Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Bucket

Gears of War killer? Not yet, but close

Recommended Posts

Killzone 2 trailer

http://media.1up.com/media?id=3345486&type=lg

This is an early alpha shot of the game shown last night at E3. You probably saw the pre-launch version-- which turned out to be a "target render"-- but I have to say this is pretty damn close to it. There are tiny details that should be worked on like facial expressions... but if they can tackle that, this'll be the most impressive next-gen offering I've seen.

Share this post


Link to post

You're insane to think that is anywhere near the Target render they showed, but it doesn't look bad. The original game was your average futuristic FPS and was atleast fun to play for the most part.

Edit: I like the guy with the broken jaw. It's also hard to tell how much of this is truly ingame. It's obviously using in game assets, but it's far too smooth in spots.

Not to mention how bland it looks. They might as well have just made it black and white, sheesh. Not even the original Quake had a palette that drab! :p

Share this post


Link to post

Though I'm not really a fan of anything Sony related I do admit that trailer looks pretty cool.

I've never played Killzone though and probably won't anytime soon. I'm not too into FPS games and it never looked terribly exiting to me. I do have to admit though that the art style the games have is pretty awesome.

Share this post


Link to post

I liked the plotline to the original, with the two species of humans at war with each other. It's a step up from aliens, and the concept allows for parallels or allegories to real war. There was even a character who was a human/helghast hybrid, which could have touched on racism had they explored the theme more. Like most games, however, intelligent story elements were never taken advantage of.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, Killzone had great weapons. The weapons felt real, which is always a good quality. I loved the Helghast assault rifle with the underslung shotgun. That was perfect.

Share this post


Link to post
Snarboo said:

You're insane to think that is anywhere near the Target render they showed, but it doesn't look bad. The original game was your average futuristic FPS and was atleast fun to play for the most part.

I mean "damn close" as in "much closer than anyone thought it would be". If they can smooth out the rough edges, I'm definitely buying this.

Edit: I like the guy with the broken jaw. It's also hard to tell how much of this is truly ingame. It's obviously using in game assets, but it's far too smooth in spots.

What you see is full-screen motion blur. Not the half-assed stuff in other games that blur some objects and not others, but as it should be.

Share this post


Link to post
leileilol said:

yeah motionblur that's sure to fix a game's unoriginal and repetitive monotony

Yeah the coders should boycott the feature until the level designers meet their demands. What the fuck are you ragging on exactly?

Share this post


Link to post

I meant smooth as in framerates, not as in shaders. If you watch the landing sequence, you can actually see a change in the framerate, especially during heavy action. The "gameplay" montage looks like scripted footage edited together.

I don't doubt this will be kind of fun, as even the most basic FPS is in some way. Do we really need another generic action shooter, though? I'd kill for a sequal to Blood, Quake 1 or Tron 2.0. I miss abstract and gothic stuff and the only modern FPS I've seen that fits the bill is Clive Barker's Jericho.

Share this post


Link to post

yeah, the only thing killzone had going for it was a rad art department. I remember the frame rate gave me a massive headache.

Share this post


Link to post

I simply don't get the point of "in-engine" noninteractive cinematic sequences, if you can't move or do anything, what exactly about it differs from your standard cutscene?

Share this post


Link to post

Heh, now that Killzone has proven truly awesome, all you fools have left is, "Uhhhh, well... The first one wasn't that good, anyway!"

Share this post


Link to post

Linguica said:
I simply don't get the point of "in-engine" noninteractive cinematic sequences, if you can't move or do anything, what exactly about it differs from your standard cutscene?

Probably because a bunch of script files usually takes less memory then a movie file.

Share this post


Link to post


Captain Red said:

Probably because a bunch of script files usually takes less memory then a movie file.

what does that matter now that they have

THE POWER OF BLU-RAY

Share this post


Link to post

Since it seems it's trendy to bash on Sony these days, I'm seeing alot of flamebait replies here. Honestly I hope Sony gets back on it's feet. More competition is always good.

Anyway, the screenshots look pretty good. Apparently it's real-time.

Share this post


Link to post

If you keep the videos "in game". You get a better more consistent design.

But the main reason for this is probably because it's so much easier to tweak a scripted sequence than to tweak an FMV. Aswell as it takes less time, since you'll always be using the same resources as you're using in game. Rather than making a different set of resources just for cinematics.
If you decide to replace some graphics, the cinematics will follow suit.

Share this post


Link to post

You know what, I'm willing to forgive Sony (not Guerilla, since they technically didn't lie) if this game delivers. However, the new trailer is a definite disappointment, even if you're not comparing it to the "target render". The biggest problem I have is the lack of color. I'm sorry, but this is two-thousand-fricken-seven, and we're still using drab palettes?

Atleast the original Quake had an excuse. It had a 256 color palette due to technical limitations. Now we have palettes that can consist of thousands, even millions of colors. So why are we seeing a million different shades of grey?

Some will use the excuse "it's cinematic!" or "dude, it's supposed to represent war", but I'm not buying that, especially when the "target render" had more colors than grey, which means they didn't intend for it to be so monochrome. Something must be wrong then.

The other thing pissing me off is the, *cough*, "hardcore" gaming contingent. Sony basically shit on them and they're still gobbling up a disappointing cinematic like it's God's gift to them. They have them hook, line and sinker with this. Microsoft has pulled this sort of crap too, so I'm definitely not just hating on Sony.

Jesus christ, I hate the modern gaming industry.

Share this post


Link to post
Linguica said:

By the way I swear to god I will loser any console warriors

What does that mean? Is a console warrior a person who goes around beating people with his/her PS3? Because those people deserve to be losered.
What about Kratos?

Share this post


Link to post

Actually, that might be kind of cool. Given that the PS3 is a good 11 pounds, you could tie that sucker to a chain and swing it around, medieval style! You could then make plate armor from malfunctioning 360's for extra nerd points.

Share this post


Link to post

I've given up on modern games due to their shit unoriginal gameplay. They just keep remaking Half-Life. Whoop-de-fucking-do. Only game I want to get now is Medieval 2: Total War. Yeah, pretty much the same game as the other Total Wars, but at least it's a fun game concept. Fallout 3 also looks a bit promising.

Share this post


Link to post
Linguica said:

By the way I swear to god I will loser any console warriors


ling, just because you think wii is the end-all be-all of game consoles doesn't mean you can rain fiery retribution on anybody that might prefer the ps3 or 360.

the wii is a substandard toy for children anyways.

Share this post


Link to post
udderdude said:

More competition is always good.

I disagree. Hardware competition does nothing for gameplay. Software competition is more important. Can you name one way that the Nvidia/ATI war has paved the way for gameplay innovation?

Share this post


Link to post
AndrewB said:

Can you name one way that the Nvidia/ATI war has paved the way for gameplay innovation?


No one can, because it didn't pave the way for anything new gameplay wise.

Share this post


Link to post
Snarboo said:

Actually, that might be kind of cool. Given that the PS3 is a good 11 pounds, you could tie that sucker to a chain and swing it around, medieval style! You could then make plate armor from malfunctioning 360's for extra nerd points.


Good, now stick it in Let's Get Medieval On Their Arse. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Linguica said:

I simply don't get the point of "in-engine" noninteractive cinematic sequences, if you can't move or do anything, what exactly about it differs from your standard cutscene?

Consistency.

In LOZ:TP, if you're wearing the gold armor when you beat the final boss, that's what will appear during the final credits. If you decide to carry the crappy wooden shield you finish him off, then you'll see the shield during the credits.

Plus it's just stupid to have this weird discrepancy in visual quality for no good reason. Having Toy Story quality cutscenes just ends up making the gameplay look bad in comparison.

Same thing in Resident Evil 4. You can play through the game multiple times, and the cutscenes will always be the same, but if you choose to wear different clothing then that's what you'll see in the cutscenes. No need to render every possible combination and fill up several DVDs.

Just sensible game design IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
AndrewB said:

No need to render every possible combination and fill up several DVDs.

The PS2 version prerendered all the cutscenes.

Share this post


Link to post

But they only rendered the default costumes. If you beat the game and replay it with unlocked models, it switches back during cutscenes.

Share this post


Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×