| slowmo said:
Interesting you should note a developers intervention when a lot of casual observers picked up on the texture problem who aren't in the least bit graphics professionals in this instance. That's not remotely the same thing imo. I never implied a PS3 bias for not doing the mandatory installation by the way but it's pretty obvious that shot wouldn't have appeared that way with a HDD installation. My point is that if they wanted a fair comparison it should show both consoles in their best light for stills and discarded the obivous technically flawed shots. If they wanted to bring up some performance issue then they could use that shot in their full diagnosis later, not as some quick glimpse between the systems. I'm pretty sure they probably didn't even note the issue in their haste to get the pics up. As I said by the way, that wasn't the only screen shot they posted that looked frankly crap and unrepresentative of the final product. |
I don't think they denied it being not the fully loaded pic of the game. They didn't mention that crysis 2 on the 360 has worse textures.
It was their screenshot comparison which is usually not considered as important as their head 2 heads.
Crysis 2 has some blur issues or ghosting issues so screen capturing them can give you some unfair screens and this has been noted by many, so every other capture by them not being representative of the final version is more like an illusion.
