By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Crysis 2: Consoles startlingly weak, PC very promising

M.U.G.E.N on 23 August 2010

Expected, saw it miles away but will wait until the final release nontheless to see a good comparison

a very very over rated game franchise (might be proven wrong with this one) and a developer 'imo'....

and lol at the usual omgzers pc can do better gfx lololololol..... I mean seriously? what next console guys go on and flaunt oh you got good gfx but we get the better, more veriety of games tho yada yada yada....? Give me a friggin break

it's even more sad to see some people actually support this nonsense....pc can do better graphics, just how it is....does console gamers give a F? NO. Heck I used to be a PC gamer but with the increasing requirements every year and consoles getting some crazy good games when most of the stuff that were on PC were RTS and strategy, I had no choice but to jump ship and hit this gen of consoles...never been happier...



In-Kat-We-Trust Brigade!

"This world is Merciless, and it's also very beautiful"

For All News/Info related to the PlayStation Vita, Come and join us in the Official PSV Thread!

Around the Network
Zlejedi on 23 August 2010
ZenfoldorVGI said:

A PC gaming site thinks a console game looks ugly. News at 11. We've seen video of the game, we know how it looks due to actual video, for a console game it is amazing. This is propoganda.

No that's reallity.



PROUD MEMBER OF THE PSP RPG FAN CLUB

Squilliam on 23 August 2010
CGI-Quality said:
Squilliam said:

A. Some people seem to forget that.

B. They do need to be reminded, all of the time. Almost all of the talk about console games seems to take a psudo technical angle when talking about visuals when what really needs to be praised is artistry and talent. Answer me this, who got more praise for Uncharted 2 and Killzone 2? Was it the PS3 or was it the teams whom made the game? I'll be surprised if you say the latter. It all depends on the context, if people use the wrong one then does it surprise you when they are corrected?

Doesn't matter who praised Uncharted 2 or Killzone 2, unless you have an inferiority complex. And if we get real technical, the industry itself hyped Uncharted 2's & Killzone 2's visuals as "the best on CONSOLES", right along with the 'fanboys' you seem so quick to call out. And saying: "PC games look better than console games" well no shit, who argued that they didn't? But in many graphics discussions, PC fans feel obligated to "trash the consoles", which can be down right annoying.

Regardless, no matter who's doing it, it remains an elitist way of thinking, which you seem to support.

Graceful sidestep. Let me remind you of what I said: "Answer me this, who got more praise for Uncharted 2 and Killzone 2? Was it the PS3 or was it the teams whom made the game?" However theres a fundamental difference, the industry in this case got it right and they more often praised the developers. The elitist PC gamer also praises the game and developer in almost all cases, noone says that it was all due to their fancy graphics card and overclocked CPU. The people who were called out got it wrong and they praised the wrong thing in the wrong way. Its not wrong to correct such talk, is it?

In any case, anyone who doesn't fall into the above is probably a troll.



Tease.

zarx on 23 August 2010
M.U.G.E.N said:

Expected, saw it miles away but will wait until the final release nontheless to see a good comparison

a very very over rated game franchise (might be proven wrong with this one) and a developer 'imo'....

and lol at the usual omgzers pc can do better gfx lololololol..... I mean seriously? what next console guys go on and flaunt oh you got good gfx but we get the better, more veriety of games tho yada yada yada....? Give me a friggin break

it's even more sad to see some people actually support this nonsense....pc can do better graphics, just how it is....does console gamers give a F? NO. Heck I used to be a PC gamer but with the increasing requirements every year and consoles getting some crazy good games when most of the stuff that were on PC were RTS and strategy, I had no choice but to jump ship and hit this gen of consoles...never been happier...

well this is a thread about a PC gamer site previewing the game on PC and 360 and saying the game looks like crap on 360. PC gamers saying well no shit was to be expected. TBH graphics is one of the last advantages PC gaming has and thanks to the rise of notebook gaming and the lack of developers actually bothering to push graphics these days, plus the level of graphics on modern consoles, that advantage is lower and lower every year. PC gamers defending one of the last devs pushing graphics is a given. As for constant requirements increases this generation has been rather slow for that with the rise of cheap no effort PC ports and great low requirements inde games. But yes the level of high quality exclusives on consoles outways those on PC exept for RTSs, MMOs and maybe WRPGs and shooters for those that just can't live with slow inaccurate duel-analogue with high levels of auto aim lol...



@TheVoxelman on twitter

Check out my hype threads: Cyberpunk, and The Witcher 3!

Barozi on 23 August 2010
Solid_Snake4RD said:
Barozi said:

so ? it's only the multiplayer.

Singleplayer will obviously look better.


the PC version was multiplayer too and on a mid-ranged PC

 

so they are already comparing it with lower standards,wonder what it will be with full on PC settings

yeah that is exactly the reason why the console singleplayer will look closer to the PC singleplayer



Around the Network
Solid_Snake4RD on 23 August 2010
Barozi said:
Solid_Snake4RD said:
Barozi said:

so ? it's only the multiplayer.

Singleplayer will obviously look better.


the PC version was multiplayer too and on a mid-ranged PC

 

so they are already comparing it with lower standards,wonder what it will be with full on PC settings

yeah that is exactly the reason why the console singleplayer will look closer to the PC singleplayer

???????????



HappySqurriel on 23 August 2010
CGI-Quality said:

Doesn't nullify my point.

A. obviously, a console isn't anywhere near the power of a PC... B. console fans don't need to be reminded of this fact all the time. I, myself, am a former PC-only fan and can appreciate a current PC fan's outlook. I don't, however, find it OK to claim that console games "aren't impressive" because the PC has games that look better. That's the time when a big, fat "SO FUCKIN' WHAT" is applied. In fact, it can be applied when PS3 fans throw their exclusives in the faces of Wii/360 fans as well.


Just a comment on point A

Every time there is a discussion about Nintendo’s (potential) next generation console someone always argues that Nintendo couldn’t possibly produce something more powerful than the PS3 because the PS3 is as powerful as a high end gaming PC. Just because every rational gamer knows that the XBox 360 and PS3 are as outdated as the PS2 was in (about) 2004, and Crysis 2 will probably see downgrades in line with what happened to Half-Life 2 and Doom 3 on the XBox, doesn’t mean that every console gamer believes that.



Chrizum on 23 August 2010
serav said:
Chrizum said:

And we didn't know that? Only hardcore 360 and PS3 fanboys think their games look amazing. Gears of War 2? Uncharted 2? Don't look that impressive at all. Killzone 2 could be done on PCs 4 years ago.


killzone 2 was done 4 years ago, released 2 years ago.

they even keep the same graphics and add 3d , and from the rumors maybe co op

It was released 1 year ago, and no of course it wasn't done 4 years ago, otherwise they'd have released it 4 years ago. Games on PC in 2006 looked better than games releasing now for the PS3 and 360. Nothing wrong with that, I think even many Wii games look great today (hell, I prefer some 16-bit games to recent games visually).

It's just sad when  you see PS3 and 360 fanboys arguing over which game is the "graphics king" when it's all been done before ages ago on PC.



Icyedge on 23 August 2010
ZenfoldorVGI said:

<table style="width: 90%;" border="0"><tr><td><strong>Icyedge said:</strong><br /><table style="width: 90%;" border="0"> <tbody><tr> <td><strong>ZenfoldorVGI said:</strong><br> <p>So just to clarify this, and correct me if I'm wrong:</p> <p>This is a PC website, comparing the game to PC quality graphics, and attempting to drive home the point that all console games look shitty compared to PC. Nowhere is it mentioned how the game stacks up to current console games.</p> <p>Next, this is probably the same goddamn video we were all "ohh"ing and "ahh"ing about 2 goddamn days ago when it first game out and all we could talk about was how good it looked.</p> <p>And now....and now...calm down...and now, we take this as evidence and implication that the graphics in Crysis 2 are bad compared to other console games, on nothing but the vague and unsubstantiated claims which don't even vaguely imply anything about comparisons to other console games.</p> <p>Each of us have the ability to reason.</p> <p> </p> <p>Wanna hear some stupid shit? Last generation, the same playstation fanboys existed. Not the general idea of them, but the exact same people. These people then, argued that graphics didn't matter, just the games mattered. At the beginning of this generation, these exact same playstation fanboys, when presented with ugly ports said, "graphics don't matter, we get to play the game, who cares if we have a few less polygons." What have they become if not hipocritical? Playstation 3 fanboys are now WORSE graphics whores than the elistist PC fanboys.</p> <p>Thing is, if the PS4 had the shittiest graphics next gen, they would champion the console just as much. I see that as more of a commentary on fanboyism as it relates to purchasing decisions, and post purchase justification, rather than a  commentary on graphic whoring.</p> <p>This gen is almost over. What happens when graphics reach diminishing returns, and it is impossible to distinguish between high end graphics on any available machine? Afterall, Consoles don't need to render anything over 1080p, and the PC is already to the point where developers are adding super high resolutions without pushing graphics cards, because they don't have the money to program the game to look good enough to push the gpu at 1080p.</p> <p>Graphics are graphics, and they are as unimportant as they ever were. Games are what matters, and playstation fans knew that last generation, but I pick on the Playstation guys too much. I think it's because there are a lot of outspoken ones, and I can't help it. However, you must admit there is a huge hipocritical blunder here. How many of you Playstation 3 fanboys were Xbox fanboys last gen, because of graphics? None of you right? You are just playing the cards you are delt.</p> </td> </tr> </tbody></table> <p>The PS3 game library is very good and compare to their competitors without talking about graphics.<br><br></p></td></tr></table><br /><br />

...

...

...

Goddamn 3.0, you briney bastard!!!! Should I even bother to fix this post? Damnit.

Anyway, to guy who quoted my phantom post, what you wrote has nothing at all to do with anything I wrote, and I am unsure as to what exactly you are talking about. I never implied anything negative about the PS3's library, and fyi, I deleted that post earlier, I have no idea how you managed to see it. I don't blame you though. 3.0 and all, or wtf ever this godforsaken version is, garrrr!!!!

So if you care to explain further, I'm all ears, but as of now, I'm not sure what's going on bro.

That said, you are absolutely right, the PS3 does have an amazing library. The fact that we can't go 2 posts in a row without that being mentioned is a testament to the ratio of PS3 fans this forum hosts.

The point was that since the game library are comparable, why would we say PS3 fans are fans of graphics over games.



Chrizum on 23 August 2010
CGI-Quality said:
Squilliam said:
CGI-Quality said:
Chrizum said:

And we didn't know that? Only hardcore 360 and PS3 fanboys think their games look amazing. Gears of War 2? Uncharted 2? Don't look that impressive at all. Killzone 2 could be done on PCs 4 years ago.

Of course, to elitist PC fans, console games won't look "impressive at all". I say that because not all PC fans behave that way. But on the flipside, those console games took dedication, talent, and horsepower. One man's rags is another man's riches.

Not so fast! A lot of those elitist fans are able to appeciate talent, artistry and excellent production values, more so that anyone who has ever uttered the words 'Powah of teh Cell' with any hint of seriousness. They only appear to be elitist because they have to shoot down many of the latter comments which doesn't give them any chance to espouse the true form excellence has taken in many of the console games, especially PS3 exclusives.

Doesn't nullify my point.

A. obviously, a console isn't anywhere near the power of a PC... B. console fans don't need to be reminded of this fact all the time. I, myself, am a former PC-only fan and can appreciate a current PC fan's outlook. I don't, however, find it OK to claim that console games "aren't impressive" because the PC has games that look better. That's the time when a big, fat "SO FUCKIN' WHAT" is applied. In fact, it can be applied when PS3 fans throw their exclusives in the faces of Wii/360 fans as well.

We actually agree with eachother. I'm hardly an elitist, I find people like Shio extremely annoying. But you have to admit most PS3 fanboys are arguing how extremely powerful the PS3 is and how Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2 are the best looking games in the world. When someone says he finds Super Mario Galaxy verry pretty (which it is), HD owners barge in and say Wii games per definition look worse than HD games.

My point is, PC is more powerful than whatever console. There should be no comparison between the two. There also shouldn't be a comparison to Wii and HD consoles, or Atari 2600 and N64. It's pointless. I think Limbo looks better than Crysis, but people saying "HD game X looks just as good as a PC game" should get some grip on reality.

The PS3 and 360 are not that powerful. Bashing them for lack of powerful is idiotic, just like bashing the Wii for lack of power is. However, the latter is accepted, while the former is seen as elitist, whereas both are moronic behavior.