Crysis 2 has delivered the best graphics ever in a console game. And, as expected, the Xbox 360 beats the snot out of the PS3. You just got served.
Crysis 2 puts KZ3 to shame, its the best looking console game to date, but a notch less then Crysis from 2007. http://uk.pc.ign.com/articles/115/1156497p2.html
Maxed out both consoles my arse. It is a very good looking multi platform game but it's not as impressive as KillZone3 and nowhere near as good as Uncharted 2. Dream on x-bots.
Yeah it's a claim but based on what? When I see Digital Foundry say that Crysis 2 is technically better than KZ3 and UC2 then you can call me impressed. All I've seen so far are 2 sub-HD versions, both versions with bad texture pop in, the 360 version suffering from tearing and the PS3 version suffering from framerate dips. I don't see any of that in KZ3 and UC2.
It's probably worth noting that PSU are calling it "the best looking shooter on PlayStation 3". Heres some other nice quotes: CVG "best looking fps ever" IGN "Crysis 2 on Xbox 360 has taken the crown for best graphics in a console game" PSU "best looking shooter on PlayStation 3" Eurogamer "sits next to Uncharted 2 as the most detailed" "Crysis 2 is outstanding in almost every department, not least its visuals, which are the very best either PS3 or Xbox 360 has to offer right now"electricpig.co.uk "Crysis 2 does run on consoles, and it does so beautifully. We're calling it now: Crysis 2 is possibly the best-looking console game ever." Gamesradar ________________________________________________________________ I'm really interested to see what Cryteks 360 exclusive Kingdoms looks like since they don't have to tone any of the graphics down to let the PS3 keep up.
From what ive seen, it looks better then KZ3 and Uncharted 2. Not only IGN made the claim, aswel did some other review sites. Or yea, most review sites do, just read around... If it looks better, it must have maxed them aswel, aint it.
Like I said it does look impressive but that could be art style. I want to read a proper technical analysis before I make my own conclusion. Both versions are sub HD which is pathetic by now, what more could KZ3 and UC2 push if they were also sub HD. The PS3 is still graphics king until a technical analysis says otherwise.
Theres no technical analyse needed to spot the differences lol. And i dont care HOW the graphics are being done, as it looks greater, then it does. The 360 just stole the PS3's graphic king throne, and i think those experienced review sites are able to tell the differences aswel, they arent lying about it or something. Crytek have allways been a developer who pushes games to another level graphic wise. This time they did on the consoles, and they did it very well. Not on the PC though, as most were expecting way more on the pc. This somewhere shows how big the gap is between console and pc, on console its the best looking game, surpassing KZ3 and UC2, while on the PC, were all complaining about the graphics, whom allready look ALOT better then the console versions.
I don't imagine that Crysis 2 pushes as much on screen as Kill Zone 3 does, not to mention the solid framerate and no tearing in Kill Zone 3 and the MLAA which looks fantastic. It may not be as bright and pretty to the eye as Crysis 2 but it's technical far more impressive. And for me I still consider Uncharted 2 the graphics king as it has none of the terrible glitches Crysis 2 suffers from.
Thats what your opininion is. Just looking around the inet though, its clear that Crysis 2 dethroned UC2 and KZ3, a game having a glitch or another frame drop doesnt exclude it from the title 'best looking game'. Maybe not on an technical level, but who cares, its about how pretty the game looks, and Crysis 2 certainly surpassed all games (on console) in this regard. Crysis 1 on PC probally lacked some features UC2 has on PS3, but its still known as a better looking game in general. How-ever, it atleast shows the one year older Xbox 360 still has some serious power under the hood, even enough to get atleast as good looking as KZ3 and UC2 (and according to reviewers, it looks even greater on many levels).
I'd like to see a single player campaign demo for the consoles. I've only played the campaign in 1080p on Extreme on the PC. That is for sure better looking than Killzone 3, but I don't know about the final console version campaigns. I have played lots of Killzone 3 both online and offline and all the multiplayer demos of Crysis 2, and that comparison overwhelmingly favored Killzone 3 with the exception of the PC version (of course). I haven't been able to compare campaign to campaign with the console versions, however.
Its said that the demo's didnt represent the final graphics of the SP mode. MP mode's graphics seem to be a notch down from the SP, for some reasons.
@AKS How is the game so far? In addition to the graphics, what I liked about the original was the mostly open-ended gameplay in huge outdoor environments. I was dismayed at the change to an urban setting as I was afraid it would turn into another generic, on-rails, corridor crawling shooter.
You can forget about open huge outdoor environments with this one. MP maps are half the size aswel, with half amount the players. Crysis 2 is a great game, but its a step back from 2007's Crysis.
I've heard the game has problems with the AI as well. Probably the consoles' relatively weak CPUs coming into play.
Pretty decent so far. You are limited in your freedom to wander around compared to the original, but you usually get a few options. There's definitely more action. One of the biggest improvements is the substantially improved optimization. A midrange to high midrange card can run Crysis 2 without a problem, where as Crysis 1 would kill most PCs at the settings I'm using (1080p, Extreme). It is much more linear compared to the open world island settings of the original Crysis, but you aren't necessarily confined to narrow corridors or always on rails (I think there are some on rails segments, but I haven't seen much of that yet). It's closer to Half-Life 2 in "openness." You can walk around the area and find some hidden stuff, but you don't just wander around anywhere. The AI isn't great, but it wasn't necessarily great in Crysis 1, either. It's more story driven and follows a narrative, which is sometimes an enemy of open world style. It's somewhat different in it's approach, but different isn't necessarily always worse. If you go into Crysis 2 with the attitude that it better be just as open as Crysis 1, you'll be disappointed. If you are open to some changes in style and approach, you are much more likely to enjoy it. I heard that the second half of the game is where it really shines, so I'm hesitant to judge it so early in the game. I also heard that the conclusion and plot are pretty decent, which is welcome, but I avoided spoilers and can't say whether this is true yet. I have no idea how the story progresses or concludes beyond the first few areas.