CryEngine 3: PS3 vs 360

The pros and cons of cross-platform middleware, as Crytek's Mark Atkinson says "If the game's shader-heavy it runs a bit faster on 360; if it's compute-heavy with physics and particles, the the SPUs take over and it's a bit quicker on PS3."

[ShabzS]

anyone know who's getting a crack at this engine first?

[ssipmraw]

crytek?

[RememberThe357]

I want to see someone take advantage of this engine and do something like an RPG. It really does look beautiful.

EDIT: I forgot about Free Radical. Thanks for the reminder. I'd love to see what they can do with this.

[REALgamer]

Most likely Free Radical now that it's been absorbed into Crytek as their console development team.

[ZuperAmazingCooKie]

However, it's sad that they couldn't get shaders running on the cell processor like 1st party Sony devs could, or at least not as well.

[mynd]

@ 1.4 Dude, shaders dont run on the cell (allthough 1st party off load a fair chunk of vertex shader code onto the cell). They run on the Gpu.

@ 1.5 There is more than one way to skin a cat. Pure shader power on the GPU can be negated by smart SPU work.

LOL at the disagres, like you guys clearly have a clue what a vertex shader or pixel shader are.

[Hal Emmerich]

They have to prove they can stand up to Alan Wake and Splinter Cell??

You've got it the wrong way round mate, we've seen gameplay for Uncharted 2 and we all know how amazing KZ2 looks yet we've never seen gameplay for AW and SC.

[ShabzS]

i'm asking about third party.. sorry should've mentioned that... someone outside of crytek ?... coz crytek seems to be stuck in the bahamas for the past 7 yrs... wanna see this engine in a new setting

[Don_Frappucino]

Is the best looking console game out there. Anyone whos played it on a high def TV and isn't one console biased will tell you so.

[I did not murder him]

I had it before I sold it and played on a 1080p Samsung LCD. It has average textures with good lighting hiding them. Some parts look like the PS2-ish but the Lighting and the guns have more polish than the game.

[Sony Rep]

Funny how you pick the oldest and worse shot pics of the PS3 games...

[I did not murder him]

He said the PS3 has annihilated anything on the 360 and I disagree I was bored. I guess PS3 fans have conditioned themselves to think PS3 is head over heals above the 360 so I'm probably wasting my time. I have both console so I see first hand.

[table]

you are sharply becoming the laughing stock of this site. How much BS can one person spew?! You succesfully manage to make yourself sound both desperate and insecure in every comment.

Edit: how many accounts do you have to disagree with me then? beyond pathetic...

[Sayai jin]

@PorcelainGod - Why do devs need to say anything at all. All they need to do is make games. If 3rd party devs say nice things for the platforms they are working on for PR; then by that logic 1st part devs do the same thing.

On topic, I guess if it makes certain people feel better if they own a particular console and a dev said X console is better or faster or blah blah blah. People are actually arguing about what console is better as if they mad or designed it themselves.

I hope people realize that if a gamer only owns a 360 and see some really nice games that are coming out on the PS3 or the Wii, then all they need to do is go down to the store and buy that said console. Oh and if gamer owns a PS3 and sees some really good games coming out for the 360 or Wii..all they have to do is go down to the store and buy said console. Now imagine that.

Late breaking news.....Game X can only be ran on x console!!! Gamer x say "I do not have that console what do I do"? They think hey I am a gamer so all I have to do is go and buy console x to play that game or games I like. IMO, that's what gamers do (assuming that money is not the issue).

All the bickering back and forth will never end. Arguing on the internet....well you no the quote. It boils down to preference and I realize that some people prefer console x and that's cool, but you do not have to down the other console. Let's be mature about this. All 3 consoles obviously offer something, because people are buying them. Does not matter if one sells 2 billion one month and the other only sell 150,000 that month. If you actually think that a particular console is going to fold or disappear then get a grip they are all here to stay with some really good looking and fun games in the future. We should all be standing in awe at all the excellent games that have been released over the last 3 to 4 years. I have never seen this many good games in such a short period and I have been gaming for over 26 years.

Game on...

[Ausbo]

if bethesda used the cyrtek engine for the next elder scrolls game.
I don't think it would ever happen though

[All-3]

Except that THIS particular game developer released one of the MOST demanding PC games in its day... a game that had high-end gaming PCs --> WITH MORE powerful CPUs and GPUs, and FAR MORE system RAM than either the PS3 or 360 have... and those PCs back then and the hardware quite sometime after Crysis was released were unable to run Crysis at 60fps with EVERYTHING for the game set to the highest possible settings.

Why can't you accept that each system has pluses and minuses vs each other? Yeeeeeesh!

[ukilnme]

Sayai jin

Great comment. Real gamers already know this. The rest need to take note of it.

[Blitzed]

Do you really believe this crap you spew?

"Most high profile multi platform game best your games. Uncharted 2 and Killzone 2 still have to prove they can stand up to Lost Planet 2, Alan wake and Splinter Cell when all is said and done."

You just listed three games that we have ethier seen nothing for, or what we have seen is from a PC build. Its the near vapourware you listed that has to prove it can stand up.

Do you really think you hold any credibility when you make ridiculous staements like that? You are completely dilusional. Its actually a little sad.

They all may surpass KZ2 and U2 (although I wouldn't bet on it), but until you have seen anything from AW, LP2 or SC that compares to a game I can play right now, and isn't running on a PC, then STFU.

[4Sh0w]

lol bro its so funny and somewhat sad to see you and others argue so much over which console is better, both sides are stubborn and I doubt anyone here is going to change their mind no matter how much "proof" is given so really whats the point? Dave Shippy(IBM) and almost every dev who doesn't work for sony or microsoft will tell you they both have pros and cons, the games themselves are so close that if you put a hundred normal gamers in a room and showed gameplay of Gears2 and Killzone2 and asked which graphics looked better I'd be willing to bet you it would be somewhere close to 50/50. I see you vs so many ps3 fans trying to prove 1 console is better than the other which is comical because both consoles really have some great powerhouse games, I own both and I don't see any 1 game in particular that looks like OMG this can't be done on my 360/PS3. All this tit for tat is just a pissing contest among less than 1% of gamers, truth is if you like Killzone2's graphics and oh yeah the gameplay, story, multiplayer too and most of the type of games thats on ps3 then obviously ps3 its your favorite, if you prefer Halo3, Gears, Forza and the stuff coming to 360 platform then you obviously think 360 is better, and surprise!= the majority of gamers fall somewhere in the middle, and at times I like whats coming for ps3, at times I like whats coming for 360 more, so unless you just have some nolstagic loyalty to a brand you're better off with both. If you take a step back and really look at whats going on the mindshare is already set in stone 360 is seen as a great gaming console that has lots of great games and is a cheaper option than PS3, PS3 is thought of in nearly the same terms but its seen as having added value because of Bluray capability which is why its more expensive. I doubt anything or any game is going to change the mindshare of the public after 2 yrs of seeing what both have to offer. The avg joe looking to buy his first HD console will Not be thinking which one is more powerful when he walks in the store its just one very simple question he's either already answered or is about to ask: hmmm, Do I want to buy a 360 to play (insert game/games) or do I want to buy a PS3 to play (insert game/games). Sorry for the long rant.

[Oner]

Funny how when you look at the properties/sizes of some of the pics that "I did not murder him" linked to it shows 1440x2560 for a couple (here's 2 below) with a few "larger" resolutions in others

http://www.1up.com/media/03...
&
http://www.1up.com/media/03...

Of which the 360 ABSOLUTELY CANNOT DO. Along with linking to compressed, improper images for the PS3 versions...amazing.

Your cheap attempt to make an invalid point goes nowhere, reported as spam since it is not factual and only false information to confuse the truth and spread BS.

[thewhoopimen]

To me, a quote like "shaders" run faster on the 360 just proves that the developers at Crytek still haven't mastered middleware development for the ps3. Its been clear since 2007, that the SPU's in the cell are perfectly able to handle shaders, and can easily scale beyond even what the ATI GPU in the 360 can handle ALONG with the physics.

http://www.insomniacgames.c...

www.kihlander.net/files/files /MastersThesis/presentation.pd f

@I did not Murder him: Killzone 2 is so physics heavy comparing it to Ninja blade is an absolute joke. Even if Ninja blade were on par with textures and lighting, there is absolutely no comparison in the physics simulation dept.

[talltony]

that if the 360 was completely out of the picture then it would be a better all around engine.

[JHUX]

lol dont argue with murder him, hes a fanboy, never has played kz2, and doesn't own a ps3 for that matter. Place is infested with crazy fanboys. see 1.5 and 1.13. I thought 1.5 was bad, but then I did not murder him/whydis/whoever the hell it is comes in and proves he deserves the crown for fanboy of the month.

[phosphor112]

But first of all @ thewhoopimen
Every 1st and 2nd party dev for PS3 has learned how to work shaders on the SPU. Most 3rd parties have not, I'm not too sure about Konami though. I'm basically saying you are right. This is why I can play split screen co op of Resistance 2 with 50+ badguys shooting/running around at once with the graphics it does and not lag.

@ Murder Him
While personally, I don't think Heavenly Sword is THAT much of a graphical feat, the AI is where its at. 100 guys on screen, all having AI. Gears 2 can only have about 8 npc's running with AI at once..it simply can't handle it.

KZ2 looks garbage STILL FRAME/SCREENSHOT. Play it for yourself, none of that "I sold it" bs. If you played it, your fanboy head would explode into jelly.

Uncharted 2 has unparalleled animation, shaders, only 1 games beats it in poly count. That's KZ2. I don't think that terminator game (while looking good) will beat it. Also, MGS 4 is technically a lot better than Gears 2. More polys, better models, properly used shaders (none of that baby oil on everyone bull crap), AI is HELL of a lot better, not to mention the shear amount of weapons, texture counts, effects, and not to mention sound. And nice to know you pulled up PC screenshots of Gears as well.

[ShabzS]

a multi plat engine turns into another my console has the bigger disc garbage!!.. get a life seriously.. lets not loose focus on this engine here... every bloody article same bloddy arguments... blame the headline even

[Shadow Flare]

You can make any game look awful if you choose the right screenshots. I could make Crysis look awful if i showed you the right screenshot. What matters is the overall essence of the game in motion, the physics, the lighting and the graphics. That is where ps3 exclusives destroy xbox 360 exclusives. But if it's screenshots you love, then chew on this:

http://kineticninja.blogspo...

[AshleyRiot]

You guys going nuts over this should check out Play magazines interview with lead programmer for Crytek Michael Kopietz. It's very informative.

[ZuperAmazingCooKie]

Doesn't anyone see anything wrong with the following sentences?

1.- "Dude, shaders dont run on the cell"

2.- "(allthough 1st party off load a fair chunk of vertex shader code onto the cell)"

Anyway, I wonder how very few notice that "i did not murder him" = "Why Dis". They make the exact same comments, Why Dis rarely if ever comments anymore because he lost all his bubbles so he prepared a new account with more bubbles than the average in order to lend himself some a priori credibility. How sad that mods are too dense to notice duplicate accounts.

[DaTruth]

Wow, an entire wall of text, just to prove me right. Thank you for doing the research for me. How sad that you believe that helped you in whatever you were trying to prove! Guess you were just fanboying at me and had nothing to prove.

Notice in the first article, how he doesn't say anything about the 360 running anything better! ONLY the PS3! Notice the second article, when suddenly the 360 runs something better; EXACTLY!!!

You must think your smart, when you're probably The Mart! Biggest fanboy at N4G besides Nasim! Run under your bridge, nothing I said there is promoting the PS3; It is just a FACT that they already said the PS3 runs the engine better!

Now research the original Cryengine 3 GDC article first posted on N4G;
Go to the comments and see how I was the first to congratulate 360 OWNERS on their console not being MAXED!!!

I thought so!!! In advance!

[E74]

uncharted 2, already does look better than lp2, and so is killzone.
and your forgetting heavy rain which from what ive seen, looks a hell of alot better than alan wake.

[free2game365]

@ ZuperAmazingCooKie
CPUs aren't very efficient at doing GPU bound tasks like shaders, especially with just how their all designed to be parallel processed as hell. So at the most you're giving up a lot of physics processing to match shader performance or maybe better it a little, but then you've still got the weaker memory set up on the PS3.

[cmrbe]

but we all know exclusives is a very different story.

For example Gears vs Uncharted.

Uncharted slaughter Gears in both physics and shaders.

Until MS develop games that can match MGS4,Uncharted and KZ2 in both physics and shaders. The PS3 will always be superior hardware wise.

I find it funny that the x360 people are looking at a multi-plat engine to compare HW lol!.

People. Using a mutli-plat engine to claim superiority is just as stupid as using multi-plat games to claim superiority.For example, there is no way on Earth IW will say COD MW 2 is superior on one console over another just the same as Crytek will never say Cryengine 3 will be better on one console over another.

I don't blame you x360 fans though. However i really do feel sorry for you folks. Perhaps if MS spent more money on developing the engines for Halo 3 or Fable 2 or Froza 2 than on avertising them then perhaps you poor folks wouldn't have to rely on a MULTI_PLAT engine but then again, you folk would rather MS spend more money on advertising their games, put on Super Bowl ads and mountain dew ads lol! so that they would sell a million copies on first day then actually making them look great.

[Traveler]

Both consoles have their strengths and weaknesses. What ultimately matters is how they are utilized and taken advantage of.

As a dual-console owner I think the PS3 exclusives have so far been more graphically impressive in general. That said, I do believe that the 360 is capable of putting out better graphics than what we have seen if only Microsoft would invest a little more in their console. Sony has the first-party resources to really bring out the graphical potential of their console and until we see something change on the Microsoft side I think we will continue to see the PS3 exclusives leading the pack in terms of graphics.

That said, I do believe the consoles are much closer in performance than some people want to believe. The 360 has a slightly more powerful GPU and an architecture that is a little easier to work with for the traditional game developer, while the PS3 has more top end performance on the CPU side. But again, these differences really aren't so drastic in the bigger scheme of things. What really matters is how these consoles are utilized and whether their particular strengths are being taken advantage of. Unfortunately, multi-platform developers, for the most part, really aren't going to do that.

[mynd]

@thewhoopimen - Yes, I agree, to a certian extent, there has been no evidence anywhere that the SPU's can do any PS based work. VS work is fine to offload, not an issue, however this has never been the bottle neck when it comes to "shader" heavy code, relative to most PS code, VS shader code does little more than a few tangent calculaitons and transforms and a few lighting caluclaitons. Remeber thats done per vetex, one texture might have more op work than an entire model made out of vertices.

eg. One model might be 5,000 vertices. A 75x75 pixel texture has more potential calculations than the model.

@ZuperAmazingCooKie- Thats because you dont understand the difference between a pixel shader nad a vertex shader. Off loading VS work is not the same as running an entire shader effect. Far from it. In saying that, I will tell you when it comes to moving those vertices around in a calculated way, the PS3 shines (ie. animaiton and physics work).

[N4g_null]

Any one got any links as to how shaders are ran on the cell's SPUs? That would be a great read because that would mean we don't have to write shader code for the GPU any more. Also that would make making a game in linux really easy since you can get it to run on the cell right? Has any one tried putting lunix on their PS3 here, how did that run? We should be able to at least get conduit level shaders out of the cell then right? Also any one know how to do shaders on the cell and the RSX at the same time? I mean you can do after effects style color correction but shader work off load is a new one! Naughty dog does have this tweak any where, so they are hiding stuff now?

Seriously you won't see a difference. Also do any of you guys know how to programmer a shader? What API you use? does IBM even have a way to run shaders by way of it's cell compiler? I'm asking because you guys know so much more about cell tech than any one else.

It is really sad that they gave the shader crown to the xbox 360 and physics to the PS3, most HD gamers like to see good games first.

They will be pretty much equal so why even worry they still will not be running the full engine regardless.

[-chaz-]

@scissor_runner

Shaders run on the GPU, not on the Cell. The reason the 360 runs shaders better is because ATI implemented a DX10/unified shader GPU before NVIDIA did. You can process vertex effects on the SPUs which might accelerate certain vertex shaders, but post-processing ops (which is what shaders are) are done on the GPU...to send them back to the Cell from the GPU would bottleneck the system.

[GUNS N SWORDS]

360 has 48 shaders that can be used as both pixel/vertex.

VS.

ps3 has 24 pixel shaders and 8 vertex shaders.

CPU's since they don't have vertex/shaders they have to be taught through software, hence software acceleration. (which by the way isn't as good as hardware acceleration)

[ZuperAmazingCooKie]

http://www.amazon.com/exec/...

You can program using the OpenGL API on the Cell Processor. Page 503.

Chapter 20: OpenGL on the Cell: Gallium and Mesa 503

"CPUs aren't very efficient at doing GPU bound tasks like shaders, especially with just how their all designed to be parallel processed as hell"

The Cell processor is designed with parallel processing in mind too, as is any multi-core processor. And yes, it can process shaders, nearly every PS3 developer has expressed their thoughts about that, check this out.

http://www.insomniacgames.c...

Guerrilla games has peer reviewed papers related to the way PS3 is programmed and they conclude that the PS3 is a unified graphics system if you consider that both the Cell processor and the RSX can do graphics. You still have to program for the RSX as the RSX does a lot of stuff better than the Cell and viceversa, so they complement each other. Doesn't anyone remember that the original PS3 prototype was gonna have 4-cell processors and no RSX? They opted out of that because it would have been too expensive, not because the Cell couldn't do graphics.

"Thats because you dont understand the difference between a pixel shader nad a vertex shader. "

I never talked about their differences and you don't really know what I know or I don't know. What I do know is that among all the vertex shading functions there are, you can transform a 3D scene into a 2D scene, i.e. take all the vertices in 3D and present them in 2D. For this you need plenty of dot product operations and trigonometric functions. This is basically vector math and floating point operations, and the cell processor is great at both. Feel free to disagree, but PS3 developers have stated this repeatedly. Evidence shows you can run shader code on the SPUs, specialized books and developer diaries.

"The reason the 360 runs shaders better is because ATI implemented a DX10/unified shader GPU before NVIDIA did."

360 runs vertex shaders better than the RSX, not than the PS3 as a whole. Also, the 360 can't handle DX10, for that it would need geometry shaders and its shader pipeline can only process either Pixel or Vertex shaders.

"360 has 48 shaders that can be used as both pixel/vertex. "

It's not as both, it's either or. Each of the 48 stream processors on the GPU can process two shading instructions at the same time.

VS.

"ps3 has 24 pixel shaders and 8 vertex shaders. "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

It's the RSX, not the PS3 as a whole. Yeah, the difference is that the RSX does a whole lot more instructions per clock cycle, some pipelines can do up to 5 instructions per cycle. Since the RSX is clocked 10% higher than the Xenos, the RSX is 50% more powerful than the Xenos in optimal conditions. The only conditions were it is beaten by the Xenos is when a game is programmed with only vertex shaders but that's what the cell processor is for.

"CPU's since they don't have vertex/shaders they have to be taught through software, hence software acceleration. (which by the way isn't as good as hardware acceleration)"

They aren't "taught" anything, they are programmed differently because their architecture isn't as complex as that of a GPU. However, this acceleration is pretty good on the cell processor considering it's very good for floating point operations AND vector math. That's what graphics are all about after all. That's why so much stuff, including lighting, runs on the cell processor in many PS3 exclusives.

The RSX is used for what the cell processor isn't good for and viceversa. The PS2 worked similarly.

[GUNS N SWORDS]

"360 runs vertex shaders better than the RSX, not than the PS3 as a whole. Also, the 360 can't handle DX10, for that it would need geometry shaders and its shader pipeline can only process either Pixel or Vertex shaders."

actually to make games on XNA using C++ you need DX10, so yes technically 360 can run DX10.

http://social.msdn.microsof...

"However, this acceleration is pretty good on the cell processor considering it's very good for floating point operations AND vector math. That's what graphics are all about after all. That's why so much stuff, including lighting, runs on the cell processor in many PS3 exclusives."

by saying that your pitting ps3's GPU and CPU against 360's GPU, both ps3 and 360 have their CPUs and GPUs geared for graphics work.

this old GPU CPU thing has been done ages and ages ago, and it just keeps on repeating.
http://rofl-at.us/?page_id=...
http://on-mirrors-edge.com/...

[phosphor112]

I love you guys. You actually know wtf you are saying when it comes to technology. Not some "Well this IBM guy said the Xenon and Cell are the same" *facepalm*. It's about time I've read something meaningful. Some intelligence exists on N4G.

Now I know that when I say something technical, it doesn't always go in vain. Glad to know there are people that can understand this kind of talk.

Thank you!

[324110493]

Actually the last link you posted is proven to be false because the hardware comparison was just predicted, the comparison came before the PS3's release.

[onijutsu]

who gives a f

Edit:
it just annoys me that people forget what the cry engine is about, its not so much the graphics its about creating a massive scale world that doesn't reset its self as soon as it is no longer in view which is what happens with farcry 2, this is the reason that crysis got good reviews, not because of teh uber hectic graphics.

[Microsoft Xbox 360]

x2

[Sayai jin]

Far Cry 2 was an excellent game. I thought the graphics were really good and the mechanics were excellent to. The ending was not as good as I wanted, but a good game never the less.

[DaTruth]

Sorry but, all I heard about was the civilians, over and over again. Never once saw one ever walking around. At first I would approach checkpoints, not knowing if they were bad or good; Then it quickly became obvious that everyone is your enemy and within minutes you will have to fight the same dudes you just killed 3-4 times. Could have added a ten minute reset or something.

Farcry 2 is a pretty picture and that's it! They must have trimmed the gameplay to the bare bones to accommodate the graphics!

I was gonna write all the problems in Farcry 2, but I realized I could write a 3 page essay on the "Failures of Farcry 2"

[kwicksandz]

The most boring and repettive game i had the misfortune to play last year. nothing but a respawning checkpoint simulator with the added frustrations of malaria and weapon jamming thrown into the mix

[blackbeld]

PS3 is the Winner!!!!!!!!

[-MD-]

No.

[Sir Ken_Kutaragi]

We PS3 owners don't have to WAIT for next-gen looking games, we got them NOW!!! ;-P

Where are all these 'CryEngine 3' games NOW on Games consoles???
i.e NOW in the Shops so i can buy 1???
I got KillZone 2 NOW + the other PS3 Exclusives NOW;)

@blackbeld ;) Yep PS3 always WINS;)

[Maxned]

blackbeld is a loser!!!!

[AngryTypingGuy]

"Yep PS3 always WINS" Actually Kenny, the PS3 has been on the losing end of just about everything this gen. There have been a few multiplatform games here and there that look better on the PS3, but every round of comparisons has seen the 360 come away the winner or in a tie. The PS3 can lay claim to the most impressive looking exclusive so far with Killzone 2, I'll give it that, but there are games coming out in the future on both consoles that look very impressive.
The PS3 is a loser in terms of market share. Sony is no longer king of the mountain.

[PopEmUp]

Angry Typing Bots :P

but you need to understand what 1 game on the xbox 360 that can outshine the Uncharted 1?

[Major_Tom]

Crytek basically acknowledged that the PS3 version is their console baby.

[mynd]

Pretty good sumation of the systems strengths. Should be a good alternative to the Unreal engine.

[mynd]

Your LOL because a developer tells you something a little bit more specific than oh X game couldnt be done on Y system.

Why?

[Sayai jin]

@mynd- I agree with you. On another note...Well you know many people like flame wars or to down X console on this site. You know a person can not say the PS3 is an excellent console or has this game that is a true marvel without getting flamed by the radicals on the other side. Oh and you can not say the 360 is a excellent console or that it has a game that is truly topnotch without getting hammered by the radicals on the other side. Notice I did not say that they could not disagree, but these people have to down a rip the other platform to do so. This is where maturity comes in.

Anyway, I like Crytek's engine, I like the Unreal engine, but I want to see more engines developed. What engine does KZ2 use? Whats engine does Bioshock use? I can not think of those right now.

[DaTruth]

The problem is that Crytech already said that their engine runs better on PS3. So this article is a complete about face! The vertex shader part is a new addition.

[360isgreat]

Kinda pointless..

360 and ps3 are old news at this point whens the next gen starting this one has gotten boring,

[-MD-]

I agree lol these consoles are played out.

[GamerPS360]

PC gaming is good if you have good PC to run. I got 4890 X 2 crossfire and already feels outdated. Not to mention, I have seen fps dropping to 30 while playing crysis max out.

[Reshun]

Like watching a car and a motorcycle duke it out over who's the fastest next to a jet.

[Shane Kim]

Hahaha, the 360 is but the PS3 is just getting started you imbecil bots. If you're crying now, you'll take your own lives when the PS3 is in its 4-5th year.

[GamerPS360]

gimme the game. I can careless about engine or tech demo crap.

edit below : I mean, Yes. I'd like to play game. I am a customer aka gamer. I pay for games and I play games. I don't play tech demo or engine's pros and cons.

[onijutsu]

i suppose you mean show me game that will actually use this engine right?
As opposed to asking for the game shown in the picture which is a tech demo.

[Sayai jin]

@GamerPS360- Bubbless for you. Imagine that, a gamer on a gaming site.

[Sarcasm]

Just give us Crysis for consoles already. That's all I want from this.

[xaviertooth]

shader is so old-gen... physics is teh future!

[xg-ei8ht]

Why take the comment out of context.

This is where the comment starts.

Although this ’same speed’ clearly depends on what the engine is doing at that particular time. “If the game’s shader-heavy it runs a bit faster on 360; if it’s compute-heavy with physics and particles, then the SPUs take over and it’s a bit quicker on PS3.”

Depends on what the system is doing, i/e not much going on. I/e not much physics, it'll be slightly faster on 360. but once the heavy lifting starts, the PS3 will shine.

But in the end, they'll make it so close, i really wouldn't worry about it.

If u want to see the PS3 power, just look at uncharted 1&2, GT5, etc. Even resistance1&2 do a bloody good job.

[raztad]

I dont buy this at all. "bit quicker", "bit faster" sounds like PR bs to me to appease the masses.

Crytek is new comer in the console development. I expect it to be more familiar to x360 arch (Valve comes to mind). Those guys arent GG nor ND for that matter, so they are not used to the PS3 tricky arch, that's why in the CE2 demo the shadows in the PS3 version looked like total CRAP. Go and compare U2 video's shadows with the PS3 crytek demo's.

The PS3 a "bit faster" at doing physics calculations?, give me a break. No way the 360 can compete with the PS3 doing raw calculations if all the SPUs are properly used. PS3 games excel in effects, things going on screen, AI. Its just not a "bit faster" is MUCH faster.

Another thing is the 360 old gen dvd tech. Man that is really hurting it. If you need to compress all your assets (as all the 360 games do), that means processor power wasted in decompression (on the fly), while the PS3 get them uncompressed straigh from the BR. Ms is so cheap, if they opted to go with dvd, why didnt include a standard 20G HD, so some assets can be uncompress there (like PCs)?

Finally, we need to stop using Crytek's words as if they are the Gods in console development. First, lets see some real games using their engine and that wont happen anytime soon.

[tordavis]

I don't care how much better the assets are on the PS3, you still have to fit them in 512mb of ram. It all comes down to how much you load in memory.

[N4g_null]

Man you guys truly think the spus are that powerful.

Go and do some research man. Go read up on the cell compiler and tell me if it will let you vectorize all of your code. Tell me it can run shaders, then tell me what you can use to do this, Open CL, OPEN GL, CUDA, direct x 9? I mean really are you guys telling me sony 1st party wrote their own compilers and are not sharing them with IBM and other 3rd parties?

Man it's going to be a sad day when you guys get the truth. I wonder who you will be mad at? I mean don't get me wrong but the game will still look good by HD console gamer standards. I'm sure crytek can lower the resolution and get some good shadowing going or maybe not because those tree actually move when you hit them. I wonder if that was in killzone2?

Some times I wonder if SONY's next machine will look more like a PC than a console. Crytek knows some and they are not telling!

[Dave2001]

360 is far better all hail Microsoft!!!!!!!!!!!!

[-MoOkS-]

"Shader heavey it runs faster on 360"

See droids, I was right all along. The 360 has the better graphics card, thats why it has way better texture's and colors compared to ps3 games.

I bet no one apologises to me. All that arguing for nothing droids?

Xbox 360 GPU - More RAM, more triangles per secound, Anti aliasing,

Ps3 GPU - 256mb RAM, no anti aliasing ( thats why inFamous has lots of jaggies like a ps2 game )

I was right all along.

[heyheyhey]

you think a bit too highly of yourself and your uninformed trolling

360 GPU has more unified shaders, not more RAM... you have no idea what your talking about.. stop acting like you know anything about technology because you clearly know jack sh!t

[darkzodiac55]

you are jacking off to xbox every day right ?

[d0nT wOrrY]

lol Okay, compare exclusives games Please :)
and for this year
opps you don't have any haha don't get yourself owned next time

[-MoOkS-]

Exclusive games

Xbox 360

- http://xbox360media.ign.com...
- http://images.gamersyde.com...
- http://images.gamersyde.com...
- http://images.gamersyde.com...

I can list more 360 games, just can't be bothered

PS3

- http://ps3media.ign.com/ps3...
- http://i293.photobucket.com...
- http://i293.photobucket.com...

[Shane Kim]

Hahahha, look at Mooks posts. 50% of the time he talk about sales and the other 50% he talks about textures. Dude, the 3sh!tty is maxed out. The textures look like garbage.

[Foxgod]

The proof is there, Geow2 is owning all that ps3 garbage.

[Sony Rep]

http://forums.highdefdigest...
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
http://www.lensoftruth.com/...

[darkzodiac55]

geow 2 is GARBAGE you sad fool

[Foxgod]

You are the fool here, Mooks posted physical evidence, it right there in front of your face, ps3 exclusives look like crap compared to 360 exclusives.

[darkzodiac55]

Well i can afford both consoles, and i played all those so-called AAA exclusives on xbox so i can judge with my brain and with my own eyes, If you ever get some money together and buy a ps3 than you can judge unbiased. And do not call ps3 games crap if you haven´t played any.

[TheBand1t]

You idiots do realize the PS3 and 360 both have strengths and weaknesses, right?

[Foxgod]

I got the money to buy a ps3, my pc is 6 x as much as a ps3, and i bought it recently.
I could have made a ps3 tower by now, i just dont want it because the games on it are garbage.

[ambientFLIER]

Wow Mooks, those MGS4 textures are LOW RES !

[Traveler]

Of course Gears looks pretty good in screen shots. Its strongest point are the textures, which show up easily in screen shots. Textures, however, are only one element among many that play a role in how good a game's graphics are.

Gears definitely has better textures than, say, MGS4. On the other hand, the lighting in MGS4 blows away the lighting in Gears of War.

As far as how the graphics look on an actual HDTV in motion, Uncharted is definitely a step above Gears of War.

Gears doesn't even have any real-time lighting. Uncharted wins in lighting, animation, post-processing effects and is at least equal to Gears in terms of textures.

Seriously, they are both good games, but if you don't realize Uncharted is more graphically advanced than Gears of War, you really don't have a clue about the technical aspects of game graphics.

[Borat Sagdiyev]

Those pictures are official....pause NOT!

These pictures have been edited, i was looking at the originals a couple of minutes ago, go back to your hand-party over xbox, but don't make romance explosion.

[ambientFLIER]

Hey Borat, you don't actually have to type "Pause". Just skip a few lines and then say "Not".

[Zoomer76]

You guys should be politicians, you can put spin on any comment lol!

This is great news that an awsome engine is able to run on our consoles. But the majority still manage to turn this news into a fanboy fight.

[DaTruth]

All multi platform games will end up being less compute heavy with physics and particles and have less Vertex shading! So no, this is not good news at all!

Suddenly said awesome engine becomes mediocre engine!

But we know what will really happen; They will absolutely not add a hundred more characters shooting a thousand more bullets with hundred more explosions into the PS3 version, they will however keep the vertex shaders high leading to a slightly sputtering one pixel less PS3 version that we have to watch comparisons of and have fanbots in the comments section saying "PS3 getz teh pwn again!"

Again, not great news!

[tootiFrooti]

ahahahaha nice conspiracy theory brah. i LOL'd

[N4g_null]

Why do PS3 fans even care? You have some of the best artist working on your system this gen? Don't worry about the win any more have fun. If you play it right other gamers will not look at you as xbox like fanboys. Which could mean you make the platform look cooler. I mean seriously the xbox fan really did suck for a while LOL, then the PS3 fan became the same thing.

The funny thing is console have always been less powerful than PCs and the PS2 is less powerful and it won back then so I'm just wondering if you realize power doesn't matter yet?

[outlawlife]

wow all of these kids getting tiffy about a dev saying what aspects runs better on each console?

you gotta be kidding me, these guys know a fair share better than you ever will about game development, console specs, and exactly what they can do with the engine they (not you) wrote

this whole 360 vs ps3 pissing contest is the most worthless thing on the planet to argue about

grow up kids, just be glad with what you have because nobody cares if you think it is better than what somebody else has

to show such devotion to a consumer electronic device shows so much about people

including but not limited to:
- inferiority complexes
- mental instability
- detachment from reality
- obsessive behaviors
- lack of education
- lack of rationale
- etc

and i'm sure some of you wonder why you have very little outside video games, why people avoid real world conversation with you

reason? nobody cares if you are in love with your ps3, nobody cares you coddle your xbox 360, nobody cares what you think about a game engine that has barely been demoed yet

none of you know anything about this stuff but you read wikipedia to try an argue a point in favor of your stupid biased opinion

i saw one intelligent post in this whole thing and it was the guy who was talking about shader offloads, pixel shaders, and vertex shaders

he knows clearly what hes talking about and yet you people argue with the same "killzone blaaa" ..."b-b-b-b-but uncharted 2!"...you don't even know what a shader is so shut up please

nobody cares, go outside, do something productive, better yet try going a week without touching your game console or talking about it, you'll find out exactly how uninteresting and unfilling your life is

now i'm going to bed because i'm going to go do things tomorrow...you know what? i may not even play a game....shocking

[Reshun]

and have a bubble

[table]

you are absolutely correct, but we can still have an opinion on which game looks better(uncharted2 and killzone2). you don't need to be a computer geek to know that those games look awesome.

[Cartesian3D]

I disagree with you on some parts .. btw my english isnt as good as you guys..sorry correct me if Im wrong..

you said:
"i saw one intelligent post in this whole thing and it was the guy who was talking about shader offloads, pixel shaders, and vertex shaders"

even that guy was wrong, because he said Cell cant process shaders but after that said developers put VERTEX SHADERs on cell.. :) vertex shader is shader as well :P.. so there is no intelligent comment

btw why do you care about BLIND fanboys? some of them made stupid comments , I know.. but thats their passion , may be they have no life out there(u think), but they enjoy talking about sth stupid like which Multiplat game runs better on X console.

you cant change their life that easy, and even its not RIGHT. they LOVE to be a 360 or PS3 fan in here. its like why you choose a Football team and then say BS about rivals.its one kind of LIFE , exactly what you think they havent. (may be not the best kind)

with 100percent Logical and rational life you will never enjoy victory because you are not a FAN of any side.

[outlawlife]

what he said about vertex shaders is right, you have to understand how that works to know what he is saying

shaders do not run on the cell, shaders are strictly a gpu driven component

you pose a question of why i care well then, why do you care what i think?

[Cartesian3D]

have you ever heard of Unified shader?(vertex and pixel)

it means Vertex and Pixel shader can be processed in same unit .. in PS3 RSX is beast in Pixel shading (its not unified btw).. but it has only 256 MB ram, so first party devs put Vertex pressure on cell (or other general processes)

VERTEX shader is a kind of shader!! we have 2 shaders :1- VERTEX 2- Pixel

so Cell can process one kind of shaders and thats VERTEX. and thats the (((PIXEL))) shader which we cant run it on Cell. OK ?

when did I say BS about your comment.. or saying get a life.. but you said all that to blind Fanboys.. so my question was appropriate. but you act like a kid.. answering my question with the same one..

[mynd]

A unified shader does, indeed, mean you can process vertex and pixel shade rowrk in the same unit, but it still splits the unit into 2 distinct componants, it just that that split veries between each combined pixel shader an dvertex shader work load.

Technically, all the processed vertices from the Cell still need to pass thorugh the Vertex Shader unit, even if they do little else inside there, there is no direct route to the pixel shader.

Working with vertices in a way so that they are pretransofromed, or loaded with informaiton for verious other claucations passed through to the pixel shader (eg Tangent information), chews up 2 SPU's in the form of edgeGeom componants. It also unfair to say that ALL vertices do this process, it's pointless to do VS work on static geomtry for exmaple (unles syour really pushing the vertex count).

The issues is VS code is a relatively small % if the actual GPU work.
In terms of shader caluclaitons even in a basic pipeline they get out numbered 3-1 by PS clauciaton units.

In basic terms think of a VS as creating the outline for a picture, and the PS as colouring in between the lines.

At the end of the day, they still all pass thorugh the VS, even if it is a simply mov commend to shift them to the vertex shader outputs.

[ShiNe-Box-]

This is good news for PS3 gamers since most developers make games that are more physics intensive than shader intensive.

Don't believe me? Look at how many developers use Havok.

[XULTIMATEXGAMEONX]

3rd parties engines/developers still can't manage how to use the cell power of the PS3 ....Uncharted 2 does alot more than Crysis games,Uncharted 2 does cover system,rolling,driving,climbin g,jumping from wall to wall etc...

[callahan09]

Well, I do agree with you that Uncharted is prettier to look at than Crysis. But it's not doing more. Crysis is a giant, open world with fully destructible environments (the trees can be knocked down, the buildings can be demonlished). It's got more going on in terms of physics and draw distance, etc. Those aspects of a cover system and climbing in Uncharted 2 just serve to vary up the gameplay and make the whole experience more fun. They really have little to do with processing power or graphical fidelity. It's just quality design. But again, I'd rather look at Uncharted 2 being played than Crysis being played: there's just so much beauty in those textures, so much detail, such impeccable world design, and those animations! My god, the animations...

[cyclindk]

I'd have to disagree with you on this one in that all those things you mentioned, especially the cover system and climbing are not necessarily difficult for either system (or PC as the case may be) to do, just difficult to do well depending on the developer.

[raztad]

I dont know why people keep comparing PC games with console's.

You can have an unlimited ammount of RAM on PCs to accomodate all the textures and other assets. You can have an unlimited processor power and GPU power. PCs drawback is their main strength, there isnt a standard spec. I used to be mainly pc gamer, but bugs, installation problems, all the games that use the latest tech and can not run on lower spec machines really turned me off. The PS3 albeit being resources limited, provide enough power to make my TV sings and its pretty clear that games in the like of KZ2 and U2 are just the tip of the iceberg, but is not of help to compare them with crysis.

I understand what the fuss is all about the crytek engine, 360 gamers are hoping for some engine that improve the visual fidelity of their games, that is OK, but I think people need to keep expectations low and wait for the games. So far Crytek contribution to the console development is a demo and PR bs.

[Pootangpie]

and they haven't started developing any games running on the engine your in no position to make that claim and from what I saw from the techdemo it already looks better then Uncharted 2 and KZ2 for that matter

[devilhunterx]

CrapEngine 3.0.

[Mr Face Creamer]

The biggest turd on this website... And that's actually saying A LOT by comparison with other mindless droids.

[devilhunterx]

Is it cause I am black? - Ali G

[Nelson M]

This Means that the No XclusiveBox is the Medium spec setting
And the PS3 is the High spec setting

Anyway Dont Matter Come Back BoTs with Exclusive Comparisons
Its kinda Funny years ago the BoTs Used to Say
I Got a Xbox to Play Games
Well you aint got no Games now
And all you got is pointless Multiplatform Comparisons
The BoTs are Really Sad and Pathetic

[Nihilism]

no conditioner isa better it leaves the hair silky and smooth

[gnothe1]

I have said it before that I think the PS3 does particle effects better than the 360 but on the other hand the 360 handles textures better than the PS3 an this guy just confirmed it!!

[LostDjinn]

The way I see it, no middleware engine will use the PS3's potential as well as a dedicated engine. Same goes for the 360. It's called middleware for a reason.

Now all M$ need to do is pluck their head out of their ass and get to work on a great in-house engine. Sony's built quite a few.

At the end of the day though, the best we can hope for as gamers is that the CE3 is used to make good games.

[Chubear]

The only ones wanting to desperately believe articles like these are the 360 fanbase. I mean, what was he supposed to say? That the 360 version of their game is over poweringly better than the PS3 or vice versa?

They're trying to sell their game on both platforms but if you think a multiplatform game is what can be used to measure the raw power of a system or it's potential then you have to be incredibly naive or just plain stupid; especially when you've seen the kind of games that have already come out as exclusives.

If you want to know the power of these consoles only in-house (1st&2nd party)exclusives can show you their potential or limits. You look at the PS3 and you don't see a limit yet; seeing as every year, or several months later, an exclusive comes out and tops the previous year e.g Resistance-Motorstorm-Uncharte d-MGS4-Killzone2-Uncharted2-GoW 3-Heavy Rain etc

On the 360 side you can admit no in-house 1st party game as really shown the potential of the system to this point but you do have 3rd/2nd party exclusives and so far only two have tried to show the potential of the system but one kinda proves you've reach a threshold and it's now left to developers to make better graphics based of this threshold e.g Kameo-GeoW1-GeoW2-Alan Wake? I'm not even sure Alan Wake will have better graphics -pound for pound- than GeoW2.

I guess for the wii it's Metriod-Zelda-Mario galaxy... but they all kinda have the same level of graphics in relation to their genres.

Only exclusives can show the power of these consoles. Multiplat games always want to makes the versions of the game look similar always.

[mynd]

Agreed.

[ultimolu]

I just want to see a game using the engine. I'm impressed with it so far.

[Morgue]

Don't own a PC and I don't know why this article is even on here since no game on a console has been released using whatever this engine is. Besides. By the time it comes out it will already be out dated more than likely. 360 hype is all this is......

[outlawlife]

i fail to see how this is 360 hype...did you even read the article?

there is no way you could have unless you are completely ignorant

[CypH]

the game almost tap this engine without the help of PC.

we make games thats close to realism then games that is darker than the other

[JasonPC360PS3Wii]

Poor droids... you guys lose so much, and we hear you b!tch about it every day.

[heyheyhey]

what exactly have we "lost" here? you must know something we don't..

jeez, no exclusive games so instead you just make victories appear out of nowehere? lol

give it up, all you have is sales (or do you? major companies are reporting higher profits on PS3) so just stick to that

[Mr Face Creamer]

Who exactly? The only below decent average Namco Bandai released last year was SoulCalibur IV, which sold more on the 360. I guess you guys must have bought Afro Samurai and Crash since you didn't have any other titles LOL!

And hmm... Konami? MGS4 and Pro Fail Soccer 09? MGS4 was their best selling title and currently is the best-selling PS3 title (I lol'd)... You do the math. (That can be hard for droids but try an online calculator)

[xbollox]

in fact as everyone knows, we're on a historical exclusives winning spree, each of which would instantly fry your aging toaster with half the resources it needs and it's yet another AAA title you can only drool on

and you ain't seen nothing b!tches:
E3 will show GOW3, HR, GT5 most likely T ICO
and you'll cry us a tsunami, begging for mercy, hahahahahaha!

it was nice to meet you b!tches, decent fight for a while: cya nextgen
lololol

[XLiveGamer]

-We have parity between the platforms now: BOTH run at the same speed.”

-Although this ’same speed’ clearly DEPENDS on what the engine is doing at that particular time.

-“If the game’s shader-heavy it runs a BIT faster on 360;

-if it’s compute-heavy with physics and particles, then the SPUs take over and it’s a BIT quicker on PS3.”

-Alright people STOP living in denial and start enjoying this console gen. Enjoy both consoles and PC and Viva La Gaming!

[JasonPC360PS3Wii]

Any engine running multiplatform games look and run smother on the 360, because they are created on a PC. PC = 360 or 360 = PC for game design.

[PotNoodle]

While that may be true some of the time, it isn't true all of the time.

(I wasn't the one who hit your disagree button).

[lizzbeester]

Why do people fight over this whole "ps3 vs xbox" thing anyway? I have a ps3 but I can't say it's better than an xbox since I've never played one but still... they both play cool games right? They both entertain people for hours on end, same job done on both., same purpose right?

Whether this game is better on ps3 or xbox when it comes out it looks cool to play and the graphics look awsome! Good looking game if you ask me!

[JHUX]

lol @ disagree for that, you must of offended someone.

[PotNoodle]

"if it's compute-heavy with physics and particles, the the SPUs take over and it's a bit quicker on PS3"

I guess this is how they managed to get such amazing physics and particle effects in games like killzone 2 and the amazing realistic physics in littlebigplanet.

[OmarJA]

Sad bots, you guys really break my heart.

[psiom]

Everyone's opinion is stupid except mine and only a RETARD would think the console I don't own would run anything better than the console I do own because it's the one I bought and therefore it's better than anything else as proven right here in this wall of text.

My console of choice is better and you should buy one because I did.

You're reading this on the internet so you know it's true.

[green]

I play games not tech demos,shaders or particle blah blah blah.So pls call me when they show a game using this engine that i can actually play in the comfort of my living room.

[MADPIRAHNA]

PS3 owners have been enjoying great 1st party engines for a while now. I think 360 owners need this more so they can retire that old man known as UE.

Seriously though, stop with the tech demos and show us a great running game with it..

[Gun_Senshi]

CryEngine 2 on PC ONLY

[Pandamobile]

Why do retards disagree with this.

It's true.

Cry Engine 2 looks WAY better than this, because it was developed for PC.

Cry Engine 3 running Crysis? Hah, have fun with your "medium" graphics settings, because that's exactly what CE3 looks like.

[dogmeat eater]

This engine doesn't even look that great.

[goflyakite]

It's all the bot's have.

[ULTIMATE_REVENGE]

Mo0ks comparison is full of crap, those were the original IGN screen-shots of Gears of War 2 that were on the site before the game released and they were proven to be touched up and even then those screens still look like a jag-fest. Its filled with jaggies all over the dam place and it has little to no colour at all, all the texture are the exact same and light doesn't reflect or bounce off any objects in GeOW2, even the characters have no light reflecting off of them, most of the lighting is all static and completely rubbish, notice how everything is Green, black, Grey and a bit bluish in some areas and the game tends to have a brown smeared look all over the screen.

The game has no dynamic colours because the 360 itself can't do dynamic colours because its a rubbish piece of hardware soon to be vapourware.

Take a look at this:

http://image.com.com/gamesp...

It looks like Marcus PhoeDix is suffering from skin cancer and the gun has freaking 2D textures, and the amount of jaggies all over the dam screen is amazing. Seriously where did they mess that up?

Remember Gears of War2 consists of both touched up in-game cut scenes & GGI cut scenes and anyone with a good pare of eyes would recognise the difference between both of them while playing GeOW2, so anyone who post this (below)

http://media.teamxbox.com/g...

and says it's in-game is retarded.

Here's the link to the full comparison between Uncharted1 vs GeOW2:
http://kineticninja.blogspo...

Just look at this below:

(Uncharted 1)
http://farm4.static.flickr....

(Gears Of War 2)
http://farm4.static.flickr....

It seems that everyone in GeO2 is suffering from skin cancer and I think the Locust have got the worse form of skin cancer
http://farm4.static.flickr....

(unloaded textures my ass!)

Seriously I've done this so many times now and I'm sick & tired of all these XBUTT's saying Gears 2 looks better then Uncharted 1 but it clearly looks like sh1t!

All you bots praising this brown coloured jag-fest FAILED!!!

[ambientFLIER]

Do you honestly think someone is going to read all that bs?

[Traveler]

Well, if they read all that stuff Mooks wrote and linked to I don't see why they wouldn't read this as well.

Anyway, I own both games and Uncharted does look better. However, Gears is also a very nice looking game and I don't see why fanboys on both sides are always trying to tear down games on the other console.

[jlemdon]

why is this article even up, we was talking about this a few months back. all in all, the 360 and PS3 have certain advantage over another with this engine.

[steck67]

Killzone 2 s currently the best looking console game to date, if you believe otherwise then you are dillusional. I find it funny that since the 360 has a 1 year lead, arent they suppose to have the more graphically superior games? Then comes Uncharted 2 which looks better than Killzone 2, which will release in fall of this year. So when is Lost Planet, SC and Alan Wait suppose to come out, because I will guarantee you, when you compare Uncharted 2 to those 3 listed games in motion (not your bullshots), on the 360 (and not on the PC), then Uncharted 2 will undoubtedly win in terms of graphics.

[PS360PCROCKS]

Than I'm delusional because I don't think very highly of KZ2's visuals. While I think they look fantastic, I don't enjoy the style, but they're up their. I think Uncharted 2 is the best graphics ever on a console. I think God Of War 3 comes next, than KZ2, GT5 is right their as well. Gears Of War, Mass Effect, Bioshock, Resident Evil 5, Fight Night 3 and 4 are all also graphically fantastic. But you have to remember graphics are personal preference as well. Someone yesterday said Fable 2 was gorgeous and I think it looks like ass.

[MetalGearBear]

To: I not murder him
U get 100 over disagree. U know what u SUX!!! Learn on PS3

To:Mooks
why u not married to Xbox360? After day XBOX360 died by RROD.

[BX81]

That was the worst comment I've ever seen on this site! Cave man like fire, me go get rabbit to feed in my belly!

[jack who]

shader >>>>physics

[Avenged Sevenfold]

Who was that idiot trolling yesterday saying this looks better than U2:AT? Still looks good though, we've seen better.

[N4realGMRZ]

Another school of sharks acting as if they know more than the developers...really some of you talking about why the developer not knowing what they are talking about sound sooo juvenile....grow up people....its a game plain and simple enjoy it stop shredding it.....and Please about killzone 2 and U2 looking better the crysis is just plain silly they all have there strong points crysis is a technical marvel on many levels though that no one can denie.

[xtreampro_REVENGE]

physics>>>>shader

everything in the real world has physics dumbass, so its harder to do it in a game and since the PS3 finds running physics easy then it's a better console...

nuff said.

[PS360PCROCKS]

Why so much hate? Lol isn't this kind of already known? PS3 has higher computational power for physics. The 360's GPU has better shaders. Isn't that known?! lol.

[drewsny]

I mean really, you ps3 fanboys make it sound like the ps3 beats the xbox so much that it could compare to the ps3 vs ps2. I mean really, the xbox 360 does have A LITTLE worse graphics but nothing that you can tell unless you have a 50" plasma screen tv that you play them on. And i bet that 3/4 of you ps3 fanboys spewing about how great the graphics are haven't even played the 360. All i am asking is for you ps3 fanboys AND xbox 360 fanboys to stop being immature 5 year olds arguing over the computer. Just play your damn console if it is so good.

[IQUITN4G]

Bit silly entering into this mostly childish debate but i'm going to anyway

I played Army of two last night(a game i had absolutely no intention of ever buying) and it's fun enough and while it's clearly not the best in the genre, i'm enjoying the experience with a mate

To follow on with what i'm saying here, i remember thinking to myself how excellent i thought the graphics were in this.I doubt they are the best technically that i will ever see but they were really rather good.

I suppose the point is that the likes of say a game like Army of Two or indeed any future good and better looking games, people really wont be too bothered just how much better it really all is

For me i don't care if graphics stayed just the way they are because they're perfectly gorgeous right now on both machines

The truth is it's only people on forums like this that think people in general can actually see the massive difference they can, and that simply isn't the case for most gamers

As much as i think Uncharted 2 for example is beautifully crafted, it doesn't stand out as anything i haven't already seen

Technically yes games will advance on these current gens but there comes a point where it's really not all that big a deal anyway visually unless it's subtle like Halo3 and Uncharted2's hdr

Gameplay is where things need to improve the most now

[drewsny]

yea but if you say that graphics are just fine the way they are then the ps3 fanboys cant make articles about how much better the graphics are than the 360. No, but really, the wii is a good example of how good graphics need to be. The wii has games with amazing gameplay but not great graphics and it the games sell millions. I mean really, basically the wii just prints money and the reason why is because nintendo focused more on the gameplay than the graphics. Graphics really only matter to the most hardcore of the gamers that still only play games because they have good graphics. Lets do another example. Halo 3 sold 10 million copies not because of the graphics but because of the gameplay (and the really good advertising). Developers just need to start focusing on the gameplay now and leave the graphics where they are.

[scott182]

drewsny- I agree that it's dumb to argue graphics at this point. But if you play killzone 2 on a 50 inch plasma versus gears of war 2, you will see a HUGE difference. I'm not a fanboy but I litterally have seen both played through on a 60 in plasma. There is nothing out there like killzone 2 and I would be suprised to see a game with such immersion in the near future. G.G. deserves serious credit for what they have done.

[GiantEnemyCrab]

I have a 67" 1080p TV and I don't agree that there is some huge graphical difference between Killzone 2 and Gears 2. They are both impressive in their own ways. Technically KZ2 has more going on but when I'm playing the game what is registering with my eyes and brain is much the same thing. They look incredible and are incredibly fun.

[jack who]

shader >>>>physics

(Shaders are used to program the graphics processing unit programmable rendering pipeline)

without shaders the world would be ugly.

more proof the 360 has a better (GPU)

[ULTIMATE_REVENGE]

In that case then Uncharted 2 displayed an excellent use of shaders then any other game which means the PS3 has a better GPU

[jack who]

in that case it would look/run way better with the 360 GPU

[xbollox]

the crytek dude was just being polite, cuz as we all know:

PS3 CPU >>>> 360 CPU
PS3 GPU ==== 360 GPU

isn't that cute?
he actually had to lie a bit so that you desperate b!tches would not commit mass suicide: BWAAAAAAAAAAA HA HA HA HA!

"without shaders the world would be ugly"
you got a point, check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watc...
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
http://www.gamersyde.com/ne...

and in case you couldn't spot it in KZ2 because of sensory overload, here's what's possible today on a platform with the muscle to handle advanced physics:

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

no disrespect :)

[jack who]

whatever helps you sleep at night

[Bladestar]

here it's what it comes down to... we have to wait and see when the first CryEngine game comes out... if that game Look and perform better than Kill Zone 2 or other PS3 games than it's clear Sony lied again.. since they said those weren't possible on any other console but the PS3...

This will prove what many smart people already knew... that code can be optimized, new engines with new algorithms and techniques can be created that are able to continue to push and take advantage of the hardware during the entire console generation.

The xbox 360 is going into it's 4th years soon... (console average lifespan is 5 years) and developers still are creating new game engines that allow game to run and look better proving that there is no such thing as maxed out...

usually the first 2-3 years of a console.. developer dump not optimize code and engines into their games... but as proven with the PS1 and PS2... after the 3rd year... developer continue to release better games...

this can easily be illustrated by running Firefox 1 and Firefox 3 on the same hardware... Firefox is way faster since... it has a new render and javascript engine... games work the same way.

[Bill Gates]

Uncharted 2 > BABOONS.....AHAHHAAHHAHHAHAHAH AA

[DiLeCtioN]

dont ever trust their comparing videos of XBOX360 and PS3. Notice how they showed mostly 360 gameplay in detail and with action, while PS3's footage was mainly based on a zoomed out landscape.

[BobbySaget]

If you guys understood the intricacies of how the hardware of both systems work, you would know that this statement was correct.

As PS3 Fanboys, you fail to understand how your hardware works. Instead you just presume that you console is better or stronger simply because it has a couple of games with good graphics. Realistically this is indicative of less first party support for the 360, and not that the 360 is necessarily a less powerful machine.

If you look at any of the developer videos, you will see that they develop 360 games using a computer. This is because the 360's computeresque design allows for this option. As such, not a single developer has designed an engine or a game that takes advantage SPECIFICALLY of the 360's In-Order 3.2ghz, 3-core, 3-thread processor or for its Xenos graphics chip.

The processor in the PS3 has ONE SINGLE logic processor clocked at 3.2ghz. Attached to this processor are 8 tiny processors called SPU's. Keep in mind that one SPU is locked for "redundancy" and another is locked for the PS3 OS. This means 6 usable SPU's.

So at first look, you can already see that these processors are "similar" in a sense. The 360 Xenon has 5+ threads(1 thread partially used for OS)and the PS3 has 6 SPU's.

What many of you fail to understand is that a 'THREAD' is capable of 'far more' and 'far higher' calculations than a SPU is. Each SPU is essentially a beefed up calculator processor for lack of a better example. HOWEVER each SPU's is generally better at doing calculations somewhat faster, and its better at 'specific' calculations, effectively making it more accurate.

So lets update ourselves!, at this point both processors seem to 'balance out' even though each one has its differences.

When developing a game, or running an engine on the 360, each thread effectively 'Splits' the workload. On top of this, the 360's pooled memory and pooled pipelines split their respective workloads. The added eDRAM allows for more resources to open up, and the 360's GPU is relatively stronger. The PS3 lacks all of these benefits which severely limit the system in many ways, and create several bottlenecks.

This isn't, of course, to say that the PS3 is weak. But i don't think a system has ever existed with as many bottlenecks as the PS3. The PS3's biggest limiting factor, is itself. Another enormous bottleneck posed by the RSX is that it is incapable of streaming high definition textures. In fact, it even has trouble streaming regular high quality textures in realtime (thus why we see dumbed down textures in mutliplat comparsions). The reason this is an issue, is because it sufficiently ruins one of the MAIN REASONS people want Blu-ray. For HD (gaming) textures.

But i digress!. Let me explain how games are exclusively built for the PS3. Since it has the single main logical processor, as stated earlier, in order to take ADVANTAGE of the SPU's you must develop a core game that is ultimately single-threaded/single-cored. Then (and then only) you OPEN up the SPU's to do things like AI, physics, etc.

So when you look at a PS3 game your looking at glorified 'single-core' core. Essentially you have a game that is similar to old Pentium 4 compatible games, you just have the SPU's adding several shaders. effects, etc that make it look stunning.

But the fact of the matter, from a developer standpoint, THERE IS nothing done on either console thus-far that cannot be done on the opposing console. This may change with Uncharted2 but that doesn't mean a nearly identical game nor a possibly better game could be made on the 360. From a theoretical standpoint the 360 is actually more powerful. This is why it is capable of higher AA/AF and its GPU (as stated in this article) is better at shading.

You guys assume that Crytek is saying this so they can be "buddy buddy" and please the consumers of both consoles, but that is ridiculous. Any time an article is not in favor of the PS3 you cannot just ASSUME that it is incorrect.

The fact of the matter is that any NON-PS3 developer will probably tell you that the 360 is more powerful. Maybe it cannot "trick" its players by making a single-core game look flashy (using SPU's). But its the sum of its components are weaker, and it is severely limited by its bottlenecks.

Sony could have put a 4ghz, 4-core, 8-thread, In-Order-processor into the PS3 for the same price as the CELL. If they had done this, there would be no QUESTION who had the more powerful console. The quad-core would have blown the cell out of the water. So instead of blindly believing that Sony did you a favor by incorporating the CELL, next time tell them to take a holistic approach, and give you the "better hardware" instead of the "innovative" hardware.

[BobbySaget]

I didn't have time to edit, i was playing a videogame.

"Realistically this is indicative of less first party support for the 360, and not that the 360 is necessarily a less powerful machine."
- i mean exclusive support, which kind of goes hand in hand with 'first party support"

"From a theoretical standpoint the 360 is actually more powerful. This is why it is capable of higher AA/AF and its GPU (as stated in this article) is better at shading."
- by "this is why" i mean, "this is shown through"...higher AA/AF etc.

"he fact of the matter is that any NON-PS3 developer will probably tell you that the 360 is more powerful. Maybe it cannot "trick" its players by making a single-core game look flashy (using SPU's). But its the sum of its components are weaker, and it is severely limited by its bottlenecks."
-But the Sum of the ((((PS3's)))) components are weaker.

[LostDjinn]

The Xenon in the 360 is rated at 115 GFlops (projected).
The Cell is rated at over 200 GFlops (tested). Even if 2 SPU's can't be used by a game the difference is still massive. Add to that the fact that Xenon is capped by a bottleneck and your statement makes no sense.
Why would you come in here spouting that everyone's a fool and you're the keeper of knowledge just to make yourself look stupid.

Look, let me put it to you like this (very simply).

The 360's FSB is actually 2 gateways. One dedicated to upstream traffic, the other downstream traffic. They act as the link between the CPU and the GPU. Now Microsoft list the throughput of the 360's FSB as 21.6 Gbs (10.8 Gbs x 2). That meaning that the CPU can never send or receive information faster than 10.8 Gbs and has to be sending and receiving at maximum rate to reach 21.6 Gbs. The Xenon can only write to RAM through the FSB. It has no RAM of it's own. So the FSB dictates the usefulness of the CPU in the 360. OK. If Sony were to use the same method of measurement(the FlexIO is the PS3's FSB), the total throughput of data would be 35 Gbs (20 Gbs to the Cell, 'cos it can take it. 15 Gbs to the RSX). That's over 70% more data in the same period just between the CPU and GPU. When you add the fact that the Cell has it's own RAM to write to that's far speedier then that of the 360, you can see that you entire argument is about as believable as your statement: "As PS3 Fanboys, you fail to understand how your hardware works".

Now put away you pathetic Fanboy ways.
If you have games enjoy them.
For the love of God though drop the "I'm the only one who knows what's really going on" bit.

P.S. If you want to get into the eDRAM I'm more than willing to come and discuss it. Just make sure you understand the bottleneck on that one before you go spouting off again.

[bobbysagettwo]

And this is why simply "googling" the differences between the two consoles isn't sufficient. Maybe you should acquire some experience developing for them.

First things first, the gflop performance for either system is nearly identical. AS EXPECTED the SPU's serve to raise the PS3's "theoretical" flop performance. But DO NOT RESULT in a actual measurable difference. that difference is "tested" in a "pefect" environment, that is not indicative of the PS3's actual performance.

Secondly the differences in hardware latency is not relevant in this generation. Both systems give MORE THAN ENOUGH. You cannot give a a single concrete example where the PS3's unique hardware latency is beneficial in any single way. You are attempting to tell me that a 3.2ghz 3core 6thread processor does not support a high enough transfer between itself and the GPU. I don't know if you understand how ridiculous that sounds. How many computers (that are 20x stronger than your PS3) are running with a with a 3.2ghz Dual-core? they have almost identical transfer rates. The only difference is that the 360's CPU is in-order, but so is the PS3's. The Cell having its OWN RAM still does not change the fact that the it is strictly limited to 256MB unlike the 360.

Your post didn't compromise my post in any way. You only addressed one specific part of my post, and ignored the rest of it. Not to mention you were incorrect in your representation

The reason my post was oversimplified was because i was trying to appeal to everyone in the forum. Your misrepresentation is only serving to fuel the fire. Instead of reading my semi-unbiased post, they will read your completely-biased post and ONCE AGAIN take a defensive stance albeit based on false information.

The 360 only REAL FLAW (besides the previously unreliable hardware) is that its too powerful. As we have seen so far, this allows developers to just SLAP a game into the 360 and have it run great. The PS3 on the other hand practically REQUIRES A GAME TO BE EXCLUSIVELY DESIGNED FOR IT in order for it to run properly.

Hopefully the 360 will see some ACTUAL exclusive development in its future. But until then you PS3 fanboys would 'do good' knowing how your system ACTUALLY works instead of just spaming "ThE CELL" and "Blu-ray" all over the forums!

I can almost guarantee you that if you were designing a videogame console without any prior knowledge of the PS3 or 360, you would develop one like the Xbox 360. Its design is ridiculously complementary and powerful. The PS3 is simply based on the "lets fill it with new fancy stuff" principle. And in this regard, all of its parts do not complement one another. For example, the RSX and the CELL? that's like putting together a Video card from 1990 and a CPU from 2010. As i said, Sony could have simply put in a quad-core processor and created a system 100x better than the 360. Instead they forced the CELL upon their users, and the result is a console that "in some cases maybe kinda looks better than the 360", but cant even do AA/AF and HDR properly.

[Borat Sagdiyev]

Will look better on 360....pause NOT!

[ULTIMATE_REVENGE]

in that case the game would look rubbish because no game on the 360 has matched Uncharted 2 on the PS3 using advanced shaders, and plus there's a heavy load of polygons running on the screen at 1 time with a heafty amount of physics going in that 1 scene, so NO! it would look rubbish on the 360

[chidori666]

i prefer engine of killzone 2.

[LiquifiedArt]

Until then...All the PR nonsense and "we are using the using the system to the fullest" is all Bullsh@t.

No 3rd Party developer is using the PS3 to the fullest nor do they really want to. Lowest common denominator rule applies. This is why GG should license that KZ2 engine out to Internal Sony Studios. Infact i'd go a step further. Sony should pay them more just to develop the engine beyond the scope of shooters and hire staff just for Engine suppot. Similar to UE3. Keep it as part of Sony's internal advancements on their playstation platform and pay GG more so they can hire separate staff to learn and support the engine!!

Then all Sony 1st part games would be out of this world.

EDIT:
on a sidenote, anyone that honestly doenst see the quality difference in PS3 games VISUALLY as well as with animations, particles and physics is lieing. Pure and simple. I for the first time months ago played Xbox top game... Gears of war and thought to myself (this game is not next gen) It looked Great for Xbox but average for PS3 and everything from animations to physics and beyond looked last gen.

[ForROME]

True, I dont have a PS3 but its safe to say the 360 graphic wise is causing engines to be dummied down a bit, sad.

[KingKionic]

Well in single player gears 2 is just...amazing... in mulyiplayer ill still say gears of war 1 graphics are a tad better. I dont know why though..werid. But gears 2 overall is good.

Just look at this pics graphhics...my gosh
http://i38.tinypic.com/1z18...

EDIT on topic

Also i cant wait to see what they do with this engine on consoles. Even if it doesn't surpass the cry engine 2 i still would like to see some amazing games.

[xg-ei8ht]

Actually the RSX has better texture filtering then xenon. Whether it's used or not is upto the devs.

AA on the other hand is done by the edram. 10mb to be exact. Daughter die.

Which yes was a clever approach to this problem and since ati pushed this type of method first i was impressed. Of course that's why Nvidia did unified after ati had done it, i remember them saying it wasn't needed at the time.

RSX either does x2aa, or quincnix, close to x4aa with slight blur.

Both are close when it comes to bandwidth for the system.

On the topic of cell.

In video encoding cell destroys quadcore by quite a margin.

Even using half the resources it does recode in half the time.

http://www.tgdaily.com/cont...

The question is, does this translate into games.

But the other problem is you cannot compare a game written for 360 and ported to PS3, Because of the obvious core difference and how the engines are setup, spu's etc.

From what i've heard and learnt, orange box used no SPU'S at all, was all done on the single core. And that's the reason for it being a poor conversion, and totally makes sense. The main power of cell comes from it's SPU'S.

Also comes down to who you believe.

CRYTEK
ND
INSOMNIAC
EPIC.
etc.

Neither of these companies wants to go out on a limb and say the 360 is better or the ps3 is better, it's bad business.

COD3 had higher quality shaders on the ps3 version, but when comparisons were shown, they had limited turned on. Which inturn made the ps3 look worse.(to bright)

GTA4 higher rez and aa on 360.
But does the $50 million ms gave them make a difference, and since sony's console was a year late, it's much more likely the 360 was the lead platform and was up and running and optimized alot sooner.

Tombraider underworld, lots of shaders and yet runs higher rez with better shadows and self shadowing only on the ps3 version.

http://forum.beyond3d.com/s...

A well respected source. Know's what he's talking about.

So it depends on many things, But overall i'd give the nod to the PS3 for graphics, it just depends who's hands they are in.

I don't think you'll see night and day between in the two most of the time,360 pushes some sweet visuals.

But when i look at some of the PS3 games. I give it the nod.

I also just bought Unreal 3. and i'm very impressed with the work they've done on the PS3 version, smooth as butter. Tons of maps. Clean visuals. Can't really knock it tbh.

[mynd]

Actually the TR thing was rubbish, it did exhibt higher resolution but the self shadwoing etc was actually a fault in both systems, when you did a certian thing all the shadows and effects disappeared.
http://www.lensoftruth.com/...

There is a reason why most 360 games have a higher resolution on multiplat games, because the "actual" bandwidth used between vram<-Gpu-> is higher. Again its thanks to the edram.

[324110493]

No Evidence= An Opinion and Not a Fact

[Obama]

The bots are still using gears 2 to showoff the 360's graphical power. How sad can they be??

[KingKionic]

Well im a fan of the game. There are other games that surpass gears ,im not denying that.

Just wanted to show the game does have some good graphics.

[CobraKai]

I just want someone, anyone, to replace the overused and seriously outdated (even with the upgrades) Unreal Engine as the licensed engine of choice.

[ssipmraw]

better physics = better frame rate > better graphics

you could have a game as realistic looking as life but is pointless when the game is incapable of supporting itself

[Diabloz]

Crysis for ps3!

[LostDjinn]

As for your comment: "You cannot give a a single concrete example where the PS3's unique hardware latency is beneficial in any single way."

http://www.neogaf.com/forum...

For those of you that can't be bothered looking, it's a Ray Tracing and Procedural Texturing benchmark that was done to test the PS3, 360 and 8800GTS.

How'd it end up there Bobby?
Oh that's right.

PS3: 1.2 seconds to complete the task.
8800GTS: 5 seconds to complete the task.
360: 10 seconds to complete the task.

Now does that mean the 360 can't be fun to play? No it doesn't.
It does show your whole "the 360 is too perfect" bit is a rather large turd sandwich though. Still you don't seem to mind munching it down.

Now let me be perfectly clear when I say this. The power is and always will be with the PC. Of the consoles the PS3 wins but still loses to the PC. It doesn't make the 360 worthless, it just means that it doesn't have the same horsepower.

God! Even M$ don't try and lie that big.

[Tone]

Once again, a lot of you are making out that you know more than developers... i have to laugh!!

[gamingparadise]

as far as i know, if the engine turns out successfully for the pc, ps3, and 360, then it doesn't matter who get's it first or which of the 3 provides better graphic quality(really? some people arguing over pixels and animations on a screen?) for gamers, it doesn't really matter about the graphics, but the game and gameplay are what really counts.

[lizzbeester]

People just don't seem to understand that though... at the end of the day they all provide entertainment which is basically their purpose, so people should just get over with it!

Some people must have their pants in a REAL twist to be fighting over graphics, if people disagree with me then that's their choice but it just proves my point further that people just won't grow up...