Top
900°

Head2Head: Killzone: Shadow Fall Vs Battlefield 4 Side By Side Comparison (Easter Egg Inside)

Lens of Truth Writes "Welcome back everyone and Happy Easter! Today the Easter Bunny has brought us a special gift, he wanted to see how the “best of the best” next generation FPS compare to one another when side by side. Although we don’t have the exact specifications running Battlefield 4 we can assume its top of the line hardware. So, with that being said, we want to hear from you in the comments section on how you think the PlayStation 4, graphics, HDR lighting and performance is compared to top end PC’s. Let us say this, its going to be very interesting “Rabbit” when the system finally hits this fall.. Let the “Battle” begin!"

Also there's an Easter Egg somewhere in the post linking to a side by side video of the PlayStation 4 and PC Unreal Engine 4: Tech Demo.. I found it and its really worth checking out.

Read Full Story >>
lensoftruth.com
The story is too old to be commented.
NastyLeftHook01344d ago

both look amazing. and its a win win for future ps4 owners.

JoGam1344d ago

Thats not a picture of Battlefield, Its a picture of Socom Confrontation.

NastyLeftHook01344d ago (Edited 1344d ago )

i will be the first to be honest and admit that i did not notice until you said it. smh-_-

brettyd1344d ago

For some reason people always seem to use that image for military shooters. I don't get it.

thechosenone1344d ago (Edited 1344d ago )

So the obvious and biggest difference is the lighting, also the textures are bit lower rez in certain places and the particles are a bit more muted in the PS4 version. Man Epic did a sh*t job with UE4 for consoles. But what do you expect from an engine that's meant for multiplat development. It'll never tap the true power of the PS4's hardware.

The xbox version will fair far worse if the rumors are true about the weaker specs.

:D
http://i.imgur.com/EsR0Cay....

IcyEyes1344d ago

Both are amazing ...
But Killzone is simply awesome because its not only about texture quality/resolution is also about the tons of stuff on the screen.

Looks like a live-cam :D

thechosenone1344d ago (Edited 1344d ago )

And of course I was only talking about UE4 demo in my comment above not about BF4 vs KZ.

kevnb1343d ago (Edited 1343d ago )

@FATAL1TY
none of those killzone shots are the actual playable bits.
actual gameplay of KZ SF
http://www.pixelenemy.com/w...

http://media.officialplayst...

http://i.imgur.com/C6vX5F5....

the quality of the images might not be the greatest, but watch the trailer they showed again. Im highlighting the parts that are playable.
https://www.youtube.com/wat...

Im not even going to pick which game I think looks better, but fair is fair. And at the end, its just a cod style barely playable section thats almost a cutscene. I already know artists can make those look good.
battlefield 4 looks really similar to battlefield 3 in my eyes, but battlefield 3 looks and plays great.

TheRealSpy1343d ago

If you desperately want Killzone to look better, it will. That's the mindset of a fanboy.

It's night and day.

Dee_911343d ago

gotta love this pixel counting gaming era.

DOMination-1343d ago

Its hard to define "better" and we will all choose whatever looks aesthetically pleasing to us personally. Both look good and it makes me excited for the next few years.

silverbeld1343d ago

Battlefield looks to GREY!

Killzone looks much better.

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 1343d ago
Muerte24941344d ago

but the playing fields aren't remotely level. Let's wait until we get some ps4 footage of BF4 before we start comparing. Comparing locked in hardware to something only 5% of the PC gaming market owns is a little biased if you ask me.

AngelicIceDiamond1344d ago

You can't compare them? Ones Syfy shooter and the others a modern real world shooter? two different engines two different goals.

Mustang300C20121344d ago

Not that I don't agree with you but most games being compared have different engines.

BISHOP-BRASIL1343d ago

Yeah, but when you compare pics of two games running on different engines that happen to have similar scnearios, weponry, lighting and what not, you at least get a good comparison of how the different engines deal with those and, if both indeed aim for the same final look, you can say who did the best job in achieving, i.e., realistic graphics if we were comparing modern militar shooters (COD, BF, Arma, Op. Flashpoint, Rainbow Six, the very Socom - as in the image -, the list could go on and on).

Here the only thing in common really is the genre, they are both first person shooters, so meybe you could compare some gameplay elements, physics, etc... But there's nothing there to make a graphical comparison. Even if you get two similar scenarios (like the overview of the city, or just staring down at your own gun), they are not necessarily aiming for the same final look, point in case BF want to be realistic while KZ (or Halo, Gears, Resistance, Metro, Crysis, Unreal Tournament, etc) have a much more stylized graphics (as you would expect in a completelly fictional setting). It's just like comparing art styles, in the end any judgement will be highly subjetive.

Now if we had both games released we could indeed make a technical comparison of graphical effects and performance, analyse and pick each engines strong points or limitations, but that not just some side by side look at pictures as the final visual doesn't necessarily represent technical prowess, it would be much more technical talk and, probably, still wouldn't mean which look best or worst.

TheRealSpy1343d ago

Are you asking a question or making a statement.

Learn to question mark.

Of course you can compare them. You're comparing graphics, not story or setting.

OpieWinston1341d ago

I agree, the engine is focused on maximizing flexibility of destruction and sound.

Comparing graphics is just stupid, BF4 is leaning more towards a realistic feel rather than Arcade style shooter.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1341d ago
ijust2good1344d ago

The Character model is vastly superior in BF4, they look more realistic. However there are certain places where KZ looked better.

Aceman181344d ago

they both look great, and i'll be purchasing both titles easily as i love both franchises.

okmrman1343d ago

you guys must have balls pain due to amount of jizzing

bf 3 and kz 3 have completely different art style
of course everything wont be all shiny in a fucking war zone

people are so dumb

pixelsword1343d ago

Killzone 2's realistic concrete backgrounds, and people say:
"They should call it GREYzone"

ShadowFall adds some color and people say:
"of course everything wont be all shiny in a fucking war zone"

It just goes to show that people whine for the sake of whining.

jcnba281343d ago

They're both boring generic fps's.......NEXT

Ritsujun1343d ago

Cryingtek's shooters were horrible.

pixelsword1343d ago (Edited 1343d ago )

"They're both boring generic fps's.......NEXT"

...says the Wii fanboy.

Don't worry, dude: I'm almost certain that the next Wii or two will have graphics like that. Until then, don't be bitter, it just makes people giggle.

Just enjoy your generic Mario game and relax, man. Do you think Mario will have to rescue the princess? Ooh, I can't wait for the unpredictable plot twists in that one!

thedon8982z1343d ago (Edited 1343d ago )

This is the dumbest comparison I have ever seen first of all BF4 IS PRE ALPHA (AKA NOT REAL GAMEPLAY)and killzone is running off of early dev kits (no where near using PS4 real power). To top it all off I really believe killzon was originally a ps3 tital,the set peices look like it all day.I am waiting to see what games my PS4 WILL ENTERTAIN me with in 2014/15 now thats when they begin emulating the spu from the cell chip on the gpgpu and with all that gddr5 ram- all I CAN SAY DEVELOPERS DONT LET XBOX 7SHITTY HOLD YOU BACK- THE SKY IS THE LIMIT!!!LLLLLOOOOLLLLL!!!!!

pixelsword1343d ago

If they do, it won't be the 720's fault, The developer's greed is hampering their games and their vision of what their games should be, not any one console or PC.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1341d ago
Sandmano1344d ago (Edited 1344d ago )

I was literally just going to come and post that! What a coincidence! crazy! Anyway! Yes! Kill zone shadow fall FTW!!!!

user76939581344d ago

Is not coincidence.. KZSF looks way better but BF4 looks good and their fans should be happy!

abzdine1344d ago

i just played a multiplayer game of KZ3 with Move! great sensations

songoku1344d ago

BF4 looks like BF3 i couldnt tell the difference, but with KZSF i saw a big difference and love the new art work they have and the colors OMG!!! orgasim. its not KZ4 but its still good. BF4 will still be good cuz i like battle field but trying to compare it to the sony's halo is stupid cuz KZ always wins as best looking FPS. when KZ2 and 3 came out they got best graphics of the year.

Dead_Cell1343d ago Show
wishingW3L1344d ago (Edited 1344d ago )

Killzone looks last gen compared to Battlefield 4. And not to mention that the maps are not only bigger but the destruction is incredible and that requires an insane amount of calculations. But Battlefield was running on a $900 dual GPU after all... They can't be compared.

zebramocha1344d ago

You can't be serious? The biggest difference between the two is,image quality,likely to change and lighting.

Sandmano1344d ago

Bubbles for making me laugh wishingW3I

Ame_No_Shiryuu1344d ago (Edited 1344d ago )

Yeah.., WishingW3L is totally right, there no way console will be comparable to thousand dollars rig, to the people who say shadowfall is better, shame on you!!, just give it up PS fans, it's a natural order, where the rich stand above the poor.., well.., sucks to be you poor console gamer.., :D LMAO!!!

regard. PC gamer representative

Edit, please don't bubble me down, i'm just trying to be as asshole as possible as a PC "guy" cause every body else does the same, if you know what I mean..

GraySnake1344d ago (Edited 1344d ago )

You don't Represent me.

Edit:
Well then, next time add a /s or something lol

songoku1344d ago

have fun with a game that has the same guns and gameplay like call of duty, nothing new with modern shooters cuz they all have the same stuff.

scott1821344d ago (Edited 1344d ago )

I own a $2,000 gaming pc and play my ps3 while my PC catches dust. Alot of the best game designers and developers work for sony, seriously! I will admit there are games I wish were on consoles, like shogun 2, but i'm not sure the ps3 or xbox 360 have enough ram to handle it, I love it on PC though. But I haven't played a game that looked that much better, if any, than Uncharted 3. Just imagine what sony's developers will be able to do with the PS4! I am far more excited for PS4 games and graphics then for PC's.

tee_bag2421344d ago (Edited 1344d ago )

@Scott182 - I got a $2000 gaming PC too. I bought it in 1991, It's called an AMIGA 500..maybe you heard of it. It doesn't look as good as a PS3 either.
Get my drift?! Saying you have a $2000 is meaning less if it's junk old hardware. Its whats inside that matters, not the purchase price!!!

scott1821343d ago (Edited 1343d ago )

I hear ya tee bag, I bought it a couple years ago.... Still plays games full power. That's really not the point i'm going for anyways. Of course good PC's have better hardware and more power than consoles. It's the developers and the games they make that matter to me, look at uncharted 3 for instance. I know the raw power isn't there for the ps3 like it is for good PC's, but look what naughty dog made with that game. I'm not trying to be biased for playstation, I just get more excited for playstation games...

MuhammadJA1343d ago

This is the only site where they can't admit the obvious and start posting their fanboyism.

BTW, it's hard to convince people who haven't gamed on PC. -_-

JackVagina1343d ago

Running on a 900$ GPU doesn't mean the game is optimized for it

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 1343d ago
Ezz20131344d ago (Edited 1344d ago )

KZ4 look last gen ?!
are we looking at the same pics ?!
both look really close and almost the same (the art style is different though )
and both are still alpha stage

Reverent1344d ago

He's just trolling. Mark him as such, and he'll have less bubbles to do it again. And people wonder what's wrong with N4G.

songoku1344d ago

this game isnt KZ4 its KZSF, if it was KZ4 the graphics would shit on everything like all the other KZ2 and 3 did at that time. cant compare BF4 to a game not shown.

ABizzel11344d ago (Edited 1344d ago )

@wishingW3L & Zebramocha

The true answer / response is a happy medium between the both of your comments.

There's no way Killzone can look better than that Battlefield 4 trailer, from a RAW graphical standpoint. It's running on vastly superior that's at least 4x as powerful as the PS4 (my guess is at least i5-3750k CPU, HD 7990 GPU confirmed, and 32GB of RAM). The PS4 is a great console spec. wise (mid range PC, likely to be sold at a low-end price which is what PC gamers were upset about), but it can't compete with PC specs. like that (aka maxed PC specs.).

The lighting in BF4 is better, The character models faces were better in BF4, the environments are much bigger (based on the sections shown from both games), effects (smoke, fire, particles) look significantly better in Battlefield (and also proven in the UE4 comparison), and the destruction in Battlefield is in a whole other league.

Now it's time to praise Killzone. The fact is many people think of Killzone as a corridor shooter, and it was on PS3 for the most part, but the KZ4 demo all took place in a large open area. It wasn't a room that loaded the work as you progressed, but a HUGE Foyer that leads to a set piece moment. The tessellation was great, and arguably better than what was shown in BF4, the weapon models look much more detailed than BF4 (especially compared to the shotgun), the character models "In Action" are on par with BF4 if not better, and Killzone has a better artstyle IMO.

That being said KZ4 is using smoke and mirrors to achieve what BF4 is doing off RAW Power. A better comparison would be Killzone's E3 demo when the company has had time to polish up the loose ends and graphics since the game is technically finished. It will also allow Guerilla to use more of the systems 8GB of RAM compared to the 1.5GB - 4GB they maximum that had for the first reveal which would improve some aspect of the game. Killzone is also a launch title for new hardware vs. PC gaming which has been established for decades.

So while BF4 looks better, there are a lot of things that Killzone has going against that can easily be addressed before it's launch (2x more RAM, dedicated graphics development time, and improved understanding of PS4 architecture). Also a fair comparison would be BF4 running on PC hardware comparable to the PS4 (HD 7850 / 7870) or on the PS4 itself in which case Killzone is likely to give it a serious run for it money via PC hardware, and stomp it on the PS4.

I will say this; however, Killzone looks like a PS4 game, but it doesn't look like a huge evolution over Killzone 3 gameplay-wise based on that small demo.

BF4 looks like another BF as well, but the sheer amount of horsepower the game is pushing out through Frostbite Engine 3 from huge maps, multiple vehicles to freely drive, insane amounts of destructible environments, all while looking as great as it does is the first step to evolving the FPS. Now if only they could nail the story and single player, like Killzone is likely to achieve.

Muerte24941344d ago (Edited 1344d ago )

but all in all, I agree with what you said. There are however a few things people should take into account. Mark Cerny said that only people who have an enormous amount of knowledge coding for ps3 would understand ps4's "low-level hardware" support. DICE is actually one of the few 3rd party developers who truly know how to manipulate the CELL. I believe that they can give us a PS4 experience similar to that of PCs, lacking only minor bells and whistles.

AnteCash1344d ago

It was running on i7 , 32gb ram and TWO 7990.

The_Infected1344d ago (Edited 1344d ago )

Just because a game like BF4 is running on better hardware don't mean anything. It's down to how good the developer is and how far they push things. Also every PS4 gamer will enjoy KZ: Shadow Fall exactly how it looks while not many will enjoy BF4 as it was shown because not everyone will have a super high end PC.

That's the reason I enjoy being a console gamer we all enjoy the games exactly the same so we all have the same experience even if its not the best it's still the same for us all.

tee_bag2421344d ago (Edited 1344d ago )

Well said ABizzel1 - Shame the obvious and logic never prevail on N4G - The site where emotional and immature gamers take their first steps.

@Kratos_Kills - I agree with you, it doesnt mean bf4 is better at all. Likes and Dislikes aside, what is does show as Abizzel1 detailed, BF4 is more of a technical marvel.

Ravenor1343d ago

Both looked great, and things are looking up if you enjoy FPS games. I certainly wish gaming communities focused a bit less on the Game A) vs. Game B) or Platform A) vs Platform B) it's boring to read and the comments are just grating.

Both Killzone SF and BF4 looked great and they will both be enjoyable romps shooting dudes. Just like games in the past from both series they will both offer competent and enjoyable multiplayer. Why is this simple idea so hard for some of you?

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1343d ago
thechosenone1344d ago (Edited 1344d ago )

KZ's level was massive with loads of on-screen assets, dynamic lighting, reflections, volumetric smoke, dozens of NPCs, etc. BF4 demo on the other hand felt mostly empty it didn't really feel like a living breathing world like KZ:SF did.

http://i.minus.com/ibvZ53RX...

http://youtu.be/lUjQ4DJXLzw

scott1821344d ago

SHHHHH the BF4 demo had better everything because PC's have 500 Gigawopflops....

RegorL1338d ago

Take another look...

KZ3 world is rather futuristic sterile.

I think you take real world environments for granted...

Take a look at the environment in this part of BF3.
- people
- animals
- wires
- vehicles/traffic (including as light sources)
- trees (that moves in the wind)
- litter, chairs, ... (non gameplay related stuff)
- and later other forms of vegetation
http://youtu.be/U8HVQXkeU8U...

BF4 looks like BF3 as they have a common artistic target - realism in near future.

Sub-Zero851344d ago (Edited 1344d ago )

Spoken like a typical PC elitist #WellDone , Killzone : Shadow Fall looks GREAT how ever I'm a huge fan of both franchises so I want both and both look stunning !

DeadlyFire1343d ago (Edited 1343d ago )

PS4 - nearly 2 Tflop with a co-processor.
AMD 7990 - between 4-6+ Tflops

Not to much of a difference graphically between the two. Yes there are some bits here and there with the PC version that are better. I wouldn't judge map size based on one demo of KZ Shadow Fall. To run side by side its not bad at all. Many improvements will be made by time E3 erupts in June. Anything shown to the public is one month behind on what development has pushed forward too.

Sony's goal is to push their PS4 to run like it has nearly 3 Tflops of power in it. Which is why Epic's Infiltrator Demo was running on a 680 with 3 Tflops of power behind it instead of something with more juice running it. PS4 will be able to do that if all goes according to plan within 5 years.

PC games require raw power. Unless multiplatform. Then they are just ported in many cases.

Console games get specialized code lined up directly to the CPU/GPU from every game which is improved upon with every generation.

Its not hard to see why its comparable. As consoles do push forward further than their specs, but only so far. They will not breach anything above 3 Tflops side by side to a console.

My system only has a 2.2 Tflop GPU and 5 year old 4 thread quad core CPU. A PS4 launch game should match up to its PC counter part pretty well without any effort in my home.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 1338d ago
DEATHSTROKE-cro-1344d ago

Both look amazing but I like something new like that Killzone futuristic city and futuristic weapons.
I'm buying both.

LOGICWINS1344d ago

It's scary that these games aren't even final code yet. If launch games look THIS good, then the PS4 has a VERY bright future.

GraySnake1344d ago

and can you imagine the optimization later down the road? it's gonna be crazy!

Reverent1344d ago

I take back my comment towards you from a couple weeks ago... I see how you have all of your bubbles. I admit, I do agree with you most of the time, but you're comments can be pretty hit & miss sometimes.

Anyways, yeah, I personally cannot wait. Both of these games will definitely be played on the PS4 for me.

Lelldorianx1344d ago

I don't understand the premise of this blogspam. This is a non-linear comparison, no conclusion can be drawn.

Reverent1344d ago

That's what I thought. If I absolutely had to compare them though, I honestly think Killzone looks graphically better, while Battlefield looks technically better. Both are going to be amazing though. Can't wait!

Metfanant1343d ago

i think what you MEANT to say was that to you, Killzone has a more appealing art direction...

because when youre talking "graphically" and "technically" youre really talking about the same thing...