Comments on: Killzone 3’s Visual Evolution Is Phenomenal: A Screenshot Comparison

By: Bas

Bas — Mon, 10 Jan 2011 16:04:49 +0000

I think the older screens look much better. Just take a look at the second picture with the scope.

By: Kevin

Kevin — Wed, 29 Dec 2010 05:14:38 +0000

I hope these are lo-res pics because they both look kinda grainy.

By: Eric

Eric — Fri, 24 Dec 2010 20:54:16 +0000

Neither looks all the fabulous in my opinion.

By: GTRrocker

GTRrocker — Fri, 24 Dec 2010 17:03:42 +0000

It looks more photo realistic.

By: datdude

datdude — Fri, 24 Dec 2010 14:29:10 +0000

I gotta say I love the gears of war series. I think most fans of 3rd person shooters would. I think hands down epic improved the cover system in these types of games and the gun mechanics and gameplay are rock solid. Seems like so many games have copied horde mode. So simple yet so brilliant. I cannot say the same for killzone 2. To me, the sensitivity was off on the guns no matter how much you tweaked and the overall feel was not quite right. Explosions felt a little light compared to other 1st/3rd person shooters out there. And I have a loud ass 7.1 surround system. This is not to say I didn’t enjoy killzone 2, I did but it did have its flaws to me. I have pre-ordered killzone 3 and I’m really hoping that some of the issues from the 2nd volume are vastly improved as I’m really looking forward to the game. Here’s hoping it’s the best shooter on the ps3 for 2011. I will be pre-ordering gears closer to it’s release as well… along with ME3 for 360 (wish I could get it on one disc for my PS3 but my saved games from ME1 and ME2 are on my 360), Uncharted Drakes Deception, Last Guardian, Rage, Infamous 2, Resistance 3, Forza Motorsport 4, Batman Arkham City, Bioshock Infinite among others if I think they will live up to the hype. The point is both systems have their strengths and weaknesses. And both have games that if I didn’t own the console I would certainly miss out on… that’s the bottom line fangirls.

By: Alex Parkson

Alex Parkson — Fri, 24 Dec 2010 10:58:20 +0000

Granted some things look better but the main change here is they have applied a colour filter to the graphics

By: BG

BG — Fri, 24 Dec 2010 10:48:55 +0000

There is no difference between them whatsoever, this article makes no sense.

Or is the guy who wrote this article making fun of Killzone 3?

By: Izzy

Izzy — Fri, 24 Dec 2010 07:05:36 +0000

In reply to cell989.

Art direction is not a matter of texture resolution -_-
I don’t know where you got that kind of thinking from.
In Gears 2, I admit, there was shininess on the character models. We’re talking Killzone 3 and Gears 3 though, and the textures in Killzone 3 that I pointed out are subpar (on the clothes).

By: WhiteKing

WhiteKing — Fri, 24 Dec 2010 06:55:38 +0000

In reply to cell989. @Izzy That is the art direction of KillZone2! It look dirty, dusty yet the polygons are way more! Unlike gears where you believe in a battlefield everything is shinny, the edges blind you to think its smooth. Close up looking you'll see it's just a chunck of plating bound together nothing special.

By: Felix Autohousein

Felix Autohousein — Fri, 24 Dec 2010 05:05:40 +0000

Gears3 > KZ3

Killzone has awesome visuals but that’s about it. Game play is rubbish and wears thin within 14 days.