Ryse vs Killzone SF Comparison with uncompressed pics

  • 54 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Edited by mitu123 (153911 posts) -

It seems like these 2 games get compared to each other graphically even though they're completely different games. And why is that? It's because they're the best looking games both consoles have to offer at launch so it makes sense to compare them. But going by the past threads, the comparisons don't make any sense, here are the problems with them:

1. Old screens from old builds.

2. Pre-rendered screens.

3. Compressed screens that make the game look worse than they are.

I however, am thankfully avoiding all those problems, because I use a capture card(which is the new Avermedia Gamebroadcaster HD) to take uncompressed PNGs so no crappy screens or anything, and here there are, a fair comparison between Ryse and Killzone SF in their in game, real time glory, right click to view image to see their proper uncompressed quality as well thanks to GS's lol uploader:

Ryse

Killzone Shadow Fall

Happy Early New Year as well

#2 Posted by hummer700 (10197 posts) -

Different art styles, but I'd have to go with killzone for realism. Ryse looks really really good (graphically) though.

#3 Posted by wolverine4262 (19398 posts) -

Killzone's higher res is noticeable, but Ryse has some of the best animated fire and some damn good textures.

#4 Posted by MrXboxOne (743 posts) -

Irrelevant. Everyone agrees Ryse is graphics king.

#5 Posted by FPSfan1985 (2008 posts) -

I prefer the cinematic look of Ryse. Ryse looks like a movie not a videogame. Both look fantastic though.

#6 Posted by Couth_ (10182 posts) -

Killzone looks so hnnng I can't wait to see what Naughty Dog and Santa Monica do with the quad

#7 Edited by Opus_Rea-333 (987 posts) -

Ryse looks incredible and plays good, Killzone looks incredible but plays like you were playing with a 120 lbs. gun.

#8 Edited by K1ngd0m4g3rul3z (178 posts) -

Both look great, I can't really pick one over the other with them being so different and all.

Both are proof big name devs don't care about the pc Platform.

Games thrown together in a few months for console launch are more polished than anything on PC.

Mind you, I said polished, not technically sophisticated.

Even CDProjekt has gone full multiplat day one now.. Sad.

#9 Posted by FPSfan1985 (2008 posts) -

@k1ngd0m4g3rul3z said:

Both look great, and both are proof big name devs don't care about the pc Platform.

Games thrown together in a few months for console launch are more polished than anything on PC.

I said polished, not technically sophisticated.

Even CDProjekt has gone full multiplat day one now.. Sad.

Yet these "polished" games play like crap...

Give me an unpolished fun game over a pretty boring game anyday.

#10 Posted by K1ngd0m4g3rul3z (178 posts) -

@FPSfan1985 said:

@k1ngd0m4g3rul3z said:

Both look great, and both are proof big name devs don't care about the pc Platform.

Games thrown together in a few months for console launch are more polished than anything on PC.

I said polished, not technically sophisticated.

Even CDProjekt has gone full multiplat day one now.. Sad.

Yet these "polished" games play like crap...

Give me an unpolished fun game over a pretty boring game anyday.

The point is even though they're crap games and thrown together last min they still are more polished than almost any pc game by virtue of the dev giving a damn because of... console exclusive.

It's puzzling.

#11 Edited by PernicioEnigma (5390 posts) -

@k1ngd0m4g3rul3z said:

Both look great, I can't really pick one over the other with them being so different and all.

Both are proof big name devs don't care about the pc Platform.

Games thrown together in a few months for console launch are more polished than anything on PC.

Mind you, I said polished, not technically sophisticated.

Even CDProjekt has gone full multiplat day one now.. Sad.

The issues with PC games at launch have more to do with the thousands of different hardware and software combinations PC's have, don't confuse that with devs not giving a damn about the quality of their PC games (not that there aren't some devs who don't care, but the same can be said for some console game devs too).

#12 Edited by K1ngd0m4g3rul3z (178 posts) -

@PernicioEnigma: Sorry I meant graphically and artistically polished, and detailed. Look at that armor, look at that vegetation, look at that faces, those clothes look at those surfaces, that gorgeous KZ backdrops, that Ryse alley..

#13 Edited by PernicioEnigma (5390 posts) -

@k1ngd0m4g3rul3z said:

@PernicioEnigma: Sorry I meant graphically and artistically polished, and detailed. Look at that armor, look at that vegetation, look at that faces, those clothes look at those surfaces, that gorgeous KZ backdrops, that Ryse alley..

You do have a point there. I think developers have noticed the trend (I sure have) that graphically impressive games generally equates to better sales, and seeing as consoles are the mainstream gaming systems it makes sense console developers put a higher priority on graphics than, say, a small development team who make PC exclusives would. There's also the fact there's really not that many big developers out there, and of them the majority either develop console exclusive titles or multiplats, so most of the good looking PC games are also available on consoles.

I still don't agree with your conclusion that Pc developers don't care about their games because they don't bother to make them look good. Most PC only devs have a tiny fraction of the resources big developers have, and they don't want to be putting their limited resources into making the trees in their game look good or making sure light reflects off skin realistically, they'd prefer to focus their efforts onto how the games plays.

#14 Edited by RimacBugatti (1287 posts) -

There are very few games that actually look substantially better on PC. Console gaming is where it's at these days.

#15 Posted by FLOPPAGE_50 (770 posts) -

Killzone is actually more BLURRY in motion

#16 Posted by ACP_45 (434 posts) -

you cannot compare an FPS to a game like Ryze.

The devs obviously worked on different scales.

I mean for example : tree bark will look better on KZ because it’s First person.

Don’t compare the two.

It’s just stupid.

Both look good.

#17 Posted by dommeus (9379 posts) -

@k1ngd0m4g3rul3z said:

@PernicioEnigma: Sorry I meant graphically and artistically polished, and detailed. Look at that armor, look at that vegetation, look at that faces, those clothes look at those surfaces, that gorgeous KZ backdrops, that Ryse alley..

Games like this cost a lot to make, so it's no wonder that developers with backing from the console manufacturers can more easily make graphically formidable games.

Especially true when you consider these games demand the attention of the public, as they are attempting to flog expensive new hardware to millions of potential customers. If the leap in quality isn't obvious, then a lot of people will hold off on their next purchases.

You only have to look at the review scores and critical response to both these games to assume that their primary function was 'looking pretty'. Yet, plenty of PC games in the past 6 months have outscored both of these launch titles. I think that speaks volumes to the quality of the PC market, even in the face of these multi-million dollar graphical showcases.

#18 Posted by Innovazero2000 (3144 posts) -

Honestly, both of these games look really freaking good!

#19 Edited by sukraj (23060 posts) -

Ryse looks better.

#20 Posted by NFJSupreme (5379 posts) -

Ryse does look better.

#21 Edited by FreedomFreeLife (2543 posts) -

Ryse LOOKS BETTER !!!

#23 Posted by JohnF111 (14093 posts) -

Wow and people call Killzone blurry, LOOK AT RYSE! Its even blurry when walking!

#24 Posted by WallofTruth (1753 posts) -

@RimacBugatti said:

There are very few games that actually look substantially better on PC. Console gaming is where it's at these days.

Yep, because graphics are suddenly important again and in 2 or 3 years when PC looks miles ahead again then "bu bu but graphics don't matter".

#25 Edited by ronvalencia (15130 posts) -

Crytek is still king for vegetation simulator. LOL...

They both look pretty good.

#26 Edited by GreySeal9 (24513 posts) -

I think Killzone looks slightly better but the difference is so slight it doesn't really matter.

Fanboys will act like there's a generational gap between the two tho.

#27 Edited by raging_user (414 posts) -

surely is the king of fog and lens flares

puts Michael Bay to shame

ill give it the king of google maps too, but forza 5 is a close second

#28 Posted by Cyberdot (3538 posts) -

Killzone wins easily because of the resolution. It just looks sharper.

#29 Posted by freedomfreak (41035 posts) -

Needs asses.

#30 Posted by Tighaman (975 posts) -

I think killzone looks great but its just not RYSE I mean Marius ALONG with cloth physics, every piece of his armor is moving with not a jaggie in sight every round piece of the armor is fully rounded the hairs on the helmet moves This is just the character, vegetation beautiful, lighting making different colors on the armor when you walk past fire or in a cave I never seen anything like it really ITS LIKE MY GEARS OF WAR FEELING when the 360 came.

#31 Edited by tymeservesfate (1979 posts) -

@freedomfreak said:

Needs asses.

goodlord man, i wish you were wrong at least once in your life. cmon MS..Sony..get it together. throw some asses in their...nice round jubilant asses. its only right.

#32 Posted by Heil68 (45245 posts) -

Killzone has higher resolution in a bigger world and thus wins and SDC. Thank you Sony.

#33 Posted by mitu123 (153911 posts) -

@JohnF111 said:

Wow and people call Killzone blurry, LOOK AT RYSE! Its even blurry when walking!

Dat motion blur!

#34 Edited by Tessellation (8803 posts) -

i don't care witch one looks better,but KZ has more noticeable aliasing and low re textures and Ryse takes a hit for not being 1080p.

#35 Posted by SystemWarsMan (913 posts) -

@ronvalencia: ryse wins

#36 Edited by StrongBlackVine (8418 posts) -

@Opus_Rea-333 said:

Ryse looks incredible and plays good, Killzone looks incredible but plays like you were playing with a 120 lbs. gun.

Ryse has dogshit gameplay and drops below 30fps a lot. Killzone Shadow is average and never drops below 30fps at a higher resolution.

#37 Edited by WG_McFartypants (218 posts) -

FINALLY! Real solid proof that, if you take all the other issues out of the comparison between an apple and an orange, what you get in the end is...

An apple and an orange.

#38 Edited by Nengo_Flow (9861 posts) -

dat 4.0/10 tho.....

#39 Edited by I_can_haz (6551 posts) -

KZSF wins easily. It has higher res and better fps not to mention it's more detailed and in a larger environment and boasts some of the most impressive lighting to date. Look at how blurry Ryse is and it is 900p and dips to 20fps while taking place in extremely limited and tiny environments. Only the most deluded lems will think it looks better.

#40 Posted by FreedomFreeLife (2543 posts) -

Ryse has anti-alasing and killzone does not have. Why killzone looks so blurry? RYSE HIGH DETAILED TEXTURES VS BLURRY AND LOWER CARTOON TEXTURES. SO YOU I_CAN_HAZ PROVED THAT RYSE LOOKS BETTER

#41 Posted by I_can_haz (6551 posts) -

@FreedomFreeLife said:

Ryse has anti-alasing and killzone does not have.

FAIL. Is that what kids are calling the Vaseline look from running at 900p with motion blur and fog to cover up horrible textures?

#42 Edited by j2zon2591 (2239 posts) -

I think Ryse..

The human bare face models look better.

The environment looks as if it's gonna be a matter of preference (ancient rome + nature theme vs. futuristic + space theme).

#43 Edited by zeeshanhaider (2609 posts) -

@Tessellation said:

i don't care witch one looks better,but KZ has more noticeable aliasing and low re textures and Ryse takes a hit for not being 1080p.

The funny thing is DF called Ryse the better looking game and on this very site VanOrd compared Crapzone:Shadow Fail to Crysis 2 from 2011. LMAO. I mean GG is trying to do and failing at what Crytek did on last gen consoles in 2011.

Cows, you lost from every point of view, when pitched against PC your precious exclusive gets slaughtered by the likes of 2011's Crysis 2 and BF3. And on consoles.....well, I don't have to repeat what DF said.

#44 Edited by John_Matherson (2031 posts) -

It's a rough one...I have to credit KZ's Sharpness and resolution but I still Think Ryse takes it.

#45 Edited by I_can_haz (6551 posts) -

@zeeshanhaider said:

@Tessellation said:

i don't care witch one looks better,but KZ has more noticeable aliasing and low re textures and Ryse takes a hit for not being 1080p.

The funny thing is DF called Ryse the better looking game and on this very site VanOrd compared Crapzone:Shadow Fail to Crysis 2 from 2011. LMAO. I mean GG is trying to do and failing what Crytek did on last gen consoles in 2011.

Cows, you lost from every point of view, when pitched against PC your precious exclusive gets slaughtered by the likes of 2011's Crysis 2 and BF3. And on consoles.....well, I don't have to repeat what DF said.

DF was comparing it to games on XB1. They never said to looked better than KZ. You lems are illiterate idiots.

#46 Edited by zeeshanhaider (2609 posts) -

@I_can_haz said:

@zeeshanhaider said:

@Tessellation said:

i don't care witch one looks better,but KZ has more noticeable aliasing and low re textures and Ryse takes a hit for not being 1080p.

The funny thing is DF called Ryse the better looking game and on this very site VanOrd compared Crapzone:Shadow Fail to Crysis 2 from 2011. LMAO. I mean GG is trying to do and failing what Crytek did on last gen consoles in 2011.

Cows, you lost from every point of view, when pitched against PC your precious exclusive gets slaughtered by the likes of 2011's Crysis 2 and BF3. And on consoles.....well, I don't have to repeat what DF said.

DF was comparing it to games on XB1. They never said to looked better than KZ. You lems are illiterate idiots.

First I'm not a lemming. I'm a proud hermit and the only reason I give a damn about Ryse is because you pathetic sony drones claimed that your precious exclusive rivals Crysis 3 on PC. So, it's quite naturally for me to rub it in your faces when a game like Ryse beats it let alone the heavy hitters on PC.

All of which begs the question: could these new consoles run Crysis 3? Ryse delivers the full suite of CryEngine features with excellent image quality and it's still just a launch title. Given the experience of working on such a product, we have little doubt that Crytek could produce a Crysis Trilogy of sorts for next-generation consoles with few compromises - and yes, we want it. Given the quality of the developer's work on Xbox One, we would love to see what it could do with PlayStation 4 in the future as well. However, despite all the technological finery on offer, the limited and repetitive gameplay make Ryse difficult to actually recommend as a prospective purchase. That said, if you really want a taste of what we can expect from the next generation of consoles, Ryse towers over the rest.

Link

Who's the illiterate one now? Remain butthurt.

#47 Posted by I_can_haz (6551 posts) -

@zeeshanhaider said:

@I_can_haz said:

@zeeshanhaider said:

@Tessellation said:

i don't care witch one looks better,but KZ has more noticeable aliasing and low re textures and Ryse takes a hit for not being 1080p.

The funny thing is DF called Ryse the better looking game and on this very site VanOrd compared Crapzone:Shadow Fail to Crysis 2 from 2011. LMAO. I mean GG is trying to do and failing what Crytek did on last gen consoles in 2011.

Cows, you lost from every point of view, when pitched against PC your precious exclusive gets slaughtered by the likes of 2011's Crysis 2 and BF3. And on consoles.....well, I don't have to repeat what DF said.

DF was comparing it to games on XB1. They never said to looked better than KZ. You lems are illiterate idiots.

First I'm not a lemming. I'm a proud hermit and the only reason I give a damn about Ryse is because you pathetic sony drones claimed that your precious exclusive rivals Crysis 3 on PC. So, it's quite naturally for me to rub it in your faces when a game like Ryse beats it let alone the heavy hitters on PC.

All of which begs the question: could these new consoles run Crysis 3? Ryse delivers the full suite of CryEngine features with excellent image quality and it's still just a launch title. Given the experience of working on such a product, we have little doubt that Crytek could produce a Crysis Trilogy of sorts for next-generation consoles with few compromises - and yes, we want it. Given the quality of the developer's work on Xbox One, we would love to see what it could do with PlayStation 4 in the future as well. However, despite all the technological finery on offer, the limited and repetitive gameplay make Ryse difficult to actually recommend as a prospective purchase. That said, if you really want a taste of what we can expect from the next generation of consoles, Ryse towers over the rest.

Link

Who's the illiterate one now? Remain butthurt.

The guy from DF that wrote the article posted on GAF and said he was talking about XB1 games when he said "the rest". Remain butthurt and upset that your blurry Ryse of Turd can't even run above 900p and continues to dip to 20fps on average.

#48 Posted by Gaming-Planet (14022 posts) -

Ryse had better msuscle movements

#49 Posted by zeeshanhaider (2609 posts) -

@I_can_haz said:

@zeeshanhaider said:

@I_can_haz said:

@zeeshanhaider said:

@Tessellation said:

i don't care witch one looks better,but KZ has more noticeable aliasing and low re textures and Ryse takes a hit for not being 1080p.

The funny thing is DF called Ryse the better looking game and on this very site VanOrd compared Crapzone:Shadow Fail to Crysis 2 from 2011. LMAO. I mean GG is trying to do and failing what Crytek did on last gen consoles in 2011.

Cows, you lost from every point of view, when pitched against PC your precious exclusive gets slaughtered by the likes of 2011's Crysis 2 and BF3. And on consoles.....well, I don't have to repeat what DF said.

DF was comparing it to games on XB1. They never said to looked better than KZ. You lems are illiterate idiots.

First I'm not a lemming. I'm a proud hermit and the only reason I give a damn about Ryse is because you pathetic sony drones claimed that your precious exclusive rivals Crysis 3 on PC. So, it's quite naturally for me to rub it in your faces when a game like Ryse beats it let alone the heavy hitters on PC.

All of which begs the question: could these new consoles run Crysis 3? Ryse delivers the full suite of CryEngine features with excellent image quality and it's still just a launch title. Given the experience of working on such a product, we have little doubt that Crytek could produce a Crysis Trilogy of sorts for next-generation consoles with few compromises - and yes, we want it. Given the quality of the developer's work on Xbox One, we would love to see what it could do with PlayStation 4 in the future as well. However, despite all the technological finery on offer, the limited and repetitive gameplay make Ryse difficult to actually recommend as a prospective purchase. That said, if you really want a taste of what we can expect from the next generation of consoles, Ryse towers over the rest.

Link

Who's the illiterate one now? Remain butthurt.

The guy from DF that wrote the article posted on GAF and said he was talking about XB1 games when he said "the rest". Remain butthurt and upset that your blurry Ryse of Turd can't even run above 900p and continues to dip to 20fps on average.

Proof? And yeah, I would take an official verdict over some unofficial comment made to calm down raging sony drones. And clearly consoles just doesn't mean X1. I'm not a native English speaker but I can differentiate between singular and plural, primary school stuff. However, if you say so, then I would urge you to ask THAT guy on GAF to correct his article because many people are getting the wrong impression as you just said, until then I'll believe the official DF word.

Remain mad.

#50 Edited by BeardMaster (1580 posts) -

@I_can_haz said:

@zeeshanhaider said:

@I_can_haz said:

@zeeshanhaider said:

@Tessellation said:

i don't care witch one looks better,but KZ has more noticeable aliasing and low re textures and Ryse takes a hit for not being 1080p.

The funny thing is DF called Ryse the better looking game and on this very site VanOrd compared Crapzone:Shadow Fail to Crysis 2 from 2011. LMAO. I mean GG is trying to do and failing what Crytek did on last gen consoles in 2011.

Cows, you lost from every point of view, when pitched against PC your precious exclusive gets slaughtered by the likes of 2011's Crysis 2 and BF3. And on consoles.....well, I don't have to repeat what DF said.

DF was comparing it to games on XB1. They never said to looked better than KZ. You lems are illiterate idiots.

First I'm not a lemming. I'm a proud hermit and the only reason I give a damn about Ryse is because you pathetic sony drones claimed that your precious exclusive rivals Crysis 3 on PC. So, it's quite naturally for me to rub it in your faces when a game like Ryse beats it let alone the heavy hitters on PC.

All of which begs the question: could these new consoles run Crysis 3? Ryse delivers the full suite of CryEngine features with excellent image quality and it's still just a launch title. Given the experience of working on such a product, we have little doubt that Crytek could produce a Crysis Trilogy of sorts for next-generation consoles with few compromises - and yes, we want it. Given the quality of the developer's work on Xbox One, we would love to see what it could do with PlayStation 4 in the future as well. However, despite all the technological finery on offer, the limited and repetitive gameplay make Ryse difficult to actually recommend as a prospective purchase. That said, if you really want a taste of what we can expect from the next generation of consoles, Ryse towers over the rest.

Link

Who's the illiterate one now? Remain butthurt.

The guy from DF that wrote the article posted on GAF and said he was talking about XB1 games when he said "the rest". Remain butthurt and upset that your blurry Ryse of Turd can't even run above 900p and continues to dip to 20fps on average.

so were all the games you were playing last gen blurry garbage? considering last gen 900p was a pipe dream. You must have been lambasting sony and their ps3 constantly.

when TLOU came out less than a year ago i bet you were screaming from the rooftops, about sont forcing that blurry 720p garbage on you.