By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
priteshmodi on 10 April 2010
Edit Thread
disolitude said:
gwrath said:
disolitude said:
To me Metro 2033 on very high looks better than Crysis... Its a 2+ year old game guys. It was amazing back then but games have caught up.

The majority of Metro 2033 takes place in enclosed, indoor environments, and it still is not quite as good looking as crysis. I really think people are underestimating how good crysis looks.

I think Crysis is definetly a more of a technical game when it comes to visuals.

I know Metro is mostly in coridors and hence isn't as technical but to me it just looks more pleasing to the eye...with all the particle effects and amazing lighting. Pop it in Nvidia 3D Vision and the game almost justifies spending all that cash for the 3D glasses.

I do agree that Killzone 2 does not look as good as either of those two games though...or other select few games running on PC at very high detail.

The only way Killzone 2 would have looked as good as PC FPS games is if Sony didn't include a bluray drive, wifi and all that other stuff...and instead paid Nvidia for a real video card. the 7800GTX that is in the PS3 was mediocre when PS3 came out and is complete garbage today. If Sony paid for a 8800GTX...now then PS3 would have been the visual powerhouse it was promissed to be.

I think Crysis does exteriors better while Metro does interiors better. Both are amongst the most technical showpieces of gaming but I agree that Crysis is definitely the more technical game.