The difference is big but not as big as PS2 vs PS3 graphics...
for some reason I think in the next 5 - 10 years, graphics(visually) are gonna get to a point that there wouldn't be any room for improvements. They are going to look like real life and after that there's nothing else to improve... you know what I mean ?
@Hydrolex: your opinion is very relative! at the end of PS2 everybody said the same cause at that time not many could imagine what a console upgrade would bring.
There will ALWAYS be room for improvement, from AI, motion capture, graphics, physics... all this is extremely difficult to integrate in a game cause no game nails all these aspects at once. Games will never play or feel like real life, there will always be a limiting factor.
yes but I said +++Visually++++ ! did you even read ?
it's obvious, one day, there will be no more room for VISUAL improvements, visuals are gonna look close to real life... maybe 5 years ? maybe 50 years ? it will come for sure
It will be a LONG time before we reach the limit of graphics. Think of something like Avatar, or more recently, The Avengers (look up what is done with CG in the movie, it's unreal...all of New York in that last battle is CG). It will be a LONG time before even the most powerful super-computers can run a game that looks like those in real-time, much less a very powerful PC, and even less so, consoles.
What people need to remember is that the PS2 was one of the weakest systems of it's generation and the PS3 was the most powerful. When the 360 was first shown most people were disappointed with the graphical jump from the original Xbox. It wasn't until GoW and GRAW that people started seeing a big leap.
The DC was the weakest but even then you're right about the Xbox-to-Xbox360 initial gap, especially when you compared the ports they got (there was only a 4-year difference between the consoles).
The disappointment was tremendous but no one really expected much from the 360 then anyway (all hopes were on the PS3). It wasn't until Gears of War on 2006 that people realized the 360 was truly ahead of the Xbox.
You know whats crazy? people are saying the "Textures" for KZ:SF aren't high res enough...but to those people, I say F U, High Res textures can wait, what's more important are character models in general, and the way things move, if you look at the actual character models in the gameplay and screenshots that have been shown, they have a pretty ridiculously high polly count, they look fleshed out, and the way people move and stuff is just as important, lets put it this way...if you have a robot that looks like a human (skin and shit) but has robot features and moves like a robot, you say "Oh thats a robot" but, if you see a robot that looks like a robot, all smooth edges nice design, and moves like a human, you're most likely going to say "is that a person in a robot costume?" and I think that's a huge factor, high res textures aren't everything, I think more emphasis should be put on characters polly count and physical clothing pieces, not wasting up memory on super high res textures that you can only see close up and even then you really aren't going to see anyway because you'll be too busy doing something.
They probably disagreed with you because you want early development PS4 games to be compared to last life cycle games on the PS3,which is not reasonable.
Didn't give you a disagree btw & I'm gonna give you a +bubble. :)
If ur a console player you should know the CPU they are using from AMD is quite low end. People keep saying 8 CORES OW MY GOD. To be fair 4 cores is plenty enough and if you will remember the PS3 had an 8 core cell processor
the ps3 had 8 SPE not cores. SPE are closer to threads then cores. Do some re-search its sad just how many people still get that wrong. It was 1 core with 8 SPE(advanced threads)
I think is fair plus the difference is huge, you can tell this games have a different feeling into them, a more realistic lighting and visuals are on a whole new level of tech.
I'm still waiting to play Killzone 2 E3 2005 CGI tech demo in a REAL game, REALTIME.
The games battle sequences are far better than KZ:SF. Look at the movement and close quarters, looks just awesome. If PS4 cannot do that in realtime then the Leap from current gen to next gen is not a massive leap at all. I don't see crysis 3 on PC look that good.
I just spent $100 on a brand-new PS3 game that looks worse than any of the launch titles.
It's all about developer competence and willingness to work. Hell, there are still some PS2 games that look better than analagous PS3 games. FFXII to FFXIII, for example. Rogue Galaxy to NNK, for example.
But also this is showing what the initial games will look like, the later comparisons would not show much as it took a long time to reach that level of development. This comparison most useful as you can take changes from these two videos then apply that on top of Killzone 3 for instance.
Here's a screenshot comparison I put together of PS3 and PS4 games from the same studios: http://imgur.com/a/DHAaa Note that I included Star Wars 1313 which has not been confirmed for PS4 and is rumored to be delayed.
ps4 graphics are better and improved but not jaw dropping,main reason is that consoles are budget friendly gaming devices..anyway graphics aren't most important part in games
Well if games like Crysis 3 maxed out on high end PC doesn't look leaps and bounds ahead of console version then i doubt next gen console will. PC is better but not leap we seen from SNES to N64/ PS2 to PS3.
These games shown were done on early ps4 dev kit, killzone ,deep down and infamous 3 atleast, still 8 months developing time left. Try dl 1080p trailers and watch them on your tv,you will see the diffirence new gen brings.
I guess it is just me but I really find it dumb to compare graphics from a current gen console (PS3) to a future gen console (PS4). That's like saying, "Hey let's compare a fruit salad to a fruit salad with extra pineapple slices".
Well you can, I just don't see the point. We all know the PS4 is gonna kick ass in the graphics department. Why compare it to an inferior product. That is all I am saying.
You compare PS3 to PS4 to see how far the graphical leap of technology is. Its obviously superior but the question is.. Is the Leap "HUGE" as seen in previous generations.
please name one pc game (set at 720p) that looks better than: heavy rain, killzone3, god of war3, uncharted3, the last of us, beyond...
But yes, most pc games do look better than their console versions, because the games are mostly multi-platform and have not been optimized for the consoles only. Games which did get optimized look a generation leap better than most of the multi-platform games.
example : now that tomraider is out and looks to allmost reach the level of the very old uncharted3, another game hops on along "the last of us" and ups the game.
You should compare launch titles of the PS4 with the latest games on PS3, that's a fair comparison and shows the difference between what we have now and what we'll have by the end of the year. You might as well be comparing PS4 launch titles with PS1 launch titles.
"You should compare launch titles of the PS4 with the latest games on PS3, that's a fair comparison"
Current PS3 games look way better than early PS3 games. It's not a fair comparison because everyone knows, as developers become more familiar with new hardware they're working with, game visuals will begin to improve and newer titles will look much better than launch titles. Compare Resistance 1 to Resistance 3 for an example.
"shows the difference between what we have now and what we'll have by the end of the year"
That comment didn't make too much sense. We have no idea what PS4 games will look like at the end of next year.
"You might as well be comparing PS4 launch titles with PS1 launch titles"
That made even less sense. That comment alone was enough to get a disagree from me. So there you have it lol.
Killzone 2's trailer was GCI (not a tech demo) and the actual game wasn't even a launch title, it come out more then 2 years after the ps3. The equivelent ps4 title would something coming out in late 2015/early2016.... theres point comparing it to Shadow Fall, which is a DAY 1, launch title.
I agree with Tei777. KZ Shadow Fall is actual gameplay... the killzone demo shown at PS3 reveal was CGI rendering.
the comparison should be Shadow Fall against Killzone 2... and the comparison should be between 1080p videos and/or screenshots of the game. The difference will be even more noticeable when comparing at full resolution.
The biggest improvement for me is if we can start getting more games at 60 fps. There were precious few this gen, Cod aside, and it does make a difference.
Will the vastly improved memory help that or is it something else that deals with frames per second?
To people saying the pics and videos of ps4 games are not looking impressive,a youtube video can't show all the detail and resolution. Watch a game which you currently can buy right now on youtube and play it. Notice major differences....(framerate, resolution, details in textures, etc)
cause all the Nintendo articles on n4g arent filled with walls of nintendo hate right? but when you see 1 comment that isnt pro sony its trolling...
I see the logic
was the resistance demo for the ps3 was not cgi and it wasnt pre rendered? or am I missing something. or is pointing out the stated and proven truths considered trolling now in 2013?
I want the PS4 I just hope and this is a long shot but I hope Quantum Dream releases Kiara on PS4. I know it was a tech demo but I just can't get that game out of my head.
A lot of people seem disappointed with the graphical leap. but remember as we go on, the jump will seem like less and less as we get closer to photo realism.
The big difference I noticed immediately was the draw distance, the sheer amount going on on screen, the wider colour pallet. Obviously were seeing more polys too, but what really brings a scene to life is things moving, things going on at all scales and distances.
It just looks more real, more polished. and this is early stuff. We are definitely still going to get those wow moments like we did this gen.
Heres hoping the next elder scrolls works better on the ps4. thats the kind of game that will shine on this system.
Deep Down is going too be my first RPG on an console.That game looks amazingly fun.Too be that close with an dragon only with an sword is going too be lovely.
These games and demos you compared are veery early stages ps3 development, should be later comparisons like killzone 3 vs killzone:SF
Here's a screenshot comparison I put together of PS3 and PS4 games from the same studios:
http://imgur.com/a/DHAaa
Note that I included Star Wars 1313 which has not been confirmed for PS4 and is rumored to be delayed.
ps4 graphics are better and improved but not jaw dropping,main reason is that consoles are budget friendly gaming devices..anyway graphics aren't most important part in games
These games shown were done on early ps4 dev kit, killzone ,deep down and infamous 3 atleast, still 8 months developing time left.
Try dl 1080p trailers and watch them on your tv,you will see the diffirence new gen brings.
I guess it is just me but I really find it dumb to compare graphics from a current gen console (PS3) to a future gen console (PS4). That's like saying, "Hey let's compare a fruit salad to a fruit salad with extra pineapple slices".