Halo: Reach VS Crysis 2 Hi-Def Screenshot Comparison

Recently Bungie told Industry Gamers that, "for Reach we definitely we went back and overhauled all of our tech to make something that could hold up this holiday compared to other titles that we really did feel like would raise the bar on the visual side and certainly, to be more specific, for animation," this according to Bungie's community manager Brian Jarrard.

Not to be outdone, Crytek has said it's game that was once exclusive to PC, and deemed the best looking title on any platform will not disappoint on consoles either.

Read Full Story >>
Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
alphakennybody3498d ago (Edited 3498d ago )

where should I start huh...? nevermind, I'll leave it to the peeps below

edit: @ micheal I know crysis looks better but you know this is N4G, anything can happen.

Michael Myers3498d ago (Edited 3498d ago )

killzone 2 vs crysis would be a better match.

RememberThe3573498d ago

But you gotta admit that Reach looks damn good.

LordMarius3498d ago

ummm is this comparison a joke? April Fools?

kaveti66163498d ago

Reach looks pretty good, but looking at Crysis 2 makes me wish Bungie had hired some smarter engine developers.

Kratos Spartan3498d ago (Edited 3498d ago )

nvrmind sorry wrong reply

presto7173498d ago

I mean, come on. Lets be realistic here....

xTruthx3498d ago

IMO, Halo Reach should be the best looking game on any console. You know the $ they have made ? almost as much as the COD series and its on one platform. They should be able to make an amazing engine with all that money and create amazing games. SO I really don't know whats the prob, dk if they wanna be cheap or 360 is holding them back, because what other reasons could there be ? I'm just being honest, look at halo sales and look at kz1 sales and yet kz2 gets really optimized engine for the PS3 when kz1 didn't even sell. If kz1 had the success of halo how would their games be looking now ?

HolyOrangeCows3498d ago (Edited 3498d ago )

Halo: Reach's screenshots are obviously "in-engine" gameplay from PC. If that were Reach playing on the 360 in native 1080p and with a ridiculous amount of AA, I would eat my own shoe.

I mean it. Quote me on that. If Reach plays on the 360 in NATIVE 1080p with over 2xAA like in Bungie's screenshots, I will eat my shoe and post my eating of that shoe on Youtube.

3XP3498d ago

So many ignorant, close minded fools on this site.

u got owned3498d ago

We'll see which one is the better game... My vote goes to Halo Rech.
Crisis might look better, but when it comes to features, multiplayer and gameplay, Halo is second to none.

4Sh0w3498d ago

Reach looks awesome next to Crsisy2 hopefully Crysis2 delivers the goods in gameplay too, I think it will. Bungie should be congratulated on putting so much more into this game, they could have easily released another ODST caliber sidequest and still made some better than average sales with very little effort, I remember saying I was a bit dissapointed with ODST, but seeing what they are doing with Reach has me excited for Halo again. As it stands now the game looks phenominal, but I wouldn't trade what Halo does so well for Crysis-PC level graphics.

iamtehpwn3498d ago

God to my big toe?

...Oh wait.

Army_of_Darkness3498d ago

Hmmmm... what to choose?? standard or HI definition??... Dammit, such a difficult discission!!!

gta28003498d ago

Come on man. Stop being mean! that's not fair! Comparing Crysis 2's graphics to Halo Reach is like comparing a Lamborghini to a Ford Focus lmao

kalebgray923498d ago

why do they have artwork there though?

BattleAxe3498d ago

This is a clear attempt to make Halo look bad, and boy....does it ever.

sid4gamerfreak3498d ago

oh f***, here we go again....

You know what the best looking game out there with the best graphics ever? Crysis 2 on a pc.

NaiNaiNai3498d ago

Arnon I'm on your side.

Most of the people on N4G have one console or another shoved up there butts.

But Crysis Engine is the clear winner here.

pixelsword3498d ago (Edited 3498d ago )

That will make the difference.

I hope it's from the 360, as I love the Halo series minus how Sarge died so ignominiously versus having Chief going out in a blaze of glory. If they iced chief in a gallant way, Halo would've been the stuff of legend.

That's the thing: Halo 3 was supposed to be Chief's sendoff, like how MGS4 was Snakes. Bungie, messing that up, was the biggest mistake they made in the series. They could've brought someone back from Reach to connect Reach to the next Halo game. That would've been smart writing to have a sense of continuity between Reach and the next game.

MrMacabre3498d ago

Haha this comparison is just cruel, like Courtney love vs Megan Fox 0_o

SPACEBALL 13498d ago

i have played crisis on pc and as for gameplay... it sucks real bad... prolly one of the most boring games i have ever played, sure it looks nice, but thats not everything. reach will be the much better game either way.

this article is just another way for the ps3 fanboys to bash reach.

wicko3498d ago

Actually I really liked Crysis gameplay, I guess you just don't know what to do in a shooter if it doesn't shove you down a corridor.

Fanb0y3498d ago

I'm sorry, this article is total fail.

Those Crysis 2 'screens' are bullshots, taken from the PC version, not the consoles. It's quite obvious they're heavily touched up.

Those Halo Reach screens were from the pre-thanksgiving build. You can tell from the differences in texture quality on the Assault Rifle - and the newer builds don't have the glowing blue screen on it.

However, the Reach screenshots work in a comparison because they're taken from the 'Theater' mode. The only difference in graphics from the actual game is the anti-aliasing. The actual game will undeniably have some jaggies, covered up with film grain, motion blur, and such.

HSx93498d ago

This is like comparing Super Mario 64 and Crash Bandicoot

Projekt7tuning3498d ago

honestly, what is the point of this comparison? I have a pretty beefy computer setup that's SLI, and I still have trouble maxing out Crysis 1 at my monitors native resolution.(which is 1900x1200) So Crysis 2 should be unbelievable and need one bad mofo of a computer to push it to the max. So why take a game like that and do a comparison to a console game? I don't care if its PS3 or 360, I would have a hard time believing either one will have a game that will look as good or better as a dx11 game that can punish a modern gaming rig. This is really a stupid comparison. Is this just to try and make Reach or the 360 look bad? Or just some lame attempt to prove PC superiority in games? I don't get it and want my 2 minutes back for looking at there site.

vhero3498d ago

But Halo Reach won't be in HD when released so this is a pointless comparison it will be 540p like the rest of the games an nearly every other 360 "exclusive" (I use that term lightly as this is the 360 here)lately. Anyways even if it was HD this is crysis people only a stupid fanboy would EVER think a Halo game on 360 could compare to it. No console game can compare to a PC HD game right now. PC has surpassed consoles already..

SaberEdge3498d ago (Edited 3498d ago )

I don't care what any fanboys say, Halo Reach holds up very well to any other FPS in the graphics department. It looks awesome. I am also willing to bet that Halo Reach will be the far better game in terms of gameplay. That's not to say that I am not looking forward to Crysis 2, because I am. Kind of strange comparison anyway, since some of the Crysis 2 shots are not even screenshots, but rather artwork.

If you want to know my honest opinion, out of the best-looking upcoming shooters I personally think that Killzone 3 will be the best-looking, with Crysis 2 being second and Halo Reach being third. But its not like any of them are going to be bad-looking games. Every one of them is going to be enjoyable to look at and play.

Mamba243497d ago


Sooo you're saying Reach and Crysis2 are both skanks?

JsonHenry3497d ago

The fidelity of the Crysis 2 screens blows Halo out of the water.

mxrider23497d ago

i agree with you but disagree about halo being 3rd in graphics they terrible socom 4 and MOH will pass it up with ease

kunit22c3497d ago

Umm Halo reach is on the 360... so how can it compete with Crysis 2?

RedPawn3497d ago

Mario 64 vs Crash Bandicoot.


Horrible comparison You could of said Mario Galaxy vs Crash Bandicoot.

+ Show (29) more repliesLast reply 3497d ago
Das_Bastardion3498d ago

this kind of comparisons only shows how limited is the Xbox360 graphical power, no more, no less.

kaveti66163498d ago

Das Bastardion, don't kid yourself for one minute into thinking that the PS3 is so much better.

They're both old tech. The PS3 fulls off amazing games thanks to amazing devs who can squeeze a quarter out of a dime, but the hardware itself was outdated on launch day, so really, what's the point in bashing one underpowered hunk of silicon and praising another underpowered hunk of silicon.

MAG_SVER3498d ago (Edited 3498d ago )

You are a crackhead, what's outdated since launch are you retarded. Seriously do not comment if you are going to make a fool of yourself,

If the Ps3 is outdated then Humanity is nearing EXTINCTION & 2012 is real, & if you have a brain then you will know how to correlate that sentence.

Can we say Public Troll # 1 :)..


trancefreak3498d ago (Edited 3498d ago )

Ill take the barrage of ps3 exclusives any day than having 1 game to stare @ and say wooo that looks purty (Crysis) with my uber core i7, 4-way sli, million watt power supply lol.

Seriously though I wouldnt mind having a rig like that hehe.

The ps3 though man that thing is a beastly piece of silicon.

A change in the wind3498d ago

"don't kid yourself for one minute into thinking that the PS3 is so much better."
Oh, but I do. People love to talk, yet NO GAME on the 360 reaches Heavy Rain, Uncharted 1, Uncharted 2, Killzone 2 or God of War 3 visuals. Not even close. "Old tech" I could give a f*ck about the "tech" I let the games do the talking.

AngryTypingGuy3498d ago (Edited 3498d ago )

The PS3 fanboys on this website will never admit it, but Halo: Reach is looking amazing. Does it look as good as Crysis 2? Not quite, but it fares pretty well to most games, especially when you compare it to the outdated Halo 3 engine. I have to doubt that the game play will be amazing, and I plan on getting Reach on day one.

AngryTypingGuy3498d ago

Oops, I meant "I have NO doubt" :-)

snipermk03497d ago

seriously? That's like comparing Da Vinci's art to dog poop. Not gonna name which is which. ;)

AngryTypingGuy3497d ago

Hey, what do you want from me? I said that Crysis looks better, but Halo looks great too, something PS3 fanboys would NEVER admit, because they are mentally incapable of ever acknowledging anything remotely positive about the PS3 or one of its games.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 3497d ago
Natsu X FairyTail3498d ago

crysis got the better engine. so it looks better.

Inside_out3498d ago

There will be line ups at every video game distribution outlet in North America to buy Halo Reach...Nothing like it in gaming...NO video game offers as much in single player or Multi player...Was at the toy store the other day...Many lego halo kits available...Hmmm...I don't think anybody heard of KZ2, Crysis or UC2...LMFAO...

Haters will be haters...Reach will be huge, and laugh all the way to the bank...Reach looks AWESOME BTW...There isn't 2 PC's set up the same Crysis have the better graphics...ofcourse...It runs on the latest and greatest hardware...Who cares if it isn't accessible to the average gamer...PC community lost in polygons...Best games are on console...PC good for farm-ville ( 73 million and counting ) and pirating stuff...LMFAO....

Millions and MILLIONS of gamers will be playing Halo Reach ( and loving it ) in September...Haters can go back to counting polygons for games nobody wants or cares

RedPawn3497d ago

Multiplayer yes.

I'm not hating on Halo, but I can think of a ton more games w/better single player experience

Reach does look good though.

borgome3498d ago (Edited 3498d ago )

It appears that Halo Reach A.K.A.(Game of the Year), owns in the graphic department as well.

B~~~~~ <<< This is my bum pooping on Droids! haha

n4gn4gn4gn4g3498d ago

if Halo DOESN'T look better it is freaking shameful. If a multiplat engine is outdoing a purpose built engine you are doing something wrong.

kaveti66163498d ago


Bungie's a good developer and all, but in the tech department they are very short-handed. As Crysis 2 on Xbox 360 proves, it's not really the 360 that is holding Reach back from looking better. Bungie either don't have the talent, or they're using the resources to push for larger areas or something.

Arnon3498d ago (Edited 3498d ago )

So what happens if it looks nicer than every PS3 shooter out there? Does that mean the developers are doing something wrong? :/

Anyways, it's pretty obvious that Crysis 2 looks nicer than Halo: Reach.

Arnon3498d ago (Edited 3498d ago )

I like GIF files too. Now how about showing a still JPEG image to compare the games? I guarantee you that if I had a GIF of that nanosuit jumping through fire shooting people, it would blow that Killzone 2 GIF out of the water.


Sorry. Crysis 2 looks nicer, and I'm sure it's going to be one of, if not the nicest looking console game as well.

Gradient3498d ago (Edited 3498d ago )

Now post some video of Crysis 2 running on consoles, I want to see how laughable the framerate is.

Edit: I see you've added even more bullshots to your post.

Just show me Crysis 2 running on consoles, that's all.

HolyOrangeCows3498d ago (Edited 3498d ago )

Good job finding pre-alpha pics of Killzone 2.
If you really think the final version of Killzone 2 looks like that, you obviously haven't played it.

I'll wait and see how the game actually runs on the consoles before I start comparing it to other games like Killzone 2.

Arnon3498d ago (Edited 3498d ago )

First, I would like to ask if you even know what a framerate is, because your post had nothing to do with what was just conveyed? Or better yet, do you even know what bullshots are, because you used them in the incorrect manner?

Second, believe it or not, Crysis is that pretty. I can post screenshots of the original Crysis from my own game, if you'd like.

Here's a couple of tech demos:

[email protected]

Those screenshots are of the latest Killzone 2 pictures on IGN. They were posted May 20th, 2009. Almost an entire month AFTER the game was released.

There's proof, and yes, I had over 70% of all the trophies for Killzone 2 until they updated it and added more for the multiplayer aspect of the game.

HolyOrangeCows3498d ago (Edited 3498d ago )

An engine tech demonstration doesn't exactly reflect how an action-packed game will run on it.

Give it up. Metro 2033 on the 360 isn't a graphical powerhouse and it's not comparable to Killzone 2.

beans3498d ago (Edited 3498d ago )

Why don't you guys post some KZ2 VS Metro 2033 shots. I can tell you right now Metro looks better.

edit holy orange: Yes it is although it has some rough spots.

Tekton0143498d ago (Edited 3498d ago )

lol your serious? Crysis looked like trash, but it did come out in 2007, i've maxed it out with a 5970, without hi-res texture mods and real-lifesis config it looks just like any other game. and seriously, good job finding multiplayer shots, everyone knows the visuals are downgraded for multiplayer in Killzone 2 to maintain 32 player battles and a steady framerate, now i ask you, have you even played Killzone 2?

if were comparing the Metro 2033, were comparing the console version, which i'm not referencing to the 360 because it doesn't matter, Metro 2033 has a great atmosphere, it makes you feel like your apart of the game and progress with it, but it doesn't do anything technically what Killzone 2 hasn't and it came out a year before. were not just talking about a few hi-res resolution maps, Killzone 2 looks aesthetically pleasing on many levels.

Arnon3498d ago (Edited 3498d ago )

Does that make you feel better? Lol... the game does not look better than Crysis 2:

(both of these from this VERY article)

let alone Crysis:

[email protected]

Why do I get the feeling that the CryEngine 3 will run at 30 FPS on consoles; the exact same framerate as Killzone 2? In fact, how are you even able to judge a framerate based off of a youtube video showcasing a tech demo? Also, Anti-Aliasing has nothing to do with HDR lighting, or shaders for that matter.

Gradient3498d ago

Nah I don't know what framerate is man, I'm just a simple-minded folk i.e All I know is that CryEngine 3 runs like 20 day old horse sh*t on consoles. I don't know why it runs like complete trash.

I definitely have no clue as to why every single video showing the CryEngine3 - on consoles- has been accompanied by an absolutely horrendous framerate.

Don't know about AA and it's impact on performance, shaders, HDR, non of that. Just a simple-minded folk who can tell the difference between 30fps and 10fps.

Hmm, I wonder why console developers are staying the f*ck away from the CryEngine 3. HMMM....

alphakennybody3498d ago

@ arnon, you do know some the last last crysis shots are fake right?
by the way those kz2 shot are nothing compared to what I'm seeing on my 42 inch 1080p samsung. Crysis is a great looking game, that is something everyone should accept, but that is also its problem. It looks good but the atmosphere and rest is average. KZ2 on the other not only the visual is great but the atmosphere and animation takes it on a level of its own.

Arnon3498d ago

I agree with you on that. I found Killzone 2's art style to be much more appealing, but Crysis was most certainly a much more inveigling title. Also, I believe those aren't fake at all. They're modded levels that people created.

Here's a screenshot from the main story of Crysis (my Crysis, to be exact), running with the RealLifesis mod:

WetN00dle693498d ago

Just wish people would stop pulling KZ2 out of their ***.

ChozenWoan3498d ago (Edited 3498d ago )

You really need to take a second look at these vids you posted

I just watched both at 720p and not any of the console footage came close to the bullshots you posted earlier... especially of the nanosuits. At that resolution and coming from youtube, I must say yes Crysis will look great. At the same time, I didn't see anything from the console versions that matched KZ2. Like I said, the vids are from youtube so I feel that that was a major factor in the quality of the vids.

As far as Halo: Reach goes, I still feel Bungie is not pushing the envelope. I like the new art direction, but I feel they are only taking a half step into the right direction.

Bhai3498d ago (Edited 3498d ago )

@Arnon, Hahhah, you are comparing Crysis 2 bullshots(which the devs themselves conveyed that are cryengine render works) with online mode of Killzone-2... bravo, shows your desperation to dethrown KZ2. I think you didn't know the two images you keep posting above are from "Thunder and Lightening" map pack of KZ2... your comparison remains pointless to say the least.

We don't even know how crysis2 will look for right now it has only given out either PC level bullshots(extreme AA and resolutions), or shown a minute long tech-demo that basically says nothing.

While, in KZ2:
The volumetrics of KZ2,
bouncing particle FX,
number of NPCs onscreen,
destructible environments in KZ2,
water rendering,
cloth simulation in KZ2,
some of the richest parallax mapping,
Physics-impulse induced character animations(especially for Helghan)
32 player online etc.
...are all extra stuff in KZ2 to just being looking good and having one of the finest lighting techs ever!!!, and yes as killer looking KZ2 is, its as complete with solid story and execution. We'll say Crysis 2 goodluck to even begin to top all that :)

sikbeta3498d ago


That was lame, I don't know if you did it on purpose, but those KZ2-MP Shots can't be compared with SP gameplay pics from other games, leave alone the nice-bullshots

If you bring some SP pics, but you probably didn't play KZ2, so you think those pics you posted are from the SP-Campaign, well is not your fault, is the Internet and Google-Images...

sGIBMBR3498d ago

Wowwww, you bunch of deluded fanboys "lol your serious? Crysis looked like trash" actually thinking Killzone looks better than crysis makes me p!ss my pants laughing, its a joke.

Killzone looks incredible, but you ps3 FANBOYS give it way to much credit. But yeah whatever, fanboys will be fanboys and they are so far up their respected companies asses, its untrue!

Arnon3498d ago (Edited 3498d ago )

Here is what Crysis 2 looks like. They're the exact same images from this very article, and this is now the 3rd time I'm posting them. I also posted single player screenshots of Killzone 2 because I had someone complain they were multiplayer as well.

Killzone 2 Single Player (posted twice, now):

Yes, Killzone 2 is a good looking game. Yes, Killzone 2 is, as of right now, the nicest looking shooter available on consoles. No, Killzone 2 does not look better than Crysis or Crysis 2 from screenshots we've seen so far.

I also cant believe Bhai is trying to tout Killzone 2's technical aspects as if they're something to awe over.

The volumetrics of KZ2 - Volumetrics of what, exactly?
bouncing particle FX, - I guarantee you the CryEngine 2 and 3 are much better at this.
number of NPCs onscreen - A whopping total of 6-7 enemies on-screen, at once.
destructible environments in KZ2 - There are no destructible environments in Killzone 2. Only pre-scripted ones. Unless of course you consider shooting tile and cement from pillars destructible and amazing.
water rendering - Can you actually find me any rendering for water in Killzone 2 that didn't look like a skybox or flat surface?...
cloth simulation in KZ2 - Bad Company 2 has this down much better (
some of the richest parallax mapping,
Physics-impulse induced character animations(especially for Helghan)
32 player online etc."

Crysis particle physics:

You guys seriously give Killzone 2 way too much credit for the game it is.

GiantEnemyCrab3498d ago

So when it comes to graphics we don't include the PC? So if a game is 360/PC we can't forget about the PC.. But when doing graphics comparison we should just ignore it? The thing is either a gaming platform or it isn't...

Of course Crysis 2 is going to look better when they compare PC screenshots to a pre-alpha build. Why was this even done? To further slag off Reach.. Give it your best shot fanboys, it will not stop this juggernaut of a game.

And I have to agree with 3.19 that if you really think KZ2 matches Crysis you are delusional. I own KZ2 and have played Crisis on not even maxed out settings and it was incredible. Not only visually but technically it wipes the floor with any game out there. KZ2 is incredible but saying better than Crysis is pushing it.