Killzone 2 surpasses Crysis

During CES, Sony demonstrated the latest build of Killzone 2 for the PS3, which is set to ship out next month and suffice to say the game looks jaw dropping. Everything about the game was phenomenal from the details, physics, graphics, audio and gameplay.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
jkhan3666d ago

Technically no, artistically yes.

Jock3666d ago

gameplay wise yes....and in the end thats what really counts....

TheColbertinator3666d ago


You are very wise.

bubbles for you

evrfighter3666d ago

won't comment on the graphics part because I don't feel this article warrants such a debate.

But to go on like Crysis is a hit game for the pc gave me a good laugh. Even though Crysis did indeed break the one million sold barrier.

In its first month it only sold 84k...It's considered a flop in the pc, wonder if this guy knows that.

gametheory3666d ago

I mean obviously that depends on the hardware you're running it, but... is there any engine other than the Killzone 2 engine that renders games the way it does? I think if it's not on par or better it's at least very near, and frankly after watching the last few Gametrailer videos which are *not* in HD looked amazing. Today I actually went into radioshack and watched KZ2 gameplay vids in an HDTV, and my god what a difference. I think KZ2 is up there with Crysis. PS3 might not have 2 or 4 Gigs of RAM, but the fact that it is a single SKU and the engine is highly optimized can at least give you the illusion that the game looks just as good in 720p as Crysis running @ 720p.

SullyDrake3666d ago

It does surpass Crysis, although I mean Crysis without texture mods. Crysis with texture mods might be better, but that's merely a might.

Killzone 2 looks stunning.

sonarus3666d ago

Fukin blogs need to die. These are just regular N4G members who just expand their usual N4G comments and post it on their blog just to submit as news. N4G already has a blog section and thats where blog news belongs

MURKERR3666d ago (Edited 3666d ago )

then re-post mate

PoSTedUP3666d ago

but but but the CELL!!!

ah yes... the cell.... isnt it great. : D

jkhan3666d ago

Ok I should have been a bit more specific. I didn't say that technically its bad or anything. Its technically the most advanced game on consoles, no game, & I don't even see Uncharted 2 surpassing it at a technical level. But you can't really compare Crysis running on a monster machine to Killzone 2 running on a console. Calling Killzone 2 graphics great or mind blowing is an understatement. & a console game competing with a high end pc game and while maintaining its own and coming close at some most spots is an achievement in itself.
But those of us who played Crysis on a high end machine knows from vegetation to sunset its a jaw dropping visual masterpiece, but again that does not mean Killzone 2 looks any less good. I am sure Crysis running on PS3 will not come close to what Killzone 2 looks like.
I hope that clarifies my statement.

caladbolg7773666d ago

I agree, but if so, can we stop posting Kotaku articles on the front page as well? Kotaku is only a blog as well, and a crappy one at that.


All i know is that i want killzone2 more than crysis.I never play PC games so i dont care about crysis.

HighDefinition3666d ago

Killzone2 looks/moves better than Crysis.


DaTruth3666d ago

This is not good! I'm in the middle of LBP, Resistance 2 and Farcry; I'm not done with any of these games yet. And now three more games I have to get are due this spring, Killzone, Infamous, Resident Evil 5 and I just don't know how I'm gonna play them all.
It's gonna be like when I was a kid and my friends had an intervention to get me away from my Sega Master System.

FantasyStar3666d ago (Edited 3665d ago )

It's not. Killzone 2 is an incredibly good-looking game, however just no. Console Games will never look better than PC Games. EVER. People are confusing graphical prowess with art-direction: and this simply isn't the case. Art-Direction is always debatable, but in terms of sheer graphical prowess like 2048x1536 resolution, 100% Dynamic Shadows, 8x AA, 100% Dynamic Lighting, Fully-Destructible Environment, Insane Layer of Depth(LoD), and a game that's comparable to real-life: there isn't anything to debate about. (notice how I didn't bring textures into question because consoles have done a great job with streaming high-res textures: Uncharted is testament to this fact)

For one thing, Just because you can see Rico's sweat does not automatically mean Crysis is automatic "suck" in the modeling department. Just different detail in different places. The details in the Nanosuit itself, and the Korean Soldiers blows away the ISA models, and the Helghast models with much left over. And BIG [email protected] the physics claim. Look, you can literally tear down everything in Crysis from sandbags to friggin buildings with your CAR! YOUR CAR! Last time I checked, in Killzone 2: you can't even use a grenade to blow away sandbags - different details in different areas. I'll give that Killzone 2 focuses on different areas that really stands out like , little rocks falling down of buildings, lighting, how mud looks, and wind direction. However if you've truly played Crysis on the setting that offers every single detail that Crytek has to offer. You'll realize that the article is clearly off its rocker. , Crysis is rendered on a much bigger scale than Killzone 2, with much more going on than Killzone 2 is this is why there's simply no other Graphical King than Crysis.

I still admire Killzone 2 very much, but this article is just engulfed in its own hype. Crysis blows Killzone 2 out of the water: there isn't much to debate about unless you want to compare sweat which is the only thing the article points out. Last time I checked, especially in the physics department: in Crysis, you can spawn 3,000 EXPLODING barrels or 5,000,000 Chickens and all would react to its physics properly, all with its own shadowing and proper lighting So let's break it down.

Physics? Crysis Wins
Detail? Debatable. (sweat really, c'mon. I can think of better ways why Killzone 2 stands up on its own)
Graphics? Crysis Wins( just being able to render that beautiful of a world on a geographic scale is automatic win already. If Layer of Depth(LoD) wasn't ever a consideration into graphical prowess: then I would argue that Gears 2 looks just as good as Killzone 2 because both can only render so much on screen, while I can fire a rocket in Crysis and it would go on forever and actually hit the nearby island that's a couple thousand feet away.)

I own a PS3, 360, and moderately powerful PC and I can still make this claim. Don't get too sucked in the Killzone 2 hype to forget that PCs will and always will surpass consoles in every way if developers step up. Crytek has clearly proved their talent with Crytek Engine 2 & Crysis and shouldn't be looked down upon just because the media decided to suck on GGs balls for the moment. Killzone 2 is definitely a great looking game and it achieves a hollywood style that's definitely respectable, but to compare Killzone 2 and Crysis together? Please...

The only thing Killzone 2 should be proud of is the fact that it looks so damn good that people are actually willing to compare Killzone 2 to Crysis, when the general consensus is that even Gears 2 cant' stand up to Crysis. The fact that the big PS3 game can be compared to a PC game is a merit on its own and that's what matters here.

I thought about not posting this gigantic wall-o-text, but you know what? Why not? I know I should wait until the retail version is out: but the wait for Killzone 2 is killing me.

I understand where you're coming at, however this isn't a debate about how the graphics are limited by how much we're willing to spend. It's a debate about graphics between Killzone 2 vs. Crysis period. If we were debating about the biggest bang for your graphical buck: then I'd clearly say Killzone 2 is the winner in all regards. However an article claims that one game looks better than the other, so money stops becoming a factor. We're comparing the best of integrities between 2 games. If we were to use your logic: then I'd argue that Gears 2 offers the biggest bang for your graphical buck because well...$200 Xbox 360 + $60 Gears of War 2 = $250.

DaTruth3665d ago (Edited 3665d ago )

I saw a tech demo on my 14" low res screen and I was blown away by Crysis. Obviously the textures weren't there and the video was highly compressed and still I was blown away. The open world nature of Crysis and the insane amount of destructability beats down every game technically. So even with my little taste of Crysis I would have to say "no" Killzone does not compare to Crysis, but we should reserve our judgment for the final build as everyone says it looks far better than what we've seen thus far and what we've seen looks incredible.

P.S.You're getting upset at people comparing Killzone to Crysis and than you bring Gears(pop in textures) 2 into it. Gears 2 doesn't compare to Uncharted and you're placing it with Killzone and Crysis.

Consoldtobots3665d ago

you miss Fantasy Star is that while Crysis is an incredible game in and of itself, the hardware it runs on to it's full capacity is a RARITY. Meaning very few people are willing to build the rig it would take to run all those settings maxed at playable framerate. It would most likely be a dual or quad SLI setup meaning you would need to buy 4 top of the line graphics cards. That's about $2000 alone, nevermind the memory, peripherals and software you would need to do this.
The fact that a PS3 game is even generating a debate as to wether it looks better than Crysis speaks volumes about the power of a console Sony is currently selling for $400-$500 or better yet the price of just one of those graphics cards. Who will have their game played in it's true graphical glory by more people when it's all said and done? That's why PC vs console arguments are silly and way off point.

The Killer3665d ago (Edited 3665d ago )

in graphics i think crysis looks more real but killzone 2 looks just better with all the light effects, its like CG game while crysis is like more realistic and more detailed but not better looking!

so i think people will vote for killzone 2 graphics!

and for physics i think crysis wins in that department but who said that physics is what makes the game more fun?? its good to gave realistic physics but in the difference is small and one game is better in many things then it wont matter.

gameplay clearly killzone 2 wins, i had Crysis on my pc, my pc is 3.6GHz intel CPU, nvidia 7800 GTX 265MB and 2GB RAM, and i barely run it on medium settings and the gameplay sucked so much that i removed it from my pc very before i had to fight the Aliens!

so this is what i think

graphics Crysis wins but Killzone 2 is better looking
physics Crysis wins but killzone 2 feels better
gameplay kilzzone 2 wins
story definitely Killzone 2 wins!

so i think in the overall Killzone 2 is much better!

MazzingerZ3665d ago

I've never cared about Crysis or whatever you can play on a PC because to get the best experience you need to upgrade every year...yeah games looks great but provided you count with certain specifications

I like consoles because you buy a piece of HW and games look every year better and better without you needing to do anything to the consoles, development is more standardiserad and devs can specialize and get the better from the HW as the time goes.

On the PC devs says, let's make this amazing game, you just need this much RAM, this type of card, etc to be able to run it...

I'd never compare Killzone 2 or MGS4 to a PC game but only against other games on the same console or the if Crysis runs on a PC you bought 2 years ago that hasn't been upgraded at all then I'd say Crysis is also a technical achievement.

Killzone 2 is a technical achievement that will just cause devs to put more effort and deliver better games...also it shows what the PS3 is capable of... MGS4, Uncharted, GT5P, Wipeout HD are not concidence or pure luck....after all, it seems the PS3's HW is not a "waste of time"

TheExecutive3665d ago

There is NO WAY it takes Crysis technically. I am sorry, it just doesnt. However, artistically? It takes it by a mile. I cant comment on the gameplay as I havent played either game.

Hype is ok guys, but take a step back and quit saying stupid sh*t. Crysis still takes it on the technical side. but I dont really care. Killzone 2 looks to be a better game...

HighDefinition3665d ago (Edited 3665d ago )

When the the guy falls slowly and his shoulder hits the railing (right at the start) is the most realistic footage I`ve ever seen from a videogame. Crysis doesn`t do that. Crysis is a beautiful game, but I think Killzone2 is FAR more impressive.

FantasyStar3665d ago (Edited 3665d ago )

It's just simply different details in different areas and it appeals to different people. Personally, I like how the rag-dolls work in Killzone 2. Physics-based calculations with a combination of mo-cap, hit-detection, and force application to render a realistic way of interacting with the environment is definitely a step forward for our industry. I would consider Crysis of being short in that respect but only because of Germany's strict censorship on violent acts depicted in video games: which is why Crytek took out the death rag-doll physics, so you can't beat em around after they're dead. (on paper anyways, community mods say otherwise)

P.S. - aww...I got de'bubbled.

jammy_703665d ago

yes gameplay is important but come on...the graphics is why we are all so bloody excited about this game!!!

Danja3665d ago

at first the graphics was what made every one excited , but after playing the Beta the gameplay is also really f-ing fun and intense and just left you wanting more...

so it's both graphics and gameplay...thats makes me want this game...

hippo243665d ago

Im sorry Killzone looks good (no doubt there) but Im almost positive that Crysis is better, just because of the relative technical specs of the PC and the Ps3. Its Hard for a console game to contend with a PC with ease of programing, and computing power.

While Im looking forward to Killzone 2, I don't think Im going to be as impressed as I was with Crysis.

house3665d ago

this game is great do really always do the thing where oh it looks better than this and that please its a good game and thats it

Consoldtobots3665d ago (Edited 3665d ago )

some people just dont get it to the point of being obtuse. You can't argue tech specs because it doesn't take the software side of the argument into account. IMO developers haven't really begun to dig into what the cell processor can do along with the RSX. It may take them a few years to master new programming concepts to bring their visions to life. The payoff will be huge in the long run as Sony will have a solid platform to expand on into the future. The PS4 could simply have two cell broadband engines and the latest graphics card at the time and it would be all set to deliver amazing graphics from day one.

Raptors3665d ago

I admit, I was a non believer. Now, this game has brought me to my knees...I can no longer argue against it. February can't come soon enough.

morganfell3665d ago (Edited 3665d ago )

Technically in some areas yes as well. GG availed themselves of the Cell's ability to do perform mathematical calculations at warp 9. Hence the bullet impact physics calculations that Crysis or Crysis Warhead cannot approach.

And as a 360 superfan if you are reduced to throwing a PC game at the PS3 that was known for crippling 95% of the PC rigs in the world then you have lost and should just go home.

MNicholas3665d ago

There are so many different parameters (from ROP output to bullet response to vertex transform to number of simultaneous real-time lights, and so on ...) that can be used to argue one way or another. Two well informed people could debate this for weeks.

Overall, Crysis has it's moments when it looks absolutely incredible and so does Killzone 2. I'd say Killzone 2 does an overall better job at being graphically consistent, interactively realistic (none of that floating gun nonsense), and generally more immersive and therefore takes the win.

Killzone 2 will probably have better sound as well.

Ninja-Sama3665d ago

KZ2 is more appealing to me both visually and in terms of gameplay.

evrfighter3665d ago (Edited 3665d ago )

@ morganfell

You may think that comparing the two would make killzone 2 a great game just because its compared to crysis. But this isn't the media doing it. It's some blogger that nobody knows about. So in that respect the media isn't comparing killzone 2 to crysis because there's still so much of a gap it's not even funny.

If you wanna debate gameplay wise. Crysis is not a hard game to beat. There's a reason it only sold 84k in its first month. well two reasons actually. But no one I've met has said Crysis is the best game they've ever played.

This is why I said above. This article doesn't even warrant a comparison debate. Because Killzone 2 doesn't come close to what Crysis did visually. It's interesting to me that sony fans would take a some unknown blog and almost make it out to be the truth.

There's a reason you wont see this comparison in the media. To do so would make you the laughingstock of the tech industry.

pain777pas3665d ago

The anger at the article is astounding. This is not a 360 debate. This is really what the author was really getting at was pointing out that a console game could be mistaken to be the best graphic game on the planet that's all. Just relax and drink a cold beverage we all know that PCs will always have better graphics but isn't it nice to congradulate an excellent dev team on a job well done?

Shepherd 2143665d ago

please tell me you guys arnt serious?? please tell me this article is a joke??? Theres no way in the living gates of hell killzone 2 has better graphics than crysis, its not possible. Crysis maxed out on a PC destroys Killzone in ever sense of the word.

Not to mention, Crysis has enormous, dense jungles, gorgeous water visuals, rays of sun reflect off every leaf, the grainy sandy beaches and jungle canopy, rocks look ridged and coarse as can be, AI is superb, enemies faces are more detailed than any console game this generation can handle, and theres so much more.

KIllzone 2: Black, gray, gray, brown, gray, black, gray, black, brown.

this article is way out of proportion, jesus come back to reality

iamtehpwn3665d ago

Crysis had no ART direction at all.

incogneato3665d ago (Edited 3665d ago )

technically Crysis has more in some spots, but so does Killzone 2. but it doesnt matter because Crysis is a piece of crap. its easy to make a game that looks like a Pixar movie, but will it run? nope. and Crysis still doesnt run well after years. its a true piece of crap. it has a lot going on, a lot of wasted resources, yet Killzone 2 STILL looks way better. the animations physics AI and more are also TECHNICALLY superior to Crysis. in the end Killzone 2 has more technical achievements AND looks visually superior to Crysis.

pixelsword3665d ago (Edited 3665d ago )

...because people were doing the same thing with HAZE before it came out, remember?

Just wait until you see it with your own eyes, then judge.

Don't be so eager to let someone think for you.

As far as we know, this person could be doing it for hits to their website, just like some people will say Killzone 2 doesn't look better than the first Gears... for the hits.

MazzingerZ3665d ago (Edited 3665d ago )

"Just wait until you see it with your own eyes, then judge"

I won't judge...I know I'll cry, hug my PS3 and turn a candle to a Ken Kutaragi picture for his vision when designing the PS3 HWw...he's a genius!

pixelsword3665d ago

you get a bubble for that.

Legion3665d ago

Killzone 2 surpasses Crysis
President Obama owns a Wii - Nintendo start new world order
Sony talks up PS3 and sticks it to Wii, Xbox - Flamebait?
Qore gets PS3 exclusive demos - F.E.A.R 2
Xbox 360 LittleBigPlanet killer part of shift to casual market

This is what we get from this site all the time. Sensational claims to draw their crowd. Stop pandering to them.

theox2g73665d ago (Edited 3665d ago )

You're wrong about sales but right about the stupidity of comparisons, Do some research, Crysis NPD results was 86k indeed, But guess what? That was only after 2 weeks from launch and the NPD doesn't even measure digital distribution that takes up a huge chunk of sales or better yet Europe where pc gaming is huge, You want proof? Check the German, French, Italian charts where pc games mostly dominate top selling lists, Those results were far from indicative about the game sales, What's even worse about those NPD results is that 2.5 weeks later, EA themselves came out named Crysis a commercial success due to hitting platinum sales in less than 50 days worldwide, And this didn't even add private digital distribution and Crysis wasn't even on Steam, Why do you think that Orange Box on pc outsold both console versions combined by a double digit percentage when Steam sales were added? Just so you know, the game Crysis hit 2 million before Q2 last million when some other independent digital retailers added in their figures, And sales are even higher now that it is on Steam with Warhead, Oh no, but these sales are bad yet some of you avidly defend LBP's sales and I concur with each of those arguments, Same case for Crysis, new franchise, 1 million in a short time worldwide = Sales success, Only difference is less people could play Crysis at launch compared to the 20 million ps3 owners who could for LBP, I don't even think 1 million people had rigs that could run high settings in fall 2007, yet it hit platinum quickly, That's pretty darn good if you ask me,

For those nitpicking its gameplay aspect saying its all graphics or that it isn't fun, try playing the game first, And if you wanna know why it sold well whiles Gears of War pc was abysmal, It's because Crysis was a pc game at heart, a breath of fresh air to shooters and the nanosuit was a nice innovation along with little immersion tweaks that made the overall experience what it is, There's nothing like smashing a north Korean through a building or throwing an exploding barrel at an approaching enemy boat to blow it up, Or even gunning down a chopper with a chain gun and seeing it crash and burn more North Koreans on the grounds thanks to the impressive open world physics, Just watch this video

That's why Gamespot gave it a 93 and it averages in 90s on all gameranking sites, It was a good game and you can't deny it, Just because you can't play it doesn't mean you should downplay it, Try beating the single player before making judgments instead of watching crappy youtube videos

Consoldtobots3665d ago

I understand where you're coming at, however this isn't a debate about how the graphics are limited by how much we're willing to spend. It's a debate about graphics between Killzone 2 vs. Crysis period. If we were debating about the biggest bang for your graphical buck: then I'd clearly say Killzone 2 is the winner in all regards. However an article claims that one game looks better than the other, so money stops becoming a factor. We're comparing the best of integrities between 2 games. If we were to use your logic: then I'd argue that Gears 2 offers the biggest bang for your graphical buck because well...$200 Xbox 360 + $60 Gears of War 2 = $250."

true but I haven't heard anyone comparing Gears to Crysis, not even close, THAT is the difference.

+ Show (38) more repliesLast reply 3665d ago
Nathan Drake3666d ago (Edited 3666d ago )

And boom goes the dynamite.

HDgamer3666d ago

If this is certainly true I think this game will be the new benchmark for this generation until GOW3 surpasses it.

gameraxis3665d ago

is farcry2... no way crytek is going to spend the time juicing every ounce of the ps3, there gonna do a calculation and say this is how good we can do it...

Ju3665d ago

I bet if others realize what benchmark KZ2 is, and it'll sell a couple of millions, some might reconsider their decision.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3665d ago
ape0073666d ago

the anticipation us killing me

badz1493666d ago

I can't wait plus I can't get the game straight away on 1st day because I'll nrd to buy it from ebay! argh!!

el_bandito3666d ago

There's no need for this game to surpass some other game. All it needs is to surpass my expectations, and seemingly it will. Cheers!

RememberThe3573666d ago

And I'm freakin happy they said it. I can't wait to have this game in my hands. My PS3 is going to get a lot of use.