Worth A look IMO.
KZ2 Versus GEOW 2 Video Comparison.(19 posts)
Unreal engine doesnt touch Gurreilla's engine.
Gears 2 is great, dont ge me wrong.
But to compare the Killzone 2 engine to the Unreal engine, while decent but sloppy in some places, is basiclly stupid.
Thanks for the linkage, Reask :D
mm have to say KZ looks good but gears holds up pretty well imo.
Remember JC this is the game on PS3 that was going to blow the competition away again.
I somehow find PS3 graphics can be just to clinical.
I quite like the gritty look of gears.
But hey just an opinion mind you.
If Gears 2 had more particle effects and better lighting it would probably look better than KZ2. But lets face it, that's a pretty major if. :)
Still you must remember gears is third person while KZ is First person.
Still leaving that aside it looks pretty good and fair play to guerilla on a good game.
Mind you on vg chartz some guy done a thread on it saying he did not like the game.
I can put a link up if anyone is interested.
I aint saying Gears 2 looks rubbish, I think it actually does look good (a bit of hyprocriscy :P) but I really wouldnt get Unreal engine compared to the Killzone engine.
Besides, its not used to the best of its abilties in other games from 3rd parties unless it's from Epic ala Unreal or Gears.
The only game whci hwas a 3rd party game which used the Unreal engine fine was Rainbow Six Vegas 1.
Now THAT was a good game, especially multiplayer. :D
You have to remember that GOW is basically using a 360 launch period engine with a few tweaks.
It also only took 2 years, not near on 5.
KZ2 certainly looks slightly better to me, but it should only be good for competition in visuals between the 360 and PS3 in the long run...
KZ2 certainly looks better in nearly ever way, apart from the characters faces, in KZ2 they look pretty sloppy at times whereas in Gears Of War they look much better.
UE3's only advantage is in terms of high resolution textures. KZ2 doesn't need them owing to the look blurry GG went for. In every other way, GG's engine annihilates UE3. Gears2 is a great looking game but a direct comparison just shows how technically advanced KZ2 is.
Just saw video review and have to say it does look excellent.
Both engines play to the platforms strengths. GeoW2 for high quality textures and KZ2 for effects. Both succeed well in their own way. Any differences are more down to an aesthetic level for me.
"It also only took 2 years, not near on 5."
Great warping of the facts there. E3 2005 was the pre-rendered target vid, so less than 4 years since then. GeoW came out mid 2006 and you've got to factor in at least 1.5 years dev time, GeoW2 was late 2008 so as it is a progression of the same engine the total time in development is more like hmmmm ... 4 years strangely.
It's not a progression of the same engine, it IS the same engine.
It's had a few lighting and AI tweaks, but it's still the same Unreal engine 3 that was being developed before the 360 was even released.
Ok so it was being developed before the 360 was released, they then did some development work for GeoW2. That = at least 3.5 years in time elapsed. The point still stands. It certainly isn't 2 years is it? What about all that new stuff they showed at a conference prior to a lot of the info of GeoW2?
If you don't take my word for it how about Tim Sweeney?
"BIZ: What are some of those new features that we'll see in Gears of War 2?
TS: We've added a lot of new features and tools to Unreal Engine 3. There's an ambient tool system in lighting, which allows you to see real-time shadows in scenes. We have a real-time destruction system, which allows you to make holes in walls. We have a crowd system, which causes thousands of characters to run around on screen – each with their own shadows cast on them. This all creates a more realistic and compelling game. The objects seem to fit more realistically with the environment. We've greatly improved the cinematic editor."
Yeah, that new stuff was the lighting changes and the new AI that I mentioned.
What I'm saying is that Gears 2 itself took around 2 years to develop. The technology in the engine was finished way before they started Gears 2's development (with the exception of the lighting/AI stuff).
So for example if I make a game in 10 years time using Unreal Engine 3, it doesn't mean that the game took 13 years to develop.
When it comes to Gears, the engine and the game are two seperate things (Gears is basically just a showcase for Unreal Engine 3), but I don't think that this is the case with KZ2.
Edit: Just saw your post above.
Yeah, again, this is what I was mentioning before. These are small tweaks, but the core engine is still the basic Unreal Engine 3.
Well if we say the engine was already done at the start of development then you still can't make a 2 years vs. 5 years comparison can you? As you have excluded engine development completely from one side.
Yeah, that's true...
I suppose I hadn't looked at it that way... Guerilla have made their game from scratch, whereas Gears 2 started with the benefit of a finished engine to build the game in.
Good point. I retract the 2 years vs near on 5 statement.
But not the bit about Unreal Engine 3 being the older technology of the two, which still holds, I believe.
Ok I'll give you that :). It is constantly changing and being updated but the basis is older certainly. They have more or less stated UE4 will be next gen though 2012 at earliest.
After having another look at video I would have to be honest and say KZ2 looks better.
The light coming in the window was a very sweet touch.
Also the debris from explosions.
Good thing is it raises the bar for MS which is good for gamers.
At least both companies are trying and that is all good imo.
You must log in to post.