By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
mantlepiecek on 24 March 2011
Edit Thread
Badassbab said:
mantlepiecek said:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-crysis2-face-off

Couple of things, here.

No. 1, Richard agrees that Killzone 3 and Motorstorm Apocalypse are the best 3D games out there, even better than Crysis 2.

No. 2:

Both versions are supposedly the same, 360 seems to run at 1280x720p so the demo code was an older build. The PS3 version, however runs at 1024 x 720 but the differences are minor, due to blur effects.

The PS3 version seems to have better 3D effects from what I have read. I maybe wrong so you may want to check it out.

The PS3 version maintains its frame rate throughout the whole game perfectly even though its lower than the 360 version. The 360 version however has frame-rate going below 20 fps in some scenes. What this means is that the PS3 version operates more consistently then the 360 version, but the 360 version seems to hit 30 fps a lot more.

There is no screen tearing visible on either consoles.

Which is why he seemed to think that either versions are equally good.

No. 1 Ok....thought this was about Crysis H2H but if that's how you want to start it off fine.

No. 2 The implementation of 3D is better on PS3 due to HDMI 1.4 which 360 can't do. It's also since been established both games are upscaled to 720p via hardware, 360 using it's dedicated scaler and PS3 using it's GPU. 360 has a 12.5 % resolution advantage, PS3 has superior texture filtering. 360 is double buffered with soft v-sync, PS3 is triple buffered (not sure if it's v-synced as it might not need it). 360 has correct shadow implementation while PS3 has what appears to be an offset bias issue but has PCF which looks better than the blocky 360 shadows up close. Now according to DF the PS3 may have more bugs in the implementation of lighting but we don't really know if that is the case as is the water using the 360 tessellator, we don't know yet.

No game maintains frame rate perfectly. During general gameplay the 360 commands a lead in frame rate hovering closer to 30fps while PS3 hovers closer to 25fps however during the chaotic scenes the PS3 commands a lead unfortunatley we are talking 20fps vs the 360's 15fps so neither are that respectable in this instance.

Another point worth mentioning is the supeior sound on PS3 if you have the set up.

All in all it's a very close call so probably it's a tie taking all things into account but I believe the 360 is doing more work due to the increased res and the double buffered v-sync approach (I believe it has no choice in this matter due to the eDRAM size).

And PC version will be best. As usual.

That's what I wrote, you just went in a little more detail.

The reason why I started off with the 3D was because there was recently an article here that talked how the crysis 2 3D is the best 3D implementation EVAR. And I thought it would be a good idea to put it in here.

I excluded PC because, well...the writer himself excluded PC.

How is it very PS3 biased I am not sure since I forgot to add the audio advantage for the PS3? OK maybe I shouldn't have started with the 3D stuff at the beginning but that was more in relation to the recent article then PS3 bias.

Also, isn't triple buffering superior to double buffering?