JaggedSac said:
sc94597 said:
JaggedSac said:
Intersting bench-mark. At only 1024X768 the system could only manage a measly 37 fps with no AA. Not impressive. Wonder if they actually played a large portion of the game, including fights with explosions and heavy usage of the physics engine, because they never specify. What you just proved is that even at a baseline of $500 the Crysis graphics that everyone loves so much, just aren't there. Now increase the resolution to where it is widescreen. See how the frame rate likes that. The XBox360 handles my 42" 1080p well. That IGN reviewer's system is well over $500. |
YEt the game probably looks better than any console game. Good luck playing the mass of array iof 1080p games.......oh wait. SO your point?
|
Actually GoW looks pretty darn good. And in fact looks worse on the PC. Textures are more important than polygons. UT 3 looks better than Crysis in my opinion and runs better too. |
Wait are you kidding me?
The PC Version has higher resolution textures, better models, and a higher resolution image + better controls. I don't even see how you can say it looks worse on PC when Epic Games themselves even said it looks better on PC.
And I doubt you've ever even seen Crysis run on Ultra settings, or probably even ever seen it run at all for that matter. But the game definitely looks way better than UT3. If you've seen it run on Ultra in real life you'll know what I'm talking about.
