Killzone 2 goes to the doctors

Since 6348 Days

lol, do you like the title, thought of it myself :p

anyway, Guerrilla have just addmitted docturing the recent screenshots of killzone 2, and i have to admit myself, at least they have been honest about and come clean.

but here is the extent of the docturing shown by a comparison by playstation universe. obviously the one on the right is the doctored one

this is what Guerrilla have said on the playstation forum:

"They are only the tiniest bit touched up. Short answer is yes. Long answer is that there was a little bit of colour-correction done and some minor polish, but nothing major. Still very close to reality and it looks better in motion in my opinion."

as you can see form the comparison, saying its only minor changes is definatly trying to soften the blow.personally i would class it as major 'touch ups'. but i'll agree that it does look better in motion

and if you want to know more, type killzone 2 in google news or check out this link

http://news.filefront.com/killzone-2-screenshots-w...

its pretty common for screens to get touched up a bit, so no biggie.
its good that they have come clean and admitted it, hopefully they wont do it again. they are only raising expectaions too high anyway so its bad for them. but its still pretty shocking

In reply to

lol, do you like the title, thought of it myself :p

anyway, Guerrilla have just addmitted docturing the recent screenshots of killzone 2, and i have to admit myself, at least they have been honest about and come clean.

but here is the extent of the docturing shown by a comparison by playstation universe. obviously the one on the right is the doctored one

[img]http://www.psu.com/media/killzone-project-/killzone-project--ss-61.jpg[/img]

this is what Guerrilla have said on the playstation forum:

"They are only the tiniest bit touched up. Short answer is yes. Long answer is that there was a little bit of colour-correction done and some minor polish, but nothing major. Still very close to reality and it looks better in motion in my opinion."

as you can see form the comparison, saying its only minor changes is definatly trying to soften the blow.personally i would class it as major 'touch ups'. but i'll agree that it does look better in motion

and if you want to know more, type killzone 2 in google news or check out this link

http://news.filefront.com/killzone-2-screenshots-were-touched-up/

its pretty common for screens to get touched up a bit, so no biggie.
its good that they have come clean and admitted it, hopefully they wont do it again. they are only raising expectaions too high anyway so its bad for them. but its still pretty shocking

Inflatable

Since 7654 Days

That's why I always want to see actual live gameplay footage, not screenshots and/or cutscenes, before I fully judge a game..

In reply to

http://www.cyberwarriors.nl
http://home.xmsnet.nl/bigbear/fiat124.jpg

PlumbDrumb

Since 7010 Days

well, it really depends on what they want us to see, but I like the left picture more.

I'm probably just sick of dark looking stuff.

In reply to

CANADA!!

Sath

Since 6882 Days

When they release screenshots its all good even if they touch it up.
I have seen alot of gameplay videos from the game, enough to know that it looks great, even if some screenshots are TINY bit touched up as they say it is.

In reply to

*A New Form of Change*

PlumbDrumb

Since 7010 Days

yeah, it's no biggie, just more contrasty.

I can't wait to get my hands on this game.

In reply to

CANADA!!

Sath

Since 6882 Days

The animation is just mazing, for example in that Helghast soldier jumping down, in motion it looks so realistic, so smooth.

The right one is obviously as stated, the touch up with the colors.

In one of the dev videos they even turned that blurry filter off and showed the true colors and all, and it looked identical to the right picture.
But they turned it off again because that certain level was suppose to look that.

In reply to

*A New Form of Change*

Slabs

Since 7046 Days

Posted by Sath

The animation is just mazing, for example in that Helghast soldier jumping down, in motion it looks so realistic, so smooth.

I've seen people praise that piece of animation before elsewhere and I just don't understand why. It's a non-interactive piece of mo-cap.

In reply to

JediMasterMalik

Since 6751 Days

The animations that impressed me was when they got shot.

In reply to

Sheps

Since 6957 Days

I find that quite concerning, in a sense its false advertisement, if someone gives you an image of a pretty young woman, then you buy her and you get an old saggy woman, thats wrong!

In reply to

UFC 2009, Its going to be the best game ever.

Sath

Since 6882 Days

Posted by Sheps

I find that quite concerning, in a sense its false advertisement, if someone gives you an image of a pretty young woman, then you buy her and you get an old saggy woman, thats wrong!

No then yopu are just horny :P

Posted by Slabs

I've seen people praise that piece of animation before elsewhere and I just don't understand why. It's a non-interactive piece of mo-cap.

People praise it because they think its good.

In reply to

*A New Form of Change*

KORNdog

Since 6420 Days

Posted by Sheps

I find that quite concerning, in a sense its false advertisement, if someone gives you an image of a pretty young woman, then you buy her and you get an old saggy woman, thats wrong!

not really the same at all but lol.

dont see why people are moaning about this tbh, we've seen it in motion and it made the gaming public, plus the critics jaws drop...but they release a couple of doctored screenshots and for some reason it becomes conclusive evidence the whole dev team are liars and the games gonna suck??? lol.

hell, at least they admit it when they're doing it unlike certain other companies *coughEAcough*

In reply to

PlumbDrumb

Since 7010 Days

Posted by KORNdog

hell, at least they admit it when they're doing it unlike certain other companies *coughEAcough*

No doubt man, that is one for the books.

In reply to

CANADA!!

fr0sty

Since 6467 Days

I wonder if Jack Tretton had anything to do with the `Doctoring` rofl......nah, that wouldn`t be possible as in his lying eyes these doctored shots would still (apparently) be untouched.

In reply to

mt_sabao

Since 6447 Days

Posted by Sheps

I find that quite concerning, in a sense its false advertisement, if someone gives you an image of a pretty young woman, then you buy her and you get an old saggy woman, thats wrong!

yeah, i don't get how come people here don't think this is strange and wrong and get all defensive.
It's not as if there's nothing wrong with it, the first beautiful initial shots that come out as ingame screenshots while being infact closer to artworks, slowly slide into the zeitgeist and start creating that initial wow, building hype which evetually turn into more sales.

I think it's a very dirty cheap (and illegal) marketing technique. Not saying this case in particular, but every major developer seems to be doing it this gen as if it was the most natural thing. I think that at some point the authorities governing commercial activities should start putting some sense in these people (again not this case in particular, but game developers in general), as this is clearly false publicity and unfair competition.

If an image is ingame with 2xAA extra, that should be stated, if the colors were photoshoped and the consumer will not see it in the final product it should be stated, etc etc etc

In reply to

[quote=Sheps]I find that quite concerning, in a sense its false advertisement, if someone gives you an image of a pretty young woman, then you buy her and you get an old saggy woman, thats wrong![/quote]
yeah, i don't get how come people here don't think this is strange and wrong and get all defensive.
It's not as if there's nothing wrong with it, the first beautiful initial shots that come out as ingame screenshots while being infact closer to artworks, slowly slide into the zeitgeist and start creating that initial wow, building hype which evetually turn into more sales.

I think it's a very dirty cheap (and illegal) marketing technique. Not saying this case in particular, but every major developer seems to be doing it this gen as if it was the most natural thing. I think that at some point the authorities governing commercial activities should start putting some sense in these people (again not this case in particular, but game developers in general), as this is clearly false publicity and unfair competition.

If an image is ingame with 2xAA extra, that should be stated, if the colors were photoshoped and the consumer will not see it in the final product it should be stated, etc etc etc

KORNdog

Since 6420 Days

Posted by mt_sabao

yeah, i don't get how come people here don't think this is strange and wrong and get all defensive.
It's not as if there's nothing wrong with it, the first beautiful initial shots that come out as ingame screenshots while being infact closer to artworks, slowly slide into the zeitgeist and start creating that initial wow, building hype which evetually turn into more sales.

I think it's a very dirty cheap (and illegal) marketing technique. Not saying this case in particular, but every major developer seems to be doing it this gen as if it was the most natural thing. I think that at some point the authorities governing commercial activities should start putting some sense in these people (again not this case in particular, but game developers in general), as this is clearly false publicity and unfair competition.

If an image is ingame with 2xAA extra, that should be stated, if the colors were photoshoped and the consumer will not see it in the final product it should be stated, etc etc etc

i dont agree with it myself. but in THIS case (which is the case we're discussing) the devs released unedited footage for all to see before these doctored screens where released. EA on the other hand try to pass off their initial doctored screens as authentic in-game shots when they're not, and its not untill we see footage that we truley see that. these guys however did it backwards. they showed us what the game was actually like and then released the pretty pictures afterwards (not counting the pre-rendered trailer). so that to me is no harm no foul. IF however this was the only media avaliable for the game and they where saying it was legit, then THAT is something to be bothered about.

In reply to

[quote=mt_sabao]
yeah, i don't get how come people here don't think this is strange and wrong and get all defensive.
It's not as if there's nothing wrong with it, the first beautiful initial shots that come out as ingame screenshots while being infact closer to artworks, slowly slide into the zeitgeist and start creating that initial wow, building hype which evetually turn into more sales.

I think it's a very dirty cheap (and illegal) marketing technique. Not saying this case in particular, but every major developer seems to be doing it this gen as if it was the most natural thing. I think that at some point the authorities governing commercial activities should start putting some sense in these people (again not this case in particular, but game developers in general), as this is clearly false publicity and unfair competition.

If an image is ingame with 2xAA extra, that should be stated, if the colors were photoshoped and the consumer will not see it in the final product it should be stated, etc etc etc[/quote]

i dont agree with it myself. but in THIS case (which is the case we're discussing) the devs released unedited footage for all to see before these doctored screens where released. EA on the other hand try to pass off their initial doctored screens as authentic in-game shots when they're not, and its not untill we see footage that we truley see that. these guys however did it backwards. they showed us what the game was actually like and then released the pretty pictures afterwards (not counting the pre-rendered trailer). so that to me is no harm no foul. IF however this was the only media avaliable for the game and they where saying it was legit, then THAT is something to be bothered about.

ManThatYouFear

Since 6959 Days

Posted by fr0sty

I wonder if Jack Tretton had anything to do with the `Doctoring` rofl......nah, that wouldn`t be possible as in his lying eyes these doctored shots would still (apparently) be untouched.

"that is INGAME what you are seeing there is ACTUAL ingame footage"

*other sony execs in background*"some one please shut him the fuck up"

In reply to

STREET FIGHTER 4, BRING IT ON!

Sath

Since 6882 Days

Posted by ManThatYouFear

"that is INGAME what you are seeing there is ACTUAL ingame footage"

*other sony execs in background*"some one please shut him the fuck up"

HAha I remember him saying those exact words in that good old E3 interview from IGN.

Seriously, how the fuck did he get the job.
trade him against a chimp, and the chimp will atleast amuse us and not piss us off like Jack The Liar. haha

In reply to

*A New Form of Change*

omegamaximus

Since 6635 Days

weve seen the game in motion. it looks amazing. i dont know what the fuss is about. nit pickyness on a game that isnt nearly as bad as some other games that look very different from the touch ups.in a bad way.

In reply to

[][maximus][]

dcdelgado

Since 6876 Days

Personally i just hope the AI and game play is tightened up, as thats what really matters, i dont want this to turn out to be yet another pretty looking title that plays like crap, i dont care if the visuals dont match the first shown REAL footage of the game, as its so dark anyway it wont really matter.

In reply to

Mass Effect - Nov 07 - Start the Fight!!!

Bitches!!

rustykaks

Since 6996 Days

i actually think the undoctored pic looks better...but i may be insane

In reply to

Sath

Since 6882 Days

Dc, AI isnt the really thing that matters, if you played the first one there was alot of things that had problems.

Same dialogue over and over again, aiming and shooting mechanic in general sucked.
you couldn't shoot enemies in a limited range even though the fact it was pure possible range to take them down.
Too much animation for everything and slow animation.
...and AI.

In reply to

*A New Form of Change*

GriftGFX

Since 7016 Days

Sounds promising, heh.

In reply to

dcdelgado

Since 6876 Days

Posted by Sath

Dc, AI isnt the really thing that matters, if you played the first one there was alot of things that had problems.

Same dialogue over and over again, aiming and shooting mechanic in general sucked.
you couldn't shoot enemies in a limited range even though the fact it was pure possible range to take them down.
Too much animation for everything and slow animation.
...and AI.

of course the AI matters its a shooter, and from what i have read read from various hands on, this was still an issue for most the played it, but its still a long way off so i expect it to be all sorted by release.

And just WOW to alll the shit that was wrong with the first one!!

In reply to

Mass Effect - Nov 07 - Start the Fight!!!

Bitches!!

KORNdog

Since 6420 Days

Posted by dcdelgado

of course the AI matters its a shooter, and from what i have read read from various hands on, this was still an issue for most the played it, but its still a long way off so i expect it to be all sorted by release.

And just WOW to alll the shit that was wrong with the first one!!

there was a whole lot wrong with the first. the character, art, graphics and story where good imo. the performance however let the graphics down, the sound was inconsistant and overly loud most of the time (death screams where the same no matter what the distance), and overall it felt mediocre. i still had a moderate amount of fun with it (unlike sath i LIKED the shooting mechanics and reload animations since the former reminded me a whole lot of the N64's goldeneye/perfect dark)

already tho, this game looks a TON better. but the AI does need a little work, although everything else looks pretty spot on to me, and they seem to have thought of a cover system that doesnt throw you out of first person....hurrah.

In reply to

[quote=dcdelgado]

of course the AI matters its a shooter, and from what i have read read from various hands on, this was still an issue for most the played it, but its still a long way off so i expect it to be all sorted by release.

And just WOW to alll the shit that was wrong with the first one!![/quote]

there was a whole lot wrong with the first. the character, art, graphics and story where good imo. the performance however let the graphics down, the sound was inconsistant and overly loud most of the time (death screams where the same no matter what the distance), and overall it felt mediocre. i still had a moderate amount of fun with it (unlike sath i LIKED the shooting mechanics and reload animations since the former reminded me a whole lot of the N64's goldeneye/perfect dark)

already tho, this game looks a TON better. but the AI does need a little work, although everything else looks pretty spot on to me, and they seem to have thought of a cover system that doesnt throw you out of first person....hurrah.

Sath

Since 6882 Days

Dc, I listed AI in that "problem list", so yeah AI must be there in a shooter, especially in FPS so it feels more intense and "realistic".

But IF the AI aint there, there is always versus humans for its online, which I will spend alot of time in.

In reply to

*A New Form of Change*

Indiana Jones and the Great Circle

Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver 1-2 Remastered

Assassin's Creed Shadows

The First 43 Minutes of Loco Motive

Our Switch video of Ys X: Nordics

The Callisto Protocol is now PS5 Pro Enhanced