Crysis 2 dev: Both consoles are equal, but PS3 is 'lowest denominator'

I still dont get, if they say that they are both equaly powerful, yet they cant make the PS3 version the same? so they are admitting that its too hard for them and are just going to take the easy way out and deliver a sloppy port. CRYTEK is suppose to be this master of "unlocking" and "maxing" out hardware, but they cant make their own game the same on the PS3???? these people dun goof'dJ-WOW

[QUOTE="Anastasia1997"][QUOTE="johny300"] Now how did you know that you're a level 1.johny300

[QUOTE="johny300"][QUOTE="Anastasia1997"] Ive looked on this board before i created my account, to see if the people are as the bad as the GT forums :/Anastasia1997

[QUOTE="Anastasia1997"][QUOTE="johny300"] Beleive me it's hell in here :lol:.johny300

Sure if you're like Crytek and just throw as many shaders as you can at something in place of actual design or talent.

Sure if you're like Crytek and just throw as many shaders as you can at something in place of actual design or talent.

Aidenfury19

Well, devs have been using 360 as lowest denominator for the longest time, and thats worked out swimingly for them.

Arguing about which 2005 piece of hardware is stronger than the other is kind of pointless. In a couple of months we'll be greeting the year of 2011 and compared to todays technology the difference in performance between the two consoles are smaller than ever.

It's time to face facts, both consoles are based on technology that was available at the time they were designed and it's only reasonable to assume that they are on the same level. It's not like Sony or Microsoft traveled through time to pick up the hardware for their consoles.

And regarding KZ3 vs. C2. Crysis 2 even on the 360 looks better than KZ3. It's not just my personal opinion but game critics agree to that too.KZ3 got NO awards for graphics this years E3, C2 on the hand won several, so there you go.

Arguing about which 2005 piece of hardware is stronger than the other is kind of pointless. In a couple of months we'll be greeting the year of 2011 and compared to todays technology the difference in performance between the two consoles are smaller than ever.

It's time to face facts, both consoles are based on technology that was available at the time they were designed and it's only reasonable to assume that they are on the same level. It's not like Sony or Microsoft traveled through time to pick up the hardware for their consoles.

And regarding KZ3 vs. C2. Crysis 2 even on the 360 looks better than KZ3. It's not just my personal opinion but game critics agree to that too.KZ3 got NO awards for graphics this years E3, C2 on the hand won several, so there you go.

fireballonfire

Arguing about which 2005 piece of hardware is stronger than the other is kind of pointless. In a couple of months we'll be greeting the year of 2011 and compared to todays technology the difference in performance between the two consoles are smaller than ever.

It's time to face facts, both consoles are based on technology that was available at the time they were designed and it's only reasonable to assume that they are on the same level. It's not like Sony or Microsoft traveled through time to pick up the hardware for their consoles.

And regarding KZ3 vs. C2. Crysis 2 even on the 360 looks better than KZ3. It's not just my personal opinion but game critics agree to that too.KZ3 got NO awards for graphics this years E3, C2 on the hand won several, so there you go.

Does anybody else remember watching a crysis 2 interview (medieval setting) and someone actually saying the words 'the 360 is the lowest common denominator'? i could of sworn they said that.

convicted_94

[QUOTE="fireballonfire"]

Arguing about which 2005 piece of hardware is stronger than the other is kind of pointless. In a couple of months we'll be greeting the year of 2011 and compared to todays technology the difference in performance between the two consoles are smaller than ever.

It's time to face facts, both consoles are based on technology that was available at the time they were designed and it's only reasonable to assume that they are on the same level. It's not like Sony or Microsoft traveled through time to pick up the hardware for their consoles.

And regarding KZ3 vs. C2. Crysis 2 even on the 360 looks better than KZ3. It's not just my personal opinion but game critics agree to that too.KZ3 got NO awards for graphics this years E3, C2 on the hand won several, so there you go.

Anastasia1997

And because one source gave the award to GT5 (even though the voters on this very site voted for C2) KZ3 looks better than C2, is that what you are saying? I'm sorry butI don't see why one award for GT5 would help KZ3s case?? Aren't they two seperate games to begin with, please help me out here.

[QUOTE="fireballonfire"]

Arguing about which 2005 piece of hardware is stronger than the other is kind of pointless. In a couple of months we'll be greeting the year of 2011 and compared to todays technology the difference in performance between the two consoles are smaller than ever.

It's time to face facts, both consoles are based on technology that was available at the time they were designed and it's only reasonable to assume that they are on the same level. It's not like Sony or Microsoft traveled through time to pick up the hardware for their consoles.

And regarding KZ3 vs. C2. Crysis 2 even on the 360 looks better than KZ3. It's not just my personal opinion but game critics agree to that too.KZ3 got NO awards for graphics this years E3, C2 on the hand won several, so there you go.

gpuking

Isn't it funny that cows are the only ones with opinions that matter. So everyone saying C2 > KZ3 knows nothing about graphics, is that what you are saying??

The privilege of having an opinion should be taken away from anyone not pro sony, sounds just like Germany 70-years ago.

[QUOTE="fireballonfire"]

Crysis 2 even on the 360 looks better than KZ3.

Orchid87

[QUOTE="gpuking"][QUOTE="fireballonfire"]

Arguing about which 2005 piece of hardware is stronger than the other is kind of pointless. In a couple of months we'll be greeting the year of 2011 and compared to todays technology the difference in performance between the two consoles are smaller than ever.

It's time to face facts, both consoles are based on technology that was available at the time they were designed and it's only reasonable to assume that they are on the same level. It's not like Sony or Microsoft traveled through time to pick up the hardware for their consoles.

And regarding KZ3 vs. C2. Crysis 2 even on the 360 looks better than KZ3. It's not just my personal opinion but game critics agree to that too.KZ3 got NO awards for graphics this years E3, C2 on the hand won several, so there you go.

fireballonfire

Isn't it funny that cows are the only ones with opinions that matter. So everyone saying C2 > KZ3 knows nothing about graphics, is that what you are saying??

The privilege of having an opinion should be taken away from anyone not pro sony, sounds just like Germany 70-years ago.

If you're "not sure he's serious" then explain your point of view. Seriously cows is being equal to the 360 in devs eyes hard to swallow?ocstew

[QUOTE="ocstew"]If you're "not sure he's serious" then explain your point of view. Seriously cows is being equal to the 360 in devs eyes hard to swallow?v13_KiiLtz

Uh, I don't think he actually said that.

[QUOTE="v13_KiiLtz"][QUOTE="ocstew"]If you're "not sure he's serious" then explain your point of view. Seriously cows is being equal to the 360 in devs eyes hard to swallow?NotTarts

Uh, I don't think he actually said that.

This is how things work here....... See......... the cows could take a polished obvious turd of a game and raise it to the level of self imposed "graphics king" simply because they have greater numbers of them here. Its like a hive mind where all they have to do with their greater numbers is spam the topic to death.

vaderhater

[QUOTE="NotTarts"]

[QUOTE="v13_KiiLtz"] He never said they were equal. He said Ps3 is far better in the graphics department, but it entirely depends on the programming teamsv13_KiiLtz

Uh, I don't think he actually said that.

"THAT GAME"

But that's the thing isn't it. Cows and Lemmings can argue back and forth which platform is the more powerful of the two but if the truth should be told it's not an easy task.

Saying that the two are more or less equal in power is not a lie. But if we were to examine both systems more thoroughly we'll find that one is more proficient in some certain areasw hile the other might be more proficient handling other certain tasks.

It's all up to what kind of elements you include in the engine. Physics, particles etc. should benefit from the more powerful CPU in the PS3 while the stronger GPU in the 360 should produce a cleaner image or produce better results handling other GPU bound tasks.

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]This is how things work here....... See......... the cows could take a polished obvious turd of a game and raise it to the level of self imposed "graphics king" simply because they have greater numbers of them here. Its like a hive mind where all they have to do with their greater numbers is spam the topic to death.

gpuking

Yes, it might very well be.

You should also take a look at another topic going on on this board showing off a few screenies from the KZ3 multiplayer. 90% of the comments in that thread consisted of a three letter expression and I quote, "Meh".

[QUOTE="v13_KiiLtz"][QUOTE="NotTarts"]

Uh, I don't think he actually said that.

fireballonfire

"THAT GAME"

But that's the thing isn't it. Cows and Lemmings can argue back and forth which platform is the more powerful of the two but if the truth should be told it's not an easy task.

Saying that the two are more or less equal in power is not a lie. But if we were to examine both systems more thoroughly we'll find that one is more proficient in some certain areasw hile the other might be more proficient handling other certain tasks.

It's all up to what kind of elements you include in the engine. Physics, particles etc. should benefit from the more powerful CPU in the PS3 while the stronger GPU in the 360 should produce a cleaner image or other GPU bound tasks.

Yet crysis will still be a boring game.

I'm pc gamer that will admit it.

[QUOTE="gpuking"]

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]This is how things work here....... See......... the cows could take a polished obvious turd of a game and raise it to the level of self imposed "graphics king" simply because they have greater numbers of them here. Its like a hive mind where all they have to do with their greater numbers is spam the topic to death.

fireballonfire

Yes, it might very well be.

You should also take a look at another topic going on on this board showing off a few screenies from the KZ3 multiplayer. 90% of the comments in that thread consisted of a three letter expression and I quote, "Meh".

[QUOTE="fireballonfire"]

[QUOTE="v13_KiiLtz"] "During that project we found that the PS3 gave far better visuals than the 360." But ok, if you want to be anal on the words.gpuking

"THAT GAME"

But that's the thing isn't it. Cows and Lemmings can argue back and forth which platform is the more powerful of the two but if the truth should be told it's not an easy task.

Saying that the two are more or less equal in power is not a lie. But if we were to examine both systems more thoroughly we'll find that one is more proficient in some certain areasw hile the other might be more proficient handling other certain tasks.

It's all up to what kind of elements you include in the engine. Physics, particles etc. should benefit from the more powerful CPU in the PS3 while the stronger GPU in the 360 should produce a cleaner image or other GPU bound tasks.

Yes it might very well be so. Maybe the PS3 has the overall "theoretical edge" but it's also a pain in the ass to work with, it evens out.

[QUOTE="NotTarts"]

[QUOTE="v13_KiiLtz"] He never said they were equal. He said Ps3 is far better in the graphics department, but it entirely depends on the programming teamsv13_KiiLtz

Uh, I don't think he actually said that.

Yeah, that project. Not in overall performance. By that logic, any multiplat that looked better on the PS3 would be proof that the PS3 is a more capable machine.

[QUOTE="fireballonfire"]

[QUOTE="gpuking"] Maybe it's because cows have evidence to back up the claim while on the other hand lemmings are too desperate in need of a messiah and they would hype it up no matter how different the truth appears to them. I mean just look at it http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=galgKO4tCog you honestly think that's the new console graphics king?

gpuking

Yes, it might very well be.

You should also take a look at another topic going on on this board showing off a few screenies from the KZ3 multiplayer. 90% of the comments in that thread consisted of a three letter expression and I quote, "Meh".

I'm sure KZ3 will be a great looking game just like C2 on the 360. I have yet to play both games in their release state so I'll reserve my final judgement till that day comes.

This won't end well.

waltefmoney

[QUOTE="v13_KiiLtz"][QUOTE="NotTarts"]

Uh, I don't think he actually said that.

NotTarts

Yeah, that project. Not in overall performance. By that logic, any multiplat that looked better on the PS3 would be proof that the PS3 is a more capable machine.

If you're "not sure he's serious" then explain your point of view. Seriously cows is being equal to the 360 in devs eyes hard to swallow?ocstew

First, don't mistake me for cow here. I am not even interested in any PS3 exclusives aside Killzone and I play mostly on PC.

Second, have you seen the 360 Crysis 2 videos? It is laughable when compared to KZ2 let alone KZ3 in motion.

Yet crysis will still be a boring game.

I'm pc gamer that will admit it.

OmegaTau

[QUOTE="ocstew"]

If you're "not sure he's serious" then explain your point of view. Seriously cows is being equal to the 360 in devs eyes hard to swallow?Orchid87

First, don't mistake me for cow here. I am not even interested in any PS3 exclusives aside Killzone and I play mostly on PC.

Second, have you seen the 360 Crysis 2 videos? It is laughable when compared to KZ2 let alone KZ3 in motion.

If 360 and ps3 are equal, explain Killzone 2, Uncharted 2, God of War 3, GT5? How come the 360 isn't turning out the same quality graphics?thetruespin

With bull**** hyperbole like it's "laughable" compared to KZ2, let alone KZ3, it's no wonder people mistake you for a fanboy. AAllxxjjnn

You might check the C2 beta videos then. Pop-up, screen tearing, excessive DOF, cartoonish unnatural animations, sterile MW2-esque environments, and don't forget that KZ3 has far better particle effects.

So PS3 is more powerful, but being harder to develop for brings it down. Honestly, that is one sucky catch-22.

So PS3 is more powerful, but being harder to develop for brings it down. Honestly, that is one sucky catch-22.

SPYDER0416

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

So PS3 is more powerful, but being harder to develop for brings it down. Honestly, that is one sucky catch-22.

gpuking

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]

With bull**** hyperbole like it's "laughable" compared to KZ2, let alone KZ3, it's no wonder people mistake you for a fanboy. Orchid87

You might check the C2 beta videos then. Pop-up, screen tearing, excessive DOF, cartoonish unnatural animations, sterile MW2-esque environments, and don't forget that KZ3 has far better particle effects.

There is a recent KZ3-thread where the TC showed off some screenies from the KZ3s multiplayer. Maybe you should go over there and read all comments as to why 95% of the gamers thought KZ3s graphics to be, "Meh" -level. That's an exaggeration just like yours about C2.

This black and white thinking is what make system wars so fun, but sometimes it needs to be pointed out so people don't get stuck in this narrow way of thinking.

SW-users way of reasoning handbook (first edition).

- The game with one less pixel is dog turd and unplayable.

- If you're not president or king then you're a homeless bum.

- If you're not driving a Lamborghini then you're riding a three wheeled baby bicycle.

Feel free to fill in

There is a recent KZ3-thread where the TC showed off some screenies from the KZ3s multiplayer. Maybe you should go over there and read all comments as to why 95% of the gamers thought KZ3s graphics to be, "Meh" -level. That's an exaggeration just like yours about C2.

This black and white thinking is what make system wars so fun, but sometimes it needs to be pointed out so people don't get stuck in this narrow way of thinking.

SW-users way of reasoning handbook (first edition).

- The game with one less pixel is dog turd and unplayable.

- If you're not president or king then you're a homeless bum.

- If you're not driving a Lamborghini then you're riding a three wheeled baby bicycle.

Feel free to fill in

fireballonfire

Those KZ3 shots were actually meh. So? Every other KZ3 media shows that game looks spectacular for the weak 5 year old hardware. Crysis 2 360 version on the other hand shows that Crytek struggle hard not only with PS3 but also with the 360 hardware. They should have stayed PC-only developer and don't compromise themselves with 360 Crysis 2 that looks worse than console competition. Console Crysis 2 was hyped as console graphics king by the developers themselves and it backfires now.

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]

With bull**** hyperbole like it's "laughable" compared to KZ2, let alone KZ3, it's no wonder people mistake you for a fanboy. Orchid87

You might check the C2 beta videos then. Pop-up, screen tearing, excessive DOF, cartoonish unnatural animations, sterile MW2-esque environments, and don't forget that KZ3 has far better particle effects.

[QUOTE="fireballonfire"]

There is a recent KZ3-thread where the TC showed off some screenies from the KZ3s multiplayer. Maybe you should go over there and read all comments as to why 95% of the gamers thought KZ3s graphics to be, "Meh" -level. That's an exaggeration just like yours about C2.

This black and white thinking is what make system wars so fun, but sometimes it needs to be pointed out so people don't get stuck in this narrow way of thinking.

SW-users way of reasoning handbook (first edition).

- The game with one less pixel is dog turd and unplayable.

- If you're not president or king then you're a homeless bum.

- If you're not driving a Lamborghini then you're riding a three wheeled baby bicycle.

Feel free to fill in

Orchid87

Those KZ3 shots were actually meh. So? Every other KZ3 media shows that game looks spectacular for the weak 5 year old hardware. Crysis 2 360 version on the other hand shows that Crytek struggle hard not only with PS3 but also with the 360 hardware. They should have stayed PC-only developer and don't compromise themselves with 360 Crysis 2 that looks worse than console competition. Console Crysis 2 was hyped as console graphics king by the developers themselves and it backfires now.

the big problem is the fact that you are saying all of this based on unoptimised Alpha footage of crysis 2, you can't judge a game until it's released, chances are the framerate dips and screen tearing in crysis 2 will be non existent when the game actually releases.delta3074

I doubt they have enough time to optimize it well enough. GeoW3 looks better at this point and it's release date is moved to fall 2011 so I think it'll be a winner for 360. Console Crysis 2 future doesn't look as bright. Also we didn't see any PS3 footage - it might be even worse.

[QUOTE="Orchid87"]

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]

With bull**** hyperbole like it's "laughable" compared to KZ2, let alone KZ3, it's no wonder people mistake you for a fanboy. AAllxxjjnn

You might check the C2 beta videos then. Pop-up, screen tearing, excessive DOF, cartoonish unnatural animations, sterile MW2-esque environments, and don't forget that KZ3 has far better particle effects.

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"][QUOTE="Orchid87"]

You might check the C2 beta videos then. Pop-up, screen tearing, excessive DOF, cartoonish unnatural animations, sterile MW2-esque environments, and don't forget that KZ3 has far better particle effects.

gpuking

[QUOTE="gpuking"]

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"] DOF is appropriately used, only when you're looking down the sights. The pop-up is only present at the beginning of the match, and, remember, it's alpha code. Based on the videos, the environment isn't sterile, concrete chips off walls, the dropship kicks up dirt, breakable glass, running water. Unless you think they should put tarp all over the place and have heavy 100 mile per hour winds constantly hitting the building to make it feel "alive". Crysis 2 has better lighting, employing dynamic global illumination, volumetric light beams and SSAO (which KZ2 did not have). ronvalencia

Exactly. Nothing in Crysis 2 is pre-baked; all the lighting and shading is processed in real-time. Taking that into account, it's pretty amazing that they've managed to make it look as good as it does.

Also @gpuking: Crysis 2 does have AA: the hybrid AA (edge + temporal) solution.

So PS3 is more powerful, but being harder to develop for brings it down. Honestly, that is one sucky catch-22.

SPYDER0416

MLAA benchmark test, Refer to http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=583531

To apply 1280x720p with MLAA (lower is better)

1. PS3 with 5 SPEs, it yeilds 4 ms. You have six SPEs for userland programs.

2. XBOX 360 with ATI Xenos GPU: it yeilds 3.7 ms.

3. PC wih NV GeForce 9800 GTX+ it yields, 0.44 ms.

On seleted DX9 games, AMD's MLAA works fine on both of my laptop and desktop PCs.