IGN Editors state whether they think the Killzone footage is real.
 

"What do IGN editors think. Is the Killzone video real? Will the game look like that?"

Jeremy Dunham - IGNPS2
"I don't think so. I think the only way the game will look like that is if they spent several more years in development and knew how to exploit the PlayStation 3 to its fullest. I have no doubt that they can produce cutscenes that good, but then again, the cutscene gave that away!"

Ed Lewis - IGNPS2
"We're probably going to see similar type graphics...hopefully. Because that's what they're aiming for, but...oh man. Hopefully. I mean, right now it's just a concept video. What will it be? I don't know. It's way too early to tell."

Ivan Sulic - IGNPS2
"**** no."

Juan Castro - IGNCube
"Yes. It will. On PS4... 2009. Or maybe 2015."

David Clayman - IGNXbox
"No. No. No. If that's the style of the game, it will look like that, but not at that level of quality. That had separate animations for every single movement. That is not a game. It was total CG. Those little things giveaway stuff like that real well."

Doug Perry - IGNXbox
"It doesn't look real to me, but it's what I want the game to look like and I hope. But I don't think the developer is capable of that, especially based on the first game."

Stephen Butts - IGNPC
"No. The video is real in the sense that it exists in this time continuum, but no, it does not reflect what the game will look like."

Dan Adams - IGNPC
"No."


EDIT: Oops. Should probably have gone in the E3 forum.

Re: IGN Editors state whether they think the Killzone footage is real.
 

Even the PS2 editors are doubting it... I agree, that video was pure CG...

Re: IGN Editors state whether they think the Killzone footage is real.
 

Who cares if the editors are doubting it.

It is natual to fear what you do not know. They are only basing their opinion on the fact that "It looks too fluid and good to be real."

But NONE of us know what the PS3 is capable of... their goal was to make Cinematic CG graphics in real-time possible.

I'm not going to say the Killzone graphics were real, and I'm not going to say it wasn't real. But we have something to look forward to here, and we shouldn't shoot it down cuz it looks TOO good.

EDIT: A microsoft representative told GameSpot that the CELL chip doesn't even exist.... Do we believe him too? PS3, although unveiled... is still a mystery to many.

EDIT 2 And this thread is almost obviously trying to kill down the hype of the graphical power of PS3. This thread coming from someone who has discredited IGN in the past....

Re: IGN Editors state whether they think the Killzone footage is real.
 

I'm hopeful so I'll say yes.

Re: IGN Editors state whether they think the Killzone footage is real.
 

it's all over for PS3







*edit*

oh, wait

Comments from coder with actual PS3 experience regarding their demo (Heavenly Swords)





According to a coder on the team, the E3 footage is generated straight from their engine @ 1080p (frames were assembled after the fact to ensure a smooth framerate). He states that he fully expects the team to get the final game running @ 30+fps at that resolution (!).

The trailer was made by selecting a bunch of in-game moves/cool things, Then those frames making up those bits were output at 1080p from the engine. These are then all stuck together in a editing and post-processing package to look like a movie trailer.

But fundementally the 'renderer' itself was in-game, so you can see the shadow issues in certain frame where the in-game shadow map resolution optimiser doesn't do its job.

So in all fairness its not quite as black and white as either real-time or CGI...

Without saying anything regarding hardware etc. I will say everything you see is still early and we expect it to run alot better in future...

*Deano, can you honestly tell me that all those soldiers running around have their own AI and animations and such?*


Yep, they are simplified entities but still have basic AI (they can avoid things, stay in formation etc., they try and jump out of the way of the boozaka if you look carefully...) and use the normal animaton system, they are even the same models, the LOD system handles it transparently. They also turn into Havok ragdolls for a decent death.

Currently they are all on a single processor core, so the framerate drops pretty sharply at high number of entities... but this should go away once we have had a chance to work the machine properly...


whole thing here:

http://forums.gaming-age.com/showthread.php?t=48465


bottom line:

PS3 tech demos were real time...PS3 trailers were a mixture of real-time engine and CG touch-ups. nothing is finished, nothing is playable, so that's the best representation they could give.

Re: IGN Editors state whether they think the Killzone footage is real.
 

I don't know what the PS3 is capable of, but I can safely say that developers are not capable of producing real-time CG.

Re: IGN Editors state whether they think the Killzone footage is real.
 

if you read the interview, the developers even said, its a video of what they are trying to create.

so lets just wait and see how close they come?

Re: IGN Editors state whether they think the Killzone footage is real.
 

Well there you have it. From an actual coder and someone whose worked on the PS3 Dev Kit.. and might I add, unfinished Dev Kit....

Everything in the press conference from Sony looked too good to be true, and the Killzone 2 gameplay footage added to that doubt.

Let me recall some reasons for doubt,
"It seems too scripted // Everyone seems to know what they are doing in the footage // No one plays the game this right"

Well....... when trying to show a tech demo, you figure they'd make it look the best they can.. In essence... taking into account what the Dev's of Heavenly Sword said, they selected pre-determined moves and awesome imagery and it went through post-processing or editing, and created a trailer.

For Killzone they probably did the same thing, and had someone play the game endlessly until he got every action right to create a fluid game play... rather then someone jumping around and shooting bricks until he finally reached a checkpoint to continue on in the story.

They were trying to convey the graphics capability of what they are aiming for. And they are trying to make it look nice but cutting it and touch it up with editing, but I don't expect anyone to show a tech demo of some guy jumping around and fooling around.

And what of the Ducky demo? The guy was using the unfinished PS3 hardware, using the controller to control the ducks and the battle ships.... via wireless controllers... THAT demo looked real cuz he was fooling around and such correct? If he showed a trailer with the duck flapping his wings and the water turning into a Tsunami creating a massive mess in the bathroom... showing the drama of course.....Everyone would be speculating if THAT was real...

Movies are fake because they are scripted..... Doesn't mean games have to be. Demo's are always scripted.

Re: IGN Editors state whether they think the Killzone footage is real.
 

Like Stray said, perhaps the PS3 could this, but it would take SO long to develop these games. Imagine all the animations and models you'd have to program.

Unless they find a totally new way of making games.

Re: IGN Editors state whether they think the Killzone footage is real.
 

This is my guess too.

*waits and sees*

Re: IGN Editors state whether they think the Killzone footage is real.
 

It's not the developers job to render the CG in real-time. They make the programming and the A.I. and obviously the graphics portion of the game. It's the processing hardware that determines real-time or pre-rendered.

And who are you to say Developers aren't capable? They've been making these graphics for years in Cut-Scene and CG Scenes all over games. Just take those graphics, add A.I. and programming to them, and you've got a game with cinema-CG graphics.... the question is ... is the hardware capable of rendering such in real-time with no frame rate drop.

I think it's idiotic to doubt developers now a days, and it's idiotic to assume they are capable of so much.

But honestly... We really cannot say for sure what they are capable of this coming next-gen. Everything seems to good to be true, so we doubt it's authenticity. But all we're going to have to do is wait and see what they come up with.

Final Note: These demos from Sony were shown on Alpha dev kits of PS3... and Developers claim that games would look even BETTER on the final dev kit.

Now... stop doubting such a future, because it's a bright one to look forward to. Those who doubt the future will inevitably not be a part of it. The Next-Gen graphics look real and it's coming whether we're ready for this leap or not.

EDIT: I can definitely say that if Nintendo Revolution showed this footage, there would be no doubt and people all over would be saying, "So that's the next-gen huh?"

Sony has very little following on this forum, and in any instance to show a little power, it's shot down by fanboys alike. You can hide your intentions all you want with your clever simantics and grammatical manipulation.... but in reality you really don't want the PS3 to achieve these kind of graphics before the Revolution does.

Nuff said...

Re: IGN Editors state whether they think the Killzone footage is real.
 

Actually I want a PS3. Just doubt I can afford it when it's first released. I missed out on too many quirky titles this gen by only having a cube. The reason I seem against PS3 is because you appear to be so for it. I find it fun to argue. :) Anway, I have no doubts the graphics can look that good...just not the first batch of games. And don't expect the animations to be close to that in game. I'll wait till I actually watch someone play a game to determine the graphics. As of now all I have to go by is the duck tech demo since he actually controlled the duck.

Nintendo did show Revolution footage. It really didn't look much better than GameCube. But I'm interested in what the revolutionary aspect of the console will be. I can say I don't care about graphics but I can be impressed by them. They usually determine if someone will buy a game nowadays. I've noticed that once you're actually playing though you don't notice as much. When playing Doom 3 unless I stopped and slowly looked about my surroundings I really didn't have time to notice the graphics anymore than say the original Counter-Strike. Who cares about particle effects when you got demons on your tail.

Re: IGN Editors state whether they think the Killzone footage is real.
 

You didnt stop to admire the graphics in doom3, that doesnt mean your mind didnt notice it. the better the graphics help you get into the game more, your mind picks things up as what they are. if you walked around doom3 in doom1 graphics, it wouldnt of been anywhere near the same. you wouldnt feel as into it. not as much of a part of it.


While graphics arent the most important thing, depending on the game type, they are HUGLY important.

Re: IGN Editors state whether they think the Killzone footage is real.
 

Everything besides Epic and EA's stuff was CGI.

Re: IGN Editors state whether they think the Killzone footage is real.
 

Art style over number of polygons and special effects.