Take a closer look at how the Dunia engine performs on PS3 and 360.
I didn't realise how badly those graphics compare. Those visuals look NOTHING like the Far Cry 2 graphics I've got on my XPS with DUAL Geforce GTX 280 SLI video cards, seriously that's shocking! Play the PC version on maximum and then look at these graphics........the console version no offence look like trash on both versions compared with maximum on PC. I had no idea....wow!
Even though I own a PS3, I think the graphic card in Xbox360 is a bit stronger.
in some of the scenes I thought the x360 was mildly better, but in others I thought ps3 was better. when it was mid range normal, I thought the 360 had slightlly higher def, but in the close up, the ps3 one had less jags, looker a lot sharper without degrading the picture.
i don't know what you guys are seeing but the ps3 looks better IMO. less jaggies and the explosion effect was better. not to mention the shading is weird on the 360 version, but someone said that's due to the video being in slowmo? in any case, that's just what i'm seeing. but i'm sure the pc version looks amazing if you got a good enough gaming rig
PC graphics >>>>>>> console graphics. Always. Whilst a console version of a game might suffer from framerate problems or pop-in, on PC you can adjust settings/upgrade in order to alleviate these problems. PC games often support more players online and get free added content, especially in the form of mods. Take COD4 for example; it supports over 50 players online and we got the map pack for free. The main disadvantage of PC gaming is that it costs an awful lot.
yes but thats if u have the latest PC specs, and very few people upgrade their pc's every year, besides there is one or 2 things about pc gaming i dont like 1: the controls(its only good for shooting or strategy games) 2: the texture always have sharp edges while consoles have smoother edges than pc games and that a fact!
I have it and it looks just the same as the video is showing. At first I thought it might have been the art direction they where going but later I found out it wasn't the case with the PS3 version. The game is good either way and I won't say either is better since they both have their plus and minuses. I am sure both have the same irritations when clearing a base of enemy's, leave, come back a minute later and the enemy's have re-spawned again. I can't stand that!!!
please trust i'm not a fanboy, i don't know what version is better... but when i'm playing FC2 on my ps3 sandbags and cars (and everything else) DOES NOT look that motion blurred or blurry in general, i'm calling tom foolery right off the bat here!
No textures do not have "sharper edges" on PC games, unless by that you mean the textures are higher res and look better. If the flaws in the game's textures are more apparent on PC then that's because you're viewing it at a higher resolution than the consoles (typical console resolution is 720p which PCs were doing over 10 years ago). You can tweak (if you want) the PC version's settings to look almost identical to the console version. Lower the resolution, lower the texture resolution so they don't have "sharp edges" as you put it. I agree with you about the controls - for many types of game the keyboard/mouse setup just doesn't work that well. It's the keyboard that lets it down though, and of course, you can always buy a controller for PC.
Does anyone's PS3 version look like that; I know mine doesn't look that blurry. They must have changed the settings to force 480p.
consoles doesn't require a good processor, ram, and videocard to get good - great framerates and graphics. Most high rated games are very beautiful. MGS4 looks astounding and in close textures it's kinda similar to Crysis on Max settings, but ofcourse Crysis is still the most beautiful and demanding game. Not to mention it's on a $400 console with a video card a bit less powerful than the 360. Oh well, as for Far Cry 2, I got a bit dizzy when using the sprint. The motion blur effect or whatever is a bad addition IMO. :D
the graphics cards have nothing to do with this. devs that make games for both consoles still are having allot of trouble making games for the cell processor. if you just take a look at any MGS4 video or Killzone 2 video you will notice that devs that know how to use the cell can make the 360s graphics card look like trash.
video comparisons from eurogaymer are no better than the trolls you find on n4g, full of distortions, agendas and fanboyism.
@The Killer, PC controls are only good for shooting and stradegy games? Well, for starters, the majority of the games that are played on these consoles are shooting games. Secondly, have you ever played an RPG with a mouse and keyboard? Take WoW for example, you may have 20-30 skills - How on earth are you going to do that with a controller? But regardless, you can use an Xbox 360 controller or even a PS3 controller on a PC anyway. And don't try and come here with some "facts" when in fact they're just made up garbage.
Buubuhbuhbut teh Cell! :D I wonder where are those idiots that said that lines now.
obviously the best graphics would be on the Wii.
The console version looks like crap, what a shocker! Even more of a shocker, Farcry was designed to be a console game from the ground up. Now you see why there isn't a Crysis port for the console.
in both 360 and ps3!!!
ps3 looks fine with no errors but if u look close at xbox u see missing pixels when showing on the computer focus on the xbox side also if u look a more closer xbox looks like a cartoon in some parts
omg, so i been playing a cartoon this whole time?!
i noticed clearer texture on the 360 side ps3 looked a little fuzzy.
who cares which one is a little bit better? u cant realize it if u dont have both versions running side by side, but it matter if one version is broken and full of bugs or not!! normally ps3 version should be better since its more powerful but that also depends on the devs and which they choose as a lead console for their game!! if the game is one disk then it sucks, this gen should be about 15GB and plus for any next gen game!! anything under us just a last gen game with improvements
"omg, so i been playing a cartoon this whole time?!" well you do seem to like Power Ranger Games
"normally ps3 version should be better since its more powerful but that also depends on the devs and which they choose as a lead console for their game"
Ah you came up with it yourself or did ken told you when you were riding his bicycle? YOur fking ps3 is the weakest console this gen even wii beats it with innovation and availability of games. PS3rd will flop and remain third this gen. Keep jerking off thinking its Teh most powerful console but in reality it sucks donkey's a$$.
weakest console ? yeah right ....it it makes you sleep better at night kiddo btw have a good long look at killzone 2 and repeat what u just said . btw the 360 is also good, im not dissing any console like the fanboy you are.
http://www.youtube.com/watc... now suck on this
Look at the shadows on the man and his shirt and background on 1:58, the ps3 version has silky smooth shadows, the 360 version has lines going across them and looks dirty and messed up, almost like texture artifacts. The 360 looks sharper in parts, but it has more Aliasing and the ps3 version has better anti-aliaising, which is strange as usually the 360 has better AA but not here. I am a ps3 owner but got the pc version, and will tell you the ps3 version's shadows look more like the pc versions shadows...
we are on about consoles u pc whore
On Topic, I think it's a very short hair of difference, which is good considering that the Dunia engine was originally optimized for the pc. Did anyone else notice the dithering effect, going on in the shadows on the 360 version? The draw is probably whichever controller you prefer.
I found those mosiac lines on the 360 rather annoying. A cheesecloth effect instead of real shadows. I was wondering about that too. Ps3 wins on the shadowing for sure.
For anyone that is interested, I'll take some pics of Farcy 2 running on my PS3. Who prefers a 1080p picture to 720p pics, or vice versa? I'll post them on my photo bucket.
of the machine gun in the 360 version, it has this really weird matrix effect, almost likes it's failing to fill those pixels in time with the framerate.
Far Cry 2 is a PC lead-developed title, so obviously it would look and perform better on that particular platform. I don't think anyone would argue that the multiplatform FC2 is any indicator of the true capabilities and strengths of the PS3 in the same way that an exclusive, 1st-party title would be.
Are the 360's shadows on FC2 really cross hatched like that?
Firstly, guys this video is in slo mo, hence the framerate, I've got Far Cry 2 on the 360 and the framerate seems great to me, even with massive bush fires and explosions.
Secondly, I've seen both versions and the colours and crispness on the 360 seems a lot better. BUT the cross hatching shadow DOES exist and oh my god what a bizarre awful distraction. It doesn't seem apparent on the PS3. So, 360, much crisper but the result is a cross hatching shadow ballsup. Don't get me wrong I love this game, you can end up on it for hours but equally go back to it now and then if you wish. Great on either platforms, dont me put off, but they DO need to patch this crazy shadow weirdness, it's "unnatural"!
So it's not just me that noticed the bad shadowing effects. The 360 version is a technically adept port, so it doesn't make sense.
hoolesy, I do agree on the crispness in the 360 version, but don't you find that the bright colours on most 360 versions of games always look unnatural, almost cartoon like. This game should look and run better on the 360, because its basically a cut down PC.
I will buy a new PC, when this one crash, it´s from 2005, an oldie, but stable, and that's what I like.
The framerate is pretty bad on both versions... Why is that? edit: I just noticed how horrible the dithering in the 360 version's shadows is. The PS3 version lacks some small texture details, but the lighting and shadowing looks better than that of the 360 version. These differences are really minor, though. It seems that both have their technical shortcomings, seeing as how this game was really designed with PC's in mind. edit 2: Nevermind, it seems that the "framerate issues" are just video slow down for enhanced comparison techniques.
maybe because of develope time
That's nowhere near the proper framerates, they've probably slowed it down to show visual differences better.
Yeah, I just realized that. I was thinking that there could be no way the game runs that slow...
u could also buy it
When u actually play the game on any console the graphics look alot better. Looks like the pc version on very low for both.
no it doesnt stop chattin crap ive got the pc version and they would both be classified as high graphics baring in mind pc also has a very high and an ultra graphics option aswell
And i have the ps3 version and the detail is alot better especially on rocks.
The console version is the PC's high or medium, at low native res.
xbox has render problems in some parts Quick get a patch out
na i m not lame i made you laugh i stopped watching when the guy sat on the pc and i saw the xbox have render problems thats when i judged the ps3 has the better version
do u even have a copy of fc2?
if you're gonna pretend to be jamaican at least do some research first. it's not bomboclaat, it's BUMBACLOT secondly it translates to a "rag you wipe your butt with" in jamaican. but you knew that right??
The Graphics are crap compared to the pc version i have at home!!!
At least i made the right choice in what version i was getting beacuse i was thinking about getting the ps3 version...
Really overated, a bit better on PC, miles behind other games overall in any platform
I hope you're kidding.
The 360 has go slightly better textures but the shadows and screentearing are better on the PS3.
That said the graphics on both don't look that good. Too much jaggies for me.
I really do care is that this game has to much glitches... I mean I don't play it anymore because the only mission available is unreachable and I don't want to restart it and have the same thing happening (and I've put more than 20 hours already...)
That is BAD, not some minor pixels imo.
game on mates
They look pretty much identicle, i had to just stop and pause the video just to try notice the difference and the only difference i saw was the ps3 version being only slightly brighter. So yeah, i'd say they were identicle.
for me the bad shadows on the 360 version outweigh any issues with the ps3 version. the ps3 wins by a slight edge.
Not really, there is not much difference.......ohh wait did you see the extra strand of fog on the PS3!!!!!!! DANG!!!!! PS3 FTW!!! Come on there isnt much difference (apart from the Jaggies) and to actually be able to see said differences youd have to be a real fanboy.
Man this game was an UTTER let down
seriously i sold mine within a week, ugh.
in any case they both look the same pretty much, 360 has a slight edge though.
agrees there, I played like 5 mins of this trash and never touched it again.
No doubt the shadows look more natural on the PS3, however that may be a result of the overall blurrier look on the PS3. There's no doubt that the 360 version is sharper and more detailed overall. No a deal-breaker though.
If sharper and more detailed means full of saw edges and shadow casting problems, then i agree. Both versions have pros and cons, and are equaly bad. PC version is the only one more or less "good looking". And my personal opinion is that the PS3 is the best of the 2 just because the 360 version has so many graphical problems that i couldn't focus on the game seeing that.
ehhhhhh.............. the game doesnt look that good on both systems compared to all of the games with better graphics that came out earlier this year but that is IN MY GODS HONEST OPINION so nobody can say anything about my opinion.
nerds, nerds, nerds!! you are all such nerds! go play some games or something! hehe.....
On 360 in shadows is bad , sun efects too ,etc etc
And lets be honest.
FC2 should not have had the farcry name.
UTTER CRAP GAME
boring as hell.
i returned mine for resistance 2 I couldnt stand the ai and the way the missions were designed. poor game
I think its a great game, especially for us slower ones. Fills that gap nicely. If you like fast shooters, yeah, then no, not this kind of game. R2 is better in that respect, of course.