Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Video Game News › [CVG]Killzone 3 doesn't max out PS3 - Guerrilla
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[CVG]Killzone 3 doesn't max out PS3 - Guerrilla - Page 10

post #91 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by OmegaNemesis28 View Post
Roflmao
All im going to say is that you completely misunderstood me and you are the EXACT reason why PC games dont look as good as they should. You settle for crap, and thats EXACTLY what you're going to get as well as everyone else. Good job. You dont even deserve me ripping your post apart and responding to every issue you've brought up, especially because you completely missed the mark on what I was saying.
Where do you get that I settle for crap? I even said I understand where you are coming from when it comes to high res textures and high resolutions. You are still wrong about believing that high resolution should somehow directly improve the way textures look. It's amazing that you seem to think you are so absolutely right when you are so absolutely wrong. Get off your high horse, you are wrong about this issue. We all agree that low res textures look like crap. Doesn't change the fact that resolution and aa are for removing aliasing and have nothing to do with improving texture resolution. I should also note I completely get what you are saying about resolution and aa not making it "look better" for some people the way higher res textures, higher polycount or better effects would, I am not denying that and I completely agree that console ports suck for those very reasons. The only thing I am disagreeing with you on is the effect of resolution and aa on its own. They do not have any direct correlation with how good the textures look which it sounded like you were trying to say.
Edited by scyy - 2/24/11 at 2:13pm
3930k
(20 items)
 
  
Reply
3930k
(20 items)
 
  
Reply
post #92 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by B!0HaZard View Post
Did you read my post? I spend quite a long time on it, wouldn't want it to be wasted
Sorry u missed my edit.
I read it and ill respond fully when i get home. Im on the iphone and i cant multiquote i only responded to scyyy cause his post got me mad when i saw that he took me completely out of context and was making stuff up.
Nemesis NE-α
(15 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 4790k (Devil's Canyon) AsRock Z97 Extreme 4 Visiontek AMD 6990 Corsair XMS3 DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung EVO 840 XSPC Raystorm Windows 8.1 Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS Ducky Blue Overclock.net Themed Mechanical Keyb... Corsair Silver 1kw  
CaseMouseAudio
Case Labs TH10 Logitech G502 Logitech 5.1 speakers w/ Onkyo Receiver 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon W3520 i7 4.0ghz EVGA X58 Classified Visiontek 6990 GSkill 6GB DDR3 Pi 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x OCZ Vertex 60GB SSD ; 2x 1TB ; 2x 2TB Samsung BluRay Burner Windows 7 Ultimate 64x 3x Dell U2311H 23" 1080p IPS 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 Gaming Keyboard SilverStone Strider 1000w Modular Power Supply Lian Li V2000 Plus Logitech G9 Gaming Laser Mouse 
Mouse Pad
Cyba Sniper Tracer (Acrylic Glass) 
  hide details  
Reply
Nemesis NE-α
(15 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 4790k (Devil's Canyon) AsRock Z97 Extreme 4 Visiontek AMD 6990 Corsair XMS3 DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung EVO 840 XSPC Raystorm Windows 8.1 Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS Ducky Blue Overclock.net Themed Mechanical Keyb... Corsair Silver 1kw  
CaseMouseAudio
Case Labs TH10 Logitech G502 Logitech 5.1 speakers w/ Onkyo Receiver 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon W3520 i7 4.0ghz EVGA X58 Classified Visiontek 6990 GSkill 6GB DDR3 Pi 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x OCZ Vertex 60GB SSD ; 2x 1TB ; 2x 2TB Samsung BluRay Burner Windows 7 Ultimate 64x 3x Dell U2311H 23" 1080p IPS 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 Gaming Keyboard SilverStone Strider 1000w Modular Power Supply Lian Li V2000 Plus Logitech G9 Gaming Laser Mouse 
Mouse Pad
Cyba Sniper Tracer (Acrylic Glass) 
  hide details  
Reply
post #93 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by OmegaNemesis28 View Post
Sorry u missed my edit.
I read it and ill respond fully when i get home. Im on the iphone and i cant multiquote i only responded to scyyy cause his post got me mad when i saw that he took me completely out of context and was making stuff up.
I'm afraid I'll disappoint you then, 'cause I said pretty much the same as he did.
M1XN
(18 items)
 
Study Zenbook
(5 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770K @ 4.2 GHz ASUS Maximus VI Impact MSI GTX 970 Gaming 4G 2x8 GB Kingston HyperX DDR3 @ 2400 MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial M4 64 GB Crucial M4 128 GB SAMSUNG Spinpoint M9T 2 TB LiteOn DL-8ATSH 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Noctua NH-C14 Windows 10 64-bit ViewSonic VP2770 Vortex Pok3r 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair SF600 NCASE M1 V2.5 Logitech G502 SteelSeries QcK+ 
AudioOther
HiFiMan HE-400 Logitech C920 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i5-3317 GT 620M 2 GB soldered + 8 GB Corsair OCZ Vertex 3 120 
OS
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
  hide details  
Reply
M1XN
(18 items)
 
Study Zenbook
(5 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770K @ 4.2 GHz ASUS Maximus VI Impact MSI GTX 970 Gaming 4G 2x8 GB Kingston HyperX DDR3 @ 2400 MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial M4 64 GB Crucial M4 128 GB SAMSUNG Spinpoint M9T 2 TB LiteOn DL-8ATSH 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Noctua NH-C14 Windows 10 64-bit ViewSonic VP2770 Vortex Pok3r 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair SF600 NCASE M1 V2.5 Logitech G502 SteelSeries QcK+ 
AudioOther
HiFiMan HE-400 Logitech C920 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i5-3317 GT 620M 2 GB soldered + 8 GB Corsair OCZ Vertex 3 120 
OS
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
  hide details  
Reply
post #94 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by OmegaNemesis28 View Post
Sorry u missed my edit.
I read it and ill respond fully when i get home. Im on the iphone and i cant multiquote i only responded to scyyy cause his post got me mad when i saw that he took me completely out of context and was making stuff up.
I didn't make anything up, you said

Quote:
Originally Posted by OmegaNemesis28 View Post
Dead Space 2 is another example of how rendering resolution does little to nothing. The game looks pixel for pixel the same as console with the exception of AA effecting the shadows. Increasing the resolution makes the game look no different on my PC at 1080p then it does on my PS3's version of the game at 720p.
Maybe it's a different story when you go to the 2k resolutions, I dont know but unless the textures or effects are there to support it - 720p to 1080p has never made a significant difference for me.
When having a higher res DOES do something, it may not improve the textures(which it isn't designed to do in the first place) It removes jaggies and makes everything smoother. You can say that does nothing for the look of the game but many people like having the game look smooth and not have aliasing all over, this is the only thing I was making my post about. As I said I do not disagree about low res textures looking like garbage, I do not disagree that devs should stop being lazy and implement higher res textures in pc versions. The ONLY thing I disagree with is the effect resolution and aa have on the game which I am right about.
3930k
(20 items)
 
  
Reply
3930k
(20 items)
 
  
Reply
post #95 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by OmegaNemesis28 View Post
Exactly why I'm focusing on ME2. Compared to Black Ops, all you've got are FPS rates and AA which can be very subjective things. Alot of people such as myself don't really see a difference in FPS rates or make a big deal over lower AA rates. When you change something as significant as texture resolution or shaders, thats where the differences come in as well as clarity as in Black Ops. ME2 and MoH had none of that.

Though, I would stop using Black Ops as an example in favor of PC. Every CoD to date, even though they're console games - they're poorly designed console games. They have never looked good on the consoles yet alone run at a decent resolution. There is absolutely no reason for it either. When you have games like Killzone 3, Halo Reach, or if you want something more-less inhouse: games like Bad Company 2 - that look so amazing and actually run at the resolution they're supposed to without a hitch, then why can't something as lousy looking as CoD do it. Comparing them and actually trying to make a point about PC looking better doesn't work out as good. Black Ops on the PS3 is a good example at how they just suck at designing these games. The game looks super lousy, runs super lousy, and plays super lousy on PS3. Legit reason for it? None, absolutely nothing.
Ok, first of all; this whole tangent all started because I said "I" (my own personal preference, which I'm entitled to btw & can not by definition be wrong about) "can't help think at how bad it looks in comparison to PC.

It confuses me to no end when i hear console fans argue about how good graphics of some game are and how much better it is than the other console. It's like 2 bums fighting over whether jjim beam or jack daniels is the best while i'm sipping johnnie walker blue label."


You're using ME2 and DS2 as examples of games which didnt get good PC versions. Well, what about all the games which get good PC versions?

And as for BO, I thought that was a swell example because it was heavily developed for consoles. Remember the whole MW2 fiasco? CoD4 was also critically acclaimed for graphics & performance during it's time. The reason BO on console doesn't look as good as PC is because PC can make games look & run a lot better, simple as that.

Not because they didn't try hard enough on the consoles. KZ3 looks better than BO (marginally imo) on console because BO was designed to run "around" 60fps, killzone "around" 30fps. Eurogamer has BO clocked around 50avg on 360 and 40something on PS3. Yes PS3 got the crappy port, but what do you expect MS threw money at Activision for DLC & marketing.

So i chose BO because it was a newish game, because it got big $$$ for console development, because it's developers have been under criticism for neglecting the PC gaming community, because it's using a somewhat dated engine, & because it looks obviously much better on PC & runs smoother.

If you don't believe me here's a snippet from the Digital Foundry BO tech analysis
Quote:
Both console versions of Black Ops are once again sub-HD. Call of Duty has always been a 60FPS experience - or as close to it as the hardware allows at any given point during gameplay. Infinity Ward made the decision to downscale onscreen resolution in order to create as much temporal resolution as possible - the idea being that a more arcade-style feel to the visuals along with crisper response from the pad would make the game unique. The COD games in the past have hovered around the 1040x600 mark, with 2x multi-sampling anti-aliasing.

The Xbox 360 version remains the same (our measurement comes in at 1040x608 with 2x MSAA) but it appears to be the case that the PS3 game has been reduced to 960x544, again with 2x MSAA.

The challenge facing Treyarch is that the enhancements made for Modern Warfare 2 really seem to have pushed the tech close to the limits, and rather than just tweak the engine for Black Ops there are a number of enhancements: animation (particularly facial animation) is much improved, and skin shaders on the characters are phenomenally good, to the point where the developer is not afraid to use its "actors" as talking heads to relay plot information.
Quote:
In the final analysis, Call of Duty: Black Ops is a good game on both PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360. If this game were to be released as a PS3 exclusive without 360 as a frame of reference, it would be difficult to believe that the scores would be different. Having played through the game twice, Tom's comments in the Eurogamer review apply equally to both versions. Black Ops is highly playable, polished and enjoyable and, for me, the best single-player campaign game in the series' history. Additions like the Dead Ops bonus game and the inclusion of the Nazi Zombies mode add plenty of further value.

For those with both consoles, the choice of where you spend the majority of your online gaming time must be factored into any purchasing decision - as was the case with Modern Warfare 2 before it. However, from a technical perspective, there's little doubt that the Xbox 360 offers the better experience: superior image definition, and a pleasingly smoother run of play.

In many ways, the core experience of playing a COD title is defined by that 60FPS target frame-rate and the advantages that brings. Neither version of the game sustains it, but the Xbox 360 game comes closest and thus it just feels like the more playable, satisfying game. Factor in the higher resolution and what feels like a bit more polish, and it's clearly the pick of the two HD console releases.

Edited by pale_neon - 2/24/11 at 5:57pm
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q9550 GIGABYTE GA-EP45-UD3R eVGA GTX 560 Ti 4GB Patriot Viper II DDR2 1066 5-5-5-15 2.1V 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Western Digital Caviar Black 2TB 64MB 7200 RPM Lite-On 22X DVD+/-RW XP Pro, Windows 7 Ultimate, Ubuntu Lucid Lynx Samsung UN46B8000 240Hz LED 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft Natural Elite PC Power & Cooling 750W Silencer Antec Nine Hundred Logitech G9 
Mouse Pad
Razer Mantis Speed 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q9550 GIGABYTE GA-EP45-UD3R eVGA GTX 560 Ti 4GB Patriot Viper II DDR2 1066 5-5-5-15 2.1V 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Western Digital Caviar Black 2TB 64MB 7200 RPM Lite-On 22X DVD+/-RW XP Pro, Windows 7 Ultimate, Ubuntu Lucid Lynx Samsung UN46B8000 240Hz LED 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft Natural Elite PC Power & Cooling 750W Silencer Antec Nine Hundred Logitech G9 
Mouse Pad
Razer Mantis Speed 
  hide details  
Reply
post #96 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by B!0HaZard View Post
I'm afraid I'll disappoint you then, 'cause I said pretty much the same as he did.
It's just his time of the month probably.

He tried arguing in another thread that someone in a multiplayer server causes lag if they have their game detail turned up because every piece of rubble and debris on your screen needs to be synced with all the other clients.
Bueller
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770K 4.7Ghz @ 1.36v Asus Sabertooth Z77 Gigabyte Windforce 780 Ti 3GB 16GB Corsair Vengeance 1866 9-10-9-27 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
256GB Samsung 840 Pro + RAID1 2TB 7200 Hitachis LG 6X Blu-ray Burner Corsair H100i Windows 7 x64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Asus VG236HE XArmor U9BL-S Enermax Galaxy Evo 1250W Corsair 600T 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G500 SteelSeries 5L O2DAC -> Corsair SP2500 (or O2 amp and Beyerdyn... 
  hide details  
Reply
Bueller
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770K 4.7Ghz @ 1.36v Asus Sabertooth Z77 Gigabyte Windforce 780 Ti 3GB 16GB Corsair Vengeance 1866 9-10-9-27 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
256GB Samsung 840 Pro + RAID1 2TB 7200 Hitachis LG 6X Blu-ray Burner Corsair H100i Windows 7 x64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Asus VG236HE XArmor U9BL-S Enermax Galaxy Evo 1250W Corsair 600T 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G500 SteelSeries 5L O2DAC -> Corsair SP2500 (or O2 amp and Beyerdyn... 
  hide details  
Reply
post #97 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by B!0HaZard View Post
I never said that low res textures on a high res game looks good (this is actually one of the main reasons I don't like the graphics in MMO's, only APB did clothes the right way), I (and many others) said that the game's resolution matters whether or not the textures are good enough and you kept saying that was wrong.
Sorry for the late response.
Anyways - resolution matters. I never said it didn't. But if the assets don't back it up, then it doesn't make that big of a difference as you people make it out to be. That's my point.

Like I said before - Dead Space 2 can be rendered in a resolution as big as the side of a house and it's still Dead Space 2 with Xbox 360 graphics no matter how you twist your words. I said this before word for word. You can have your baby butt smooth lines all you want to - it doesnt change how the game looks overall period.

Quote:
Then I saw your last post and I see why you weren't getting this. A lot of us actually do appreciate higher res and AA in itself. Just having the res and the AA is visually pleasing and will improve significantly on the graphics whether or not the textures are high res. Of course that's just IMO.
AA and higher resolution do matter. I never said they don't, but you guys make them out to be so much more then what they are. Developers see this and go "oh they don't need higher resolution textures or special effects or DX11, they're happy with they can just play the game and have their AA."

I might have overexaggerated when I said they do little to nothing, I don't mean they don't do anything at all. But they just dont change how a game looks. Ok it's better, but how much better? You might reason a ton better in your opinion but that just means you don't know what better really CAN BE.

Don't get me wrong, Dead Space 2 and Mass Effect 2 are good looking game. But they don't look anywhere near as they COULD BE. Having 16xAA and higher resolution is not bringing the game to it's potential. It might make the game look "nicer" but it's how significant is what I'm questioning. You guys make a big deal out of it, Im saying that it isn't and there is a whole lot more room for improvement and not showing or saying that is what keeps developers from standing back/not putting their best foot forward.

Quote:
Yes, I actually can see the difference between the PC and Xbox SS. Now, this is of course not a great example of console vs. PC because, as you said, it has next to no PC specific features (which is lame considering the HW difference), but it's still obvious to me that the textures are sharper and that the characters are less blocky on the PC version. Do I notice every little difference unless I look for it? No. Do I still get an overall better impression? Yes. And that's what matters right? That I feel I get a better impression because my characters don't look like legos and my text is actually readable (read the guy's name, Edgar is easily recognized on PC, but not so on Xbox). But if you feel that AA doesn't matter to you then that's cool. Just don't expect that others feel the same (as you can see in post 84 which is written in a slightly more hostile tone than mine).
AA does matter to an extent. Having smoother edges is great, dont get me wrong. But it just doesnt make a game look any better necessarily in my eyes. Im not going to choose a game between PC and 360/PS3 over just AA. What really gets me going are the people who sit there and say,"Oh well this game looks better on the PC because of AA and resolution. PC FTW - it kicks console butt."
NO - no it doesn't! What really kicks console butt is when you have better textures, shaders, DX10/11 effects like tesselation, better level design, solid multiplayer, and about a dozen other things. AA and resolution are like.... standard. They're the bare bones minimum and dont make a game look a ton better. It's like bragging that you run a race with .1 or .01 seconds photo finish.

[qupte]
Regarding the cutscenes, I totally agree. Compression and low res isn't even an option. Why the hell can't I watch a 2011 cutscene without noticing compression blocks like it's a damn Youtube movie?! The initial scene in BO was horrible. Both the style and the quality reminds me of those C&C Red Alert cutscenes. Yeah, they're cool, but they're 15 years old (for C&C95 at least), the quality should've improved quite a lot (it has, but it's still too heavily compressed).[/QUOTE]

Thank you because I've yet to see a single person agree to that in the entire forums whenever I bring up ME2 on the PC. They ignore the one thing that is the WORST about the game. I mean, I garuntee Bioware has a massive resolution raw videos in their datacenter somewhere that would take 5-10 minutes each to convert into decently compressed but super nice looking videos. I mean, I know Xbox 360 data storage was small but even the 360 they could've done it not even counting the PC. I would know, I've been playing with video codecs since I was like 10. It's just unthinkable why BO couldn't do it, even on the PS3 version they didn't even bother. That just makes me depressed lol

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seann View Post
I just played the KZ3 demo, and tbh it doesn't look good at all, not as good as KZ2 anyways. Jaggies galore, so much for MLAA. God of War 3 today is best looking console game IMO, along with uncharted 2.
O.o
KZ3 looks super better than KZ2.

Jaggies are almost nonexistant too, maybe it was the demo I forget how it looked but throughout the singleplayer full game there was like 16x AA on everything. With the exception of background objects that were thin like metal crosswalks - there isn't any jaggies throughout the game.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Viridian View Post
Killzone looks rubbish, though. and Pl;aying an FPS with the Move is like trying to lick your elbow. I found myself reaching for the pad, ultimately.

But nah, I didn't think it looked good at all. Then again, I'm spoilt with PC graphics.

I thought it looked great, especially for the PS3. Maybe not as good as Uncharted 2 but still fantastic none the less.

The Move I can agree on simply because it's a very sensitive thing for people. Some like it some don't - it's a hit or miss. I on one hand LOVE Move with Killzone 3. I played the beta and demo with it, and wasn't quite sure but once I got the full game - tweaked the dead zones and sensitivity a bit - I played BOTH SP and multi. Hell I even beat SP in 1 sitting with the Move: 8-9 hours straight. In MP, I do better than I do with the controller and I'm certain you don't get thrown into game with everyone else using Move either from what I've been talking to people. It's a hit or miss I suppose.

Quote:
Originally Posted by scyy View Post
No YOU misunderstand, Resolution has nothing to do with texture resolution, upping resolution and using aa simply removes jaggies, NOTHING MORE. You are the one wrong here. Don't *sigh* at me when you are the one who has no idea what resolution or aa actually do. I agree the textures on console ports suck, that has NOTHING to do with what resolution or aa settings you play at. That has to do with lazy devs not adding high res textures since the consoles lack of ram and vram prohibit them from using them. If you can't see the difference between 1920x1080 and 1280x720 resolution or 0 aa and 8 aa good for you, you are probably blind but good for you. You don't have to use some of the most stressing graphic options to get games to look good for you. Some of us can see aliasing at 1920x1080 and 8aa still.
Exactly what I mean by making things up.
Upping the resolution does a whole lot more than just removes jaggies. It scales everything including models - and while it might clear jaggies up: it can do a whole lot more. You're rendering more pixels and sometimes even increasing the view size of your game. You can see alot more when you increase resolution, especially increasing aspect ratios.

But textures work in TANDEM with the resolution changes. I said this word for word and it's true. Don't tell me I'm wrong when I'm not. I'll sigh at you all I want Mr.Hostile.
You increase resolution, the game is rendering things at a bigger resolution. Sure - you can, again, have all the smooth lines you want to Mr.BigBadManWithNoJaggies but in the end, without the assets to back it up, it doesn't look anywhere near as significantly better as it would with better textures. Textures that are low resolution STAND OUT A TON MORE than it does when you have high resolution textures with a high resolution. End of story, they word in tandem.

You can go ahead and render your Doom at 1080p or higher. You can argue the game looks better all you want to, but in the end - nothing changes the fact that if the texture resolution isn't as high as the native rendered resolution - the game will still look like crap.
I mean aside from the classic look of Doom (who would want to change that right?) isn't the point so don't go there. Doom isn't something, at least imo, you would want to change even with higher resolution textures

Quote:
No one is denying that low res textures on console ports look bad, but you are wrong about how resolution and aa affect the game. Yes high resolution and high res textures do look better together but that doesn't change the fact that higher resolutions and aa are for removing aliasing.
I never said they DID NOT remove aliasing. Making things up like I said.

Quote:
Originally Posted by scyy View Post
Where do you get that I settle for crap? I even said I understand where you are coming from when it comes to high res textures and high resolutions.
Because - you're making resolution and AA much bigger than what they are.

Quote:
You are still wrong about believing that high resolution should somehow directly improve the way textures look. It's amazing that you seem to think you are so absolutely right when you are so absolutely wrong. Get off your high horse, you are wrong about this issue.
NO AGAIN!!!
I never said that! I said the OPPOSITE!! You're making things up and putting words in my mouth. Go back to my original post - I said that increasing resolution doesn't magically change the way textures look. They don't improve them at all! I never said such a thing.

My high horse? Get outta here. If you don't like me posting, then don't respond to me if you're going to be like that.

Quote:
We all agree that low res textures look like crap. Doesn't change the fact that resolution and aa are for removing aliasing and have nothing to do with improving texture resolution.
I NEVER SAID THEY IMPROVE TEXTURE RESOLUTION.
Wow man, and I'm on the high horse?

Quote:
I should also note I completely get what you are saying about resolution and aa not making it "look better" for some people the way higher res textures, higher polycount or better effects would, I am not denying that and I completely agree that console ports suck for those very reasons. The only thing I am disagreeing with you on is the effect of resolution and aa on its own. They do not have any direct correlation with how good the textures look which it sounded like you were trying to say.
Then clearly this is a major misunderstanding on what I'm trying to say. Like usual. Has to be me, even though I end up repeating myself about 20x over by the time these things end. I give up lol I mean, I could put things in CAPS like I sometimes do or B/U things and people still misunderstand me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by scyy View Post
When having a higher res DOES do something, it may not improve the textures(which it isn't designed to do in the first place) It removes jaggies and makes everything smoother. You can say that does nothing for the look of the game but many people like having the game look smooth and not have aliasing all over, this is the only thing I was making my post about. As I said I do not disagree about low res textures looking like garbage, I do not disagree that devs should stop being lazy and implement higher res textures in pc versions. The ONLY thing I disagree with is the effect resolution and aa have on the game which I am right about.
AGAIN - where did I say they IMPROVE TEXTURES?! I said specifically that they DO NOT in my first post. That's my point!

Quote:
Originally Posted by OmegaNemesis28
Dead Space 2 is another example of how rendering resolution does little to nothing. The game looks pixel for pixel the same as console with the exception of AA effecting the shadows. Increasing the resolution makes the game look no different on my PC at 1080p then it does on my PS3's version of the game at 720p.
Maybe it's a different story when you go to the 2k resolutions, I dont know but unless the textures or effects are there to support it - 720p to 1080p has never made a significant difference for me.
Nowhere in that post do I say that texture resolutions improve by increasing AA. What are you on about again?!

Nor do I deny that raising the resolution improve aliasing. What I'm trying to say is that aliasing isn't everything and in the end - even with 18xSSAA or w/e the only thing you're changing are the edges of models and with some types of AA for the worst. You're not really changing the way the game looks at all.

Here's my original post that kinda starts it all incase you're not in the mood to read, which you clearly didn't it seems:

Quote:
Originally Posted by OmegaNemesis28
Nope - in ME2 and Medal of Honor - the textures and effects that are employed are the same resolution as the console. 720p. And no matter how high you increase the resolution: it stays the same, it's not magical powers that can change the source material. I don't care what resolution you can pull off - it could cover the entire wall of my house, it still has the look and feel of 720p.

Bad Company 2 is very similar in that as well. The textures and effects are of same resolution and quality as the consoles. Hell, the PC version even has the same AA effect employs that leads to a fence effect on the edges of models as the 360 does. Though, BC2 has a number of additional effects on the PC (like Black Ops which we'll get to later) as compared to consoles which seperates it from ME2.

AA in ME2 was and still kinda is broken too. You have to force it and even then users still have problems sometimes. It's probably the only thing along with performance that ME2 on the PC has over the consoles. That's it.
Right there in BIG AND BOLD AND UNDERLINED do I more or less say that increasing resolution does not "enhance" textures like you keep claiming I'm saying. IE - making stuff up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pale_neon View Post
You're using ME2 and DS2 as examples of games which didnt get good PC versions. Well, what about all the games which get good PC versions?
Exactly my point, because those two games are RAVED about by people for being great looking games on PC. This entire forum absolutely loves ME2 and every conversation about PC vs console uses ME2 as an example, and it's so far from true it's not even funny. I'm just used to saying it all the time, and this convo happens alot (not about the same thing though). It's not because Im wrong about ME2 being a console port either, because people think ME2 looks so good they have a hard time believe the consoles put out similar if not exactly the same as their amazing PCs. Sans AA and resolution. They refuse to believe the textures being the same resolution, and they love ignoring the cutscenes.


Quote:
And as for BO, I thought that was a swell example because it was heavily developed for consoles. Remember the whole MW2 fiasco? CoD4 was also critically acclaimed for graphics & performance during it's time. The reason BO on console doesn't look as good as PC is because PC can make games look & run a lot better, simple as that.
Not true at all.
It might be heavily developed for consoles, but it doesn't mean they are designed good graphically for consoles.
Same thing with Halo 3 and ODST. Those two games were developed by Bungie specifically for the Xbox 360, and they looks TERRIBLE graphically. It took Bungie how long to finally get to the 720p resolution and actually make a decently good looking Halo game with Reach. Even when Halo 3 came out, I could think of a dozen different games even on the 360 itself that blew its ass out of the water in every aspect.
Same with CoD4 and BO. They both look "nice" on the console (well Black Ops only on the 360 for no reason at all) but they don't look as good as they should when you compare it to other games. Why does BC2 look amazing on the 360 and PC and it runs at 720p when Black Ops barely runs at 640p or w/e in the 600 range it is? It makes no sense at all [even with the FPS difference], BC2 looks YEARS ahead of Black Ops and it runs at HD resolution with no problem.

Quote:
Not because they didn't try hard enough on the consoles. KZ3 looks better than BO (marginally imo) on console because BO was designed to run "around" 60fps, killzone "around" 30fps. Eurogamer has BO clocked around 50avg on 360 and 40something on PS3. Yes PS3 got the crappy port, but what do you expect MS threw money at Activision for DLC & marketing.
KZ3 looks miles ahead of BO, especially on the PS3 (for reasons that explain itself). Why under achieve for 50FPS on a game that could, and should really, at 30FPS and look worlds better though? Many bring up the FPS argument, but that's for PC not on the console.

Though, I will admit I did forget the FPS difference in my previous post. Mainly because on the 360, I remember alot of FPS drops and tearing in singleplayer. That would indeed explain the sub resolution.

Quote:
So i chose BO because it was a newish game, because it got big $$$ for console development, because it's developers have been under criticism for neglecting the PC gaming community, because it's using a somewhat dated engine, & because it looks obviously much better on PC & runs smoother.

If you don't believe me here's a snippet from the Digital Foundry BO tech analysis
But it can look alot better on the consoles had they just run it at 720p and raised some effects, score for 30FPS instead of 50 like every other game. There isn't any reason for it to be so damn crappy looking on the consoles.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaldari View Post
It's just his time of the month probably.

He tried arguing in another thread that someone in a multiplayer server causes lag if they have their game detail turned up because every piece of rubble and debris on your screen needs to be synced with all the other clients.
And I pretty much proved that in every way possible, especially with the case of MMOs.
Edited by OmegaNemesis28 - 2/24/11 at 10:40pm
Nemesis NE-α
(15 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 4790k (Devil's Canyon) AsRock Z97 Extreme 4 Visiontek AMD 6990 Corsair XMS3 DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung EVO 840 XSPC Raystorm Windows 8.1 Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS Ducky Blue Overclock.net Themed Mechanical Keyb... Corsair Silver 1kw  
CaseMouseAudio
Case Labs TH10 Logitech G502 Logitech 5.1 speakers w/ Onkyo Receiver 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon W3520 i7 4.0ghz EVGA X58 Classified Visiontek 6990 GSkill 6GB DDR3 Pi 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x OCZ Vertex 60GB SSD ; 2x 1TB ; 2x 2TB Samsung BluRay Burner Windows 7 Ultimate 64x 3x Dell U2311H 23" 1080p IPS 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 Gaming Keyboard SilverStone Strider 1000w Modular Power Supply Lian Li V2000 Plus Logitech G9 Gaming Laser Mouse 
Mouse Pad
Cyba Sniper Tracer (Acrylic Glass) 
  hide details  
Reply
Nemesis NE-α
(15 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 4790k (Devil's Canyon) AsRock Z97 Extreme 4 Visiontek AMD 6990 Corsair XMS3 DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung EVO 840 XSPC Raystorm Windows 8.1 Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS Ducky Blue Overclock.net Themed Mechanical Keyb... Corsair Silver 1kw  
CaseMouseAudio
Case Labs TH10 Logitech G502 Logitech 5.1 speakers w/ Onkyo Receiver 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon W3520 i7 4.0ghz EVGA X58 Classified Visiontek 6990 GSkill 6GB DDR3 Pi 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x OCZ Vertex 60GB SSD ; 2x 1TB ; 2x 2TB Samsung BluRay Burner Windows 7 Ultimate 64x 3x Dell U2311H 23" 1080p IPS 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 Gaming Keyboard SilverStone Strider 1000w Modular Power Supply Lian Li V2000 Plus Logitech G9 Gaming Laser Mouse 
Mouse Pad
Cyba Sniper Tracer (Acrylic Glass) 
  hide details  
Reply
post #98 of 118
If you know that increasing resolution doesn't improve textures or the overall look of the game detail wise why are you complaining about Mass Effect 2 and Dead Space 2's low res textures when talking about increases of resolution? You could have explained yourself much better instead of talking about both things at the same time and making it sound like thats what you thought. I wasn't the only one who misunderstood what you were saying you know. The way it sounded when reading your intial posts is you were complaining about those two games specifically because increasing resolution didn't help with the textures.
Edited by scyy - 2/24/11 at 11:05pm
3930k
(20 items)
 
  
Reply
3930k
(20 items)
 
  
Reply
post #99 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by scyy View Post
If you know that increasing resolution doesn't improve textures or the overall look of the game detail wise why are you complaining about Mass Effect 2 and Dead Space 2's low res textures when talking about increases of resolution? You could have explained yourself much better instead of talking about both things at the same time and making it sound like thats what you thought. I wasn't the only one who misunderstood what you were saying you know.
Because - increasing the resolution doesnt make THAT much of a change as people think it does.
Also the textures are just copy pasta from the Xbox 360 version - therefore they stick out more and make it look all the more worse when you increase the resolution. I never said they don't improve textures, I was stating the OPPOSITE. People seem to think the textures look better magically when they increase the resolution of the game, therefore it looks better than the 360 or PS3 versions of the game when it simply doesn't. It's like magical powers change the source material - I think not. No such witchcraft exists in the PC world, yet. It's funny when people think it does though.
My point is that - AA and resolution are ok. Sure, you can argue that they make the game look soooo much more amazing all you want to but in reality they don't. They make it look better to an extent, but not anywhere near as much as people make it out to be especially around here on OCN. It's the same thing every time.


Quote:
The way it sounded when reading your intial posts is you were complaining about those two games specifically because increasing resolution didn't help with the textures.
I wish it did lol

Sorry for making it all confusing somehow, I thought I was very clear with what I said. Even going back and reading some if not all of it - it seemed pretty straight forward. My bad then, I apologize.
Nemesis NE-α
(15 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 4790k (Devil's Canyon) AsRock Z97 Extreme 4 Visiontek AMD 6990 Corsair XMS3 DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung EVO 840 XSPC Raystorm Windows 8.1 Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS Ducky Blue Overclock.net Themed Mechanical Keyb... Corsair Silver 1kw  
CaseMouseAudio
Case Labs TH10 Logitech G502 Logitech 5.1 speakers w/ Onkyo Receiver 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon W3520 i7 4.0ghz EVGA X58 Classified Visiontek 6990 GSkill 6GB DDR3 Pi 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x OCZ Vertex 60GB SSD ; 2x 1TB ; 2x 2TB Samsung BluRay Burner Windows 7 Ultimate 64x 3x Dell U2311H 23" 1080p IPS 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 Gaming Keyboard SilverStone Strider 1000w Modular Power Supply Lian Li V2000 Plus Logitech G9 Gaming Laser Mouse 
Mouse Pad
Cyba Sniper Tracer (Acrylic Glass) 
  hide details  
Reply
Nemesis NE-α
(15 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 4790k (Devil's Canyon) AsRock Z97 Extreme 4 Visiontek AMD 6990 Corsair XMS3 DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung EVO 840 XSPC Raystorm Windows 8.1 Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS Ducky Blue Overclock.net Themed Mechanical Keyb... Corsair Silver 1kw  
CaseMouseAudio
Case Labs TH10 Logitech G502 Logitech 5.1 speakers w/ Onkyo Receiver 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon W3520 i7 4.0ghz EVGA X58 Classified Visiontek 6990 GSkill 6GB DDR3 Pi 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x OCZ Vertex 60GB SSD ; 2x 1TB ; 2x 2TB Samsung BluRay Burner Windows 7 Ultimate 64x 3x Dell U2311H 23" 1080p IPS 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 Gaming Keyboard SilverStone Strider 1000w Modular Power Supply Lian Li V2000 Plus Logitech G9 Gaming Laser Mouse 
Mouse Pad
Cyba Sniper Tracer (Acrylic Glass) 
  hide details  
Reply
post #100 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by OmegaNemesis28 View Post
Because - increasing the resolution doesnt make THAT much of a change as people think it does.
Also the textures are just copy pasta from the Xbox 360 version - therefore they stick out more and make it look all the more worse when you increase the resolution. I never said they don't improve textures, I was stating the OPPOSITE. People seem to think the textures look better magically when they increase the resolution of the game, therefore it looks better than the 360 or PS3 versions of the game when it simply doesn't. It's like magical powers change the source material - I think not. No such witchcraft exists in the PC world, yet. It's funny when people think it does though.
My point is that - AA and resolution are ok. Sure, you can argue that they make the game look soooo much more amazing all you want to but in reality they don't. They make it look better to an extent, but not anywhere near as much as people make it out to be especially around here on OCN. It's the same thing every time.




I wish it did lol

Sorry for making it all confusing somehow, I thought I was very clear with what I said. Even going back and reading some if not all of it - it seemed pretty straight forward. My bad then, I apologize.
My bad too, I kinda got pissed off when you said "*sigh* you misunderstood me completely. Why do I even bother with people on here anymore? Waste of time." And I just went from there without really rereading your posts. Now that I have reread through everything I get what you were saying.
3930k
(20 items)
 
  
Reply
3930k
(20 items)
 
  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Video Game News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Video Game News › [CVG]Killzone 3 doesn't max out PS3 - Guerrilla