180°

Crysis 3 Beta - Console version looks great but no contest versus PC

At least Crysis 3 shows the vast differences between PC and console gaming at present especially in light of some multi format PC games being held back by consoles.

Read Full Story >>
cramgaming.com
iamnsuperman4097d ago

Well it should as it is latest hardware. Is there really a need to compare consoles to PCs in terms of graphics. I mean the PC version is depending on what PC you have. The console version is the same regardless. A better title would be PC version looks great [with no mention of the console version]

decrypt4097d ago

"I mean the PC version is depending on what PC you have."

Its designed with consoles as the lowest denominator. Any Mid range PC probably will be able to max it out. Hell a PC from 4-5 years back will be out performing the console versions.

neoMAXMLC4096d ago

"Hell a PC from 4-5 years back will be out performing the console versions."

Actually no. Because apparently Crytek will only support DX11 now. So even if I have a GPU that's about 3x more powerful than both consoles that play same game combined, I can't play the beta because it doesn't support DX11.

T9004096d ago

Early DX11 GPUs were out in 2009. Thats about 5 years back.

5870 should have no problems outperforming consoles in Crysis 3.

Karpetburnz4096d ago

This is True, You shouldnt compare consoles with PC, of course PC will have better graphics. yet fanboys still get boners because their version looks better than the 7 year old hardware version.

ShadesMoolah4096d ago

Even so, as a console gamer it's interesting to see the differneces, as with next-gen around the corner, I would expect the Xbox/PS4 launch titles to be comparable to today's modern PC games.

pr0digyZA4096d ago

"I mean the PC version is depending on what PC you have"
Although if you can run crysis 3 you will already have better graphics
eg: PC lowest settings
http://i6.minus.com/iRhD5QP...

PS3
http://i.imgur.com/dwa9bgf....

360
http://www.abload.de/img/x1...

sourav934096d ago (Edited 4096d ago )

I tried the beta from Origin yesterday on my laptop, though it's a gaming beast by no means, I managed to get an average of 30fps on medium settings. Come today, I downloaded the beta on my ps3, fired it up, and the first thing I noticed was the huge drop in resolution, AA, and overall picture quality compared to LOW settings on PC (I tried low to see what performance I was getting on my laptop). But that's fine, the console is 7 years old, so the fact that it even runs the game, that's good. But then, when I started moving around and started playing properly, I noticed the biggest flaw. I can't speak for the 360 version, since I only got it for my ps3, but the low framerate made the game almost unplayable! I know what 30fps feels like on the beta because that's what I was getting on my laptop, but the ps3 version was nowhere close. This, mind you, is no way the console's fault. If a game like Killzone 3, which I still think looks better than Crysis 3 (console version), can run relatively smoothly with 24 players online, then why can't this game?

I know that it's a beta, and most likely these flaws will not be present in the final game. But when you see the state of the multiplayer less than a month before the game's full retail release, you have to wonder.

The console version of the beta doesn't look that much different than the console version of crysis 2. So my question is, if they could manage to make Crysis 2's multiplayer smooth, why not this new one? I was looking forward to picking up Crysis 3 for my PS3, since I own both Crysis 1 and 2 on ps3, though I recently bought the max edition of crysis 2 from origin, but with the looks of it, I might have to pick it up for my laptop instead, unless the final game shows a lot of improvements from the beta.

deadfrag4096d ago (Edited 4096d ago )

Thats exactly what i noted when playing CRISIS 3 on origins.I like to play vsync so my gtx580 only gets the game on very high with SMAA at 30fps,but i notice that the 30fps i was getting where actually very fluid on the PC,the game run very fast and fluid at 30fps on PC and i was like WOW wtf i never seen a 30fps game run so fluid, it was marking 30 fps on fraps and i didnt believe it because of the fast game play i was getting !Well i could lower some specs and i might get 60fps in a custom setting but thats to be seen when i get the game and after tweek it, because the multiplayer is a lag fest and im most interested in SP.But today i got to play the console version and i have to tell you people ;i dont have fraps to run on consoles and see the actuall FPS but its obvious that the game is running way bellow 30fps on consoles not to mention the graphics are low specs,EA and Crytek made this game for PC and for ultimate cards just like THEY DID Crisis! This game plays crap on consoles and they are going win lots of cash from the console version because people will go and buy it.Well if you have a dx 11 card forget the console versions if you can get at least 30fps from your card on this game its way better than get the game on console anyway because the 30fps on PC in this game it actually LOOKS AND PLAYS super fluid i guess it haves to be related to the post processing effects they have on PC!Not to mention that the PC version is cheaper too!

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4096d ago
Skate-AK4096d ago

I played the PS3 version for like 10 mins. Doesnt look that great and its blurry. I think Battlefield 3 looks better.

sourav934096d ago

Completely agree. What BF3 lacks in colour, is made up with overall better picture quality.

Skate-AK4096d ago

I know what you mean about the color. I was bummed when it didnt have a color palate like Battlefield Bad Company 2.

Reborn4096d ago

I don't get it. Each time Crysis comes out, do we need an article to tell us PC looks better than console?

Honestly...

steve30x4096d ago

Why do you people approve these news articles? All it does is cause arguments between PC gamers and console gamers. We really dont need these news articles on N4G. Its bad enough on here already.

DA_SHREDDER4096d ago

Crysis 2 was garbage and not fun, and the Crysis 3 demo shows it's just as bad. I don't care if the game looked like real life, it sucks! The beta sucks!!

Detoxx4096d ago

I loved Crysis 2 and I'm about to play Crysis 3 now, just finished downloading the Beta.

Tyre4096d ago (Edited 4096d ago )

@Da Shredder & others who join/post stupid articles that flame the hate campaign on Crytek & Crysis. Oh Everything sucks? Console looks like shit? What a good argument. Stop beating ur phantom dead horse, don't like it? skip the article about Crysis. And don't post an Article about Crysis at all. Stop using Crysis as a scapegoat to vent ur own boring misery. They are all just opinions of minions...What is the purpose of posting negative remarks and/or posting the stupid comparison articles? hoping others will join in ur misery & make u feel better about urself. Pathetic Losers

Show all comments (36)
140°

EA’s best multiplayer games have now shut down for good

Battlefield Bad Company 2, Dead Space 2, Crysis 3, and a handful other EA games have finally had their online services shut down.

Read Full Story >>
pcgamesn.com
OtterX130d ago

I had no idea that Bad Company 2 was still running, and only now that I know, I want to jump on! 😥

SonyStyled130d ago

I was able to find games in the Vietnam dlc on ps3 the last week. There were articles on here about the server closure when it was announced in April

DaReapa130d ago

BF1943 is the only online MP game that I was genuinely interested in. Been playing since launch 14 years ago. Hate that I couldn't put in as much time to play as I'd hoped for during the final week.

Inverno129d ago

I got really into 43 when I bought Bf3, and preferred it. Everything that I disliked or found annoying about Bf3, wasn't an issue in 43. Too bad they never bothered releasing it on PS4 or PC.

1nsomniac129d ago (Edited 129d ago )

Dead Space 2...... I wasn't even aware that had multiplayer. Nevermind that it was apparently one of their best multiplayers!

anast129d ago

Once people stop buying micros, these companies close the doors.

Xenial129d ago

Dead Space 2 multiplayer had been hanging on for years - I'd boot my PS3 up to see some familiar names in lobbies. This will definitely be missed!

100°

EA has finally removed SecuROM from Crysis 3

Electronic Arts has released a new update for the PC version of Crysis 3 that removes its SecuROM protection system.

Read Full Story >>
dsogaming.com
370°

The Witcher 3, Horizon Zero Dawn & more running in 8K/30fps on NVIDIA GeForce RTX3090

Bang4BuckPC Gamer tested Crysis 3, The Witcher 3, Horizon Zero Dawn and Final Fantasy XV, with all of them running with 30fps in 8K.

Read Full Story >>
dsogaming.com
RazzerRedux1277d ago

Yep. Wait a couple of years and get this level of performance on a RTX 4070 or 4080 at a much lower price.

Killer73nova1277d ago

And wait a couple more years for rtx 5070 or 5080 at a much much lower price

Yung-T1277d ago (Edited 1277d ago )

That headline is a tad misleading.
The rig stated in that YouTube video is extremely high-end (ryzen 3950x oc, 32gb etc) and utilizing special water-cooling solutions, loops with pumps etc.

This rig easily costs 5k+ and a normal pc with a RTX 3090 wouldn't get close to these framerates or sustainable temperatures.

Aggesan1277d ago

Who has a "normal" pc with a RTX 3090?

Yung-T1277d ago (Edited 1277d ago )

There's still a difference between a high-end GPU+CPU and a custom-made water cooling system including a Waterloop&pumps etc though, it allows for much higher performance due to the better temperature management that would fry the GPU&CPU with normal builds.

lonewolf101277d ago

That's why people need to read the articles, most headlines are just to get you to click.

Rainbowcookie1277d ago

You would think yes, but honestly does it happen often 🤣 enough

I_am_Batman1277d ago (Edited 1277d ago )

Most of the threads of the 3950x were barely utilized and none of the games that were tested allocated more than ~12.5GB of system memory. Gaming at 8k is pretty much as GPU bound as you can get so you won't need a water cooled high-end CPU or 32GB of memory.

Psychotica1277d ago (Edited 1277d ago )

How does the cost of the PC make the headline misleading?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1277d ago
Father__Merrin1277d ago

Mega powerful video card but the games you can play on that card are all available elsewhere. I want to see compelling pc only goty material titles ASAP

Psychotica1277d ago

And where else can you run them in 8K or even in 4K with the same level of performance?

averagejoe261277d ago

Who cares? Nobody has 8k screens and the majority don't even have 4k screens.

This push for pointless high resolution is ruining progress. Give us better framerates, lighting, physics, etc. Stop wasting power on needles 8k.

lonewolf101277d ago

@averagejoe26

There are people with 8k monitors though.

Bender65021277d ago

And still we can't escape 30fps.

JCOLE131951277d ago

I mean given the fact the games are running at 8K it doesn’t surprise me...

MrDead1277d ago

DLSS 2.0 no doubt has a big part in this too, The Witcher 3, Horizon Zero Dawn and Death Stranding run like a dream on my 3080, 4k ultra set to 60fps no drops or stutters and the system runs very quiet. Playing Borderlands 3 on badass settings, Red Dead or Division 2 on 4k ultra all run great (Red Dead has a few drops below 60fps) but my PC is working a lot harder on games that don't utilise DLSS, my room warms up nicely when playing those games.

Show all comments (19)