By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Homeroids on 23 March 2011
Edit Thread
Spagoodle said:
Homeroids said:

Interesting. I got this email from my mate just yesterday. Did IGN base their review on the poor PS3 demo. Seems other sites are not agreeing with IGN. I guess Lens of Truth is not related to frame rate? Maybe....

 

Seems like in the retail version of Crysis 2, the PS3 has better graphics than the 360.
  
  
Odd considering the PS3 demo of Crysis 2 was far worse than the 360 and even at a lower res.  Wonder why they released such a poor demo on the PS3?
 

 

 

One more time. Click the link below for a detailed description of how the game was reviewed.

http://www.ign.com/blogs/arthur-ign/2011/03/22/how-i-reviewed-crysis-2

No reputable site would ever review a games performance off a demo. If you disagree with the review and can support your opinion that's totally fair. Just don't discredit the review/reviewer by flat out making shit up or supposing the absurd.

Maybe you need to look at this from how he reviewed and it kind of shows that not all things are equal. EA were not setup properly in that there was an obvious over representation for the 360 version. So how do we even know if the review version is the final build at all? From your link on "how" it was reviewed.

 

quote, "At this event, EA had around 16 stations set up with Crysis 2 for Xbox 360. In another room, there was one PS3 build available, and a pair of PCs brought by Nvidia to show off the game on their hardware."

 

He goes onto say he finally played the retail version a day later or so but why would EA put a non-retail version (1 only) on the floor in the first place. Something don't add up. That's all I am saying.