New Planetside 2 screenshots

"PlanetSide 2 launched this week. It is a free-to-play FPS MMO with battles on an epic scale, not unlike CCP's Dust 514. PlanetSide 2 is a game that would work extremely well on consoles, so why isn't it available for Sony's PS3?

Well, the graphics."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Walker1888d ago

Current generation graphics looks much better than this !

Dailynch1888d ago

Seriously? Really, cos these images (and the gameplay videos) are really impressive. Much better than current gen FPSs.

Walker1888d ago (Edited 1888d ago )

Look at Halo 4 ! Which one is better, seriously ?!

Fishy Fingers1888d ago (Edited 1888d ago )

Halo looks good, no denying that. But not this good and it's no where near the scale of Planetside 2.

jaosobno1888d ago (Edited 1888d ago )

I expect much better than Planetside 2 graphics on next gen. Even launch titles (that always look worse when compared to later titles) should look way better.

ChronoJoe1887d ago

What they miss is that the game scales.

Lower performance machines could run this no problem, just with lower graphics settings.

It would probably make more sense to wait for PS4 and then present this game in it's true glory on that platform though... in my opinion.

SilentNegotiator1887d ago (Edited 1887d ago )

Considering it's an MMO....uh, that's pretty darn good.

yodawins1887d ago

not to mention its f2p... pretty amazing graphics if you ask me.

Mounce1887d ago

The screenshots don't do this game justice. If you can play the game MAXED on your PC, only then will you understand the Scope, size, and Epicness of the world

asbuwango1887d ago (Edited 1887d ago )


ChrisW1887d ago (Edited 1887d ago )

Considering it's an FPS-MMO with approx 2,000 players per a continent, with several hundred square kilometers per a continent...

It's very DAMN good looking!

1887d ago
PickAShoe1887d ago

Just be glad that we have something. Kids these day don't appreciate many things, and this game is free.

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 1887d ago
HammadTheBeast1888d ago

Guys let's remember here. Planet side 2 pulls of these amazing graphics while allowing up to 2000 players playing simultaneously on a massive map with tons of vehicles, customized suits, and basically lots of assets.

f7897901887d ago

Well ok then. That's impressive.

I was about to say the graphics are nothing special.

geth1gh1887d ago (Edited 1887d ago )

Yea, been playing this game for months. Even if it had launch ps2 and xbox graphics I doubt current gen consoles would be able to run the game playable with the amount of scale and players required.

Hell they can't even get past 24 players in bf3 so how would they be able to run a map the size of NYC with thousands of players?

Also it cost a total of ZERO dollars...

pr0digyZA1887d ago

There are much better shots around the internet, also this game has a massive massive world with 2000 characters and vehicles.

shackdaddy1887d ago

There's even better pics than those.

donman11887d ago


I fully agree with you. PS3/Xbox360 are capable of those visuals and Wii U can do that easily. Nothing next gen about those screen shots.

OneAboveAll1887d ago Show
Axecution1887d ago (Edited 1887d ago )


I agreed because you're right but i bubbled you down for calling people an idiot on an internet forum about video games. xD

Axecution1887d ago (Edited 1887d ago )

lol disagrees.

k nevermind he didn't call somebody an idiot on a forum about video games and that isn't a personal attack on somebody

Bolts1887d ago

This is a clown comment. I've been in a sprawling battle with over two hundred players. We're talking epic huge here, like over 40 tanks and planes and hundreds of infantry clashing all around me.

This game makes BF 3 looks like Call of Duty. And it's free.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1887d ago
StraightPath1887d ago

this game looks beautiful people who are saying this game looks nothing special are idiots. For the scale of the game and pulling those graphics is IMPRESSIVE and graphics which current gen or next gen probably wont be able to pull off.

ThanatosDMC1887d ago

This shows those who have played the game and those that cant.... hahhahah

Ducky1887d ago (Edited 1887d ago )

Here's a better gallery from the beta:

Planetside2 itself isn't a taxing game visually. It does demand a strong CPU though, due to the scale of the game.

When it comes to next-gen, I'd expect launch titles to have similar visuals at 1080p.

Shacojin1887d ago

Yea it doesnt tax the game visually... until you MAX the Settings and put it at the highest resolution.

shutUpAndTakeMyMoney1887d ago (Edited 1887d ago )

dude your talking out of your ass.
Don't compare current games to this 2000 players game.

Does halo have 2000 players, physx, bullet drop, 64 Square Kilometer(25 sq mile) maps?, day/night 24/7 non stop battles in a persistant world?

What current game are you comparing it to?

Oh yeah your waiting for a new console.

This shows the power of pc and also shows how sony can make a great mmo. Hence my pc/ps3 soon ps4 preference.

Now tell me about your $60 hallway shooters with less things to do again?

ZombieNinjaPanda1887d ago

Considering that Planetside 2 is an MMO, it's probably 100X the size of Halo 4, or some absurd number like that. It looks pretty damn nice for what it is.

ATi_Elite1887d ago

1. Those are Not Ultra Settings!

I have Planetside 2 and have been playing since the Beta.....those pictures are not on Ultra with all the bells and whistles on!

Also the video they supplied is total crap! check the video I have at night and see all the lighting effects!

sure PS2 is NO battlefield 3 on Ultra but PS2 looks better than that! so check the link out for a Nice comparison of PS2 on High vs. Ultra and see the real difference! 1:38 mark u get good side by side comparisons.

2. The stupid editor never mentioned that Planetside 2 has 2000 players per map which is a MAJOR reason why Planetside 2 is not on consoles!

I'm not bad mouthing the consoles but Planetside 2 is a PC Game designed to take advantage of the PC and as of right now I know no console that can have this level of graphics and 2000 players per map!

Surely Next Gen consoles will be more than capable as Planetside 2 is such an awesome game that should be enjoyed by all.

TooTall191887d ago

How are you getting ultra? High is currently the best setting available for me. It will look awesome in motion once they enable PhysX.

BitbyDeath1887d ago

Technically 360 and PS3 are last gen now lol

vortis1887d ago

Halo 4 has 2000 players on screen at once and looks like that?


360ICE1887d ago

If you only look at the pictures, I agree consoles would be able to do that. But behind the pictures are some serious, raw scale. Maybe PS3 could do it. Not 100% sure, but maybe.

TooTall191887d ago

Honestly I don't think any console could render this scale at 720p and 32 players. This is the first game I played on my new PC that made my jaw drop. The jump from console BF3 to pc BF3 was awesome, but this game is even more impressive.

PickAShoe1887d ago

I own MAG, and that holds about 256 player. Planet Side 2 take it to the next level.

360ICE1887d ago

I think the scale in itself has already been done on console: Just Cause 2, Fuel etc. PS3 also has MAG and a few other MMOs that do sit quite well on the console. I don't see why at least the PS3 wouldn't be able to run at least a slightly reduced version. Another thing: My lap top is able to run Planetside on decent quality. My lap top is fairly powerful, but it's still not quite a PS3.

Flavor1887d ago

Its not so much the visuals as the fact that you can fight with thousands of people at the same time with gunships and tanks and stuff. And there's no lag as far as I have experienced. And it's free.

cj1pate1011887d ago

first off you havent even seen how big the map is. Thirdly a ps3 couldnt run this game even on lowest settings.

+ Show (12) more repliesLast reply 1887d ago
PrivateRyan1888d ago

Looks much better in motion

TimmyShire1888d ago

There's actually a video they've done too, link in that story. You should watch it!

bozebo1887d ago (Edited 1887d ago )

Yeah, they should have turned off motion blur before taking screen shots while playing. Makes it look like it has lazy Bethesda PS3 AA.

bumnut1887d ago

would be nice if they had hi res screens shots too. Im playing at 1440p and it looks sweet.

csreynolds1888d ago (Edited 1888d ago )

The graphics are pretty impressive, though having seen what the Unreal 4 engine is capable of I would expect PS4 visuals to be closer to this:

There's a lot of powerful hardware out there Sony could take advantage of...

dirthurts1888d ago

Lol, sorry man. My high end pc STRUGGLES running that same tech demo at high settings. You may get half that quality on the PS4/720. Maybe.

csreynolds1888d ago

Oh. Fair play. Thanks for the info. Perhaps I should reconsider my former statement... :-/


That demo is running on a GTX680 1080p @ 30 fps and Unreal Engine 4 is built for next gen consoles so it's possible it will look that good. If history repeats itself next-gen is gonna be able to compete with High-end PC's just like in 2005.

vortis1887d ago


You honestly think for next-gen consoles they're going to put in a dedicated GPU that can be optimized to run graphics parity equivalent to a GTX 680?

Dream on, dude. With Sony's current financial state and Microsoft looking to cash in on casuals, we'll be lucky if we get consoles that can output visuals equivalent to a GTX 580, much less a GTX 680.

dirthurts1888d ago

Don't get me wrong, I would LOVE to see the next consoles run that well (I'll be buying either a PS4 or 720, depending on the hardware) but graphics are not improving as fast as they used to.
With the resolutions we're running at (1080p and up), you can double the power of your graphics card and only see a tiny bit of a performance boost (10-20fps?). Normally, it takes about a 4x boost in power to double the visual fidelity at around 1080p.
Back when consoles were pushing 480p/i, all you were doubling was graphical detail, But now, new consoles are dealing with more resolution and higher frame rate demands. It takes a ton of power.

bozebo1887d ago (Edited 1887d ago )

If they want to compete performance-wise with current high-end PCs I could see the next gen consoles not appearing on the scene until late 2014. If they launch next year MS/Sony would have to take quite a big price hit for them not to cost upwards of ~$800 (assuming they perform relative to a home built $1600 PC), if the production cost doesn't reduce for a substantial time (my the next christmas) games would have to cost upwards of $75 to cover the loss taken on unit console sales (they would need to drop them to ~$350 to not lose out on market share). The Wii-U is pretty dire price-performance and Nint still take a loss for each console, it'd be so much worse for a high-end device. Good games still sell on current platforms too.

dirthurts1887d ago

I see what you're saying, but even if they wait another year, PC's will still evolve 2 more generations (graphics cards and cpu's tend to have 2 gen per year), so really it wouldn't help them cost wise. No matter when they release it, they will probably be 2-4 years behind the most current tech.
BUT, that doesn't really matter. Even at 2 years behind, they technology that will be available is phenomenal.
I don't think they'll raise game costs, and people are already complaining about the 60 dollar mark.

bozebo1887d ago (Edited 1887d ago )

Yeah that's why I said if they wanted to compete against current high-end. They probably won't, they will probably have graphics chips relative to what a 560Ti is capable of thereabouts and another custom memory/cpu configuration (cheaper for loads of identical machines than how PC components have to conform for plug & play). That would leave them with a reasonable amount of loss per console and a fast sales surge due to a low retail price ($300 seems to be the golden number) so games wouldn't have to be too pricey but they will suck, technologically, after 2-3 years like this gen.

I do think the step up in performance by them waiting till 680GTX quality graphics are viable though, games designed solely for tessellated rendering allow optimizations and detail that can't be put in a game that'll also run on DX9 (well, it can, but it takes loads more time from the artists and level editors)

If one company waits, and the other releases earlier - there should be a giant performance difference.

vortis1887d ago

I agree with your second comment entirely.

Although I'm thinking they'll go along with something like a GTX 480 before a GTX 560Ti. They'll probably go as cheap as possible while trying to boast as much raw performance power as possible.

Mac4201888d ago ShowReplies(1)
Knight_Crawler1888d ago

This is what we should expect from Sony and MS next gen console but I going to to be bluny here and ssay that I don not expect much improvement next gen from this gen, the only yhing I see both console adding is more RAM.

Sony will continue to use Blu Rey and they will upgrade the cell,as much as3rd party developers do not want to put work into it Sony will no throw away miilions of dollars on R&D.

MS will use there own disk format, sorta of like Nintendo and I expect a complete over haul with heavy PC specs.

TimmyShire1888d ago

Most will disagree with you. They'll think you're just a PC elitist fanboy, but I actually agree.

Just look at the rumours for the hardware planned to be in PS4/X720 - not confirmed, obviously, and while the specs are good they don't seem particularly ground-breaking on top of what is currently available for PCs.

It's a shame, but tech is moving at such a speed these days it's hard to think they could do anything else.

GroundsKeeperJimbo1887d ago

Pretty Much, new but standard GPU to optimize and hopefully about 8x the RAM.