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

Forums - Gaming - CVG: Crysis 2 is "THE BEST LOOKING GAME ON CONSOLE"

tuscaniman said:
ethomaz said:
tuscaniman said:

Still think its outdated? The only thing that is outdated is the consoles because they can't show the true power of UE3.

Same old UE3 engine running in Tri-Way SLI GTX 580... and I'm already said in other forum "not impressive".

And the character looks artificial (plastic or rubber?) like every other rendered by Unreal Engine 3.

The UE3 was impressive in 2005... not today... Epic needs a new engine (Unreal Engine 4?) but I guess it waiting the new generation.


Wow.....not impressive? This demo looks 10x better than any game out on consoles right now. Get serious man.

Nothing new... the demo is just a "put any UE3 game here" running in 3x GTX 580 with heavly use of tessalation (DirectX 11).

That's a demo horse power... not graphic improviments.

Unreal Engine 3 already support DirectX 11 and tessalation... the demo just show the power of three top gaphic cards working together.

Still looks like everything is made of plastic as Unreal Engine games always do.



Around the Network

Wow...I read this whole thread and not a single piece of concrete information has been given or exchanged.  Just a bunch of predictable opinions...

Come on guys, for all we know that comment can say "best graphics on console...but it plays like shit". Save your strengths for when the game is actually out and you got to play it.



ethomaz said:
tuscaniman said:
ethomaz said:
tuscaniman said:

Still think its outdated? The only thing that is outdated is the consoles because they can't show the true power of UE3.

Same old UE3 engine running in Tri-Way SLI GTX 580... and I'm already said in other forum "not impressive".

And the character looks artificial (plastic or rubber?) like every other rendered by Unreal Engine 3.

The UE3 was impressive in 2005... not today... Epic needs a new engine (Unreal Engine 4?) but I guess it waiting the new generation.


Wow.....not impressive? This demo looks 10x better than any game out on consoles right now. Get serious man.

Nothing new... the demo is just a "put any UE3 game here" running in 3x GTX 580 with heavly use of tessalation (DirectX 11).

That's a demo horse power... not graphic improviments.

Unreal Engine 3 already support DirectX 11 and tessalation... the demo just show the power of three top gaphic cards working together.

Still looks like everything is made of plastic as Unreal Engine games always do.

But guess what? The consoles don't support either of those. So your comments should be "UE3 is outdated for PCs." Believe what you want but Epic will have almost 3 years working on their own engine and optimizing it for Gears 3 on the 360. It will be BY FAR the best looking UE3 game to date on consoles. Mass Effect 3 may be close because BioWare does a damn good job with that engine. Mark my words. Gears 3 will be at the top of the heap with UC3 this gen for console graphics.



CGI-Quality said:
disolitude said:

Wow...I read this whole thread and not a single piece of concrete information has been given or exchanged.  Just a bunch of predictable opinions...

Come on guys, for all we know that comment can say "best graphics on console...but it plays like shit". Save your strengths for when the game is actually out and you got to play it.

Shows how much you know! A few of my bits were actually concrete (straight from the horse's [devs] mouths). Just sayin' 

i guess some people dont have access to sites like digital foundry and lens of truth, and things called reviewers.

or else this debate about which game looks better wouldnt be going on.

and its comical that some people are bringing in AI into this graphics debate, as well as Halo which isnt lauded for it graphics at all, other than its lighting its pretty unimpressive. not to say it isnt fun, it is



Killzone 3 vs Crysis 2

http://www.lensoftruth.com/head2head/demo/head2head-killzone-3-beta-vs-crysis-2-demo-performance-analysis/

Killzone 3 wins with 0 screen tearing and perfect 30 fps.



Around the Network
CGI-Quality said:
disolitude said:

Wow...I read this whole thread and not a single piece of concrete information has been given or exchanged.  Just a bunch of predictable opinions...

Come on guys, for all we know that comment can say "best graphics on console...but it plays like shit". Save your strengths for when the game is actually out and you got to play it.

Shows how much you know! A few of my bits were actually concrete (straight from the horse's [devs] mouths). Just sayin' 


I don't know, maybe you did and I missed some good info...but its all becoming very predictable here with the console support sides and opinions.  

In any case Im going to bed, someone wake me up when ethomaz posts a non ps3 biased comment about anything...



osamanobama said:
CGI-Quality said:
disolitude said:

Wow...I read this whole thread and not a single piece of concrete information has been given or exchanged.  Just a bunch of predictable opinions...

Come on guys, for all we know that comment can say "best graphics on console...but it plays like shit". Save your strengths for when the game is actually out and you got to play it.

Shows how much you know! A few of my bits were actually concrete (straight from the horse's [devs] mouths). Just sayin' 

i guess some people dont have access to sites like digital foundry and lens of truth, and things called reviewers.

or else this debate about which game looks better wouldnt be going on.

and its comical that some people are bringing in AI into this graphics debate, as well as Halo which isnt lauded for it graphics at all, other than its lighting its pretty unimpressive. not to say it isnt fun, it is

At least were debating but you on the other hand are acting like its some kind of law that 360 or multiplatform game are not allowed to be above or on par with PS3 excluisves and Halo Reach not applaud eh?

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-halo-reach-tech-analysis-articlehttp://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-halo-reach-tech-interviewhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgjylRdDrIA&feature=player_embedded



Nsanity said:
osamanobama said:
CGI-Quality said:
disolitude said:

Wow...I read this whole thread and not a single piece of concrete information has been given or exchanged.  Just a bunch of predictable opinions...

Come on guys, for all we know that comment can say "best graphics on console...but it plays like shit". Save your strengths for when the game is actually out and you got to play it.

Shows how much you know! A few of my bits were actually concrete (straight from the horse's [devs] mouths). Just sayin' 

i guess some people dont have access to sites like digital foundry and lens of truth, and things called reviewers.

or else this debate about which game looks better wouldnt be going on.

and its comical that some people are bringing in AI into this graphics debate, as well as Halo which isnt lauded for it graphics at all, other than its lighting its pretty unimpressive. not to say it isnt fun, it is

At least were debating but you on the other hand are acting like its some kind of law that 360 or multiplatform game are not allowed to be above or on par with PS3 excluisves.

theres tons of games that look better than ps3 exclusives, just not the ones i mentioned.

there are games that look better than Uncharted 1, demon's souls, mag, ratchet and clank, infamous, and many more.

im not acting like games cant look better than ps3 exclusives, its just that recently many 1st part ps3 games have been really showing of the true power of the ps3, and have been widening the gap. (dont take my word for, reviewers have been mentioning this to0) and to this date no console games look better (technically more advanced) than the games i mentioned



One day ........

One day in my dreams we will have a gaming discussion about how good games graphics are instead of debating which one is the best.

One day in my dreams PS360 gamers will describe in wonderously loquacious ways why the games they play are so fun instead of looking for ways to demean a game simply on the lack of perfection in its aesthetics.

One day in my dreams posts like mine and others that have preached this same gospel of peaceful coexistence will not be ignored or minimized but instead expounded upon and strengthened for the betterment of all that enjoy this medium.

One day .........



CGI-Quality said:
Mad55 said:
CGI-Quality said:
Nsanity said:
CGI-Quality said:
Nsanity said:

Crysis 2 is a sandbox in a city.

I don't care for the back and fourth grpahics 'war", but while Crysis 2 is more open ended, it is not more technically advanced than Killzone 3.

What's Killzone doing that Crysis isn't?

If you've played the game (or listened to feedback), you'd know that there's far more happening on screen in Killzone 3 (and I mean a lot). It also uses parts of the SPUs Crysis 2 just can't/won't, because it's engine was nurtured by an in-house dev who's truly taking advantage of the console.

Particle effects, textures, & amount on screen are all ahead in Killzone 3.

theres far more happening in killzone3 than crysis or theres alot happening. because how could you know how impressive cyrsis is until it releases or gets more reviews.

I haven't said that Crysis 2 isn't impressive, I said it's not doing as much on-screen as Killzone 3. But as I said to Nsanity, if I'm wrong, show me a video/footage/gameplay to the contrary.

oh lol i didnt mean it in general i meant in comparison with killzone 3.