Killzone: Shadow Fall demo runs at 30FPS, Digital Foundry tests suggest

Oh my.

and Crysis 1 on my PC in 2007 looks already much better then this.
Don’t forget that in first Crysis there were simulations with Water, physics in general and you could crush buildings. (It was open-world) and AI could do whatever it wanted.

Killzone:SF was a mediocre corridor shooter = 30 fps. Next gen consoles. Oh yeah.

“Should developers be aiming for 60 FPS as a benchmark in next-gen consoles? Let us know below.”

they can’t, unless they are going to make visuals like in the PS3.

Did they just benchmark a movie of a game? Wow.

So they benchmarked a 30hz streaming and the result is the game is 30hz, what a genius!!!!

So is it confirmed that it’ll run games at 1080p? 30fps at 1080p is expected, 30fps at 720p is unacceptable and not “next gen” at all.

@4,
1080p 60fps is the target according to leaks.
On topic, doesn’t matter. Its next-gen, and is way better than current gen. I wonder why its being compared to 1000-2000$ PCs by some people though….
Read the article, its nothing that can be achieved on current gen, and looks truly awesome.

Frames per second in the headline and you have PC nuts in the comments. Pot, kettle. Easy as that.

Ahem:
http://www.gamepur.com/news/10480-killzone-shadow-fall-was-only-using-15-gb-ram-graphics.html

in b4 Erthazus starts bitching

…

goddammit!!

There’s no comparison to a game demo shown now, at least 9 months before release, on pre-release hardware, to the end product.

@Gekidami this is actually more worrying, as it implies that there were no 8GB dev-kits around…?!

You should read the whole article on the Eurogamer link. They just didn’t pull the 30fps out of the air. Guerrilla games also confirmed the numbers.

Also, I believe without prior knowledge, 9 out of 10 gamers couldn’t tell you whether or not this game is running at 30 or 60fps. The fact that its full 1080p and running at 30fps makes it a solid looking game. Would we like 60fps? Sure. And although graphics are nice, its not everything. I can’t think of one bad game I’ve played and though- “Man, I bet this game would be better if it didn’t have so much AA.” I have played good games and thought it would be nice if they looked better, but console graphics have never taken the joy out of playing a good game.

I know everyone likes to throw Crysis out there. We’re talking about a A+ PC experience. Frankly, I think it says more about Crytek than about PC gaming as a whole. Yes, a lot of PC games look better, but, if your primarily a console gamer like me, you could really care less. Thats not the main experience I’m looking for. For the most part, I like the couch/controler experience and I like the ease of putting a game in the disc tray and just playing. That’s just me- that’s what I like.

All that demo proves, is that Helghans are still dumb. “ooh i’m gonna shoot these two guys dead & take a slow walk up to the 3rd heavily armed soldier…urk”

Another troll article, well done!

Who cares phew phew shooting like all other games

in b4 console fanboys starts bitching,

…

goddammit!!

You don’t need a hardware because trailer was recorded using Apple’s ProRes which can show how much FPS that thing has without any issue.
Eurogamer does not do this the first time, they did this before many times and it worked for them.

About the memory, first of all, Sony fanboys are retards, second, no way in hell someone there will say a secret information to some fanboy that asked about memory. It’s a secret information.
third and the most obvious. Do you actually know what is video memory and what you need it for? So far, not.

Good luck guys, have fun with 30 frames per second with last gen PC visuals.

@14 Why do you care so much? Honestly, you try so hard to talk down consoles and talk up P.C’s. It just comes of as really sad.

@14 Clearly you don’t like this game and the upcoming new consoles. Fine with that. What’s your problem coming in the comment section pissing on everyones favorite gaming platform just to show off your powerful PC capabilities?

@15/16 because he gains attention which in real life seems a bit of a far stretch

30fps or not, it’s a massive step up from pre-rendered ‘to target specs’ footage.

JM

@Erth
“Crysis 1 on my PC in 2007 looks already much better then this”

You got some shots to back that up? Ones from the un-modded game?

@1 “Killzone:SF was a mediocre corridor shooter”

Was? Because you have already seen the full game right? Or maybe the full game will be just what they showed, which btw only has one corridor…

Damn, I know I shouldn’t feed trolls but your posts are just too stupid not to bash.

I really like playing on PC at 60 fps but if I have the choice between rock-solid 30 fps and 60 fps with fluctuation I prefer the rock-solid 30 fps. Of course rock-solid 60 fps is best!

My pc is bigger than your dad etc. Pointless

just be happy that guy doesnt play on your console, so PSN/XBL is safe from those obnoxious people and only houses little, screaming kids

I just don’t see the point in CONSTANTLY going on about how shit current consoles are and will be next gen. Why post comments on a console exclusive title thread that are of no use to anyone and appear to only serve the purpose of virtual dick measuring?

@14 “Have fun with 30 frames per second with last gen PC visuals.”
Thanks, we will!

@DrDamn, Screenshots? SCREENSHOTS? Pfff.
Why Screenshots? I will show you just one video from a monitor in Real-time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDAksXFwbNg

btw, every building you see there you can destroy and look at these explosions. ! 2007 !
direct X10 (outdated). From monitor.

@15, “Why do you care so much?”

I don’t. I just laugh at console fanboys.

@20, “Was? Because you have already seen the full game right?”

I saw the gameplay. It was the same as Killzone 2 and 3 which were corridor shooters.

Erthazus you’re a twat.

@26 YouTube video is 30fps. Using the same logic you mock by, that must mean PC games are 30fps also.

JM

Erthazus gets off on being an asshole.

@28, I showed the quality of a game and youtube has nothing to do with 30 fps per second.
Eurogamer did this with Apple ProRes which not just record video.

I don’t mock Killzone because the one who did this was Eurogamer. I did absolutely nothing.

@29, you are the one that is asshole. Thx/k/bye

What you showed was a game running at 30fps. So your comparison fails. Or your logic for mocking things running at 30fps fails.

Either way, you fail because you mock based on frame-rate and can’t show something better. I’m not disputing the PC can produce 60fps visuals, but your ham-fisted ‘evidence’ is very poorly considered.

Perhaps, before jumping in with your PC-superiority complex, you should present a better rounded argument than “LOL my old PC is better TROLLOL” But why change the habit of a lifetime, eh?

JM

@Erthazus

You do know that the Killzone demo has much more detail and particles running rampid than your Crysis Warhead demo does and it has it all without all the pop ins too right?
I mean, i played Crysis Warhead at max, and textures and props were always popping in randomly as i progressed even though i was capable of playing the game at MAX everything at 60fps without a problem.

And here we have a Killzone Shadowfall demo video in a lowres flash stream and we can still see that the visuals are at least twice as good as Crysis Warhead’s without the random pop ins and much more going on on-screen at once. And on top of it all, it is only using 1.5gb of available 4-8gbs of ram from the PS4 so the finished product could be 10x better and even possibly 60fps…

You fail man. Give it a rest. MAX PC is great but it isn’t the end all.

I’ve yet to see him post a positive comment about any game other than witcher 2, and even then it’s “great game, my pc runs it better than shitty sub-hd Xbox. A hahaha.” do you even like gaming?

@26
And do you also have a video that looks better than the Killzone: Shadow Fall? Cos that kinda didn’t. Nice, smooth, but in comparison not very actually as good looking. If they had shown that at the PS4 show you’d have been claiming Far Cry looked better in 2004.

Oh and btw, it was also Crysis Warhead (2008) and a PC with a couple of GTX480 (2010). 2 x EVGA GTX480s will still set you back ~$340 today and that’s with only 3Gb memory and no CPU, HDD etc.

Entire thread being derailed because of a single guy. We could ignore him cant we?
Live and let live.

True, but it’s annoying and on EVERY, SINGLE, COMMENT..

Maybe it’s time for the almighty ban-hammer to serve justice…

Sony always shows INCREDIBLE visuals, great vids, cut scenes, etc. Then BOOM you put in the disc and youre like WTF? Sans Uncharted, its marketing, marketing, and more marketing. And Killzone blew ass, and bad ass at that. Only game worth its weight has been Uncharted. Other than that, nothing has made me unbox my PS3. I sense the same w the PS4…

Its just lame that they analyse some video of the game and opine about the performance of the system.

I’m just happy it’s in 1080P. Needs to be the console standard next gen.

Some games are still rendered in sub-hd on PS3/360, can’t wait for next gen.

Erthazus, if you’re going to write paragraphs about how PC is better and consoles are crap then you do care. -.-