Last Gen vs. Next Gen Graphics: Halo 4 vs. Killzone Shadow Fall

Karam Elahi from SpawnFirst writes: "In our "Last Gen vs. Next Gen Graphics" feature, we pit the best late-in-the-lifecycle game of our choosing from the previous gen, to as similar a title as we can find in the next gen line-up. We’re not restricted to one console line, as in this series PS3 vs. Xbox One, Xbox 360 vs. PS4, PS3 vs. PS4, and Xbox 360 vs. Xbox One graphics comparisons are all fair game. We post up decent in-game and some in-engine cinematic shots of both games, and we leave the decision all to you as to which game looks better."


Proper HD resolution images have been added per feedback from users.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Kayant1734d ago

Seriously where do you get these screen shots from? These are damn awful and compressed to death especially KZ:SF. Doesn't do either real justice.


Halo 4 -

More KZ:SF -->

Halo 4 -->

Irishguy951734d ago (Edited 1734d ago )

Killzone rapes Halo always in the graphics department. But never in the gameplay department. At best it has equaled Halo(Killzone 2) and that was only once. I find Halo 4 to be below the rest of the halo's too though(Yeah even with better graphics :/ ). And won't be surprised if Halo 5 is.

Edit - Killzone 2 was the only Killzone with that feeling. Killzone 3 and SF through it away. GG admitted to it. Because casual cod players didn't like that feeling. GG have really lost their minds with what they're up too now. Although it's not surprising. Instead of adding some new to killzone they added bullet time and seeing through walls. Slow clap for them.

WeAreLegion1734d ago

I prefer Killzone's game play, but they're very different games. Tribes was Halo before Halo and it still plays better, IMO.

vishmarx1734d ago

halo is obvously inferior to SF...
but not KZ 2 lol no.
even though KZ 2 is prolly the best fps of the last gen

ForgottenProphecy1734d ago

I'd disagree. I just like the realistic, heavy feel of Killzone

Do you mean superior, not inferior?

combatcash1734d ago

Halo Reach IMO was more impressive visually than killzone.

AndrewLB1734d ago

I'm pretty sure those killzone screenshots on his page are not the final retail graphics.

mikeslemonade1734d ago

Never seen Halo 4 but Halo Reach and Halo 3 were two of the worst graphics of last generation in comparison to highly rated games.

Some other bad looking last gen games were:
Saints Row

A better comparison would be COD or BF of last generation to Kilzone.

TheGreatAndPowerful1734d ago

>Killzone rapes Halo always in the graphics department but never in the gameplay department.

and yet Halo 4's MP is basically dead right now. heh

assdan1734d ago

I honestly don't understand halo's appeal. I've always hated it whenever I played it. The environments seem empty, the graphics are OK, and the gameplay is horendous. People literally never die in multiplayer.

PeaSFor1734d ago

Halo rely way WAY too much on aim assist for me, everything is sticky when they cross your reticle.

Mosiac771734d ago

Killzone in no way rapes Halo. Killzone has had many opportunities to be a great FPS games and has missed that every time. Where they went wrong was when they called Killzone 1 the halo killer. You never want to compare your games with a master piece or it will hunt you forever. The designs and graphics of KZ are alway good even KZ1 for being a PS2 game, but we're they fall short are on gameplay, voice acting and multiplayer. And believe me I always have hopes for this franchise. I've played every KZ hoping that it will come close to How fun Halo is but you can't replace the one that started it all. It just like God of War, how many have try to copy them and always fail. Stay away from the masters path.

joab7771734d ago

This article is stupid. I played them both through 2x each and the multi extensively. Wasnt a big fan of either sp, but gameplay wise, I like halo sp story and SF multi.

Graphics wise...don't spend time looking at screenshots of different gens. Play them and u will realize that it isn't even a discussion. Killzone Shadowfall is one of the best looking next gen console games to date. Yeah, halo 4 looked good on the 360 but lets hav this discussion when halo 5 releases. Though one of the ppl resposible for halo 4's good looks now works for Naughty Dog!

Azmatik1734d ago

Im so sick of screen shot comparisons screen shit never count u dont see it in motion and when u do see it in motion thats when u see all the jaggies from the AA and the true graphics. I can take a screenshot of one of the oldest games and itl make it look good.

TheGrimReaper1734d ago (Edited 1734d ago )

Learn WHO called KZ 1 a Halo killer, come back again ;)

I like KZ more than Halo, it's a more grounded sci-fi approach imho.
BUT one thing which KZ really lacks: Coop SP!
So much fun playing Halo with a buddy next to you!

OT: Yeah, let's compare games from two different gens! -.-"
If you want to show the improvements, compare it to KZ3...

VforVideogames1734d ago

HALO rapes KZ in every department last and new gen hands down. but by the way this article its stupid.

Utalkin2me1734d ago


Says the kid that has never played KZ obviously.

ChrisW1734d ago

Which of those screen shots are actually CGI?

Muffins12231734d ago (Edited 1734d ago )

Not any of its art desighn,it dose not..killzone has great graphics but like many comments about it,its been called a grey fest,ugly,and dull looking.K SF looks amazing and did a better job this time with its style especially in like the forest level but it still dose not have 343s talent in making the games scenery look amazing like halo 4s levels.It never game me any jaw droppin moments like halo 4 or other halos did.

mikeslemonade1734d ago

sigh.. Halo fans are as bad as Nintendo fans. All they do is say "Halo rapes ________" without any facts. Debating with kids are the worst.

badz1491734d ago

why is this comparison even surfaced? Halo 4 is not even the best looking game last gen and it even looks inferior compared to KZ2/KZ3. and suddenly comparison to KZSF seems warranted? Halo has its great side, sure, but graphic is NOT one of it!

hazardman1734d ago

IdK I feel like shadow fall hit the sweet spot gameplay wise for me of the 4.

Ps4Console1733d ago (Edited 1733d ago )

KillZone's graphics were good but there is nothing new in the game we haven't seen before sadly it's average at best graphics are brilliant but we want new gameplay .

snoopgg1733d ago

Halo 4 graphics are no where close. Killzone 3 graphics on the ps3 blows them away. As far as halos gameplay, that game was only good when there were no other fps out there to play. The only people keeping that franchise going are kids.

saber000051733d ago

I've played all of Halo games, and I've played Killzone. I personally like Killzone better. It's not overly hyped compared to Halo. Just my opinion. I actually enjoyed KZ's campaign a lot. They brought a LOT of new gameplay stuff that I've never seen or played before. Perfect example is the falling maps. It was EPIC.

But hey, that's just my two cents. ;)

+ Show (20) more repliesLast reply 1733d ago
karamsoul1734d ago

To be consistent, 1280x720 screenshots were used for both games.

Stick891734d ago


Let's take an advantage one side has and completely disregard it so that it looks more like the other one...sweet logic bro.

gigoran1734d ago

karamsoul, that's a pathetic excuse. To be consistent? You're comparing a previous generation of technology to the current generation. You don't do a comparison of an old vhs copy of star wars to a bluray version and dumb it down. This certainly will be the last of your posts that I read.

karamsoul1734d ago

I'll switch em up. Thanks for the feedback.

assdan1734d ago

This isnt a proper comparison if one of the games is in a smaller resution than it should be. That's like taking the turbo out of a car in a street race because the other cars don't have one.

N0gg1nsh0tz1734d ago

I just inspected the screenshots from the article and Hillzone's ones are 1080p resolution. Halo's are 720p. I like halo but, it doesn't beat Killzone: SF in graphics. Not sure about other aspects of the game but i'll find out when i get my PS4. (When i manage to get one :/) Stop trolling and go back to 9gag.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1733d ago
ATi_Elite1734d ago

I can't wait to see Contra NES vs. KZ:SF PS4

If you are gonna compare something then Compare KZ:Sf to BF4 PS4

TRD4L1fe1734d ago

No comparison. Contra is way more fun than any KZ

SilentNegotiator1734d ago

The Halo series hasn't been exceptional graphics wise since TWO generations ago. What a dumb comparison.

A better comparison would have been KZ3 and KZ:SF.

showtimefolks1734d ago

Killzone is the only FPS where i can play online and do well, COD just sucks with campers and BF series has a huge learning curve

Never tried halo so can't give my honest opinion. KZ2 and Resistance 2-8 player co-op are the best FPS online games i have played last gen

i am mostly into single player games

AyeUMadBro1733d ago (Edited 1733d ago )

You are all clearly missing the point here. A game looking better is not about how each texture pops in the character or environments. As a fan of both franchises. All of you don't realize that developers have to fit as much as they can in a game with the hardware they have. So comparing KZSF and H4 are terrible but comparing it to KZ2&3 and H4 are more appropriate.

I personally think Halo looks more impressive, even though Killzone has better texture and detail, any game could look better if all you have to do is fit so much detail into basically a corridor shooter. Halo has much more open environments in comparison, way more enemies on screen, vehicles that are air and ground, 4 player co-op, etc. All of these factors take away from a texture or two that could go into the game, but these factors make a game more impressive to me visually because it has to accomplish all of these tasks while at the same time trying to look good and add as much detail doing it. So of course Killzone is going to look better in terms of detail, it doesn't have to perform any of the tasks I mentioned above about Halo. I'm pretty sure Killzone would lag pretty badly if it had as much going on on-screen as Halo did while trying to maintain the visuals it has. Killzone just lacks to much in variety just to look good. I would much rather drive a vehicle, play co-op, and have forge mode rather than some good looking character models. Anyone would agree that is a better experience.

I like Killzone and have almost every trophy but I don't love it as much as Halo. The Halo universe is so big and there is so much to do in Halo compared to Killzone. That's what makes Halo a much more overall and impressive experience.

thisismyaccount1733d ago

On a technical level

Killzone > Halo 4

On a graphical level

You either like it or not the look&Feel of Killzone, i personally don´t because my assoziation with the Franchise-Killzone is this :

and certainly not this futuristic approach in SF

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1733d ago
Gabenbrah1734d ago

Halo 4 looks astonishing for current-gen, I can only imagine what 343i will achieve on the Xbox One.

lets_go_gunners1734d ago

I still wonder how they managed to put that much detail into the enemies on a system running on less than 512 mb ram.

Are_The_MaDNess1734d ago

texture streaming my man. texture streaming. nothing more to it.

ProjectSeoul1734d ago

Apparently they had one of the best programmers in the business, so that helped a lot with the graphics. Sad news is that she left 343i, the good news is that she went to Naughty Dog. But don't expect the next halo game to look too amazing in terms of graphics, but that doesnt stop me from getting excited about the next Halo

DigitalRaptor1734d ago

Corrinne Yu, is your answer. She's now at Naughty Dog.

You win some, you lose some.

ELCUCO1734d ago

Not much since Corrine Yu jumped over to Naughty Dog.

Gabenbrah1734d ago (Edited 1734d ago )

You do realize she would of complete the new engine for Halo 5 since she would of been working on it for at least a year now not to mention 1 employee out of the 343 at 343i which consist of Naughty Dog employees as well is hardly a dent on Halo 5.

ELCUCO1734d ago

No dispute on the engine work, but hardly a dent is severly under appreciating her work. You must not understand the significance of her work at 343. All that is praised of Halo 4 graphics was a direct reflection of what she has accomplished.

On lighting alone, MS filed a software patent based on the techniques that she was applying to Halo 4.

beerzombie1733d ago

That is a big time loss. she is considered the best if not the best engine builder on the planet.

WeAreLegion1734d ago

Why does this exist? Let's forget about the vast graphical gap between the titles for a second. No conclusion was reached. No article was written. He posted photos and a title for hits. Ban this crap!

karamsoul1734d ago

This piece is categorized as "screenshot", NOT opinion or article.

Prime1571733d ago

Look, I understand. I get it as I took this submission's title and went, "who does this? Is this a joke?"

I know you won't agree with me and that is fine, and maybe part of me still wants to believe in honesty and integrity so I will understand my disagrees. Maybe that makes me naive... However, I just wonder if maybe, JUST MAYBE, this author Was a fan of both games and genuinely comparing the two in a POSITIVE light. That really IS possible.

It really is.

karamsoul1733d ago

It is. I love both games. :)

BillytheBarbarian1734d ago

People will be disappointed with nextgen if all they care about is graphics. It's not the leap forward people think it should be.

Racing games on Dreamcast still look good compared to the latest forza. They can do nice things with particle effects and physics now and there is more environment interaction. That will continue. But a car is a car.

Software_Lover1734d ago

Merry Christmas. Who is winning the fantasy league

BillytheBarbarian1734d ago

You too man. Degeneral looks to win with Jamaal Charles scoring crazy numbers every week. I ended in 4th place. We'll make sure you're in it next year!

mhunterjr1734d ago (Edited 1734d ago )

This guy is a complete joke. First the completely unscientific comparison between TLOU and DR3 (he's illogical reasoning being that both games have 'zombies'), now this.

Why not compare killzone:SF to a last gen game with a similar scope and art direction... I dunno... something like KILLZONE 3 for Christs sake!!!

How can you get an accurate representation of the generation shift when you keep compairing totally unrelated titles? Again, this guy is a joke.

Next, let's compare Resogun to Mass Effect 3. Why not? They both have space ships!

Shadonic1734d ago

How do you compare the graphics of an open world game to that of a more linear based one ? logically TLOU would have better visuals.

mhunterjr1734d ago

Not to mention the open world game has several hundreds of procedurally generated enemies onscreen at once.... Nope, the fact that both games have zombie-like enemies makes those points invalid...

ziggurcat1733d ago

DR3 and TLoU are both 3rd person survival games. KZ and halo are both 1st person shooters... How are they not related?

And they have compared KZ: SF to KZ3:

mhunterjr1733d ago (Edited 1733d ago )

Man, anyone who knows ANYTHING about game design would understand the technical reasons why these are invalid comparisons. The genre of the game is not what determines it's potential graphical output. It's the scope.

Why would you compare a linear corridor shooter to an open world game? The features that tax the system are going to differ vastly. Why would you compare character models between a game that has <10 onscreen characters to one that has to deal with >400? Obviously, the one with fewer will have more detailed models. Why compare the textures between a game that loads new ones for every scene, and a game that has to stream them all in on the fly? There are so many reasons why the comparison makes no sense.

The same goes for Halo and Killzone. The scopes of the games are totally different. Killzone has one of the tightest fields-of-view ever in a FPS. That allows for greater detail, as their are less items onscreen at once. It also historically had tighter encounters with fewer enemies at once. Halo's engine had to account for a much wider FOV, as the game is played from the 3rd person perspective much of the time, and with vehicles, characters are moving at much higher rate of speed. There are also many more enemies on screen at once. From a technical standpoint these games are doing completely different things with the hardware.

It just makes so much more sense to compare games that are more technically related of your trying to compare next gen to current gen.

PS: that comparison you posted isn't from SpawnFirst.

mhunterjr1733d ago (Edited 1733d ago )

Forgot to mention Halo's graphical engine has to allow for four player split screen and dynamic physics. There's simply no logical reason to compare these two graphical engines.