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

[QUOTE="Ilikemyname420"]

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"] im sure he was actually using the ps3 even though it wasnt released

TintedEyes

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"]

[QUOTE="Ilikemyname420"] Still he basically corrected himself. Which is why it's silly to use the 2005 quote when the guy basically shoots down said quote 4 years later.

Ilikemyname420

[QUOTE="NotTarts"]

From this interview:

http://www.gameblog.fr/blogs/eska/p_16980_mes-amis-les-devs-daniel-phillips

[QUOTE="Gameblog"]AKka:What was the Lead Console at the beginning of Crysis 2 dev ?

Daniel:At the start I believe it was the Xbox 360 that was used as the console benchmark. As of now though, we've switched to the PS3 as our "low end" benchmark. Not because it's inferior to the 360, but because it's just so much harder to develop on. It has very different specs compared to the 360.

---

AKka: Does the hardware difference between the 360 and the PS3 allow one of these version to look better?

Daniel:When I worked on A:CM I would have said yes to this question. During that project we found that the PS3 gave far better visuals than the 360. But having worked on Crysis 2, I have found that the quality is all dependant on the programming team. As it stands right now, the quality is near identical between the 360 and PS3 for Crysis 2 (and amazing)

Lol, cows are picking parts of this interview and taking it out of context to fit their own cow needs. This is not hard cows. Please read slowly...

The key statement in that interview is this one:

"I have found that the quality is all dependant on the programming team." This is what I have been preaching here but it falls on deaf cow ears.

Then you hear this from the typical cow:

"Well what about UC2?GOW3? KZ2?"

First of all to me KZ2 was not that great looking. Too much blur and vaseline. Some Poor textures and some low poly structures in the environment. The game is overrated graphically and to me was a mess of a game because of the funky controls. GOW3 looks great but to me UC2 is the only ps3 game that impresses me graphically. But as others have already mentioned there are other games that are just as impressive graphically on the 360(Reach, RDR, Wake, etc...) and are doing FAR MORE things in their games than what is being done in UC2.

But anyway I digress. The point I'm trying to make is that because the quality is dependant on the programming team, cows cannot just say well UC2, KZ2, etc... Why? Because those are first party titles with development teams who were given the resources and time to throw their blood, sweat and tears into their game with graphics as a primary focus. I honestly believe that if you gathered the same teams (i.e. Naughty Dog, Santa Monica, Guerilla, etc..) and they were given the same resources and the same length of time to complete their games as with the ps3, not only would the visuals be identical more or less but it would not shock me one bit if the same games looked slightly better than their ps3 counterparts.

Seriously, cows seem to be really hurting that it is coming out from respected developers that the 360 and ps3 are pretty equal in their capabilities. But that's what happens when you delude yourself into thinking that the ps3 is the second coming and then get hit with the truth.

As far as Crysis 2 vs. KZ3? I'll wait until both games are completed and I get to play them. Which reminds me... I'm too lazy to search for that post in here but some cow made the ridiculous claim that critics don't have good eyes and can't be taken seriously in response to someone saying that critics are already saying that Crysis 2 is already looking great and that Kz3 received no graphical accolades this past E3.

So if critics can't be taken seriously and don't have good eyes so then I guess I can't take them seriously when they were praising UC2 when it was released huh? Ya see how cows set themselves up and just make themselves look bad? You guys continue to spam and spit out nonsense only to serve your own cow needs and then act as though it is fact or the holy grail when in reality you guys make yourselves look bad when faced with the truth.

[QUOTE="Ilikemyname420"]

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"] looks like he is just talking about specific parts not the entire consoles power, this isnt like the article from 2005

johny300

Am I the only one who noticed that the Dev said "PS3 gave far better visuals" but it is harder to program on and it "depends on the development team"? This pretty much means that the PS3 is more powerful but a lot harder to develop for, and that's why multiplats look about the same on both systems. This makes sense as PS3 exclusives generally have much better graphics than 360 exclusives and those dev teams have a lot of experience with the systems.

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"][QUOTE="delta3074"]marginally means by an 'insignificant' amount, and being easier to develope for is a bigger advantage than a miniscule amount of extra power,loldelta3074

[QUOTE="delta3074"][QUOTE="TintedEyes"] ok but carmack still said more powerful but very small difference at the end of the day, cows were still rightronvalencia

Am I the only one who noticed that the Dev said "PS3 gave far better visuals" but it is harder to program on and it "depends on the development team"? This pretty much means that the PS3 is more powerful but a lot harder to develop for, and that's why multiplats look about the same on both systems. This makes sense as PS3 exclusives generally have much better graphics than 360 exclusives and those dev teams have a lot of experience with the systems.

Cheesehead9099

No, you misunderstood it. He said he noticed that it produced better visuals on that particular project, implying that the engine was optimized for the PS3 but not the 360 (like FF13).

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"][QUOTE="delta3074"]no they where not, because they where all saying the Ps3 was a 'supercomputer' and 'vastly more powerful than the 360' and they all touted it as the second coming of jesus christ, it's there own fault, cows hyped the Ps3 and the cell up to be something that it just wasn't, basically, the ps3 didn't meet the hype,they where wrong because they touted it to be 'far more' powerful than the 360, the reality is it has a little extra power that is gobbled up supporting a gimped GPU, yet again nvidia shafted another concole hardware manufacturer. 04dcarraher

Supporting DX9c, NV40 architecture was completed in April 2004. G70 was also known as NV47 i.e. yet another DX9c GPU with similar design flaws as with NV40. Sony didn't cough enough $$$ for post-DX9c NV GPU R&D. I defined "proto-G80" as half baked G80 i.e. a design between NV4X and G80.Hardware feature set (e.g. SMT, decoupled texture/shader design, full 32bit FP performance, concurrent HDR+MSAA, 3DC+ texture compression) similar to G80 yet still fails full DirectX10.

After DX9c's release, MS and ATI was already designingthe post-DX9c GPU architecture i.e. DirectX Next. "DirectX Next" term already exist around 2003.

From 4th of December 2003 http://www.beyond3d.com/content/articles/14/

Notice unified shader GPU architecture back in December 2003.

[QUOTE="Ilikemyname420"]

[QUOTE="TintedEyes"] looks like he is just talking about specific parts not the entire consoles power, this isnt like the article from 2005

johny300

From what I understand the PS3 is technically more powerful than the 360, but not by that much.

[QUOTE="johny300"][QUOTE="Ilikemyname420"] So the GPU in the 360 is more powerful and the CPU is the same..... but the PS3 is more powerful overall? Do you REALLY think that makes sense?

themyth01

Well maybe MS would have some 1st party studios if they didn't CLOSE them all down!

From what I understand the PS3 is technically more powerful than the 360, but not by that much.

painguy1

[QUOTE="painguy1"]

From what I understand the PS3 is technically more powerful than the 360, but not by that much.

themyth01

Yet it's exclusives look better then those of the 360 :roll:

IMO the performance difference between consoles is minimal. It's all up to developers mad skillz which MS devs lack.

IMO the performance difference between consoles is minimal. It's all up to developers mad skillz which MS devs lack.

Orchid87

Spot on.

[QUOTE="themyth01"][QUOTE="painguy1"]

From what I understand the PS3 is technically more powerful than the 360, but not by that much.

UnrealDelusion

Yet it's exclusives look better then those of the 360 :roll:

[QUOTE="UnrealDelusion"]

[QUOTE="themyth01"] It's as Carmack puts it, in practice PS3 doesn't match the 360 even though it has more theoretical power. delta3074

Yet it's exclusives look better then those of the 360 :roll:

well having games which look better then anything on the 360 means more then mere words. So until the 360 gets a game in the same league graphics wise the 360 is less powerfull.

[QUOTE="delta3074"][QUOTE="UnrealDelusion"]

Yet it's exclusives look better then those of the 360 :roll:

UnrealDelusion

well having games which look better then anything on the 360 means more then mere words. So until the 360 gets a game in the same league graphics wise the 360 is less powerfull.

[QUOTE="delta3074"][QUOTE="UnrealDelusion"]

Yet it's exclusives look better then those of the 360 :roll:

UnrealDelusion

well having games which look better then anything on the 360 means more then mere words. So until the 360 gets a game in the same league graphics wise the 360 is less powerfull.

With your logic, comparing 3DMarks Vantage benchmarks+ATI Radeon against Unigine benchmarks+NV Geforce would be considered as a joke. .

[QUOTE="UnrealDelusion"]

correction, 3 of the Ps3's exclusives look better than anything on the xbox 360,if that's the best you can come up with to counter a developer like carmacks words you should quit, he knows a whole world more about hardware than you mate.delta3074

well having games which look better then anything on the 360 means more then mere words. So until the 360 gets a game in the same league graphics wise the 360 is less powerfull.

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="gpuking"] The dynamic GI is not accurate and only a small amount of bounce is employed in the console version. It certainly did not put it on a huge advantage here. Speaking of lighting, the deferred lighting in kz2&3 are vastly better implemented, muzzle flash casts shadows, more dynamic light sources and better blooms. Killzone 3 has much better particle effect too, not only it has a lot more going on per frame, they are also affected by wind physics, colliding sparks and just tons more atmospheric effects such as snow flakes, debris, cinders and what not. Oh and MLAA > 0xaa.

NotTarts

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.

[QUOTE="NotTarts"]

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"] KZ2 uses both static/prebaked and shadows sun shadows.KZ2 doesn't eye adaptive HDR.C2 uses DR btw.

gpuking

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.

http://mycryengine.com/index.php?conid=2

CryENGINE® 3 features a novel real-time dynamic global illumination solution, fully optimized for current and next generation platforms. For the first time – without pre-computation or geometric limits

CryENGINE® 3 features near-reality natural lighting at low-cost on multiple platforms and creates soft shadows that dynamically respond to natural movements in real time

With rocket mod, all Crysis's shadow casting from destroyable objects can move.Crysis has time of day weather environments i.e.pre-bake shadows would not work.

If you use Crysis's Sandbox Editor, pre-baked shadows doesn't exist.

[QUOTE="NotTarts"]

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"] KZ2 uses both static/prebaked and shadows sun shadows.KZ2 doesn't eye adaptive HDR.C2 uses DR btw.

gpuking

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.

[QUOTE="themyth01"]

[QUOTE="UnrealDelusion"]

well having games which look better then anything on the 360 means more then mere words. So until the 360 gets a game in the same league graphics wise the 360 is less powerfull.

Anastasia1997

"Best looking" is subjective.

In judging hardware performance, Quantitative benchmarks are superior over subjective statements.

[QUOTE="NotTarts"]

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"] KZ2 uses both static/prebaked and shadows sun shadows.KZ2 doesn't eye adaptive HDR.C2 uses DR btw.

gpuking

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.

Since when? Is there some unspoken rule that I haven't heard of? CryEngine 2/3 doesn't use any baked lighting at all; you can open up the editor, change the time, move lights around, and instantly render the scene without needing to compute pre-baked lighting. It's even mentioned in the interview:

Crytek's CryEngine 3:As you've guess, I've saved the best for last:) I really can't say enough good things about this engine. The first thing is no compiling!. Absolutely every light you see in game is either Deferred or Dynamic. There is no baked shadows or lighting. This by itself is enough to take the crown, but it doesn't stop here. CryEngine 3 is NOT based on the old BSP Tree model. There is a tool within Sandbox that allows the user to create Solids (CryEngines version of BSP), but they require no compiling! All of this equals one very important thing - Rapid Iteration. While I could go on and on about other features, I do want to mention that Flowgraph is by far the most powerful scripting GUI I have used. It lacks a few key features that Kismet (UnrealEd) has (such as Remote Events Print to Screen debugging). But this is compensated for by the sheer quantity of operations provided (Math, Vec, Int, String, etc). This gives the scripter literally all the tools they need to do what ever your crazy mind can think of .Daniel Phillips

Don't be so brash unless you actually know what you're talking about.

[QUOTE="gpuking"][QUOTE="NotTarts"]

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.

ocstew

[QUOTE="ocstew"][QUOTE="gpuking"] Er, no. Every game uses pre-baked shadows and lighting to a certain extend. Tons of shadows are pre baked in Crysis 2 and even the original. In Crysis 2 there are lots of light sources that don't even cast a shadow. The temporal aa I've seen offers far less quality than the MLAA.gpuking

Does not how CryEngine 3 works.

How old are those screenshots? It has GI, light's colour influencing the environment.

From http://www.incrysis.com/forums/viewtopic.php?pid=497220

Crytek's CryEngine 3: As you've guessed, I've saved the best for last I really can't say enough good things about this engine. The first thing is no compiling! Absolutely every light you see in game is either deferred or dynamic. There is no baked shadows or lighting. This by itself is enough to take the crown, but it doesn't stop here. CryEngine 3 is NOT based on the old BSP tree model. There is a tool within Sandbox that allows the user to create Solids (CryEngine's version of BSP), but they require no compiling! All of this equals one very important thing - Rapid iteration. While I could go on and on about other features, I do want to mention that Flowgraph is by far the most powerful scripting GUI I have used. It lacks a few key features that Kismet (UnrealEd) has (such as Remote Events Print to Screen debugging). But this is compensated for by the sheer quantity of operations provided (Math, Vec, Int, String, etc). This gives the scripter literally all the tools they need to do what ever your crazy mind can think of

[QUOTE="ocstew"][QUOTE="gpuking"] Er, no. Every game uses pre-baked shadows and lighting to a certain extend. Tons of shadows are pre baked in Crysis 2 and even the original. In Crysis 2 there are lots of light sources that don't even cast a shadow. The temporal aa I've seen offers far less quality than the MLAA.gpuking

Why does Crytek do everything in real-time? Easy question, really: because it's so much easier for the developer to design. Look back at the quote I posted above, and you'll see what I mean.

In those shots, shadows aren't being casted, but there's nothing pre-baked there either. Doesn't really invalidate the point.

Don't be so brash unless you actually know what you're talking about.

NotTarts

[QUOTE="UnrealDelusion"]

[QUOTE="delta3074"]correction, 3 of the Ps3's exclusives look better than anything on the xbox 360,if that's the best you can come up with to counter a developer like carmacks words you should quit, he knows a whole world more about hardware than you mate.Tessellation

well having games which look better then anything on the 360 means more then mere words. So until the 360 gets a game in the same league graphics wise the 360 is less powerfull.

Who the hell is Hanzah12345?

And no I'm not bandodging just stating facts actions speak louder then words.

[QUOTE="NotTarts"]Don't be so brash unless you actually know what you're talking about.

gpuking

Those shots were from E3, though, and I'm betting that it'll be improved during the polishing stage. It's easily capable of it; it's just a matter of balancing the load. Crytek have always stuck by 'real-time, all the time', and I don't think that's going to change.

And no I'm not bandodging just stating facts actions speak louder then words.UnrealDelusion

[QUOTE="Tessellation"][QUOTE="UnrealDelusion"]

well having games which look better then anything on the 360 means more then mere words. So until the 360 gets a game in the same league graphics wise the 360 is less powerfull.

UnrealDelusion

Who the hell is Hanzah12345?

And no I'm not bandodging just stating facts actions speak louder then words.

[QUOTE="UnrealDelusion"]

[QUOTE="Tessellation"] Bandoding again Hanzah1235?delta3074

Who the hell is Hanzah12345?

And no I'm not bandodging just stating facts actions speak louder then words.

lol me a sony fanboy I don't even own a PS3 :lol: And yes I stand by actions speak louder then words and if his words are true then why is there not one single game on the 360 that looks better then most PS3 exclusives while it is on the market longer and easier to program for?

[QUOTE="delta3074"][QUOTE="UnrealDelusion"]

Who the hell is Hanzah12345?

And no I'm not bandodging just stating facts actions speak louder then words.

UnrealDelusion

lol me a sony fanboy I don't even own a PS3 :lol: And yes I stand by actions speak louder then words and if his words are true then why is there not one single game on the 360 that looks better then most PS3 exclusives while it is on the market longer and easier to program for?

[QUOTE="gpuking"]

[QUOTE="NotTarts"]Don't be so brash unless you actually know what you're talking about.

NotTarts

Those shots were from E3, though, and I'm betting that it'll be improved during the polishing stage. It's easily capable of it; it's just a matter of balancing the load. Crytek have always stuck by 'real-time, all the time', and I don't think that's going to change.

[QUOTE="UnrealDelusion"]

[QUOTE="delta3074"]so basically your saying that john carmack, who is a developer god, the guy who invented mega textures and has written every engine that ID uses from scratch, the guy who coded the first doom game and has been developing games on various platforms for as long as anyone can remember, doesn't have a clue what e's talking about and you a SONY fanboy know more than him? i don't think so buddy, your argument is weaksauce,loldelta3074

lol me a sony fanboy I don't even own a PS3 :lol: And yes I stand by actions speak louder then words and if his words are true then why is there not one single game on the 360 that looks better then most PS3 exclusives while it is on the market longer and easier to program for?

3 is still more then none and who says I need to owna PS3 to be able to play and see the games in action?

[QUOTE="delta3074"][QUOTE="UnrealDelusion"]

lol me a sony fanboy I don't even own a PS3 :lol: And yes I stand by actions speak louder then words and if his words are true then why is there not one single game on the 360 that looks better then most PS3 exclusives while it is on the market longer and easier to program for?

UnrealDelusion

3 is still more then none and who says I need to owna PS3 to be able to play and see the games in action?

[QUOTE="UnrealDelusion"]

[QUOTE="delta3074"]so you have not even played the games you are saying are better looking than any 360 exclusive and you are defending a console you don't even own, wow, you just lost all your credibility in one post, good job and 3 games isn't 'most' of the Ps3's exc;usive,learn maths,loldelta3074

3 is still more then none and who says I need to owna PS3 to be able to play and see the games in action?

Painless1979, satisfied?

[QUOTE="delta3074"][QUOTE="UnrealDelusion"]

3 is still more then none and who says I need to owna PS3 to be able to play and see the games in action?

UnrealDelusion

Painless1979, satisfied?

[QUOTE="UnrealDelusion"]

[QUOTE="delta3074"]prove that you have actually played those games and all is forgiven.delta3074

Painless1979, satisfied?

Friend's because I said I DON'T OWN a PS3. lol resulting to insults you don't even know my age and no he is not a programming god he is heavily overrated and that comes from a pc only gamer. So I take what I see with my own 2 eyes over what he says.

[QUOTE="delta3074"][QUOTE="UnrealDelusion"]

Painless1979, satisfied?

UnrealDelusion

Friend's because I said I DON'T OWN a PS3. lol resulting to insults you don't even know my age and no he is not a programming god he is heavily overrated and that comes from a pc only gamer. So I take what I see with my own 2 eyes over what he says.

[QUOTE="UnrealDelusion"]

[QUOTE="delta3074"]is that yours or your friends PSN ID, either way i suppose you have played those games, still doesn't change the fact that you have no credibility to say that john carmack is wrong, he was coding hardware before you left nappys mate and i will take his word over yours if thats alright.delta3074

Friend's because I said I DON'T OWN a PS3. lol resulting to insults you don't even know my age and no he is not a programming god he is heavily overrated and that comes from a pc only gamer. So I take what I see with my own 2 eyes over what he says.

Why should I enlighten you why I think he is overrated since we won't agree on it anyway. He just is overrated imo and hasn't done anything noteworthy for quite some time now. He's just an old relic living on past glories.

18 pages of quibbling over a developer saying, "hey, they're both the same". Bored times we live in.jpeg

Unless you are doing a 24/7 dynamic weather system which is not the case in Crysis 2, there would be no reason not to use pre baked shadows especially on the consoles. You would be simply wasting resources away.

gpuking

This. Doing everything dynamic isn't always the best solution.