PS3 Killzone 2 video pre-rendered?

[if76]

Sources at IGN (http://www.ign.com) have reported that the Killzone video shown at E3 was pre-rendered (http://ps3.ign.com/articles/615/615531p1.html).

We have found the identity of three studios that could (keyword: could) have pulled off the Killzone video. The first is Axis Animation, and they're the most likely candidate due to the fact that they actually created the opening scene (among other clips) for the first Killzone on the PS2. However, many of our leads point to Sheffield in the United Kingdom has the birthplace for the demo.I highly doubt the same team that created a PS2 game with so many graphics flaws could have pulled off such an amazing real-time demonstration for the PS3.

[Ghost_Saint]

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to tell you that it was prerended just from watching it. Anyone that's actually played games for most of their life time can tell you that you're missing vital stuff, like a HUD, or some way to tell how much ammo was left.

And the way that scene was set up it would have been so heavilly scripted that the player would have gotten to play every other second of the sequence, which no one should 'be looking forward to'.

edit sp.

[Borys]

They don't hide the fact it was pre-rendered.

Here's a Q&A with the Killzone guys on Playstation.co.uk (http://uk.playstation.com/news/newsStory.jhtml?storyId=106796_en_GB_NEWS&linktype=NT3):


Q: How long ago did work start on the sequence?

Jan-Bart: We started working on it in late November, and only finished it three days before the show, at the very, very last moment!

...

Q: Is the Killzone sequence a fair example of what people can expect from realtime gameplay on PLAYSTATION 3?

Jan-Bart: Yeah, it's basically a representation of the look and feel of the game we're trying to make.

[Evil Avatar]

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to tell you that it was prerended just from watching it. Anyone that's actually played games for most of their life time can tell you that you're missing vital stuff, like a HUD, or some way to tell how much ammo was left.

Just a little history lesson... the first Halo videos did not have a HUD, and they were all in-engine rendering sequences. What you might call a "demo".

[EvilBob46]

I'm inclined to say that the video was in fact prerendered. I think Sony should have spent more time creating actual ingame footage.

On the other hand, the mighty impressive recreation of the once prerendered Final Fantasy VII intro was a true tech demo as far as I understand it, or at the very least it was rendered on the actual PS3.

More from Mark Rein on that:

[QUOTE]

But most of those movies, which I probably watched 3 or 4 during rehearsals for the event, look very achievable and some were probably rendered on the actual box but in non-real-time. When a system is year away, heck even with a system is 6 months away, it is reasonable to expect the power of the dev kits would still only be a fraction of the power of the final system.

I know we'll certainly be able to achieve much more on the final box than we were able to show in our demo after working with the early dev kit for only ~2 months. As Tim mentioned our demo only really showed off the power of RSX and then still we're talk about an RSX that's nowhere near as fast as the final one will be. When we get home from E3 we'll also start diving seriously into the power of the cell processor. This is a very powerful system!

Sony's cell demos were extremely cool and inspiring but are totally achievable, and over time even surpassable, by third developers like us because, as Tim Sweeney said, the development environment is made up of parts we're already intimately familiar with: OpenGL, NVIDIA graphics, Linux, and PowerPC.

[END QUOTE]

[if76]

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to tell you that it was prerended just from watching it. Anyone that's actually played games for most of their life time can tell you that you're missing vital stuff, like a HUD, or some way to tell how much ammo was left.

And the way that scene was set up it would have been so heavilly scripted that the player would have gotten to play every other second of the sequence, which no one should 'be looking forward to'.

edit sp.

Anyone who's played games for most of their lifetime knows that not all scripted sequences are prerendered and there is such thing as in-engine cinematics.

[Vandenh]

You can spin it any way you like boys. Almost everything was preredered!

I could actually point out lots of things that indicate that this demo took days to prerender on existing render farms. I am amazed people even doubt it... brilliant PR!

Oh well... let's just wait for the games. This will come back to haunt Sony hopefully.

[falak]

Something good came out of Sheffield? I don't believe you.

[crackeriah]

Yeah...it just looked too much better than any of the other demos for it to be realtime, in-engine rendering. I must say, when I first saw that demo I thought "wow, Microsoft is screwed!" Now that it's looking like it was pre-rendered, I'm thinking "wow, Sony is lame and manipulative!"

[Mason]

Double-ewe Tee Eff

We already know that all but two or three of the PS3 videos were prerendered. Were they accurate representations or renderfarm fantasies? Nobody knows, at least nobody credible. Calling them "achievable" is hot air until the dirty masses are allowed to see actual gameplay footage on actual hardware.

But I'm floored that anyone took those videos seriously. Seriously, thanks to both companies for the pretty movies, but until we have footage of someone playing the game it is naive to start soiling yourself over them. You can create some mind-blowing CGI for a really boring game, you know.

[Kelegacy]

You can spin it any way you like boys. Almost everything was preredered!

Oh well... let's just wait for the games. This will come back to haunt Sony hopefully.

Hopefully? WTF is that about? I agree, I hope Nintendo and Sony die off in this round and Microsoft is the only console choice, because I hate choices.

Hoping a company fucks up and ends in the shitter is a fanboy's dream. I dont want any of the Big 3 to flub up. What has Sony done to spoil your gaming experiences? Cut off your thumbs?

[[HATE]MyLife]

You can create some mind-blowing CGI for a really boring game, you know.

Speaking of which, anyone play the Charlie's Angels game on GCN or PS2?

Decent cutscenes.

Worst game of this generation. Bar None.

[voodoo401]

All 3 companies plant a lot of bullsh!t in their release microsoft is no angel...

[Zanzibar]

What has Sony done to spoil your gaming experiences? Cut off your thumbs?

I'm a developer, so naturally I hate Sony. Fucktards. They've treated the dev community like red-headed stepchildren from the very beginning. 'We know everything, you know nothing. Never forget that.' Their machines have always been giant steaming piles of shit to develop for, and they steadfastly refused to make it better.

Everyone here has heard me go on at length as how well Microsoft has treated the developers. Treating developers well = good games made with few bottlenecks = more time at home instead of late nights at the office.

Sony burn in Hell.

[Draft]

Hopefully? WTF is that about? I agree, I hope Nintendo and Sony die off in this round and Microsoft is the only console choice, because I hate choices.

Hoping a company fucks up and ends in the shitter is a fanboy's dream. I dont want any of the Big 3 to flub up. What has Sony done to spoil your gaming experiences? Cut off your thumbs?Who wants that? What I want is for Sony to lose market share and for Nintendo and MS to gain it. What I want is for all 3 companies to do well so they have to fight tooth and nail for my gaming dollar.

[Nath5000]

The way that the screen and gun move around, the animation of the movement of the screen and the gun seems scripted in and of itself. As far as saying that it could be an "in engine" cutscene, it very well could be. If true, it would be the most detailed in game cutscene ever made showing no signs of simulated physics or clunky camera movements. They were showing it for a system thats hardware probably hasnt even been fabricated yet in front of the entire press community risking a realtime malfunction, if it WAS realtime. What is more likely? Well It couldve been a recorded video of a realtime cutscene (pretty likely). What I think is that it was a completely animated CGI video that may use the same modeling and shader look and style for the final game, but was mainly there to give people an idea of the theme of the game. Sort of like a fancy piece of concept art that simulates the vision for the game. If that video itself doesnt live up to the final design, I think sony will have shot themselves in the foot. Everyones expectation for the playstation 3 is "killzone". Most articles bring up PS3 and Killzone in the same sentence as if it was the reason and the showcase of what makes the ps3 able to say "we are the best".

Microsoft did this with the launch of the xbox and the raven demo that was supposed to show the possibility of the xbox. Did xbox turn out to be as good as that robot tech demo? No. So what is microsoft doing this time? In my opinion playing it safe showing obviously recorded videos of most likely all in game footage, and it looks believable as realtime recorded footage. To top that off the stuff shown was recorded and is being demoed on alpha hardware. Plus microsoft really hasnt shown any dedicated "tech demos" for the xbox (aside from the small final fantasy fly-through.) Sony on the other hand has mainly shown tech demo type things. Sure the Doc OC spiderman head looked good, but thats a tech demo where the entire power of the console is running it. Is that a fair respresentation of a real game? I dont think so. Same goes with the Nvidia tech demo. I have an Nvidia 6800GT and the tech demos for it are cool and all, but ive seen my card choke on games that dont look nearly as pretty.

Bottom line is that engines like Unreal Engine 3 are the best of the best right now. What are the chances that killzone would come out of nowhere and kick UE3s ass? Not likely. The only real credible believable stuff they showed at sony was the fight night and the Unreal tournament trailer/demo (which even the nvidia guy had scripted to ask if it was realtime). Both ue3 and fight night looked very good, but im definetly going to withhold judgement until i see those games ported onto xbox if it happens. My guess is that Unreal would look the same on the xbox and that fight night would be possible on the xbox as well. The conferences shown so far are all PR, and the real sad thing is that peoples opinions about the consoles are already solidifying as they take a fanboy stance with whichever console right now because of what they have seen. Only time will show the real difference between the consoles and what they have to offer.

[EvilBob46]

Who wants that? What I want is for Sony to lose market share and for Nintendo and MS to gain it. What I want is for all 3 companies to do well so they have to fight tooth and nail for my gaming dollar.

I'm hearing different things about developing for the PS3 from different people. Is this a rant about PS2 development or have you actually had some hands on with the PS3?

The *only* comment I've heard from a respectable developer and software technology firm about PS3 development is from that Mark Rein dude from Epic Games on running the Unreal 3 engine on the PS3 (who are, btw, also developing Gears of War for the XBOX 360), and he stated that "the development environment is made up of parts we're already intimately familiar with: OpenGL, NVIDIA graphics, Linux, and PowerPC."

[Crenor]

All but the EA videos were Video’s
It would be nice to see some actual game play.
BUT dev units only went out THIS January

[amusedtoe]

Well the thing that really sold it as being pre-rendered was that one of the writers from IGN or Gamespot (can't remember which) had visited the developer only 10 months prior and weren't even planning on it being a PS3 game. That means a complete rebuild of the engine and all art assests would be in order, which alone would be hard to accomplish in that amount of time let alone to the incredibly polished finished game quality of the video.

[Kelegacy]

Who wants that? What I want is for Sony to lose market share and for Nintendo and MS to gain it. What I want is for all 3 companies to do well so they have to fight tooth and nail for my gaming dollar.

That makes sense. I dont like to see too much dominance, but for Microsoft to appeal to me more, they need to get japan under it's belt. American games tend to be all guns and blood and whores and explosions. Typically action games. While I love these things as much as the next gamer, I want some more diversity. Kotor was a refreshing pace on the Xbox, but i want to see more RPG's and quirky titles. I'm not a Sony fanboy, but I enjoy the Playstations because they offer up all genres and in huge amounts. I was sold to the PS's once I played Twisted Metal back in 1996. The reason the Playstation became so mainstream is because it offered a little (or a lot) of something for everyone. What wasnt there to like?

But as I remember right, it took Sony a hell of a long time to release any RPG's, with Beyond the Beyond being the first and pretty mediocre. So maybe after nearly 5 years, Microsoft will start the ball rolling? I dont know...

Nintendo, I want them to really make a comeback. But I am saddened by their E3 debut. I'd like to see Sony or Nintendo in first place and Microsoft in 3rd. Mostly because Microsoft really didnt amaze me this past round. Some good games, nothing truly memorable for me. I know they are trying to do great things with the 360--and hopefully they succeed. Online is great, but it isnt the most important thing for me, unlike alot of people here. Also, visiting Evil Avatar every day and seeing the flamboyant Microsoft handjobbing going on, it sours me a bit.

Next round, who knows. For me, it's about the games, the diversity, and the neverending flux of fun. Anyone could sway me, and I'm open to any comers for my gaming dollar. i just find it ridiculous for anyone to hate a certain company. Every one of the big 3 released games that warranted a purchase of their console...if you dont own all 3 then you are missing out on alot of fun. Dont let "hatred" ruin your gaming experiences.

[Zanzibar]

American games tend to be all guns and blood and whores and explosions.

It ain't just games, Sparky.

[ezra]

Let me be the first to say

No. Way.

[Kelegacy]

It ain't just games, Sparky.

No shit. I feel the same about movies and other media. But we're talking about games here, and gaming equipment. The rest isnt relevant in this discussion.

[Draft]

A quick glance at my Xbox collection reveals several such games:

Panzer Dragoon Orta: rail shooter, beautiful music, breathtaking art.

Breakdown: first person beat em up, with first person vomiting included.

Phantom Dust: Post apocalyptic psychic card battling game.

Otogi 2: floating third person action with almost total level destruction abilities.

[jacktion]

They don't hide the fact it was pre-rendered.


Actually they do. Sony lied and said it was real-time. They lied in order to generate more hype and make more money. They lied before about the PS2's power and they are lying now about the PS3. If you forget the past you are doomed to repeat it. This makes me wonder if a lot of you will buy a PS3 that breaks in the first year and has crappy games for it's launch. prolly

[Plac1d]

My eyes are leaking with fluids, Kelegacy. That was just beutiful.

[Offworlder]

Hay, maybe you guys just aren't looking at it from Sony's perspective. I mean, in a sense, it WAS real-time, right? That is, it was a pre-rendered video playing back on pseudo-alpha PS3 hardware. Totally real-time video playback!

So, uh, technically, maybe they weren't lying.

Man, this thing is going to kick the Sega CD's ass.

[[HATE]MyLife]

Man, this thing is going to kick the Sega CD's ass.

I dunno. I didn't see "Blast Processing" anywhere in their list of specs.

[Scull]

I'd believe that the Killzone video was done using the game engine, but certainly not being controlled by the player, as the scripting was way to heavy to make that an actual in game sequence. So is it real-time? Sure. Is it what we can expect the graphics to look like? Sure. But is it actually a playable segment? Doubtful.

[Draft]

I'd believe that the Killzone video was done using the game engine, but certainly not being controlled by the player, as the scripting was way to heavy to make that an actual in game sequence. So is it real-time? Sure. Is it what we can expect the graphics to look like? Sure. But is it actually a playable segment? Doubtful.Does not appear that's the case.

[Stryfe01]

Sources at IGN (http://www.ign.com) have reported that the Killzone video shown at E3 was pre-rendered (http://ps3.ign.com/articles/615/615531p1.html).

I highly doubt the same team that created a PS2 game with so many graphics flaws could have pulled off such an amazing real-time demonstration for the PS3.

they didn't make the first Killzone, they made the CGI for the first Killzone.

[dr_wily]

prerendered or not, still my favorite of the show so far.
and when have tech demos ever looked BETTER than the actual product when it came out? Not many.. 100 marios is nothing to what the gc can do now...

[Reanimated]

But but but... The Press I & II said the hype train left the station.

Any idiot could tell you that it was prerendered. If it was "in-engine", they could have done a real time demonstration and it would have been on the show floor.

What's funny is that I had some idiot kid PMing me here telling ME that I was an idiot for saying it was prerendered. :rolleyes:

[if76]

they didn't make the first Killzone, they made the CGI for the first Killzone.

Yes. I was talking about the people that made the first Killzone GAME. As in, they aren't capable of making a game that looks that good.

[mister_slim]

I'm sick of misinformation. I am tired of people regurgitating the same old crap.

[Achilles]

It was pre-rendered, but I didn’t see anything there that couldn’t be done on either the 360 or probably the PS3. The only problem comes in when people start comparing real games that are in development to polished tech-demos. The real games will never look as good because they still have 6 months of development time left, no matter how realistic a representation the tech demo is (maybe Killzone wasn't realistic but who knows).

[Deadend]

I love the feeling of having called Sony on the Bullshit, and here we are, proven that they were trying to bullshit us.

Whatever you may say about the PS3 being powerful, at least the 360 HAS games, that were ingame, inengine, and that counts for waaaay more than the Final Fantasy demo, which I have a feeling had some prerended bits.

Maybe the background was video and character models in realtime, or some other major corner cutting, as I do not belive that they managed to whip up something that slick, that runs in realtime.

I still will probably end up with a PS3 and a 360, and probably a Revolution as well. But let us all remember that we have the responsibility to be pissed off when a company is trying to bullshit us.

As Sony was trying to bullshit us, as they were supposed to be demonstrating the system's power, when in fact they show a pre-rendered video, total pile of bullshit.

[Heretic Machine]

they need to get japan under it's belt. American games tend to be all guns and blood and whores and explosions.

Japan: Home of hentai and ass poking games.

Have you played any Japanese games recently? These guys are just as bad for whoring as anyone else. As for guns and violence... have you even seen one screenshot of a Silent Hill game? You do understand that these same people made anime, which is often far more violent and gory than anything in America.

I'm sick of this bullshit about painting the Japanese as non-violent conservatives, it's crap. They're America II: Big Trouble on Little Island. That's why our entertainment translates so well between borders.

[aversion2k]

The sad thing with all the ps3 tech demos (the leaf vortex's the girl with the hand things around her, dr octopus's head) is that I really doubt alot of the games will look that good. Dont get me wrong, they games will look great. But there is no way that all the people in the game will have heads as good as dr oct's. That tech demo would have been one of the best things the ps3 was capable of. And it was only rendering his head. no sound, no AI , no other people, no enviroment. Only his head. During the leaf tech demo the guy said You could attach a sound to every one of these leaves if you wanted to" Yea, But good luck finding a soundcard that can play that many sounds at once. Thats why I try not to get to hyped about these tech demos anymore.
Of course haveing the best technology doesnt mean your game is going to look the best, or be the most fun.


Hmmm. I could be completely wrong though. Maybethe ps3 was hardly even trying during those demos :P

[Furious Wang]

I'd believe that the Killzone video was done using the game engine, but certainly not being controlled by the player, as the scripting was way to heavy to make that an actual in game sequence. So is it real-time? Sure. Is it what we can expect the graphics to look like? Sure. But is it actually a playable segment? Doubtful.

God, how many times do people have to be told "IT WAS CGI?"

[YodaMouse]

For future reference, here's a tip on how to tell if a demo is pre-rendered:

1. Number of animated variables. The killzone demo had so many individually animated--and simultaneously rendered--components that a mere game station could not have pulled it off.

2. Anti-aliasing and vertice count. The shading and the sheer number of vertices and polygons involved in that demo makes me doubt that even a mainframe could have done it in real time without some sick ass mods. (Okay Bob, just jam that ISA card into that AS/400 port. It'll make it super duper fast!!! Oh wait... Why is it smoking now?)

3. Motion. The physics modellers of game engines are allways a bit off from those of 3d design programs. You get a more "fluid" or "smooth" physics from 3d design software, whereas game engines are more crisp and sharp. (I'm not sure why this is, as I've only worked on 3d design, and not on games themselves. I think it's a game engine limitation thing.)

This is just my opinion, but the way the demo was put together makes me think that Sony was actively trying to fool people into thinking it was real-time. Lot's of POV jerks, constant 1st person POV, mistakes and missed shots, etc...

Honestly, I can't believe they marketed this thing the way they did. I've worked in big companies, and let me tell you, there's no quicker way to make yourself look like an ass than to show up with a fake product demonstration in a business meeting. I've seen execs berate each other untill actual tears flowed. (My old marketing director bawled like a baby after a client screamed for 15 minutes.)

But that's just me... I could be wrong. PS3 COULD be that powerfull. Then again, my girlfriend COULD be a supermodell with great big juicy bouncing breasts... but she's not.

[bobbler]

What was the point of linking an article from May 17th?

Surely this topic has been beaten to death, nobody in their right mind thought it was realtime when it was shown. And anyone who says it was rendered at 5 fps is on crack as well -- the video had volumetric smoke that cast shadows upon itself, that type of stuff won't be in console games this gen.

However, I wouldn't be too surprised if we got games similar to that over the next gen (from X360 too, so stop your crying) -- sans a few of the more ridiculous effects.

I can also safely say that anyone who wishes death upon Sony is an absolute retard... there are a lot of good games (some of the best of all time) that I'm fairly certain MS and Nintendo wouldn't okay. The same could be said for MS and Nintendo (its good that we have 3 choices, each of the consoles has stuff the others don't). Be happy you have a choice -- you may not enjoy a given console, but don't act like a colossul moron.

[YodaMouse]

Sorry, I just realized the thread was like six months old. My bad...

I was just doing some marketing research and blundered across this stuff, and got angry, and responded.

As for wishing ill to Sony, I don't. I bow before them every day for creating the new 3d versions of GTA. My point there at the end was that it's not--in my humble opinion--a bright idea to market a game in the way they did. Not only do they obviously over inflate expectations, but they also put their execs into hot water when the game flops and there is fallout.

Anyhow, again I apologize and I will not post on this thread again...

[bobbler]

Sorry, I just realized the thread was like six months old. My bad...

I was just doing some marketing research and blundered across this stuff, and got angry, and responded.

As for wishing ill to Sony, I don't. I bow before them every day for creating the new 3d versions of GTA. My point there at the end was that it's not--in my humble opinion--a bright idea to market a game in the way they did. Not only do they obviously over inflate expectations, but they also put their execs into hot water when the game flops and there is fallout.

Anyhow, again I apologize and I will not post on this thread again...

Hah, I suppose I should pay attention to things -- I thought this was a new topic (hence my post)... I'm sure you could imagine my surprise that people would still be interested in this topic. =o