Check out this comparison between PS3, Xbox 360 and PC for Crysis 2.
is the looker out of the 3 but it sucks that we are yet to get dx 11 support for it
They had released patch for the pc version but contrary to what Crytek promised there was no DX 11 included.
according to DigitalFoundry: "The unavoidable conclusion we came to is that when frame-rate does crash in those affected areas, it's actually Crysis 2 on PS3 that holds up better." "however, close up, it's clear that shadows are somewhat more blocky and unattractive on the Microsoft console." "Bearing in mind the limited nature of the 3D support, it doesn't really factor into the purchasing decision – but the PS3 undoubtedly gives the better picture here." "this makes Crysis 2 one of the most inconsistent performers released in recent times. In these situations, it seems that it is the Xbox 360 version that has the most difficulties, though there's no mistaking that both platforms seem to lag badly in much the same areas"
@malandra Way to be one-sided... I suggest everyone just read the DF article themselves and not trust malandra. http://www.eurogamer.net/ar... (The conclusion in the article is actually more like... Inconclusive. Which is good for everyone, I guess.)
@ malandra Way to troll fanboy, I guess you didn't read the conclusion. "There's little doubt that the Xbox 360 is the cleaner, crisper experience and for the most part it commands a small but significant frame-rate advantage and fewer little glitches; especially outside of combat scenarios, the game just seems to run that much more smoothly." "On balance, 360 has the edge in terms of visuals and general performance." SMH at you being an idiot like most wouldn't have read the comparison. We can all be fanboys and be selective can't we?
PS3 maintains a consistent fps during intense action scenes there for it runs and plays better. PS3 has better gamma/light levels http://images.eurogamer.net... 360 http://images.eurogamer.net... LoT has other examples of how poor the gamma/lighting is for 360 http://bit.ly/hikTvk PS3 has no screen tearing at all So all in all where it counts, the PS3 tops the 360. Enjoy those few extra pixels while I'll enjoy the gameplay and everything else. @people saying it's the same It's most definitely not a tie. The 360 suffers from screen tearing, erratic/inconsistent fps, poor gamma/light levels.... how is that the same as the PS3 version? They need to compare MP next.
If they don't have displacement maps generated for all the art, then what is the point of releasing a dx11 version of it??? just sayan...
There are still more to DX11 than tessellation, but yeah you're mostly right...
PC version is the looker out of the 3 but it sucks that we are yet to get dx 11 support for it, Thats true, im gonna finish it once on ps3 for the trophies and then again on max on my pc.
Why are we still arguing about this when Killzone 3 looks better anyway.
Id say they both do things better than the other but there are parts of crysis 2 that blow away killzone 3. in parts its simply unbelievable
The people who were in denial have nowhere to run now. The game is out, people are seeing it running for themselves, and we can all see; it is a barely enhanced console port on PC. What a disappointment, I only wish the people in denial would have realized this sooner, rather than bashing everyone who dared to criticise a unreleased game. As if it can magically turn into a PC lead title in the last month of development...
OMG! I don't see much difference between the PS3 and Xbox 360 versions..what was all the noise?
360 version runs better. and certain instances looks better, look at IGN's review
ign is exaggerating everything... and I thought the reviewer founded himself in some black hole of some company ( no objectivity as a result) ( I know you can't be fully objective...but you can try too)
PS3 version is 2 frames less on average, but has zero screen tearing. The resolution is less than the 360 according to DF but not LOT. I dont care to really get in it. Both versions are great and the PC destroys both of them. End..
If '360 version runs better. and certain instances looks better' is what you got from IGN then you should realise that it contradicts what IGN said about the two versions earlier which was that the PS3 version is signigicantly worse. You really shouldn't be taking their words so seriously.
@NukaCola you can't say the pc version destroys both since it is only an enhanced console port to tell you the truth. No doubt it looks the best, but if it destroyed them, one would assume it was absolutely optimized and designed for the pc ground up in every way which is not the case
@Raf1k1 "If '360 version runs better. and certain instances looks better' is what you got from IGN then you should realise that it contradicts what IGN said about the two versions earlier which was that the PS3 version is signigicantly worse. You really shouldn't be taking their words so seriously." IGN is a reliable games website. They played and beat all versions of the game so i do take their word. Perhaps what you are reffering to earlier when ign said it destroyed the ps3 version is when they were comparing beta MP demos in which the case the PS3 demo was flawed and taken off the network as a result. The final version reviews of both games seem reliable because they are the final build.
Rofl yeah, since IGN is a very reliable source xD look at lensoftruth pics/analysis they are identical, but the 360 has a little smoother framerate and screen tearing while the PS3 is vsynced. In other words: It's a tie.
360 version runs better. and certain instances looks better, look at IGN's review Thats not true at all it has like 1.4fps highrer average which is nothing and has screen tearing and no vsync , and btw going by what ign says is like me reviewing bulletstorm or gears.
i just bought this game over killzone3 ... i am soo disappointed, i hope it gets better im terribly regretting my choice... and it doesnt look nowhere near as killzone 3.. i ve seen both of them running so much hype... jesus
Aren't you all bored of comparing crysis 2 yet?
Yes, How many times do they have to do this.
Especially with small compressed images.
gamers complain gamers complain
really stand out as the best, its in motion when you really see what a games like, i learned that with bulletstorm.
PLEASE NO MORE!!!!!!!!! NO MORE COMPARISONS!!!!!!!
No more of these console comparisons. They look the same more or less. Digital Foundry did a comparison and its the best so far. After that. We need no more of these for this game
there has been 100 artlcies about comparison i dont think any one cares any more i am sure everyone is enjoying playing there game on there console and dont care any more about Comparing it any more
Damn comparisons! The multiplayer's full of bugs, people still talking about `it looks better on my fanboyed platform`
PC version Number one- But all version cool-
fuck all y'all, my amstrad gx4000 version wipes the floor all of them
Enough with this. Okay, while you people are arguing pointlessly, I'm gonna go enjoy the game. I win. ;]
Crytek outdone themselves, the game looks amazing on all consoles but of course and once again the PC claims it for the lightening, the shading the Anisotropic filtering, the Field of View even the Anti Aliasing
kind of Disappointing really. I have a PS3, I have a TOP spec PC with GTX 580 I was expecting for the PC version to completely OBLITERATE the consoles version but guess i was wrong.
It does. These are just bad screenshots. If you were to actually see both versions running next to each other, there's a world of difference.
It does. These are just bad screenshots. If you were to actually see both versions running next to each other, there's a world of difference. Not true panda because unfortunatley its a console port and i know cause im running it on max easily and crysis 1 and warhead look better. pc looks better but not as much as it should is what im trying to say.
Thats not because its a port, its multiplat which did hold back the pc version some. But heck crysis is/was just too demanding to get looking nice at a good framerate. Im happy with crysis 2 overall, just needs better graphic options.
Well if better lighting, better antialiasing, at a higher resolution than 1080P, at greater than 30 FPS isn't "obliterating the PS3 version"(and the 360 version obviously) then WHAT the hell is?
Better physics, adjustable fov (console command), and overall jist less a blurry mess.
Killzone 3 does
In all honesty I expected way more from the PC version. From the looks of things, the PC version doesn't look that much better than the console versions. Of course, PC still has the performance edge..
But it does, theres alot.of blur masking the console faults.
PC is the best. Everyone complained when no one could play crysis, now everyone complains because it looks great but isn't a Juggernaut melting processors. Consider this, crytek was able to create one of the best looking console games ever, and PC is clearly better. Would u all have been happier if the consoles just didn't look as good...most likely. I am happy, though that the ps3 is at least as good as the Xbox. IMO, they probably could have made it even better, but i am very pleased w the outcome. And yeah, Xbox runs at 29 fps and ps3 between 27-29, which no one will ever notice. Hey activision, before u put out mw3, have a serious meeting w crytek and guerilla, maybe that can point u in the right direction.
its pretty sad that these days all most gamers care about is graphics. it doesn't matter how emotionally gripping the story is, or how good the game feels. If it doesn't look good noone will touch it. and that's digraceful that its become a main medium that people look at when judging a game.
The game has to atleast work right, something the console version often fails at.
It has always been about the graphics..
All this booyah because IGN could not wait for the final version and was too excited to declare XB360 the winner. The game looks equal. No screen tearing on PS3 and 2fps on average higher on XB360. Big whoop. Getting my copy tomorrow.
There's little doubt that the Xbox 360 is the cleaner, crisper experience and for the most part it commands a small but significant frame-rate advantage and fewer little glitches; especially outside of combat scenarios, the game just seems to run that much more smoothly. However, there are parts of the game that seem to be brutally unoptimised, bringing the performance level crashing down to the point where the afflicted sections become almost unplayable - a variable 15-20FPS update in an intense fire-fight is hugely disorientating, and this makes Crysis 2 one of the most inconsistent performers released in recent times.In these situations, it seems that it is the Xbox 360 version that has the most difficulties, though there's no mistaking that both platforms seem to lag badly in much the same areas. Interestingly, the really poor-performing sections do seem isolated to specific areas in the campaign, and from the hive infiltration level onwards things seemed to improve, but it's quite difficult to believe that those areas of the game got through QA without someone, somewhere raising the red flag.
This is a brilliant engine, just look how close they all look, Crytek are here to stay!
jesus man, just get the version you prefer.
Console hold the pc.back here, but the consoles cant even run the game.right. A slightly tweaked pc version is leaps.and bounds better than the console version, sorry folks.
got it for the 360 not a problem with it think it looks great plays great im enjoying it so far
got it for ps3.... game looks and plays great. smooth and consistant really enjoying the campaign. crytek did an awesome job alround, so whatever platform you prefer you'll be happy :)
Where does this suddenly come from? Few days ago we had comparements between PS3 and 360 screenshots, and it was totally obvious that the PS3 version OWNED the 360 version in all aspects. The DVDs of the 360 simply can't carry that amount of textures and details like the BluRay of the PS3 does. This is fake.
Got the game for PS3, and it looks and plays great. Could really care less what the 360 version does.
To be honest. the PC version is the only version worth getting. PS3 version looks better but they both look like crap. I'm sticking with Killzone 3
PC looks better overall, but the PS3 has better water. I was surprised to see the water on 360 looks better than PC. Go figure.
That is a horrible example of water by gamingbolt. They should have the screenshot contain some objects on the other side to reflect properly, not a skybox >_< Also, there is obvious tiling on the ps3 and 360 in the water textures. If the 360 water looks better than PC, how doesn't the PS3? The water looks almost identical on the consoles (except slight tile size differences). I am not entirely sure but the consoles might both have properly tessellated water (gpu for 360 and cell for ps3) and DX11 will do that for PC.
Only 2 different scenes were used :S what about something indoors so we can assess jaggies properly? What about some character closeups? What about water reflections that actually have objects to reflect instead of just cube maps? (apparently PS3's look better than 360's but I've not seen a proper comparison yet) Stupid comparison, with no technical understanding behind it whatsoever.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.