE5 is a beautiful game on both systems and you will only notice if you hook up some fuggin machine that counts fps and licks Bill Gates butt at the same time. I have seen both versions and they look the SAME baby. "OH MY GOD YOU CAN SEE TWO EXTRA pixels on Chris Redfields nut bulge OMG!!!!" No you cant you don't notice that trash at all.

DEAR GOD LOOK HOW MUCH BETTER IT LOOKS ON 360! More then makes up for not being able to play bluray with extra quality like that that's why the 360 version is selling better!

With that said Killzone 2 will SPOIL you and make even the most amazing games (like RE5) look dated. It's not a diss to RE5, just a complement to Killpwn 2. It's not hype, the visuals on the game are STUNNING.

I really wish X-Bots would stop. NOTHING on 360 looks as good as Killzone 2...YET. Let's wait for E3 and hope MS will drop a new IP that will outperform KZ2. Untill then ;)

Damn!!! I don't think anyone said that RE5 is better on one system than the other. Soooo where did this lil trollish post pop up from??

You know what assuming makes out of you and me ;)

 

uhm.... read the OP again. Assuming just makes things out of you...

 

Show me exactly where it says in the original post that RE5 is better on the 360 than the PS3.

Cause he said nothing of the sort.  Learn to read thoroughly my friend.

 

You first

 

 

 

Instead of saying a stupid statement like that, how bout you back up your first comment directed towards me with proof.  So show me exactly where the OP said that RE5 is better on the 360 then. Because i read it and he said nothing about one being better than the other.

 

Well seeing how you've already gotten enough things wrong in this thread, I'll explain. What would be the point of making a thread like this if you thought RE5 on both platforms was exactly the same? Why would RE5 on the 360 looking better than KZ2 be a big deal if RE5 on the PS3 looked better than KZ2 as well? If RE5 on both platforms looked better than KZ2, why would you compare the 360 version, to KZ2, why not compare both versions of RE5. It seems to me that the post insinuates that the 360 version is better, only then does it make sense.

 

 

Instead of assuming thats what he meant how bout you ask him if thats part of what he meant....

Get off your high horse dude at least i admit when i am wrong but you keep fighting like a little 2 year old when proven wrong, but i'm done its not worth it to argue with someone like you.