GearNuke: Next generation is almost here. Curious to see how far the graphics have evolved. We compare Killzone Shadow Fall, Ryse and Crysis 3 to see how far the facial tech has evolved for games.
All three look fantastic.
Actually Crysis 3 looks better than Killzone facial tech. Black Block, We are the Resistance.
its on PC so yeah that goes without saying. KZ is impressive though i'll be honest i was taken by surprise during the trailer didn't think GG would put that much care and attention into the character faces killzone was always about the harsh environment not so much about shiny graphics. they did a good job with shadow fall and should be a nice introduction to next gen i think shaping up to be one of the better launch titles we've had in the past two gens
I think that Infamous Second Son and Order 1886 have better facial expressions than Killzone or Ryse myself. But it's hard to compare when they all look so good.
Too bad Crytek games run like crap even on good systems though, if you want to play their games be sure to buy your hardware 3 years after a game they made comes out!. Though it doesn't bother me much, i don't find their games that interesting anyway, just flashier graphics and much worse performance than other games.
Ryse is the better looking without a doubt.
They left out quantum brake, shame. I still think of it as the best facial cap for a video game. http://i.minus.com/iHmzBKQ6...
Winner: The Order 1886. Check out Game Informer article on the game if you can.
It's so funny how Xbots are still buying into the CG veils that M$ is pulling over their eyes. Ryse has pre-rendered cinematics, and they look 5x better than the actual game visuals. 90% of that story trailer they released was NOT even close to real-time, and if you actually pay attention when you watch it, you can blatantly see the difference when it transitions between the actual game vs. not. It's pretty obvious. If the Xbone was a high end PC, then the game itself would be able to match or at least come close to matching the cinematics, but it's not. And then Quantum Break isn't anything as of right now other than a CGi video that was never running on an Xbone at any point. Jeeze, people are so naive.
@Destrania Crytek does cutscenes using using in game assets. They aren't prerendered. @LonChaneyTV They said that the stuff they showed was in game, in game =/= gameplay. That is a cutscene they were showing during the presentation. Quantum Break doesn't look like that Personally, I think either Cryengine or Frostbite have the best faces in gaming. Slightly leaning towards Cryengine though. Killzone SF overall looks amazing, can't wait to play it
How can you compare gifs on facial tech in the first place? 1st:your only looking at a gif, in game the facial animation will convey the given situation or emotion at hand. 2nd: they're two different art styles.by comparsion kz has a more true to life color plaette while crysis and ryse are more colorful. 3rd:crysis and ryse have very deliberate expressions while the killzone is more suddle. 4th:the eyes on crysis and ryse look lifeless while kz look more human. Edit:also the fact that your comparing ryse cutsence with kz in game graphics is just no. Kzsf is a great looking next gen title and is technically superior to ryse in every way barring poly count lol.don't know why ppl keep saying this choppy game is the best that nex gen has to offer as of now.
Destrania who are you kidding those Ryse pics are not CGI its in game with the camera zoomed in, stop making excuses Ryse looks superb KZ SF does also but Ryse is a bit better. They are using some awesome new tech to make Ryse and it shows but that in no way means KZ SF is garbage so no need to spew BS because you're offended many people think Ryse looks better. http://i1.wp.com/gearnuke.c...
If you throw infamous then you have to throw quantum break In their But this is a pointless article
I never said that those cutscenes weren't made in-engine, I said that they are pre-rendered and the Xbone isn't processing any of them. When the game transitions to real-time, the quality drops dramatically because the hardware of the Xbone simply can't handle it. If the hardware was more powerful, then the cutscenes could be processed in real-time with seamless integration with the gameplay with no dip in quality, but it's not. Seriously, watch the trailer they released and pay attention. There is very drastic differences in quality throughout. Open your eyes. I also think it's funny that during gameplay the game has to highly blur basically everything around your character to even run it at 30fps.
Deep Down looks amazing though...but honestly those weren't the best pictures of KZ just saying... http://media1.gameinformer.... http://cdn3-www.playstation... All three titles where visually impressive
They all look really good. It's just that the ones from Ryse are CG Videos and not actual game play footage. It changed since we first saw it from E3. I know now what they meant by a downscale from 150k to 85k.
As far as I see it now: -Ryse has the most realistic looking faces overall. The shadowing/detail is not the best, but they do a really good job on the emotions of the faces. -Crysis has the best detail. The shadowing is kinda bunk because the two pics they show have the same amount of shadowing on the characters despite having a glaring sunrise in the back of one of them (notice the darkness of the uniform in contrast to the barely shadowed face next to it). I don't like those dead eyes either... what, wait; didn't Crytek make Ryse? -Killzone has the best shadowing and the most realistic looking eyes (especially the female Helgast) The eyes are the window to the soul, and Guerrilla pretty much mastered that since the first Killzone. The shadow of the guy's face is what I'm talking about: if you have a light source in back of you and not too much lighting in front of you, you won't have a full look at the subject's face. GG gets mad props for that. Their facial models aren't the most realistic at all times although they do a really good job with facial expressions... mainly because of the eyes. Personally, I like the look of Ryse overall (I'm a fan of the Hyborian era/ancient type games), followed by Killzone, then Crysis, but seeing these models in motion will make the difference, but be not mistaken: I would not be ashamed to own any of those games because each and every one of them look great.
I find it funny how this one-way politicized article fails to show the games in motion and that makes "all the difference in the world". You can show me as many pics as you want of Project Cras that even look better than real life, the game still moves like jiggly *****. When it comes to facial animations, Killzone SF just looks like Horse excrements: http://i.minus.com/iboc0UsI... Crysis 3 on the other hand, manages to surpass that by going to a level beyond anything seen in animal waste, maybe something like Barchiosaurus excrements (that incldes rocks because this fell eats rock to digest what he eats, so you get excrements with rocks): http://abload.de/img/raschx... Ryse from those three games looks the best graphically and in motions even that most of the times all animations whether facial, clothes or bodies look limited (like the senator's necklace which is just a mere falt texture, yes CryEngine is just all about flatlifeless textures) , but those are still High Quality, in-engine yes, but high quality pre-rendered, pre-recorded, pre-whatever you want FMVS using the highest aspects of the engine to be displayed in a cutscene, it means you will never have such quality ingame even if you crank up the graphics even on PC, this is like the pre-rendered pre-recorded CGI FMVs of Alan Wake, Hitman Absolution and The show Crysis trailers, and this is not the same case like Uncharted games where Cut-scenes and in game models uses all the same stuff no difference. Just compare Ryse GAMEPLAY to the cinematics. This is now a fair comparison. You just have to depict the truth of anything eventhough you have chosen a side to be on.
Too me Cryteck is going down hill when they decided to make their games on the console, THEN, import to PC. That was a big blow to all the PC gamers that supported them during the development of Crysis. If I had to pick a favorite game, the 1st one was my favorite.
A lot of disagree, Ryse facial texture and lighting is a lot better while Crysis looks lifeless. KZ is very good looking but not on par with Ryse cutscenes. That said, in-game gameplay graphics is far better on KZ. Views overlooking the city, particle effects, beautiful lighting and textures are all better on KZ and the gameplay looks far superior on KZ. You have to admit though that the Ryse cutscenes are the best for launch games.
Killzone looks horrible in comparison.
U got owned, Yes they do. Ryse to me is more impressive next gen launch game, seriously the cinematic close ups are 2nd to none but hey everybody can judge for themselves. https://static.squarespace.... http://i1.wp.com/gearnuke.c... http://i.minus.com/i9tqk6Il... j-blaze, really, "awful"? come on now. KZ SF looks great.
Ryse??? ah... http://cdn.medialib.compute... and Quantum Dream sayd that this is the minimum of PS4 this own RYSE and also QUANTUM BREAK no fanboysm here just facts
Sorry twin But thats a tech demo lol Quadtic dreams tech demo the games never match it Look at the tech demos for heavy rain and beyond they did not come out as good as the tech demos Besides the fact that ryse looks just as good and we already know there want be thst much activity in quadtic's next with a static camera
joefrost what are you talking about looking good. If you are actually comparing graphics, you should use game with 900p 20 mid fps as example.
@joefrost00 are you serious? they looked better http://youtu.be/JuitbK5kO90 http://youtu.be/imFidS6pXfs
JokesOnYou thinking Ryse looks the best? Didn't see that coming...
Have fun playing a movie called Ryse lol
@u got owned Well you're never going to start an argument with that attitude. Look at all the hard work people are doing below, bringing up poly counts, texture detail, asking why NPC's are being compared to playable characters. They want to tear chunks out of you for favouring one over the other but you're not giving them the bait.
I totally agree. They all look pretty remarkable. I must say the render of female character & the detail (dew) around the eyes is exceptional as well as the translucency of the skin ; D
For everything KZ has going on in the background high detailed weapons and all i'm very satisfied with the facial animation i mean their still using the KZ3 engine so that alone makes it amazing.
Killzone 3's engine is actually Killzone 2's engine, just refined; which is actually a modified form of the original Killzone engine. mind=blown
YES. This is the most perfect 1st comment I have ever read. No fanboyism just game love. You sir are awesome.
indeed! KILLZONE SHADOW FALL eyes look way ahead any other eyes I have ever seen in a game. look at her!!! she looks amazingly beautiful.. her lips movements on the trailer do need work, they are outdated. Crysis 3 look very current gen and fake and the ayes are very bad. ryse look really good but very fake, plus who know how the final game will look in gameplay and no a rendered cut scene. well the winner so far is The Sorcerer tech demo and we all know they final game will be better! Let's not forget that KILLZONE SHADOW FALL, RYSE and crysis 3 are current gen tech with updated assets, next gen engines will look much better. we have jet to see what Santa monica and naughty dogs can do from sony side.. and RockStart devs and let's not count out Fox engine, kojina is a genius.