By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Steroid on 06 March 2009
Edit Thread

AA definately make the game look more smooth. And it takes a hell of a lot of processing power for whaever reason.

Again to those who are calling me a fanboy I'll reiterate my 2 main points on why Killzone 2 looks better then Crysis.

1. Yes a high end PC is more powerful then a PS3. But the proof is in the pudding and the fact that were even comparing this console to a $3000-$10000 machine (or a $1000 machine you have to build yourself) is a testament to the PS3 and an insult to the gaming rig.

2. Killzone 2 looks better because it developers took the time to create detalis that make it look amazing. For example the Animation in Killzone 2 is WAAAY better then Crysis. That's where time and budget come into play. There is no direct X effect that you can apply which will animate enemies or background effects. This is somthing that the developers have time and money to create.

So the point is yes Killzone 2 looks better then Crysis. Not just because PS3 is very powerful (for a console) but that fact combined with the attention to detail and effort put into the aplication. Polygons pumped is only one apect of a games "Grafix"

If you still don't get it take a look at this it's GTA4 PC version vs. 360 version.

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/43930.html

Watch how the PC version (though a higher rez) lags, stutters and struggles compared to the $200 X-Box.

And what are the Specs on this PC? A Quad core with 2 high end graphics cards and 4 gigs of ram...... I know it's sick but it's real.