Crysis 2: Proof That Exclusives Are In A Class Of Their Own

Crysis 2 is a great game.

Amidst all the platform controversy and Crytek's bragging, the aforementioned fact remains. While you can find any number of PS3/360/PC comparisons online in the form of screenshot and video compare-and-contrast scenarios, the general consensus is that PS3 owners did not get ripped off this time. Some may notice a very slight increase in sharpness on the 360 version, and a mammoth PC certainly has the edge, but after playing the PS3 version for quite some time, the following is obvious: it's one of the best-looking games out there, and it plays quite well on Sony's machine.

In fact, I dare say Crysis 2 features the best visuals of any shooter on the PS3...any multiplatform shooter, that is. While it's close to Killzone 3, especially in regards to animation, detail and choreography, the overall gameplay presentation in KZ3 is simply a bit sharper and more refined. Now, for the sake of argument, let's assume Crytek isn't just promoting themselves and their game, and their CryEngine really did produce the best looking game possible for the PS3. Of course, that means "best looking multiplatform game possible," as they didn't have the luxury of focusing on only one platform this time around. What does this say about the cream of the crop; i.e., the exclusives?

Essentially, it says what we've been saying all along- that when a developer simply pumps all its knowledge, talent, and resources into one platform without having to make a single solitary sacrifice for the sake of multiplatform, the game simply reaches another level. Crysis 2, Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood, Red Dead Redemption, Battlefield: Bad Company 2; these all look amazing and yet, they just don't have the added coat of polish, that extra glossy sheen we see in God of War III, Gran Turismo 5, Heavy Rain, Killzone 3, Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots, etc. And it's not only the PS3; in my eyes, exclusives are the best on any platform: Gears of War, Halo, and Alan Wake on the 360, Super Mario Galaxy and Zelda on the Wii, etc.

In other words, if Crysis 2 is the best we can do in the world of multiplatform shooters - and it's pretty damn good - and it still falls just a step shy of an exclusive production in terms of visual accomplishment (mind you, we're only talking about the PS3 version), doesn't that prove the superiority of the top exclusives? Doesn't this basically say, "the only way to get that extra 'oomph' is to focus?" Of course, for purposes of money, most designers can't afford to stick with one platform, especially for un-established games, but that's not the point. The point, it seems, is abundantly clear.

P.S. Watch for our Crysis 2 review later tonight.

3/23/2011 10:48:04 AM Ben Dutka

http://www.psxextreme.com/ps3-news/8767.html

I agree (most parts).

Youd be a very rich man if upcoming forum posts could be converted to money. 

Also, wow at the amount of reviews this guy writes, his practically the only reviewer on the whole site and yet their comments section completely blows away the comments section for VGChartz articles. He must be doing something right.

OT: I haven't played Crysis 2, so my answer is biased, but I think that the exclusives on each of the respective platforms are the best (in terms of visuals) that those systems have to offer (except maybe the 360). I'm sure that once I pick up my copy of Crysis 2 next week, I might be swayed to the other side of the argument. I just finished Killzone 3 as well, so that kind of nudges me in the direction I was already going towards.

Crysis 2 is a great game its sort of under appreciated though. 

People, I know some of you feel very strongly about consoles but come on...

PS3 exclusives are not in a class of their own visually. They are a "little" better than your average multiplat like Resident Evil 5.

The latest video cards on the PC like the GTX590 and 6990 run Modern Warfare 2 at 1900x1200 and AA and all that shizzle...at 200 frames per second. Thats over 10X more raw performancy powr in real life application. Probably 30-40 X more in theory...

Like, I've played all PS3 visual powerhouse games (other than killzone 3) and I dare you to play Uncharted 2 for 30 minutes and then go play Battlefield Bad Company 2 on Pc on max everything and 1080p. There is no comparison which looks significantly better...

After you see that difference you should agree that PS3/360 exclusives visual performance gap is smaller than the gap between your toes and not worth arguing over.

Agreed, those exclusives are overhyped, you'd think based on some people that the games are rendering powerhouses when they struggle to maintain a pitiful 30FPS on what was medium settings 4 years ago.

As it is, more gamers prefer higher frame rates over visual fidelity anyways, given that COD is getting all the playtime.  I bet if devs left in options for turning off all the effects to boost frame rate, most people would take responsiveness over eyecandy, at least for multiplayer.

Nobody is debating that PC games are in a class of their own, that would be a dumb argument but just because PC is a monster visually doesn't mean that the PS3/360 exclusive argument is null and void. That would be another dumb argument, It is quite obvious that when a developer dedicates all there time and money into one system it makes for a better looking game.

We all know PC is best, but that doesn't discredit the miracle work the developers are pulling off on consoles with tech you would consider "outdated".

Its crap. Why do you think a PC game site gave it a 7/10? It sucks compared to the original. Maybe it seems great on consoles, but on PC its not worth a purchase at all currently since Portal 2 and many other titles that are better are coming up.

If I reviewed it for this site I would have given it somewhere between a 7 and 8.

The problem with only concentrating on the graphics is that most people forget that their are a number of different decisions that make a game look the way it does.  There are a lot of tricks that a developer can use to increase the visual fidelity of a game and a lot of it are under the hood.  These decisions are things most gamers will not understand because they are looking for the wow on screen instead of thinking about the tech that gives them a lot of different options

Case in point would be Halo Reach.  I am sure any one of you would put KZ3 graphics as crushing Halo Reach but thats all do to the different designs goals and immediate on surface wow factor.  Halo Reach is as much a technical  visual masterpiece as KZ3 but the difference is what the developers considered to be the main goals of each game.  One of the main design goals within Halo reach that has an impact on the graphics is Co-op  You have four player local and online co-op.  This alone means the game has to scale to a totally different level than KZ3.  While KZ3 only support offline Co-op for 2 player, you have just about every co-op option available on Halo Reach. Then you take the size of a level, the number of objects within a level.  Can you interact with objects within a level.  All of these things take away from a games visual wow factor because the developer has to balance what they want to do within a game compare to how it looks.  So when I see or here such statements as polish like the OP but do not see them breaking down the design decisions that go on within a game, I cannot fully come to terms with their analysis because it's based on what they can see instead of understanding what actually is happening behind the scenes.

The reason I mention this is that to only look at a games graphics and say ohh it's the best looking game on consoles etc but not take into fact the design decisions is doing a lot of games a disservice.  The more flexible a game world is, will dictate how well the visual polish the developers have room for. 

Who cares what they can do on a PC compared to consoles?  The differences have already been known.  But the differences between multiplats and exclusives on console are huge in most cases, especially the example you gave with RE5.

The comments from some pf the PC people on this site make me hate that I have a gaming PC again.  There is no reason to bring up PCs in every discusiion about graphics of games on consoles.