PS3 - Far Cry 2 Gimped? Link

"After all this hullabaloo about how the PlayStation 3 is the only "true" HD console, here comes the release of FarCry 2 to slap Sony's PR in the balls. In addition to people complaining about the messed-up widescreen and mandatory 3.5GB install, the PS3 version falls short of its Xbox 360 counterpart by only supporting 720p while the 360 version supports full 1080p."

Ouch Cows am owned confirmed , were's all the cows that claim PS3 only "real" next gen console? Oh well add up another superior multiplat for the 360..

Thats a very **** article written by a fanboy, the ps3 version isnt gimped it actually runs at a higher native rez than the 360 versionbigLLL

Link, proof, or damage control?

Written by a fanboy huh?

It is also worth noting that in a recent IGN head-to-head comparison of the game, the reviewer had the following to say regarding the differences:

"The only real differences are the PS3's occasional framerate hitches and the dropping of some sound effects during hectic gunfights. These issues don't really hurt the experience in any major way, but will be a minor irritation for some. If you're at all interested in shooters, Far Cry 2 is an experience you will enjoy on any console. If you have the luxury of choice, the 360 version runs just a little bit more smoothly."

OVERALL:
1st = PC
2nd = 360
3rd = PS3

Superior multiplat confirmed

[QUOTE="bigLLL"]Thats a very **** article written by a fanboy, the ps3 version isnt gimped it actually runs at a higher native rez than the 360 versionErik_Lensherr

Link, proof, or damage control?

umm why do I need a link most people know this by now the guy over at beyond3d forums who checks the rez on ps3/360 multiplat games already has confirmed it[QUOTE="Erik_Lensherr"]

[QUOTE="bigLLL"]Thats a very **** article written by a fanboy, the ps3 version isnt gimped it actually runs at a higher native rez than the 360 versionbigLLL

Link, proof, or damage control?

"the guy over at beyond3d" :lol:, I'll take IGN words over some random guy kthnks.

Written by a fanboy huh?

It is also worth noting that in a recent IGN head-to-head comparison of the game, the reviewer had the following to say regarding the differences:

"The only real differences are the PS3's occasional framerate hitches and the dropping of some sound effects during hectic gunfights. These issues don't really hurt the experience in any major way, but will be a minor irritation for some. If you're at all interested in shooters, Far Cry 2 is an experience you will enjoy on any console. If you have the luxury of choice, the 360 version runs just a little bit more smoothly."

OVERALL:
1st = PC
2nd = 360
3rd = PS3

Superior multiplat confirmed

Erik_Lensherr

Weren't the devs bragging about how the PS3 version was on par with the PC version? Something about 'The SPEs on the Cell work perfectly for what were doing the dynamic weather patterns' or something.Pro_wrestler

On par with the PC version? In which aspect? Graphical detail? No. Resolution? No. FPS? No.

What are you talking about?

[QUOTE="bigLLL"]Thats a very **** article written by a fanboy, the ps3 version isnt gimped it actually runs at a higher native rez than the 360 versionErik_Lensherr

Link, proof, or damage control?

The article it's self tries to hard to try and prove that the PS3 version is gimped. It dosn't give another side to the argument, and the guy seems to be very enthusiastic, mocking and excited that the Ps3 version is inferior. It sounds alot like it is coming from a fan boy. That should be really obvious just from reading the language used, "All that hullabaloo" as if to say "What a load of crap". As for it being false, it is more likely that the Xbox 360 case marks it as 1080p when it does infact just upscale from 720p, just as the PS3 does, except the PS3 cases mark this as 720p.

ok well you enjoy the tiny bit better framerate is very few parts of the game that nobody would really even take the time to pick up on and ill enjoy the tiny bit higher rez that nobody would pick up on unless really looking u fool, im sorry but there is no winners it evens out ps3 and 360 are exactly the same with a small rez and tiny framrate diff just get over it there is no superior version here, You could keep crapping on about the frame rate than I could keep crapping on about the rez but in the end there pretty much exactly the same game on consoles[QUOTE="Erik_Lensherr"]

Written by a fanboy huh?

It is also worth noting that in a recent IGN head-to-head comparison of the game, the reviewer had the following to say regarding the differences:

"The only real differences are the PS3's occasional framerate hitches and the dropping of some sound effects during hectic gunfights. These issues don't really hurt the experience in any major way, but will be a minor irritation for some. If you're at all interested in shooters, Far Cry 2 is an experience you will enjoy on any console. If you have the luxury of choice, the 360 version runs just a little bit more smoothly."

OVERALL:
1st = PC
2nd = 360
3rd = PS3

Superior multiplat confirmed

bigLLL

Downplay it all you want, I'll be playing the superior smoother running version according to IGN thanks

[QUOTE="bigLLL"]umm why do I need a link most people know this by now the guy over at beyond3d forums who checks the rez on ps3/360 multiplat games already has confirmed it[QUOTE="Erik_Lensherr"]

[QUOTE="bigLLL"]Thats a very **** article written by a fanboy, the ps3 version isnt gimped it actually runs at a higher native rez than the 360 versionErik_Lensherr

Link, proof, or damage control?

"the guy over at beyond3d" :lol:, I'll take IGN words over some random guy kthnks.

Thats a very **** article written by a fanboy, the ps3 version isnt gimped it actually runs at a higher native rez than the 360 versionbigLLL

[QUOTE="Erik_Lensherr"]

[QUOTE="bigLLL"]Thats a very **** article written by a fanboy, the ps3 version isnt gimped it actually runs at a higher native rez than the 360 versionWasntAvailable

Link, proof, or damage control?

The article it's self tries to hard to try and prove that the PS3 version is gimped. It dosn't give another side to the argument, and the guy seems to be very enthusiastic, mocking and excited that the Ps3 version is inferior. It sounds alot like it is coming from a fan boy. That should be really obvious just from reading the language used, "All that hullabaloo" as if to say "What a load of crap". As for it being false, it is more likely that the Xbox 360 case marks it as 1080p when it does infact just upscale from 720p, just as the PS3 does, except the PS3 cases mark this as 720p.

I guess you missed IGN head to head comparison part huh?. It's not really a major deal, not enough to warrant all this damage control, but it obviously a fact the 360 version runs smoother.

Fallout 3 AND Far Cry 2?

year of the PS3

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"][QUOTE="Erik_Lensherr"]

[QUOTE="bigLLL"]Thats a very **** article written by a fanboy, the ps3 version isnt gimped it actually runs at a higher native rez than the 360 versionErik_Lensherr

Link, proof, or damage control?

The article it's self tries to hard to try and prove that the PS3 version is gimped. It dosn't give another side to the argument, and the guy seems to be very enthusiastic, mocking and excited that the Ps3 version is inferior. It sounds alot like it is coming from a fan boy. That should be really obvious just from reading the language used, "All that hullabaloo" as if to say "What a load of crap". As for it being false, it is more likely that the Xbox 360 case marks it as 1080p when it does infact just upscale from 720p, just as the PS3 does, except the PS3 cases mark this as 720p.

I guess you missed IGN head to head comparison part huh?. It's not really a major deal, not enough to warrant all this damage control, but it obviously a fact the 360 version runs smoother.

[QUOTE="bigLLL"]Thats a very **** article written by a fanboy, the ps3 version isnt gimped it actually runs at a higher native rez than the 360 versionwooooode

[QUOTE="Erik_Lensherr"][QUOTE="WasntAvailable"][QUOTE="Erik_Lensherr"]

[QUOTE="bigLLL"]Thats a very **** article written by a fanboy, the ps3 version isnt gimped it actually runs at a higher native rez than the 360 versionBrainkiller05

Link, proof, or damage control?

The article it's self tries to hard to try and prove that the PS3 version is gimped. It dosn't give another side to the argument, and the guy seems to be very enthusiastic, mocking and excited that the Ps3 version is inferior. It sounds alot like it is coming from a fan boy. That should be really obvious just from reading the language used, "All that hullabaloo" as if to say "What a load of crap". As for it being false, it is more likely that the Xbox 360 case marks it as 1080p when it does infact just upscale from 720p, just as the PS3 does, except the PS3 cases mark this as 720p.

I guess you missed IGN head to head comparison part huh?. It's not really a major deal, not enough to warrant all this damage control, but it obviously a fact the 360 version runs smoother.

The link is in the OP thread :?

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"][QUOTE="Erik_Lensherr"]

[QUOTE="bigLLL"]Thats a very **** article written by a fanboy, the ps3 version isnt gimped it actually runs at a higher native rez than the 360 versionErik_Lensherr

Link, proof, or damage control?

The article it's self tries to hard to try and prove that the PS3 version is gimped. It dosn't give another side to the argument, and the guy seems to be very enthusiastic, mocking and excited that the Ps3 version is inferior. It sounds alot like it is coming from a fan boy. That should be really obvious just from reading the language used, "All that hullabaloo" as if to say "What a load of crap". As for it being false, it is more likely that the Xbox 360 case marks it as 1080p when it does infact just upscale from 720p, just as the PS3 does, except the PS3 cases mark this as 720p.

I guess you missed IGN head to head comparison part huh?. It's not really a major deal, not enough to warrant all this damage control, but it obviously a fact the 360 version runs smoother.

No I read and acknowledged the part about IGN, and they may be right, it was the blatant misunderstanding and the immediate attempt to completely discredit the PS3 version with any evidence possible that really bothered me, and just spoke out as "Fanboy" to me. I mean quoting IGN dosn't confirm that the 360 version supports 1080p and that's what the article is about, and that's why it is most likely wrong.

It's a shame. This is the 2nd in a row of inferior multiplats on PS3 lately (Fallout 3 & Far Cry 2).BioShockOwnz

:(

the cell proccesor was a failer because it was way to complex....i mean sony made it sooo good that developers had to take more time working with it compared to the other systems. So, cheap developers take shorts cuts *cough* EA*cough* and dont get the full petential of the ps3. this is a why i manly buy exclusive ps3 games, although i ebjoy the COD's on the ps3 much more then 360

How many more times will this happen until everyone realizes that more console multiplats are superior on the 360 than the PS3.

Some people are just slow learners than 360 owners.

ReverseCycology

Not for long.

[QUOTE="ReverseCycology"]

How many more times will this happen until everyone realizes that more console multiplats are superior on the 360 than the PS3.

Some people are just slow learners than 360 owners.

epic_pets

Not for long.

Yeah it's only been 2 years , how much longer Epic-Pets I would like to know or are you saying "just wait"

Just as gimped as the 360 version.

Fanboys claiming the 360 version "the superior version" are mistaken, because that obviously goes to the PC.

How is it 360 fanboys claim number one in console sales when the Wii is dominating it, and superior multiplats, when that title goes to the PC?

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"][QUOTE="Erik_Lensherr"]

[QUOTE="bigLLL"]Thats a very **** article written by a fanboy, the ps3 version isnt gimped it actually runs at a higher native rez than the 360 versionErik_Lensherr

Link, proof, or damage control?

The article it's self tries to hard to try and prove that the PS3 version is gimped. It dosn't give another side to the argument, and the guy seems to be very enthusiastic, mocking and excited that the Ps3 version is inferior. It sounds alot like it is coming from a fan boy. That should be really obvious just from reading the language used, "All that hullabaloo" as if to say "What a load of crap". As for it being false, it is more likely that the Xbox 360 case marks it as 1080p when it does infact just upscale from 720p, just as the PS3 does, except the PS3 cases mark this as 720p.

I guess you missed IGN head to head comparison part huh?. It's not really a major deal, not enough to warrant all this damage control, but it obviously a fact the 360 version runs smoother.

Exacly and isint that the whole point? If you want to look for inperfection you will find it. Or heres a crazy idea just enjoy the game. Its kinda like those crazy people who look at walls and floors textures throughout the whole game and say the game sucks without actually focusing on playing the game.

Just as gimped as the 360 version.

Fanboys claiming the 360 version "the superior version" are mistaken, because that obviously goes to the PC.

How is it 360 fanboys claim number one in console sales when the Wii is dominating it, and superior multiplats, when that title goes to the PC?

-Sluggo-

Sadly, the PC version isn't so great. There's numerous complaints on the official Far Cry 2 forums. It was expected, though -- It's Ubisoft.

Both games run 720p native on both consoles.

This is definately not ownage.

[QUOTE="epic_pets"][QUOTE="ReverseCycology"]

How many more times will this happen until everyone realizes that more console multiplats are superior on the 360 than the PS3.

Some people are just slow learners than 360 owners.

Erik_Lensherr

Not for long.

Yeah it's only been 2 years , how much longer Epic-Pets I would like to know or are you saying "just wait"

It's not a time issue, it's about how the developers utilise the hardware. The PS3 can actually be used to create a superior game if the developers use the technology to it's fullest, as the cell allows this because of SPE cores that allow for, erm something (What? Im not an expert!). But these won't be utilised on multiplatofrm titles as doing so would make the game un-portable, and you don't really wan't that in a multiplatform title. Both versions would have to be built from the ground up and that compromise is going to far for developers who already strugle with the rising budgets of game development, and for that reason PS3 multiplats will allways usually be inferior.

[QUOTE="-Sluggo-"]

Just as gimped as the 360 version.

Fanboys claiming the 360 version "the superior version" are mistaken, because that obviously goes to the PC.

How is it 360 fanboys claim number one in console sales when the Wii is dominating it, and superior multiplats, when that title goes to the PC?

BioShockOwnz

Sadly, the PC version isn't so great. There's numerous complaints on the official Far Cry 2 forums. It was expected, though -- It's Ubisoft.

Just so you know, I have the game, but thats what it sounds like.

[QUOTE="-Sluggo-"]

Just as gimped as the 360 version.

Fanboys claiming the 360 version "the superior version" are mistaken, because that obviously goes to the PC.

How is it 360 fanboys claim number one in console sales when the Wii is dominating it, and superior multiplats, when that title goes to the PC?

BioShockOwnz

Sadly, the PC version isn't so great. There's numerous complaints on the official Far Cry 2 forums. It was expected, though -- It's Ubisoft.

That's what I have been hearing as well.

I've experienced my fair share of glitches and I'm only an hour or so into the game, still having fun playing it though.

I kind of wish I would have gotten Dead Space instead though. :cry:

[QUOTE="Erik_Lensherr"][QUOTE="WasntAvailable"][QUOTE="Erik_Lensherr"]

[QUOTE="bigLLL"]Thats a very **** article written by a fanboy, the ps3 version isnt gimped it actually runs at a higher native rez than the 360 versionfinalfantasy94

Link, proof, or damage control?

The article it's self tries to hard to try and prove that the PS3 version is gimped. It dosn't give another side to the argument, and the guy seems to be very enthusiastic, mocking and excited that the Ps3 version is inferior. It sounds alot like it is coming from a fan boy. That should be really obvious just from reading the language used, "All that hullabaloo" as if to say "What a load of crap". As for it being false, it is more likely that the Xbox 360 case marks it as 1080p when it does infact just upscale from 720p, just as the PS3 does, except the PS3 cases mark this as 720p.

I guess you missed IGN head to head comparison part huh?. It's not really a major deal, not enough to warrant all this damage control, but it obviously a fact the 360 version runs smoother.

Exacly and isint that the whole point? If you want to look for inperfection you will find it. Or heres a crazy idea just enjoy the game. Its kinda like those crazy people who look at walls and floors textures throughout the whole game and say the game sucks without actually focusing on playing the game.

Yeah but sound cutting out and studders during gameplay is a little different than a pixelated floor texture as those do effect gameplay, does it make it unplayable no does it make an inferior version to the 360 Yes, by alot no way , but there is a difference.

It's a shame. This is the 2nd in a row of inferior multiplats on PS3 lately (Fallout 3 & Far Cry 2).BioShockOwnz

I havent heard anything from IGN about this. Just a magazine and I never ever trust magazines as far I can throw them. Again if greatly inferior means its texture is not a smooth in one spot then the other I see no big fuss. Thats like people saying "OMGZORZ DMC4 looks better cause this spot right here is better on the PS3 then the 360 version" just play the dang game.

It's a shame. This is the 2nd in a row of inferior multiplats on PS3 lately (Fallout 3 & Far Cry 2).BioShockOwnz

Lets just all say that the PC version destroys both console versions.

And the PS3 runs the game at it's native resolution which is 720p. The 360 upscales it to 1080p, but switch it to 720p and it will look sharper. It's better to run the game at it's native resolution rather than upscale it.

[QUOTE="Erik_Lensherr"][QUOTE="epic_pets"][QUOTE="ReverseCycology"]

How many more times will this happen until everyone realizes that more console multiplats are superior on the 360 than the PS3.

Some people are just slow learners than 360 owners.

WasntAvailable

Not for long.

Yeah it's only been 2 years , how much longer Epic-Pets I would like to know or are you saying "just wait"

It's not a time issue, it's about how the developers utilise the hardware. The PS3 can actually be used to create a superior game if the developers use the technology to it's fullest, as the cell allows this because of SPE cores that allow for, erm something (What? Im not an expert!). But these won't be utilised on multiplatofrm titles as doing so would make the game un-portable, and you don't really wan't that in a multiplatform title. Both versions would have to be built from the ground up and that compromise is going to far for developers who already strugle with the rising budgets of game development, and for that reason PS3 multiplats will allways usually be inferior.

I've been hearing this excuse for 2 years now, is it credible probably yes. Does it happen NO, so it doesn't matter if the capability is there if IT IS NOT USED. I mean it's ridiculous that they would have to put extra time and money into a Muliplat just to make it on PAR with the 360 version.

Both games run 720p native on both consoles.

This is definately not ownage.

-Sluggo-

How many more times will this happen until everyone realizes that more console multiplats are superior on the 360 than the PS3.

Some people are just slow learners than 360 owners.

ReverseCycology

Lets just all say that the PC version destroys both console versions.

And the PS3 runs the game at it's native resolution which is 720p. The 360 upscales it to 1080p, but switch it to 720p and it will look sharper. It's better to run the game at it's native resolution rather than upscale it.

dream431ca

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"][QUOTE="Erik_Lensherr"][QUOTE="epic_pets"][QUOTE="ReverseCycology"]

How many more times will this happen until everyone realizes that more console multiplats are superior on the 360 than the PS3.

Some people are just slow learners than 360 owners.

Erik_Lensherr

Not for long.

Yeah it's only been 2 years , how much longer Epic-Pets I would like to know or are you saying "just wait"

It's not a time issue, it's about how the developers utilise the hardware. The PS3 can actually be used to create a superior game if the developers use the technology to it's fullest, as the cell allows this because of SPE cores that allow for, erm something (What? Im not an expert!). But these won't be utilised on multiplatofrm titles as doing so would make the game un-portable, and you don't really wan't that in a multiplatform title. Both versions would have to be built from the ground up and that compromise is going to far for developers who already strugle with the rising budgets of game development, and for that reason PS3 multiplats will allways usually be inferior.

I've been hearing this excuse for 2 years now, is it credible probably yes. Does it happen NO, so it doesn't matter if the capability is there if IT IS NOT USED. I mean it's ridiculous that they would have to put extra time and money into a Muliplat just to make it on PAR with the 360 version.

Or heres a crazy idea for devs make the PS3 lead platform so both version come out great. Since we have heard the results are better when they use the PS3 as lead and theres always high chance of crap for PS3 when 360 is lead. Devs dont seem to learn. Its a win-win situation.

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"][QUOTE="Erik_Lensherr"][QUOTE="epic_pets"][QUOTE="ReverseCycology"]

How many more times will this happen until everyone realizes that more console multiplats are superior on the 360 than the PS3.

Some people are just slow learners than 360 owners.

Erik_Lensherr

Not for long.

Yeah it's only been 2 years , how much longer Epic-Pets I would like to know or are you saying "just wait"

It's not a time issue, it's about how the developers utilise the hardware. The PS3 can actually be used to create a superior game if the developers use the technology to it's fullest, as the cell allows this because of SPE cores that allow for, erm something (What? Im not an expert!). But these won't be utilised on multiplatofrm titles as doing so would make the game un-portable, and you don't really wan't that in a multiplatform title. Both versions would have to be built from the ground up and that compromise is going to far for developers who already strugle with the rising budgets of game development, and for that reason PS3 multiplats will allways usually be inferior.

I've been hearing this excuse for 2 years now, is it credible probably yes. Does it happen NO, so it doesn't matter if the capability is there if IT IS NOT USED. I mean it's ridiculous that they would have to put extra time and money into a Muliplat just to make it on PAR with the 360 version.

It's not an excuse, it's an explanation. The excuse is they can't do it, and that is by no means a good excuse. It is a flaw with the PS3 system, and I admit that. However the trade is that PS3 exclusive titles have a higher potential to look better than Xbox 360 exclusives. Unfortunately we can't fairly compare this, so we will never really know, so arguing about it will be fruitless. Still we know that MGS 4 can not be ported to the Xbox 360 for this very reason (It can probably be done on 360, but not ported), and I think it is the same story with Uncharted, Ratchet and Clank, Heavenly Sword and basically alot of PS3 exclusives that are worth a dam.