Here you can see some resolutions of 3,809px × 2,021px of Crysis 2 running in a PC, no more has to be said, you only need to watch this extreme images, it makes you think if you computer will handle Crysis 2 when it comes out.
No offense, but that comment in every Crysis article is getting as old as EPIC FAIL. Bubble to show I'm not trying to be a dick, but come on, get a new catch phrase! OT: This will be interesting to see how it performs on the consoles. I like gaming in my recliner. Yes, I know I can hook up my computer to my TV and all that but it's too much work. I prefer pushing a button, game comes on and I recline back and rest my hands in my lap and play. PC gaming is fun for a hour or so but my back is old, lol.
"Maximum game" is actually Crytek's catch phrase for their Crysis games. Thats why you see it so much.
'It Only Does Everything' is getting pretty old now too, especially when it really doesn't do everything...
Yeah just like Jump in is getting old as well especially when half the time there are no games to play or its rroded.
@ even though it does....you fail
"Yes, I know I can hook up my computer to my TV and all that but it's too much work." - this is just silly, too much work - you are the laziest guy in the world or worse... You can also use an xbox360 pad on pc, so your comment is just a RIDICULOUS TROLLING, nothing else.
@neoandrew No he has a valid point, i have a decent rig and i only buy exclusives on pc, i cant navigate steam with an xbox pad and it can be a pain in the arse to check if its got steam achievements etc etc and whether pad support is native or using xpadder blah blah blah
lmao how is pluging an hdmi cord from pc to tv to much work?? lol lazy ass!!
@jack_burt0n - u are so lazy, why i would need to navigate steam, check achievement, tell me WHY ? Just lunch the game and PLAY man, it's in the game and it's in your hands!!!
WOW WOW WOOOOOOW Crysis 2 is looking extreme. One another note... I never move my PC to my TV do people here actually do that every time they want to play a game?
I could take my computer out of the other room, hook up the tower to the TV and whatnot but then I am still sitting up using a m/k. I hate controllers if I am on a PC. When I feel like a 6 hour gaming session, I want the ease of not having to move my whole set up into another room and dealing with all that. At one time, when the games were leaps and bounds apart in graphics, then yes, it was worth it. Now, not so much. Come talk to me when you are almost 40, work 10 hour shifts, raising a kid, dealing with a psycho ex and tell me how "lazy" you're not feeling. :)
My PC is in the same room as my HDTV. One HDMI cable between them.... wooooow.... so much hard work to connect them! I like sitting back in my recliner with a proper powerful system with the option of either using a joypad OR a keyboard and mouse for a much better gaming experience. But hey, what do I know... I am not praising a console so I must be wrong right?! /sarc You know what the best thing is? I can use the monitor at the same time or just use the monitor so I can watch TV while playing a game or whatever else I am doing!! So much for the "It only does everthing" slogan when it eats up the only TV in the room for one thing.
lol you get alot of bubbles for your maximum comments!!
Cant wait for this game. The first picture is my favorite. Very pretty.
Now I just need to get 3 more 470 gtx cards and a 2,000p monitor and I will be set for a good 5-7 years lol
not impress and many of the screen are from cutscenes the fire effect, water looks nice, but textures look better then the normal but KILLZONE 3, GOW3 or Uncharted have better textures judging from the pictures. not saying it look bad, plus it has a lot of blur effect that pc game love to hate in KILLZONE 2 know KILLZONE 3 does not have none but Crysis 2 have that effect, funy. ps. please dont hateand be mature. I'm just been honest.
In all your reasoning, you know you are starting a FLAME WAR with the CONSOLE vs PC, you know that it is a technical FACT that PC has BETTER GRAPHICS because of it hardware right, you cannot compare Uncharted 2 o 3 or Killzone 2 o 3 or even God of War 3 with any computer game because of the discreepancy of the hardware, so less try not to go there please.
Excuse me? while I agree Crysis 2 on pc will be better looking then KZ3 your statment that UC2 , KZ3 , GOW3 cannot be compared with any pc game is absolutely incorrect. Those above games are better looking then atleast 94% of PC games so please lets not try to go there. On Topic - Pics look awesome!
no offense but the jagged linearity of kz2 and the horrid textures of anything not kratos in gow3 pretty much means they can't be compared to pc games. i mean no camera control and still barely pullin 30fps? ... meh
not really when it comes ot flames and water thats art style but the amount of physics and and interactions with that water and fire is where pcs will get ahead of consoles kilzone 3 isnt out so we dont know about textures and i will not hype it up on graphics which i have not seen on my own tv
"Those above games are better looking then atleast 94% of PC games" LoL, I love Ps3 exclusives but let's be realistic here. Most PC multiplatform games on highest settings look better than any Consoles exclusives. Try games like Metro 2033, RE5...on PC, they look incredible.
"Uncharted 2 o 3 or Killzone 2 o 3 or even God of War 3 with any computer game" That is really pathetic we know Crysis, BFBC 1&2 and lodes of other games are better prejudice aside... There are many PC games that don't match up to those PS3 games at all.
Gentlemen, stop comparing 7 or more year old PC games when claiming that 94% of PC games do not match up to PS3 exclusive. Even mediocre PC games of today far excel the best looking PS3 exclusive, and some claim I am a PS3 fanboy. There simply is no way for a PS3 game to match a modern PC game graphically.
If you played any of the Crysis games then you would know that they do in-game cut-scenes. The graphics you see are the graphics that will be in the game on highest settings so it wouldn't matter if its real-time gameplay or cutscene(actually, for Crysis 1 and its expansion, the shots that show people playing look better than the cutscenes). And dont act like something is "fact" when you haven't played any of those games yet. Makes you look like a fanboy which I am sure you dont want to look like.
The only difference is, this is their first Crysis console and pc game. It actually looks bland for a Crysis game must be console limitations. Check out the bottom pic in which the enemy is shooting and another one is hoping on chest high wall. Look at their surrounding. Look at where the guy closest to the screen is shooting. No particle effects on the walls, the ground, etc.
I agree with Thanatos. The look of this game reminds me of a mixture between Halo and Killzone. I really don't dig this at all. It's hard to describe, but every screenshot I see just looks synthetic. The New York environment looks nothing like (a destroyed) New York. I think Crysis 1 was able to capture its tropical setting much better.
ur on drugs this game makes ps3 look dated by far
Cut scenes? Anything seen from Crysis is from actual graphics, there are no cut scenes in Crysis.
These screenshots looks average. Crysis Warhead can do this on my PC right now. And to AKA: There is no such thing as a Cyrsis cutscene render, everything is live and in engine.
Yeah crisis 2 does look like crap compared to what was done with crisis 1, but thats mainly because of the consoles.
Are you high? This looks way better than Crysis. Just because it's not a jungle doesn't mean it looks bad.
I still think Crisis 1 looks better.
I was expecting......more? Idk crysis 1 looked better on my PC, more going on. I think it has something to do with the city as opposed to the jungle. The first game, when you took away the graphics was bland and repetitive. The sequal seems to have a better gameplay look and feel. Which for me makes a better game, graphics are still rock solid though.
Repetitive? Which part? How are games like COD, Halo, Killzone, etc. not repetitive while Crysis is?
Anything along the lines of " Crysis gameplay is bland/repetitive/linear/flat " automatically means that they haven't played the game. I just ignore those people because they really have no idea what they're talking about, just repeating the usual console fanboy BS that all of them agree on.
People who charge in with guns blazing tend think that Crysis is boring. These are same peeps who thinks MGS4 sucks because they play it like Call of Duty and shoots every guard on the way to the objective.
If you think Crysis was repetitive and boring, that's because YOU'RE repetitive and boring. Crysis wasn't like your typical Call of Duty/Halo/Killzone linear corridor shooter. You actually had some freedom and options in how you approached each level. You can play Crysis as a linear shooter, but where's the fun in that? The best way to play it is to sneak around like you're playing a Metal Gear Solid game. Crawl through the bushes, stalk an enemy patrol, grab the last guy in the group, quietly beat him to death with your fists, and finish off the rest with hail of bullets.
Exactly panda, crysis was either as boring or as awesome as you wanted it to be. So if you were having a boring time then you weren't using your head you were probably just going around shooting like an ordinary shooter. The cool thing though is that it gives you choice to play it like that.I mean where else at the time could you shoot a tree to make it land on someone, or throw a chicken or turtle to kill someone.
This! Gamers today doesn't want to try different approach to games that's why RPG games and some Sandbox games(excluding GTA4, that game sucked) tend to get butchered by "professional" journalists because it is so complicated.
Actually I do agree that Crysis gave us a lot of options as far as gameplay. I found myself just sneaking through some missions for the hell of it, and then some missions I just went balls out. Crysis just isn't as praised as other games simply because not a lot of people have played it.
I wouldn't call Halo a a corridor shooter. The game does give some options when getting from A to B and you can plan your approach to a situation to a degree but it is still linear. Definitely better than its competition but still limited. Crysis is the ultimate sandbox shooter.
There's something about smooth and polished PC graphics which always makes it look artificial as a plastic limb. The KillZone approach with dirt, dust, smoke and overall noise buys me better. If you want to know why, just watch Saving Private Ryan.
Well said, but you can't deny that this looks pretty impressive.
That top picture does look exceptional (Especially if the light is being diffused through the clouds & smoke.) Not sure if i'm fussed on the artistic direction, but saying that, I am interested in seeing how this turns out, and the trailer did pique my FPS interest. (If it plays as well as it looks, then it's a no-brainer purchase.)
So your argument is that low resolution and dirty is better than high resolution and clean? wat.
Don't bother. It's the typical PS3 fanboy last stand argument - "It has low-rez texture because the muddier the objects look, the more realistic." "It has low poly-count because it's more artistic."
Didn't you hear? Real life has aliasing and everything, I'm forever cutting myself on those sharp jaggy lines. And as a photographer, I'm always setting up shot to find that one particular boulder in the foreground is blurry due to it's low res texture... I can't keep that up anymore, his comment just reeks of idiocy.
It's like comparing Quake to Halo. First of all before you start bitching let me make it clear that Crysis 2 (PC) is 10x better graphically than Killzone 3. His talking about the dirt (Artstyle)... War scenes are dirty. Crysis 2 looks too clean you said it yourself. It does look better but Killzone 3 has an art style that is more of what "muzzy" wants. Clean and shiny: http://h-4.abload.de/img/am... Dirty and dusty: http://www.play-mag.co.uk/w... and the screens prove what I said above... Crysis 2 does look much better if you PC can take it.
There is always some pathetic attempt to downplay something better.
Looks stunning, Lets hope it plays as good.
wow that 1st picture was incredible.
I'm curious about the specs, they're probably managable this time around. While the screens look very good, the visuals are not as revolutionary as Crysis when it was first released.
Manageable probably isn't the right word anymore. Crysis can be handled by a mid-budget card like the 6850 / gtx 460 really well :) But if you mean at the time of release, then yeah my bad. I'm very optimistic about this game, the graphics look improved for me and I bet playing for yourself and watching everything happen would give you the same 'wow' effect that Crysis also had :)
I'm sure I heard that they optimized it to the point of having a computer that could run crysis on max could run number 2 on max. So even though it looks better it won't necessarily need a better computer.
@Ceekay Crytek said this regarding CE3: "It will perform twice as good as Cryengine 2 at a similar visual fidelity" So If you got 30 frames in crysis with no AA...expect 45 frames with 4 aa in crysis 2. I mean it's not open world anymore...although, the rooftop scenes with draw distances of 1km etc sure are big for a 'corridor shooter' ;) Crytek never goes small...
Truth is, very few people are going to have 4 top notch GFX cards and a dual quad core to run crysis at these settings. Unless you have $10g's+ to spend, its not going to look much better than consoles.
I see you've gone for the "my username describes the quality of my comment" approach. I thought the stupidity of this site had hit an all time high in that "PS3 has no limits" article the other day, but seriously? It won't look much better than consoles unless you spend $10k? Lol what? £50 GPU like a 8800GT/9600GT in a 2.6Ghz dual core system will EASILY out do either console.
Just give it up. These people need to console themselves about not owning proper hardware by convincing themselves that proper hardware costs $10 grand.
I've got a quad core CPU with a 2-year old Radeon 4850 (faster than either of those) and I still play more games on my console, including those that are cross-platform. I need to upgrade my GPU soon, but frankly, it's not a huge issue. Why? Because there's far more to this discussion than raw processing power... For games like FPS's that are cross-plat, I prefer consoles because more of my friends are online via their consoles. There's also far less cheating. I used to play the CoD games on the PC (started with the original) but all the aimbots and counter measures (e.g. punkbuster) just became a hassle. Also, game selection. Consoles have more good stuff. Way more. Where is the PC's Uncharted 2? It has nothing remotely close. Sure, it *could* be done, but it isn't. PC game development is in a funk. Sure, we got Crysis. There's a reason why people only mention it in graphics discussions: the gameplay itself wasn't all that spectacular. Solid, at best. By the way, you likely won't get anything close to these screenshots on that setup. Rule of thumb with bleeding-edge PC games is that virtually nobody can run max settings when it's launched. Hell, most PC's still can't max out Crysis without turning AA off. But that won't stop PC fanboys from acting like these are the typical settings. I do see just as much dishonest elitism from the PC side as the console side. Can't we just be allowed to enjoy them all?
A dual core with a 4yr old 8800gtx will run circles around the console version. Any present entry level gpu priced around 80-100usd will significantly out perform consoles.
That all depends on the developers. And even with raw performance, you're not necessarily correct: http://www.neogaf.com/forum... Don't make generalizations. The PS3 is a beast at certain graphical tasks. We'll see. These are max-setting screenshots. I don't think the PC version will look much better than the PS3 on that crummy old 8800.
PC Requirements: -MAXIMUM PC
Don't care since ps3 will run this at 2048p at full 360 fps.That's you hear all the time in here.
Ill kill my aliens with out a super suit, just give me a hammer.
Ok this just puts everything in 2011 to shame, and probably 2012 as well.
http://www.alphaworks.ibm.c... http://www.blachford.info/c... http://cell.scei.co.jp/inde... http://www.yostuffs.com/200...