690°
Submitted by coldfoot 1119d ago | article

Digital Foundry Face Off: Crysis 2

News that Crytek would be embracing cross-platform development and working with Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 was met with concern from its fans: would the PC game be left behind as Crytek refocused its resources on technologically outdated consoles? Could the Microsoft and Sony platforms be cajoled into running code designed for massively more powerful hardware? (Crysis 2, PS3, Xbox 360)

Update Digital Foundry has updated their article stating that the Xbox 360 version of Crysis 2 renders at 1152x720, not 1280x720 as they initially claimed. The PS3 version renders at 1024x720.

Alternative Sources
« 1 2 »
Shanks  +   1119d ago
I'm sure the PS3 can do better than that.
Why not use MLAA? not only it's the best AA solution on consoles, it frees a lot of GPU time. Crytek could have done better.
#1 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(42) | Disagree(37) | Report | Reply
vulcanproject  +   1119d ago
PS3 gives away a bit of resolution but it does get back for that some instances of better effects. In either case the article identifies major, performance crushing areas of both versions anyhows.

I was pleasantly surprised how well it runs on PC, higher end stuff like 6970s and GTX570s have no problems with it on extreme and 1920 x 1080, most of the time averaging 60 frames a second and up if you have no vsync or a 120hz monitor like moi.

You can bet this topic is gonna get smoking hot...in reality the article is fairly well balanced.
#1.1 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(21) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
MegaMohsi  +   1119d ago
I'm getting 35-40 fps on my i7930 and gtx 460 on extreme settings at 1920x1080
ImHereNow  +   1119d ago
inb4 all the ppl that said they were waiting for the DF compare b4 buying the best version of Crysis 2 pretend it doesn't matter now
#1.1.2 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(10) | Disagree(5) | Report
zootang  +   1119d ago
Megamoshi

I'm looking at builing a pc and I bet that cost no less than £600/$800. So you can't compare for price. On topic PS3 version for the 7.1 surround.
#1.1.3 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(12) | Disagree(2) | Report
StanLatMarveldotCom  +   1119d ago
"On balance, 360 has the edge in terms of visuals and general performance, but PS3 more than holds its own, bettering the Microsoft platform in some areas."

Like I said in previous articles, each version seems to take advantage of each hardware's strengths and you find advantages to both with minimal differences in each version.
vulcanproject  +   1119d ago
@ zootang

You can get a fairly good PC for 600 pounds these days. Certainly something that would run Crysis 2 far beyond the 720p/20-30 frames a second range the consoles do. You can find good guides online. This for example still works fairly well today.

http://www.tomshardware.co....

This is about 360-380 quid in UK prices. Toss in a copy of Win 7 64bit and even some bits and bobs peripheral wise and you are still shy of 500 quid. It manages the original Crysis in 1680 x 1050 with everything on in standard configuration, you will not find much more demanding than that, Crysis 2 is less demanding if anything.

Overclocked it is even playable @ 1920 x 1080. Talk about bang for buck.

The Modern warfare 2 bench shows it doing a magnificent 77 frames a second in 1080p. The consoles manage around 50-60 frames @ 1024 x 600. So that PC is managing a considerably higher framerate, while running nearly FOUR times the resolution with better in game settings and anti aliasing. That is what is called a chasm in performance.
#1.1.5 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(2) | Report
malandra  +   1119d ago
"The unavoidable conclusion we came to is that when frame-rate does crash in those affected areas, it's actually Crysis 2 on PS3 that holds up better."

"however, close up, it's clear that shadows are somewhat more blocky and unattractive on the Microsoft console."

"Bearing in mind the limited nature of the 3D support, it doesn't really factor into the purchasing decision – but the PS3 undoubtedly gives the better picture here."

"this makes Crysis 2 one of the most inconsistent performers released in recent times. In these situations, it seems that it is the Xbox 360 version that has the most difficulties, though there's no mistaking that both platforms seem to lag badly in much the same areas"
darthv72  +   1119d ago
@malandra
Those cherry picked quotes makes it out like the 360 is actually the 2600 trying to run this game.

lol
zootang  +   1119d ago
@Vulcan

I'm not trying to rain on your parade but it is still double the price of a PS3 or 360. You can understand why people stick with consoles. I'm getting a phenom x2 555 with a GTX460 for about £400. I'm going to build it myself. No bubbles so I can't reply again :(
#1.1.8 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(4) | Report
vulcanproject  +   1119d ago
It is of course double the price but its also at least quadruple the performance as a gaming machine zootang. Its also a fully functioning computer with a copy of the latest windows slapped on it. Multi format games are also on average 10-15 pounds a pop cheaper.

I can see why people would buy a console for its initial lower cost and for its simplicity, but nonetheless, a PC for games costing that amount and having that much performance is an attractive proposition. Even if its just for multi platform titles- these make up the majority of games and time spent on games these days.

Its worth it alone in my experience to be above the fanboy console arguments! There is no real reason then to argue over which console version is best when you own a machine that slaps them both silly for titles like this.
#1.1.9 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(1) | Report
Pixelated_Army  +   1119d ago
It's more or less the same except that the PS3 has better lighting and better gamma levels.

"Another aspect that lessens the impact of the resolution difference is CryEngine 3's chosen anti-aliasing technique. Halo: Reach-style temporal anti-aliasing is being used on objects a set distance away from the camera, with an edge-detect/blur mechanism in play for elements close to the player. Both of these techniques add further blurring to the visual effects chain, and again serve to make the resolution gain on Xbox 360 less noticeable in the heat of the action. More resolution is obviously a good thing and there is an overall feeling that the image on Xbox 360 is cleaner and crisper, but only with a direct A to B comparison do you actually feel you're missing anything on the PS3 rendition of the game, which still looks very impressive."
#1.1.10 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(5) | Report
Pixel_Pusher  +   1119d ago
http://www.neogaf.com/forum...

"Is this the comparison that some here were waiting for? I'm sorry, but Digital Foundry's writeup always seem to be skewed to the 360's favor, regardless of the results. His articles are always seasoned with a bit of bias, so it's hard to take him seriously. In this very article, Leadbetter goes on and on about any advantage the 360 has, take for example what he said about the lighting, he said the 360 has better lighting, however the screenshots he used to indicate that prove that the PS3 has more light sources over the 360."
Pixel_Pusher  +   1119d ago
PS3 maintains a consistent yet lower fps during intense action scenes and there for runs and plays smoother.

PS3 has better gamma and light levels
http://images.eurogamer.net...

360
http://images.eurogamer.net...

So all in all where it counts for gameplay the PS3 tops the 360. Enjoy those few extra pixels while I'll enjoy the gameplay.
#1.1.12 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(8) | Disagree(18) | Report
YodaCracker  +   1119d ago
@malandra

"The reason here is fairly straightforward: while Crysis 2 runs at 1152x720 resolution on the Microsoft platform, PS3 operates at a base resolution of 1024x720."

"In short, then, Xbox 360 benefits from a 12.5 per cent resolution boost over the PlayStation 3 version of the game. While it is true that the action generally looks clearer and not quite so blurred on the Xbox 360"

"More resolution is obviously a good thing and there is an overall feeling that the image on Xbox 360 is cleaner and crisper"

"However, there do appear to be some isolated instances where lighting appears bugged or flawed in the PS3 version, as the brace of shots above demonstrates."

"Shadows appear to have some offset issues in places on the PlayStation 3"

"In addition to a higher base resolution, the Xbox 360 appears to outperform the PS3 version of Crysis 2 in like-for-like comparisons."

"Performance is variable but in the majority of the scenes we do see an advantage to the Microsoft console."

"The increased performance and resolution indicates that the Xbox 360 is the preferred platform for Crysis 2"

"There's a performance hit on PS3 there, but the 360 version is remarkably solid, adding some weight to Crytek's claims."

"There's little doubt that the Xbox 360 is the cleaner, crisper experience and for the most part it commands a small but significant frame-rate advantage and fewer little glitches; especially outside of combat scenarios, the game just seems to run that much more smoothly."

"On balance, 360 has the edge in terms of visuals and general performance"
HolyOrangeCows  +   1119d ago
I guess the people who claimed Crysis 2 has the best graphics on consoles because of some lighting effects - despite being sub-HD, poor AA, not keeping up to 30fps, having a poor latency, etc - will LOVE the PS3 version (lol, like those persons have one).

Snarky comment out of the way, Crytech did a decent job. I mean, look at some of the disasters other developers release. This is certainly above average.
BubbleSniper  +   1119d ago
this is great!

now i can get ps3 ver. without feelin true gimpness of usual multiplat bs that go on with every other release!

i not even touch my retail Crysis 2 for PC yet... when DX11 release is when i tear open package.

i have more than enough game to keep me occupied till then. HAPPY!
DaTruth  +   1119d ago
I'm not a PC gamer, but it's not like anyone is gonna be living without a PC of some kind and that will set you back a bit! So if you're buying a mid performance PC and a console, that is practically the same price as a high performance PC!

I have two 7 year old PC's and they work fairly well for surfing the net and downloading crap so I don't really need to upgrade; but I plan to upgrade eventually, and when I do, I will be going high performance!

Although, I will always need a Sony console because Sony games are just too amazing!
MaxXAttaxX  +   1119d ago
Some nasty dark crush, loss of detail, harsh contrast and gamma display issues on 360
As usual.
Not a good attribute, really.
#1.1.17 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(5) | Report
JRobes  +   1119d ago
oh god... ps3 gamers make me laugh. over the last couple years xbox has been given so much crap over not having as high native res as ps3 games but now its all about gameplay huh pixel_pusher?
BloodyNapkin  +   1119d ago
@vulcanproject

Well i can get cheaper games on consoles by using gamefly then you can on your little steam, and getting it on day of release not waiting 2 months down the road.

Funny how all the Pc guys come in touting in Multiplatform game articles how awesome it is. But where are they when it is Uncharted 2 or 3 articles or God of War 3 or GT5 and i can sit here and go all day and slap the PC silly with PS3 exclusives, Pc's have very few good games.

Not everyone cares soley about graphics it is more about quality games which the PC lacks. If i was strictly a PC gamer i would have missed out on some of the best games in the last 5 years.
AndrewRyan  +   1119d ago
I actually have an i3 processor at 4.0 ghz and a gtx 560 ti MSI that is overclocked. The game runs easily at 40 frames on extreme. Looks great.
MaxXAttaxX  +   1118d ago
BloodyNapkin: 1 - vulcanproject: 0
I think PC fanboys need to shut up. We all know you can have better graphics on PC by upgrading.

Why are these PC elitists so insecure? It's sad.
jjohan35  +   1118d ago
Not many ppl on my friend's list (80+ friends) bought Crysis 2 for PS3. I think Crytek really hurt their marketing when they released that absolutely crappy demo build for 24 hours. Graphics were horrible and the network instability was utter crap. Everyone I know who bought retail version (myself included) agree that the retail version is much much better than the demo build, but I think the damage has already been done to keep people from buying it.
jeseth  +   1118d ago
This game basically looks the same on PS3 or 360. Some things look better on 360, some better on PS3. But to say on definitively looks way better than the other is just BS.

Whenever one says
"Well PS3 looks better here" someone could say "Yeah but, 360 looks better here". And vice versa.

I swear. Do people actually even care about playing games anymore? Cold me old fashioned but this gen has created some of the most whiny and critical "gamers" I've ever seen.
vulcanproject  +   1118d ago
I would say most PC gamers have consoles too @ Bloodynapkin, and gamefly rentals or whatever it is called is not available outside the states, so your point is kinda moot there for the other 6.6 billion people on the planet or the people that want to BUY their games.....

I am really unsure why you just ranted about PC gamers in this topic. Honestly i have no idea whatsoever. PC gamers enjoy their PC games, the wide array of titles that are out there, as well as the higher profile multi plat titles out there too like this game :-)
#1.1.24 (Edited 1118d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
jriquelme_paraguay  +   1119d ago
Camarillo 1 - Riquelme 0
theonlylolking  +   1119d ago
KZ3, KZ2, resistance 3, and some others prove the PS3 can do better but fora multiplatform dev they did just as good as criterion games does on PS3.
Graphics  +   1119d ago
KZ2, KZ3, Resis3? Last time I checked Crysis 2 looked better than all 3....
badz149  +   1119d ago
^^^
yeah, sure. /s
Kurt Russell  +   1118d ago
Shame KZ3 is poor, KZ2 even more so and Resistance 3 doesn't even exist yet eh?

Crysis looks great when you view it without your nerd fanboy goggles boys.
Ju  +   1118d ago
Yeah, Graphics, sure..if you haven't played it yet. Go get it. You'll change your mind.
#1.3.4 (Edited 1118d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report
BK-201  +   1119d ago
Actually its lower res because of a 14 mb of RAM issue which makes me facepalm on what Sony were thinking with the XMB using up so much ram.
BrianG  +   1119d ago
Fortunately Sony has drastically reduced the footprint of the OS while still implementing new features that were not available at launch.

I don't think they are doing a bad job, and I'm sure they will reduce the RAM usage further.
HeavenlySnipes  +   1119d ago
I'm no tech junky
But I swear the SPU is divided into 8 (or 6) on the Cell Processor and one of the cores is dedicated to the XMB, one is left unused and the rest are free to be used by the developers.
BubbleSniper  +   1119d ago
an you forget performance of the ram inside PS3 tidalwave over that of the 360?

strength and weaknesses in both.

move along.
Ju  +   1119d ago
I doubt it's because of the lack of those 14MB. If at all Crytek needs 4ms (per frame). Next step, please look into a (more?) deferred rendering solution. That should give them 30fps with headroom and full 1280 res.
TBM  +   1119d ago
Cool now I can play the game on my PS3, and not lose any sleep/s

These comparisons are f*cking pointless they're only for those people who are insecure about the system they purchased so they need reassuring that they made the correct choice.

Since I own both consoles I can chose whichever one I want to play on, and since I refuse to pay for Live just to play online I know which console i'll play this on.
#1.5 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(14) | Disagree(6) | Report | Reply
BigPappaPump  +   1119d ago
yep
TBM  +   1119d ago
lol i guess the people who disagreed with me fall under the category of what i said. sad, sad people.
DigitalAnalog  +   1119d ago
Wait wait wait wait wati.
The 360 actually has a NATIVE resolution of 720 + vsync? As opposed to the 1152x720 on the demo? Meanwhile, the PS3 gets the same damn resolution with no noticable improvements.

In regards to DF take on 3D:

"In short, Crysis 2 in 3D is no Motorstorm: Apocalypse or Killzone 3"

That throws Gamesradar's "opinion" out the window. That site is notoriously anti-PS3.

Other notes include:

- "a variable 15-20FPS update in an intense fire-fight is hugely disorientating, and this makes Crysis 2 one of the most inconsistent performers released in recent times."

- "issues the game has in terms of bizarre glitches, performance drops, geometry pop-in and such-like are hardly exclusive to one platform"

To wrap it all up Crytek has:

- Failed the "no difference" challenge by making the 360 running smoother and SHARPER in NATIVE 720p.

- Failed to had a steady 30FPS as they claimed.

- Failed to "revolutionise" 3D.

- Failed to have the "most advanced" AI as they claimed.

- Failed to have a solid engine.

- Managed to succeed spewing garbage talk.

I was right not to hype this game up.

- End statement
#1.6 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(21) | Disagree(15) | Report | Reply
SCW1982  +   1119d ago
Gamesradar is not notoriously anti- PS3. In fact they are my most trusted site to visit on the Internet for all reviews. And yes I am a PS3 fanboy.
Rayansaki  +   1119d ago
Well they did do one thing right. They made the best looking game on the x360. It's still not the best looking console game, but for a multiplatform game to look better than the console's exclusives is no easy fit.
joab777  +   1119d ago
I agree w you and it isn't an opinion. It goes back to this. Imagine if crytek built specifically for the ps3 & at release it was superior to Xbox and much closer to PC. All hell would break loose and the majority of fps gamers, which happen to b on Xbox would b in a state of shock; this would hurt sales, which is the bottom line. It appears to me that crytek used shortcuts to but was very specific in their desire to build a version that appeared to b equal to the Xbox. Well i guess,congratulations to crytek. Actually, no. This would have been acceptable a year ago, but too many builders have proven what can b done w the ps3. Right now, each time i switch between crysis 2 and k3, i have to change my display settings from 1080p to 720p. Really, the console w a blue ray player must b played on 720 to get Max settings...cmon...i am so damn tired of it.
socomnick  +   1119d ago
why ? because the ps3 maybe can't run mlaa and the cry engine.

Perhaps the ps3 isn't as strong as people tend to believe.
pixelsword  +   1119d ago
maybe Crytek can't run mlaa and the cry engine.

just like everyone said:

This is the best looking 360 game

This is a okay looking PS3 game
NukaCola  +   1118d ago
So unless Gears 3 steps up the 360 Graphics Award this year is going to Crysis 2, while the PS3 will get it for Uncharted 3.
NewZealander  +   1119d ago
yeah but MLAA causes awefull artifacts, in all honesty the only game where its looked good was god of war.
Tony-Red-Grave  +   1118d ago
because MLAA wouldnt work on 360 im sure theres been an article stating that the 360 with MLAA becomes ustable
bartender64  +   1119d ago
I guess that the 360 version isn't sub hd then.
coldfoot  +   1119d ago
Actually, it is, DF had a brain fart.
hennessey86  +   1119d ago
on the first pic
the ps3 is totally missing shadows on the bodybags but overall they look about the same but im going with the 360 version.
hennessey86  +   1119d ago
mmm disagrees
the proof is right there for all to see
Beefstew4u  +   1119d ago
The first screenshot also shows off the lower resolution of the PS3 version. Probably the only pic where the two versions look completely different. Hence the disagrees.
darthv72  +   1119d ago
the disagrees....
are because you said you were getting the 360 version.

I generally base my multiplatform choice on my friends and what they get it for. If my buddy gets it for the ps3, so shall I. Same for the 360.

A game like this is just an example of how it should be done when it comes to appeasing both ps3 and 360 sides.
hennessey86  +   1119d ago
@darthv72
you know what fook it im going to get the ps3 and 360 version then i please everybody, oh wait i cant get the pc version because my pc wont run it damn now im a console fanboy
Snake-eater  +   1119d ago
credit to crytek for keeping the difference to minimal
Convas  +   1119d ago
At long last, the only pixel counters I trust. Crytek should be congratulated. They did an EXCELLENT job.
Wizziokid  +   1119d ago
"There's little doubt that the Xbox 360 is the cleaner, crisper experience and for the most part it commands a small but significant frame-rate advantage and fewer little glitches; especially outside of combat scenarios, the game just seems to run that much more smoothly. However, there are parts of the game that seem to be brutally unoptimised, bringing the performance level crashing down to the point where the afflicted sections become almost unplayable - a variable 15-20FPS update in an intense fire-fight is hugely disorientating, and this makes Crysis 2 one of the most inconsistent performers released in recent times. "

well that's, that then...

edit: wait I got a disagree for posting a quote from the article? really... lol
#6 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(20) | Disagree(25) | Report | Reply
bartender64  +   1119d ago
Can someone explain why the disagrees with him? It's a damn quote from the article, i don't understand you people.
jack_burt0n  +   1119d ago
"The unavoidable conclusion we came to is that when frame-rate does crash in those affected areas, it's actually Crysis 2 on PS3 that holds up better."

You missed the crucial bit, for a biased site like DF that is scathing stuff right there.
Biggest  +   1119d ago
It's statements like "frame-rate does crash" and "brutally unoptimised, bringing the performance level crashing down to the point where the afflicted sections become almost unplayable" that make me wonder how people can trick themselves into thinking that Crysis 2 beats any of the top tier PS3 exclusives in the graphics/performance arena. Obviously PS3 owners get to play them all so it's ultimately a non-issue. It's just sad that one biased comment from IGN is all it takes for people to ignore reality and claim their new multiplatform flavor of the month as "THE GRAPHICS KING!!!" I guess now they wait for Rage and continue to hope for the best.
Tyre  +   1119d ago
ur picking a piece from the article and taking it out of it's context...these framedrops represent 3% of the game...those framedrop moments are so short lived in the actual game...the rest of the game is smooth...MGS4 also had framedrops while shooting the Gekkos from the back of a Jeep..so many console games have framedrops...the framedrops in Mass Effect 1 are so much worse....these guys mention them in this article cause it's part of their technical analysis but in the end they say that the versions are a miracle work and a job well done by Crytek with graphics/FX and gameplay not yet seen on consoles and the differences between PS3 and 360 are in the minor details..overall they are the same but PS3 excels in some departements and the 360 in others.
#6.3 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
green  +   1119d ago
Just played the 360 version for about 20mins today and it is a fantastic looking game.Lighting is exceptional and the textures are really good for a console game. Did not notice any screen tearing that the LOT article mentioned but from this article, they explain its at the top of the screen so hence is not noticeable.

I did notice a very very tiny frame rate drop but my boss said, its installed on his HDD on his home 360 and it runs much much better that way.

Anyway, from my very brief encounter with the game, i can safely say that Crytek have delivered a quality product and cant wait to get my own copy to play the full campaign.

Cant wait to see what they will do with Kingdoms.
#7 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(18) | Disagree(7) | Report | Reply
Raendom  +   1119d ago
"In conclusion, it's fair to say that Crytek has done enough to prove that Crysis can run on consoles - either of them in fact - and certainly the issues the game has in terms of bizarre glitches, performance drops, geometry pop-in and such-like are hardly exclusive to one platform. On balance, 360 has the edge in terms of visuals and general performance, but PS3 more than holds its own, bettering the Microsoft platform in some areas. "

So there you have it, bring on Crysis 3!
theonlylolking  +   1119d ago
Digital foundry did the best job out of all comparisons.

Crytek did MAXIMUM AWESOMENESS on the PS3, PC and 360 version of crysis 2
#9 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(16) | Disagree(6) | Report | Reply
MegaMohsi  +   1119d ago
They'll have a PC analysis up on Saturday, I'm interested in seeing that
Beefstew4u  +   1119d ago
Me too. Love Digital Foundry's technical analyses of games =).
gamingdroid  +   1119d ago
Yeah, I like Digital Foundry's analasys' as well. It is what it is, deal with it. Good or bad....
#9.1.2 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(0) | Report
Otheros00  +   1119d ago
More like Crytek did MAXIMUM FAIL on the ps3 and 360. Soo much for THE BEST GRAPHICS ON ANY CONSOLE EVER.
BrianG  +   1119d ago
They should receive flack for that yes. Just as other developers get criticized for not coming through on all their promises.

However, they did make what appears to be a solid game, that looks good across all platforms. The visuals weren't all they cracked it up to be, but thats what happens when Dev's run their mouth. People build up expectations that can not be met. Sometimes people build up unreachable expectations without the devs help.

With that being said, cryengine 3 looks like its going to be an interesting engine to keep my eyes on in the future.
Redlogic  +   1119d ago
@Otheros00

The entitlement gamers have these days is just sickening. It's a fun game with great graphics, learn to enjoy it.
IcarusOne  +   1119d ago
I guess style and graphics are two different things, but for my money, I enjoy the look of this way more than KZ. Crysis is truly epic. KZ feels like a graphic novel.
jack_burt0n  +   1119d ago
"The unavoidable conclusion we came to is that when frame-rate does crash in those affected areas, it's actually Crysis 2 on PS3 that holds up better."

LOL.
Raider69  +   1119d ago
@jack_burt0n  
You are still beating on that!I can tell you right away that the two version are up on par on the framerate!But i can also tell you that the game runs more smoother installed completely on the 360 HDD,actually is quite noticeably that textures and framerate seems better wend the game is installed,i guess Crytek optimise it for the HDD.Another thing to everybody The game looks good on the two platforms get it to the platform of your choise ,but the game its nothing special among the already crowded FPS market.
#10.1 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
Solidus187-SCMilk  +   1119d ago
and yet
the ps3 still has the worse overall frame rate.
anubis56  +   1119d ago
So the 360 version is slightly better after all, GREAT!
units  +   1119d ago
while Crysis 2 runs at native 720p resolution on the Microsoft platform, PS3 operates at a base resolution of 1024x720
darkride66  +   1119d ago
They also noted "other elements of the visual make-up of the game do their job in helping to bridge the difference" and "base resolution isn't always the paramount element in image quality"
baodeus  +   1119d ago
Well then, Crytek is pretty good at keeping game similar on both platforms.

@darkride66

That is exactly right. Resolution doesn't matter, it is what running underneath and the overal techniques that counts. Although i think u should tell that to the rest of the Sony fanboy or those who were bashing crysis for running a little below HD resolutions.
#12.1.1 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report
Tyre  +   1119d ago
resolution difference not noticable when played on TV i could swear they both had the same resolution.....there ye go now i know, does it make any difference? nope. The game is just as good and beautiful as before...how strange.
#12.2 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
CernaML  +   1119d ago
LOL 360 fanboys only need to read ONE advantage to declare victory.
floetry101  +   1119d ago
From what I've seen of the online multiplayer, the framerate looks remarkably solid on both platforms, so hopefully the game has longevity in that aspect.

A few things need ironing out in the campaign (A.I mostly), but the second half of the game just about topples any FPS I've played this year. Kudos Crytek.
additup28  +   1119d ago
Digital foundry really is the best when it comes to these comparisons. I went with the 360 version and it looks fantastic, but the framerate drops do kill it for me a bit. Im all about going guns blazing and blowing up everything and going all out. Sorry if I have a supersuit im going to utilize it and not hide in the shadows.
come_stains  +   1119d ago
How the hell can you even say that! The best my ass!

Did you even watch his analysis video?
The Xbox screen torn pretty bad buddy. But since it was in the over-scan area he didn't even factor it in his decision. You do know that over-scan doesn't apply to digital signals right? Over-scan is for CRT T.V's.. If you have your xbox hooked up through HDMI that over-scan screen tearing is present!

This guy is such a Xbot it isn't even funny.
Screen tearing is screen tearing end of story! The facts are there in your face, in his own video! I don't care if it's at the Bottom, top, left, right, behind the screen, if it's there, it's there... It's a performance analysis for Christ sake! Screen tearing is a performance issue!!!

Am I the only who who finds this comparison BS?
#14.1 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(10) | Report | Reply
Solidus187-SCMilk  +   1119d ago
ouch, I thought this comparison was pretty close
no reason for you to be so butt hurt about it.
Hanuman  +   1118d ago
I'm about half way through the 360 version and besides some minor shadow issues (helicopter shadows that skip across the screen) and the framerate of some effects being very low, I can't notice anything wrong with the game. The framerate only drops below average when screenfilling events occur and when it happens most of the time you're not even in combat. The cryengine (even on consoles) is producing the best visuals I've seen in any game thus far. I only saw screentearing in Crysis 2 when it was pointed out to me and wasn't playing.
#14.1.2 (Edited 1118d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
DelbertGrady  +   1119d ago
As expected. Proving what we knew all along.

Those tricked screenshot comparisons from the german sites where the textures hadn't loaded properly tried to fool us into believing the PS3 version was better.
#15 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(11) | Disagree(19) | Report | Reply
Silly gameAr  +   1119d ago
lol. It's sad how a few pixels and missing shadows is all it for you guys to celebrate.
Tyre  +   1119d ago
apparently you haven't read the article...because they clearly say that the PS3 suffers from less texture pop-in...anyways they also say that each version excels in different areas....
ps3bestever  +   1119d ago
looks TIE :|
Quagland  +   1119d ago
Draw? Ah, how boring :)
Counter Strike   1119d ago | Trolling | show | Replies(4)
bunfighterii  +   1119d ago
Another multiplat another PS3 game gets shafted. Still looks good, but I still don't know why they can't create console 'equality' by now, we know its possible.
bozebo  +   1119d ago
eeeuuugh. Both platforms have unbearably low frame rates.

If theres one thing they certainly could have done for PS3 it's use that extra Blu-ray space to have pre-rendered cut scenes (I dunno, just screencap them on PC lol). But then 360 fanboys would blabber on that it isn't powerful enough to render them etc. (heard that argument for exclusives before, but look at MGS4, it had the same reason as the 360 for having in-engine cut-scenes: not enough disk space)

I dunno, the 360 has a better frame rate in Crysis 2. If I was getting it on consoles I would have to opt for 360 because low frame rates are really hard on my eyes, even though the 360 frame rates are still painfully low (even at solid 30fps it'd be too low).

The article mentioned something about the 360's 'tessellator'. BS: the 360's gpu is unified, so using the tessellator would mean it has less shader performance for other things. PS3 probably has plenty of spare CPU so they could shove software tessellation for water on a cell core - but that would take up a couple of MB of RAM >_<.

Consoles seriously just need more ram and they would both be better off.
#20 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(6) | Report | Reply
RankFTW  +   1119d ago
I'll pick up the PS3 version as I'll be playing it in 3D.
YOUR-MUM  +   1119d ago
I picked the pc version up. Im playing it in 3d @ 1920x1080 keeping a steady 50 to 70 fps:)
SJPFTW  +   1119d ago
cool story bro
Shazz   1119d ago | Trolling | show
swinesucker  +   1119d ago
LOL at the 360 fanboys. Good god GIVE IT UP! This game is nowhere near KZ3 quality or U2 quality when it comes to textures, Aniso filtering, framerate,etc. Playing KZ3 after Cry2 on 360 is like playing an upper level PC game for christ and this is coming from a 360 fan. You cannot just insert all this random bullshit and pass it off as truth. The game bogs down badly, has great lighting, but can hardly support it in many scenes.

Resolution is NOT 720p on 360 it is 1152x720p as CONFIRMED by CRY2 devs! Another mistake missed by the perennial douche that is DF.

Anybody care about SOUND. Dolby Digital for 360 where the PS3 gets 7.1 LPCM and not ONE MENTION! As if sound doesn't matter we might as well play without it heh! It matters and it makes a huge difference!
#23 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(23) | Disagree(21) | Report | Reply
maxcer  +   1119d ago
looks to me like YOU cant "give it up". maybe if you had a little more money and could afford a ps3/360/pc combo you wouldn't be so bitter.
#23.1 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(12) | Disagree(13) | Report | Reply
PirateThom  +   1119d ago
But, if you had a PC capable of running this, why would you even take part in this discussion?
swinesucker  +   1119d ago
LoL, I have all three. And no I don't have crysis 2 on any of them and no I will not buy it as the game doesn't interest me at all. What I posted is all in fairness. As for PC guys this game has taken a drastic step back. The AI for this game also blows. I had the PC demo and put it down after a couple hours.
swinesucker  +   1119d ago
Why not? And how was it a lie I have played all the demo's. Good enough for me to make an observation. I don't need to lie to know this game has crap multiplayer and I don't pay 60 dollars for some crap story posted onto graphics with nice lighting and nothing much else. My PC may run this nicely but it sure doesn't max it out.
#23.1.3 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report
hoops  +   1119d ago
"LoL, I have all three. And no I don't have crysis 2"

"Playing KZ3 after Cry2 on 360 is like playing an upper level PC game for christ and this is coming from a 360 fan."

First you say you don't have Crysis 2 so YOU NEVER PLAYED IT.
Then comes your next remark above. How can you compare these games when YOU DON'T HAVE CRYSIS 2? LOL
You were just caught in a lie.
Whats new.

Soon as Crysis 2 hit retail, people like you are running scared and making shit up.
The consoles versions do have glitches, but considering how advanced this game engine is, i am surprised its running on these aging consoles at all and loking as great as it is.
Digital Foundry did a in depth alanalysi of the game and determined that the Xbox360 is 720p....You are screaming its a lie. LOL. Drinking the crazy Glenn Beck fluid lately?
Please come back when your beloved KZ3 uses ANY real time effects and has a destructible interactive environment on the level of Crysis 2.
It would have been nice to see KZ3 use HDR......
And the only reason to get the console versions is if you dont have a gaming PC OR you did like what I did. Buy the console version to see if Crytek pulled it off....they did.
I just bought the PC version today...Its the way to go.
#23.2 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
bartender64  +   1119d ago
I was going to say the same thing to him, glad that you called him out. some fanboys has strong nerves.
Biggest  +   1119d ago
And now that "Digital Foundry did a in depth alanalysi of the game and determined that the Xbox360 is 720p. . . I mean less than 720p so let's retract the previous statement" do you feel better? Is he still drinking the Glenn Beck fluid? Killzone 3 is still the better performing game on consoles. That shouldn't bother you. The PC version of Crysis 2 is obviously better in every way. Enjoy it.
xtremegamerage  +   1119d ago
Seriously came down to 14mb for rez in the end,lol

OS size springs to mind.

As for the better looking game.

Higer rez on 360, but not 1280x720,higher fps,screentear(min)
Better af,shadow quality on PS3,no screentear,min lower fps.

You choose.

Bearing in mind the limited nature of the 3D support, it doesn't really factor into the purchasing decision – but the PS3 undoubtedly gives the better picture here.

Love how they say it does not factor in, well it fking does if you want to play it that way. As it does for the 7.1.

Eurogamer. 2 steps forward, 5 steps back.
#24 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
doublebass2  +   1119d ago
played both versions and completely agree!
Digital foundry once again proved them selves,also the fotos taken (some fotos)by the LOT,didd nt actually flatter the obvious winner,since maybe they were taken during loading times(example,the foto with the emplem of the skull on the soldier's arm at the very begining was equally rendered,)very thorough and professional as always!

Maybe there is still power in the 6years old machine afterall...In my opionion,crysis looked better than killzone2(have nt played 3 yet,next week,)only Uncharted 2 really gives it a hard time,and that is probably because they are very different games,there is much more interaction and free style play on crysis 2,but the uncharted 2 is really more cinematic!(To my opionion,uncharted 2 is the best game i played this year so far!!Have bought,but havent played yet the Mass effect2 360 yet,waiting the last dlc to play it complete though!!,and i played most exclusives,on ps3(sits among deus ex,Halo1,Gears 1,Resident4 and Bioshock as my best games ever)
Maybe all the sony drulling fans should just take in mind that they are lucky enough that most studios inside sony,actually work together and co opperate and exchange ideas on how to overcome the difficult to program ps3!Maybe things were different if "M$"had the expirience of most studios of sony(polyphony,15 years,,konami 15 years and made the ps1 the machine to own,naughty dog,15,insomniac 14 with the amazing disruptor,please a remake!!and santa monica for at least 7years,guerilla7etc..)
And one more thing for them to also consider...maybe if all 360 excusives were nt mostly based on older game engines,for the obvious economical and time consuming reasons(oh,well i think we should run this game on unreal engine 3,it looks great for a 6 yeras old engine,its easy and,it does relieve us from the costs of making a new engine from the ground up for 360 machine!!!lets do that!!says most developers)
Bring on kingdoms and...bring on the last e3's best graphics winner(although kz3 was shown..)RAGE(which was .also..shown on a 360..you see a pattern here!??),to prove some people what a 6 year old console can do with a newer game engine..
CLOAK EN-GAGED!!
#25 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(10) | Disagree(7) | Report | Reply
come_stains  +   1119d ago
This guy is such a Xbox fan boy makes my stomach sick!.
Screen tearing is screen tearing PERIOD!
you can see it in his own video!
It's a performance analysis for Christ sake! Screen tearing is a performance issue people!!! How do did he fail to mention that.
RudeSole Devil  +   1119d ago
I have to agree with come_stains..

http://www.lensoftruth.com/...

http://www.lensoftruth.com/...

Here some screen tearing in your viewing area on the 360.
#25.2 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
RAmar101  +   1119d ago
So frame rates come in worse on 360 game during hectic scenes plus screen tearing. Still more or less the same, but reading all the performance problems its hardly best grafix is it?
AntiHeroComplex  +   1119d ago
im a ps3 user. The 360 version looks better because of the higher resolution. It looks much cleaner and less blurry - thats a huge plus.

However this game is def not the graphics king because of:

1. Graphical pop ins. This completely ruins immersion, something good graphics are supposed to provide... But it works the other way around here. You are in a beautiful world where random shit keeps popping out.

2. FPS drops... Console games are supposed to have locked FPS. You dont see it in killzone even with more players playing, mechs etc... so why here?

Its a good looking game but nothing groundbreaking (at lest on consoles), and certainly not close to KZ3.
#27 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(13) | Disagree(18) | Report | Reply
TKCMuzzer  +   1119d ago
I'm not sure why people are disagreeing with you. After finally getting my hands on Crysis 2 and playing both SP and MP there is no doubt it's a great looking game. Better than KZ3? Yes and no. The setting is far better suited in Crysis 2 to wowing people due to the recognizable architecture used.
But there is no doubt graphics can not be based on looks. When it comes to performance Killzone 3 wins out both in SP and especially MP. Killzone 3's framerate is top notch in the SP and close to it in MP with more players.
Some will say this does not matter but it does, when trying to immerse players in the game, framerate and pop in are big killers as it throws the illusion.
People will still argue it's the best looking game, in screenshot form, yes, in motion,no. (PC not included)
#27.1 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
Bonerboy   1119d ago | Trolling | show
DrFUD  +   1119d ago
This comparison gives me flashbacks to Resident Evil 5.
And once again I'll go with the the more solid release.
It does a little better here and there and most importantly no screen tearing and nothing crippling.
Also thanks to the people posting above it sounds like there might even be 7.1 audio to enjoy Hans Zimmer's soundtrack which is supposedly totally rockin'.
From where I'm sitting the decision looks like a no-brainer.
PS3 for the logical win.
Tyre  +   1119d ago
Enjoy dude!
andron666  +   1119d ago
I'll definitely get Crysis 2 for my PS3, when it's on sale later.

Right now I'm playing KZ3 and Bulletstorm and that's enough FPSs for a while.

Also I'm a little disappointed in the frame rate issues presented here. They really should have taken their time and optimized the game properly...
eliasg  +   1119d ago
The problem with PS3 fans is that they will never accept that a multiplatform game (Crysis 2)have succeeded better results than any of their hyped exclusives ( KZ3, U2, MGS4, GOW3 , etc, etc)and even better on XBOX360
#30 (Edited 1119d ago ) | Agree(14) | Disagree(22) | Report | Reply
hoops  +   1119d ago
They wont because they have een preaching for 3+ years that NO multi-platform game can come close to PS3 exclusives. Crysis 2 does it...they can't except it.

"The crucial thing is that both are phenomenally attractive games, producing effects quite different and in many ways more advanced than anything we've seen elsewhere on console"

No current FPS game on consoles has the technology of the Cryengine 3 running under its hood, looking like Crysis 2 and many people do not want to accept it.
Kobe357  +   1119d ago
"Cryengine 3 running under its hood" Including crysis 2 on consoles, oh wait, it does have those features, it just half asses them or doesn't do it at all. But its still graphical king on consoles no doubt..no wait it looks the same as Killzone 3. LOL your funny bro. XD
Kobe357  +   1119d ago
So you send me a message yet you block so I can't give you a proper response? So why bother sending me a message? LOL what a little girl XD
TKCMuzzer  +   1119d ago
Well after playing both on my own tv I can say Killzone 3 edges it. Why? because it does all it does without flinching. Crysis 2 looks great but the framerate and pop in problems should not be ignored and unfortunately can't be whilst playing. Lets not go into MP perfromance.
SCW1982  +   1119d ago
Wow your an idiot if you think that's the case. Oh better go, your gonna miss the bus for school!
TKCMuzzer  +   1119d ago
Really, I own both consoles but can not agree with you. Crysis 2 looks great but as the articles proves it does not run great. Anyone who thinks graphics are just about looks should not comment. The above games you mention run smoothly and all look as good if not better than Crysis 2.
« 1 2 »

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember
New stories
30°

Review: Trials Fusion | Stevivor

18m ago - "Stevivor's Shane Wall writes, "The year is 2042. A lone rider must use his uncanny leaning abili... | PC
20°

Infinite Warrior Review | Android Action Games | Hardcore Droid

19m ago - Hardcore Droid: "Weighed down with your blade, shield and armor, this Android port of developer E... | iPhone
20°

Dead Nation (PS Vita) Review - STN

19m ago - STN: Though this is essentially the same game played a few years ago, the Vita does not lend i... | PS Vita
20°

Sly Cooper Trilogy Review - STN

21m ago - STN: As mentioned I missed the Sly games the first time around and these HD remixes are ideal... | PS Vita
Ad

inFamous: Second Son (PS4) Review

Now - Ken abuses his powers in the latest entry in the inFamous series. | Promoted post
40°

'Minecraft: PS3 Edition' patch 1.05 status, patch 1.06 texture packs discussed

23m ago - XMNR: Patch 1.05/Title Update 15 for “Minecraft: Playstation 3 Edition” is not yet out but 4J Stu... | PS3
Related content from friends