roflmao

Actually, he is right, some of it is deserved (especially after E3 2005).



Rob Fahey was amoungst the numerous journalists were suckered into believing all the hype about the PS3 at E3 2005, assuming the specs showed the console was twice as powerful as the 360 and that games like Killzone was an example of this power (he assumed it was realtime!).



PS3 vs Xbox 360 - Rob's take:

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=59134



"We're not just talking about a console that's twice as powerful as Xbox 360 in simple, logical terms (and bear in mind that that's a far, far greater gap in power than existed between PS2 and Xbox); we're talking about a console with more functionality, with fewer corners cut and with a genuinely more impressive line-up of software."



And here's what his colleague Tom Bramwell had to say on that same day;



PS3 vs Xbox 360 - Tom's take

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=59133



"You know what? Frankly, going on what I've seen so far, I'm not even convinced Xbox 360 and PS3 are the same generation"



Today, like other reporters, Rob and Tom have since had to face up to the fact that they were caught up in the hype surrounding the console at the time.



So given that PS3 is only slightly more powerful than the 360 overall and not twice as powerful as presented last year, plus delays to the PS3, proof that videos like Killzone was pre-rendered, an uninspiring showing at E3 2006, features cut from the original spec (eg. 2x HDMI), Sony's criticisms of MS last year for 2 SKUs and then announcing 2 SKUs, criticisms of MS for the worldwide launch and then announcing a worldwide launch, the feeling of copying the opposition (whether justified or not), and so on... have all dented the image of a gaming utopia which Sony presented to the world last year.



That said, I can't wait for my PS3.

"Killzone wasn't pre rendered. It used real time graphics, but it had no game engine. It was a scripted real time scene."



Thanks for proving my point about how Sony suckered people like yourself at E3 2005.



Watch the following interview from January this year;



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-CQ1qxxWLQ



And here's a video created by one of the guys who worked on that pre-rendered trailer to showcase his CGI talents (Jeremy Hardin);



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHM6Y_nsZh0



It's no wonder Sony does this when it's SO easy to fool those who asked to be fooled. :|

I WANT A PS4

I think you just hit a home run.



Thanks for the videos, I've seen the first video before, but not the second (very interesting).

i meant to say "wow, i'm shocked to see there are gamers out there who still believe killzone was REALTIME."



Doh!

>"so, even if Killzone PS3 does indeed look like it's pre-rendered video, you'll still be pissed that the E3 2005 video was pre-rendered? huh?!"



Who said anything about being 'pissed' that it was pre-rendered at E3 2005? Go read my original post #3 for which certain people responded saying Killzone was realtime. I responded with proof that it wasn't. It's as simple as that.



>"the point of those videos (i was at E3 2005, and i saw Sony's presentation), was to show what the console was capable of."



Great, you were at E3 last year and this year. I'm soooo happy for you. ;)



Anyway, I have absolutely NO problem with target videos providing the devs are HONEST about it. Therefore my 'problem' with Killzone is Sony and Guerilla refusing to confirm that it was pre-rendered, even when challenged in interviews. They are more than happy for people to think it was realtime which imo is rather deceiptful. If this was Microsoft, I doubt gamers here would be so forgiving. :| Instead, MS will be "teh eval".



>"looking at the progress of games like Untold Legends: Dark Kingdom and MotorStorm (which is starting to very much look like it's pre-rendered target demo), the system is probably capable of delivering visuals on par with the Killzone video."



They should be able to achieve the look of that Killzone video in general, but NOT with those models which have millions of polygons EACH (detailed down to their eyelashes). The actual game would have normal-mapped models, as seen in MGS4, Unreal Engine 3 games and other next-gen games.



>"i can't wait for September."



I can't wait either, I especially can't wait for my PS3, but it seems to me that some people are so defensive over the PS3, that they'd believe anything that supports the console (even if it's untrue) and dismiss anything that can be seen as negative (even if it's true).

Why is it that you only notice errors after you post? :)



Anyway...



"I could go on, but someone is bound to read this and see it as another attack against Sony, even though it's not that at all, it's just the thoughts from a gamer who prefers fact over fiction."

i wasn't automatically jumping to Sony's defense, but the statement, "Killzone could be quite spectacular, but that doesn't change the fact that the trailer shown at E3 2005 was pre-rendered" came off as you being pissed that the video at E3 2005 was pre-rendered.

my response was, "So what if it was pre-rendered." a lot of the videos in their presentation were target demos, as hardly anyone was aware of what the PS3 would be capable of except Sony.



i saw the Killzone video, thought it looked amazing, but took it (as well as the rest of Sony's presentation) with a grain of salt. after i found out it wasn't real time, i still didn't hold any grudges against Sony. PR people lie and bull***** (look up videos from Eidos back before Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness came out. they were talking as if the game would be the second coming). i've come to terms with that fact. i don't expect anything coming out of any company's mouth (even Microsoft and Nintendo) to be 100% fact, and take a wait and see attitude.



and since games like MGS4, Final Fantasy XIII, the Naughty Dog Game, Untold Legends, and Heavenly Sword look phenomenal, it doesn't bother me that they may not look like pre-rendered videos from a year ago. Sony hypes the ***** out of their products, but from my experiences with the Playstation brand, they've delivered more hours of entertainment to me than any other console combined (even my cherished NES and Super Nintendo).



i don't know what other gamer's criteria for "delivering on promises" is, and personally, i don't care. i love my PS1, my PS2, and hopefully, i'll love my PS3. judging by what i've seen and played, and what other developers plan on doing with the console, i expect to have a great time with it also.



sorry if i misunderstood you're comment, but it's getting annoying to be labeled and treated like a fanboy, just because i happen to like a Sony console, and yes, i've defended it quite a bit lately. i own all 3 current consoles, and i plan on owning all 3 next gen consoles. so what if people are defending Sony. with all the bad press that's been spewed out for the past few months, it's not hard to understand *why* people who truly enjoy the Playstation wouldn't be on edge. any fan of any product would feel the same way.



anyway, i understood completely that you were pointing out that the Killzone trailer wasn't real time with links and proof, i just didn't understand why you seemed so angry about it (you may not have been, but that's how it *looked* and came off).

Yeah I read about that as well. I don't see why they Guerrilla would say it's real time if it isnt. They even said that it was simply a scripted sequence, aka not a game, and probably wont play that way, and most likely not look that way either.



The trailer has cliping and pop ups, and on a system like the PS3, why do people doubt that you can make a scripted non-game real time sequence that looks like CG, when you could do that with the previous consoles as well? (The Final Fantasy VIII dance sequence)



It sounds very resonable to me.

i didn't mean for that to double post. sorry everybody! stupid internet and their error messages that lie!

My last post just slipped into #22 instead of appending to the end at #28?

"anyway, i understood completely that you were pointing out that the Killzone trailer wasn't real time with links and proof, i just didn't understand why you seemed so angry about it (you may not have been, but that's how it *looked* and came off)."



Well, not everyone here got that impression from my posts, but fair enough. :)



If I *seemed* angry, perhaps it's because post #3 was simply to explain why Rob says _some_ of the criticisms towards Sony is deserved. It wasn't about Killzone, I just mentioned it as one of many reasons, and yet this is the one point certain gamers pounced upon. So now instead of discussing Rob's comments and opinions, I now find myself defending my point that Killzone was pre-rendered against those who still believe it's real time.



I know I don't pull punches with my views, but that doesn't mean I'm angry (it's actually quite difficult to be that critical without coming across as angry or bitter). Perhaps it seems I'm not being nice towards Sony on these issues, but they're still getting my money for the PS3 console, and they're getting my money for all the games and peripherals I'm going to buy.



Sony needs me, they need you, they need all the other gamers out there. We don't have to be 'nice', we can and should be critical at times. ;)

>"You're expecting the impossible. Guerilla Games hasn't said anything for over a year!"



I'm not asking the impossible. I provided links to prove

Killzone was pre-rendered, including the ONLY interview Guerilla gave at last year's E3. If people what to say Guerilla said it was real time, then they should provide the proof and stop hiding behind it being a year ago. I say that because I've been discussing this since E3 last year, and every time I've asked for proof that Guerilla or Sony says it was running in real time, no-one has ever been able to provide any proof, and it still continues today!



BTW, that interview was not with Jeremy Hardin, it was with Tim Miller of Blur Studios, a company who creates CGI cinematics for games, commercials, TV etc. They turned it down and so Sony approached Axis Animation who did the original cinematics for Killzone (where Jeremy Hardin worked on it). This is what Tim confirms in the interview (he doesn't say Axis, he says a company in Scotland, and Axis happen to be in Sctoland and happen to be the company who worked on Killzone for the PS2. Hmmm).



Anyway, just because the video has errors does NOT mean it isn't CGI. The idea that CGI sequences are always perfect is a myth. It's a sequence created by numerous individuals all working on their own specific areas, which then has to be pulled together to create the final movie. It was completed just 3 DAYS before E3! Given more time, they could have corrected the errors and glitches seen in the trailer.



JH demonstrates his contribution to the Killzone movie in the video I've shown. This video came from a private area on his website along with a written description of each area of the movie he worked on (particles, models etc). It spread across the net at the time until a few days later when JH found out, and he locked it (since it wasn't suppose to be made public). Like others, I download the movie but I didn't copied the page with the descriptions of his work on the movie, since we didn't know we were accessing a private area at the time. :(



>"Supposedly it was played, had the data recorded, and then rendered out at 5 frames per second, then sped up to 60 fps for E3. This was on a kit with 2.4 Ghz Cell and no RSX, so...??? PSM published this rumor, but even they don't state where they got the info from."



Yes, PSM said this, but it's because they provide no source for the info that it shouldn't be taken as fact. For months it was a good alternative view of how Killzone may have been achieved, but the interview with Tim Miller and the video from Jeremy Hardin puts an end to that theory.



>"Some of the killzone dev team members have stated on forums that the game looks like the video (in very vague attempts to avoid NDA violations)."



Yes, but that's to be taken with a pinch of salt (what else would you expect them to say? ;)).



>"We'll find out if it really was a lie eventually."



Yep, we'll find out soon enough. ;)



>"But considering how close Motorstorm (a launch title) is comparing to the CG video that Evo Studios made, it might not be so farfetched for them to claim that Killzone is also comparable to its trailer."



That comparison doesn't apply. Firstly, how close Motorstorm is to their CG video is a matter of opinion, but let's say they do manage to reach or even exceed that CG video, it would mean that their target video was an accurate prediction of their final game. This does not mean that the Killzone video is also an accurate prediction of the final game from Guerilla.



Like I've said before, you're not going to achieve Killzone with several models with millions of polygons each in game. Even if the PS3 had the power, it doesn't have the memory. But I can imagine Killzone with models of the quality seen in today's next-gen games, which have models with thousands of polygons each, and use techniques like normal-mapping to give the illusion of more polygons. Such models can look almost as good as the originals in motion, and yet require FAR less memory and FAR les

i completely understand where you're coming from. and i agree that is is very hard to not come off as angry when criticizing something. without inflection, writing on forums can be a pain in the ass, and prone to misinterpretati on.



i never thought of you as a raging fanboy or anything, however (you did, after all, say you were purchasing a PS3), i guess i was just confused.



i also have my criticisms of Sony, but they are so few and so small, and since i've been on a defending kick ever since E3 this year, they've been overshadowed by the system's good points. what annoys me is when the media everywhere is posting every single little tidbit that pops up about the PS3 and adding a negative spin to the story. i'm sure if the price of the PS3 dropped suddenly to $250, they'd find some kind of negative slant. it's driving me mad.



anyway, i understand how annoying it must be to have to defend your stance about the Killzone trailer being realtime to those that are convinced that it is. for me, i don't care if it's rendered or real time. the game will be revealed in real time eventually, and that'll be that, and hopefully the E3 2005 footage will be forgotten (unless the actual game looks god awful, and not even a quarter of the target video, then they'd never hear the end of it).