BF4 vs KZ:SF (PS4) Graphics..
- Thread starter VFX_Veteran
- Start date
Yeah, it's like anything not that far away gets this awful blur to mask the fact that in order to render up close images nicely, everything else needs to look like vaseline was smeared over it.
Pretty up close, but that's about it. That's why I say that from a tecnical standpoint, BF4 is doing more.
Depth of field isn't used a crutch though, so I don't understand your point. I can see not liking it, but I think it looks cool.
It's not a matter of liking it or not liking it, but I pointed it out to show that in KZ, the really nice visuals are just for what's really close to you. I'm trying to point out, that from a technical level, BF4 is more impressive.
I may be mistaken, but I'm 99% sure depth of field is a post-processing effect that takes up resources. You wouldn't add it to make things easier.
DOF is a screen-space feature and it will be less expensive than rendering more polygons and taking them through the entire shader pipeline. But I agree, I'm not sure whath Qbert is saying. I need to see some footage. Blurring the background doesn't mean that it took out any features.
I watched that yesterday it looks good but those are still off screen captures in 1080p60, would like direct feed. By this time, you'd expeect guerrilla to be releasing new direct feed footage, but they haven't done so lately.
This was just released:
http://www.killzone.com/kz3/en_US/blog/news/2013-11-04_new-hq-footage.html
Unfortunately I'm at work and can't download it.
is better.
I have been in Helli-copters in BF 4 and we flew through the city.... it looked as good if not better.
It's less details that need to be rendered on screen. That blur is everywhere.
And subtract what I said about the backgrounds, it still doesn't negate the other things I've mentioned. BF4 has destruction, textures, size, effects, shadowing, etc that puts it in another level over KZ, in regards to what the game is doing.
Not to mention that where you fly around in the city....it's actual parts of the maps that are really there and you can move about in....as opposed to a skyline view that is not really there.
Wouldn't it be safe to assume Guerrilla Games is getting more out of the PS4 than DICE is at this point? DICE has had to make 5 or 6 different versions of their game. GG has had the luxury of focusing on PS4 tech for how long? You're right about BF4 doing more things on a grander scale but Shadow Fall multiplayer looks significantly better than BF4 PS4 multiplayer at this point.
Side Bar: What series requires more team work/rewords non killing actions more, Killzone or Battlefield?
You know what I really like about KZ:SF....the damn thing just looks so crisp!
Like seeing a nice pair of tits in real life vs. HD content on redtube.
You could practically lick those screens Blue posted.
Like seeing a nice pair of tits in real life vs. HD content on redtube.
You could practically lick those screens Blue posted.
is better.
That scene, in-game cinema or not is still the most impressive thing I have seen from the new consoles.
It makes me want a new Wipeout game asap.
Yeah even thought the games aren't out its kinda of a difficult comparison. I agree, its a little unfair because guerilla can focus all their resources to the strengths of the ps4, whereas DICE has to try and get the best out of 4 consoles, not to mention the PC. That's one massive workload. Despite this, I doubt I will be more impressed than what I saw of the next gen bf4 60fps eurogamer vid, just so much scale etc player counts, the list goes on. Where I compare 2 games like this I instantly weigh in which is doing more with the engine. We'll see.
Not to mention you can't get out and walk around, much less take part in combat in that beautiful scenery there, its just an illusion for people who...by into illusions.
I think we are the point now were you not have to show off your beautiful graphics, but let us go there and explore it, KZ doesn't allow that in this game.
The art style however is badass.
Which is exactly why games need to be 1080p. People are kidding themselves if they think 720p is good enough. Like you said the games are just crisp and clear compared to the blurred BS of 720p or less.
Why aim for 1280x720? 1152x648 is good enough. I mean f***, we even aim for 720p; we should have simply gone with 853x480 which is the 16:9 aspect ratio of 640x480!
Exactly. I've said this before....on pc games, I'd rather cut other settings back than to cut resolution back....it makes that much of a difference. Hell, if push came to shove, I'd rather run BF4 at medium settings at 1080p than ultra at 720p.