Forums - Gaming Discussion - Crysis 2: Proof That Exclusives Are In A Class Of Their Own

Scoobes said:

It's worth noting what the Crysis 2 is doing in terms of game & level design as well. A lot of exclusives are actually quite linear and have much smaller traversable areas, pre-computed scenes, limited physics etc. than Crysis 2 does. What Crysis 2 acheives on consoles isn't and shouldn't be limited to solely its visuals. Look at everything that Crysis 2 manages to do in a single package and it's highly impressive.

Imagine what could be acheived if they were to make a smaller and linear based game like Call of Duty or Uncharted 2 on CryEngine 3.

At the end of the day CryEngine 3 is what Crytek are trying to sell.

The CryEngine 3 would be a fanatastic game engine to sell..



“Absolutely, we can do much more with it. I don’t know if we are even close to 50 percent of PlayStation 3’s power at this point,” said Asmussen about God of War 3.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME???

Around the Network

I've been playing Crysis2 for several hours now, and I feel it is a good game and great game engine, with one major outstanding flaw compared to killzone 3 or U2. The AI blows! It's very primitive, almost like the original Farcry, and very, very glitchy. Appear out of cover for an instant, everybody and their brother is firing at you at once, instantaniously. NPC getting stuck for no reason, running past you, running through barriers, shooting at you through buildings/walls.  Maybe they used all the resources for graphics and that left little for the NPCs? But still, i'm enjoying it, it has a half Life 2 feel to it, even has the same gal doing the anouncements, 'Warning, you are in a restricted area'.



well since crysis looks better than killzone i dont get this lol.



CGI-Quality said:
disolitude said:

Once you see what PCs can do with same multiplatform games, with DX11 and tasselation, MSAA stuff...consoles are equal tech wise.

Against the PC, I agree. Equal footing techwise.


techwise my GTX480 is estimated at being about 7 times as strong as the 7800gtx that RSX is based on. So PC obviously has a good advantage. Lets ignore the GTX590 which would probably be like 12 times? lol

I wonder when emulation for PS3 titles will be possible.. even a dual-CPU Core i7 Ivy Bridge would have issues doing so... I think another two CPU cycles? GPU is basically there, CPU is lagging behind.



PC gaming is better than console gaming. Always.     We are Anonymous, We are Legion    Kick-ass interview   Great Flash Series Here    Anime Ratings     Make and Play Please
Amazing discussion about being wrong
Official VGChartz Folding@Home Team #109453
 
mantlepiecek said:

IGN also said that Mass Effect 2 is better on the PS3....must be true if IGN said it, right?

Right? No?

Mass Effect 2 PS3 definitive version confirmed then.


isn't ME2 PS3 using the ME 3 engine? or do I mistake that for an other game?

it's meant to be better, so...



OoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoO

Around the Network
kowenicki said:

psxextreme article huh.

 

well that settles it then.

yeah that is what i read from that, a site dedicated to a console, wants that console to have better looking exclusive games then multiplats... shocking...



 

Bet with Conegamer and Doobie_wop 

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3879752

mantlepiecek said:

IGN also said that Mass Effect 2 is better on the PS3....must be true if IGN said it, right?

Right? No?

Mass Effect 2 PS3 definitive version confirmed then.

I think that's a no brainer. Additional year in development, using an improved engine that is to be used in the next installment. A flamebait comment there, expected better from you mantle ._.

Quoting IGN's other interesting "pieces" of journalism would have been a much better example, in terms of gaming sites IGN is everything I hate about gaming journalism, personally.



Disconnect and self destruct, one bullet a time.

jhuff394 said:

crysis 2 took a massive downgrade for pc... what a shame.

 

and No crysis 2 is not the new console graphics king... lmao (in your opinion, dont base it anything else please)

Bought it for 360 last night... expected to be blown away (considering rediculous claims that it surpassed the best ps3 exclusives).... sadly I was dissapointed....

best multiplatform graphics thats for sure... but please keep your claims reasonable people..





 

Bet with Conegamer and Doobie_wop 

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3879752

ssj12 said:
CGI-Quality said:
disolitude said:

Once you see what PCs can do with same multiplatform games, with DX11 and tasselation, MSAA stuff...consoles are equal tech wise.

Against the PC, I agree. Equal footing techwise.


techwise my GTX480 is estimated at being about 7 times as strong as the 7800gtx that RSX is based on. So PC obviously has a good advantage. Lets ignore the GTX590 which would probably be like 12 times? lol

I wonder when emulation for PS3 titles will be possible.. even a dual-CPU Core i7 Ivy Bridge would have issues doing so... I think another two CPU cycles? GPU is basically there, CPU is lagging behind.

Couldn't some of the CPU tasks on PS3 be transferred to GPU? A lot of the tasks Cell is good at can be effectively acheived on todays GPUs (e.g. Physics)



Scoobes said:
ssj12 said:
CGI-Quality said:
disolitude said:

Once you see what PCs can do with same multiplatform games, with DX11 and tasselation, MSAA stuff...consoles are equal tech wise.

Against the PC, I agree. Equal footing techwise.


techwise my GTX480 is estimated at being about 7 times as strong as the 7800gtx that RSX is based on. So PC obviously has a good advantage. Lets ignore the GTX590 which would probably be like 12 times? lol

I wonder when emulation for PS3 titles will be possible.. even a dual-CPU Core i7 Ivy Bridge would have issues doing so... I think another two CPU cycles? GPU is basically there, CPU is lagging behind.

Couldn't some of the CPU tasks on PS3 be transferred to GPU? A lot of the tasks Cell is good at can be effectively acheived on todays GPUs (e.g. Physics)


running an emulator on a GPU wouldn't really work as GPUs are clocked much lower than CPUs the CELL is 3.2Ghz and I don't think there is any non overclocked GPU over 1Ghz and clock speed/core performance is what counts when emulating something. The general rule is for each CPU)  you need a CPU 10x more powerful (clock rate being the main factor as the emulation has on overhead and then you actually have to do the work at the same speed as the CPU you are emulating) to emulate it so unless someone comes up with a way of spliting each CPU core's work load between multiple cores in software without compleatly breaking  compatability that wouldn't work. I mean you would need a CPU with at least 8 cores at like 30Ghz to emulate the Cell or 6 cores at 30Ghz to emulate the 360

I don't see emulators of current consoles being possible for a very long time given the trend for more cores rather than higher clock rates in current proccessors, not until optical or at least graphite bassed CPUs start being made and clock rates of up to 30Ghz are possible...

sorry I geeked out for a minute there 



@TheVoxelman on twitter

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