Uncharted 2 Graphics are better than Crysis because of....

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"][QUOTE="TheSterls"]

Yet I got best visual awards to back my claim up you have nothing.

TheSterls

Crysis warhead lost on Gamespot , but I already gave you the reason why it lost. Regardles Crysis Warhead still won on other websites so did Gears of war 2. This year UNC2 has one on every website and publication that has given the reward. IGN, Gamespot, Gametrailers, VGA's, G4, Gamepro and Gameinformer just to name a few. So no I dont beleive everything gamespot tells me I do however belive what the entire gaming media tells me and the fact that I played both those games and other then scale neither look good.

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

[QUOTE="dakan45"]I agree about the enviroments, if crysis 2 is in jungles i wont buy it!! Also its not jsut that, UC2 has better art design and taste in graphics, basicly the level design looks like the gamedelopers had more talent and ideas...come on admit it, in comparison with far cry, crysis maps are pretty dissapoinitng!!TheSterls

Crysis 2 seems to be in an urban area, and there is no such thing as a better artstyle as for level design.. I thought you of all people would know that crysis doesn't have levels.

It has chapters which are broke down by loading screens so yea it basically does have levels

Well of course I guess you could call that levels. The only real actual level parts I saw in the game were coming down to the end when stuff got really linear.

This has to be some of the most absurd reasoning I've seen as to why Uncharted 2 is better looking than Crysis.

I still can't believe this is even a debate. Uncharted 2 is an amazing looking game and is has some truly gorgeous set-pieces but it can't compare to Crysis on a technical level.

[QUOTE="TheSterls"]

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"] That what you consider evidence? Crysis Warhead lost to Metal Gear Solid 4 in 08, so yeh, great source you have there. I guess you believe whatever Gamespot feeds you.AAllxxjjnn

Crysis warhead lost on Gamespot , but I already gave you the reason why it lost. Regardles Crysis Warhead still won on other websites so did Gears of war 2. This year UNC2 has one on every website and publication that has given the reward. IGN, Gamespot, Gametrailers, VGA's, G4, Gamepro and Gameinformer just to name a few. So no I dont beleive everything gamespot tells me I do however belive what the entire gaming media tells me and the fact that I played both those games and other then scale neither look good.

Well the reason varies for every game each year. Thats why you watch the awards and yes those were the reasons Gamespot and Gametrailers didnt give it to Crysis Warhead. They thought it was ridiculous you had to have an SLI system at the time to run it smooth on at its max settings which is expensive. As for the case of UNC2 they gave no such excuse they simply said it was the best lookin game around as did every other webiste, See the diffrence? And unlike most these blind fanboys in the backhalls of SW im not inclinced to just limiting my opionions to the media. I can acutaly play these games on my own and make judgements .. Did you ever here me say UNC2 overall looks better then Crysis? No you didnt but I do feel it looks better then Stalker and ARMA2 and so does the rest of the media , other then the backhalls of SW nobody even brings those games up and dont tell me nobody reviewed them because every website did the fact is they just didnt like them much.

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]

[QUOTE="TheSterls"]

Crysis warhead lost on Gamespot , but I already gave you the reason why it lost. Regardles Crysis Warhead still won on other websites so did Gears of war 2. This year UNC2 has one on every website and publication that has given the reward. IGN, Gamespot, Gametrailers, VGA's, G4, Gamepro and Gameinformer just to name a few. So no I dont beleive everything gamespot tells me I do however belive what the entire gaming media tells me and the fact that I played both those games and other then scale neither look good.

TheSterls

Well the reason varies for every game each year. Thats why you watch the awards and yes those were the reasons Gamespot and Gametrailers didnt give it to Crysis Warhead. They thought it was ridiculous you had to have an SLI system at the time to run it smooth on at its max settings which is expensive. As for the case of UNC2 they gave no such excuse they simply said it was the best lookin game around as did every other webiste, See the diffrence? And unlike most these blind fanboys in the backhalls of SW im not inclinced to just limiting my opionions to the media. I can acutaly play these games on my own and make judgements .. Did you ever here me say UNC2 overall looks better then Crysis? No you didnt but I do feel it looks better then Stalker and ARMA2 and so does the rest of the media , other then the backhalls of SW nobody even brings those games up and dont tell me nobody reviewed them because every website did the fact is they just didnt like them much.

And yeh, let's compared a heavily marketed mainstream title, to a milsim game and one with about zero marketing. Seems fair. Go on any PC forum they're praised for their graphics.

You already have no credibilty for you claiming a car model in STALKER Clear Sky looked N64 level. Anyone with a GTX285 and 6 gigs of ram should know that isn't the case.

[QUOTE="TheSterls"]

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"] Oh ok, so you don't just eat up what Gamespot tells you, you just eat up whatever the media tells you in general. And please, why don't you remind me why Crysis Warhead lost? Is it because they found Metal Gear Solid 4 more impressive considering the hardware it's running on? If so, that kinda ruins everything you're saying about how UC2 is winning everywhere, because all that could mean is that those sites found UC2 more impressive considering the hardware it's running on. In fact, that's the reason GameTrailers didn't give Crysis an award for best graphics in 07.

AAllxxjjnn

Well the reason varies for every game each year. Thats why you watch the awards and yes those were the reasons Gamespot and Gametrailers didnt give it to Crysis Warhead. They thought it was ridiculous you had to have an SLI system at the time to run it smooth on at its max settings which is expensive. As for the case of UNC2 they gave no such excuse they simply said it was the best lookin game around as did every other webiste, See the diffrence? And unlike most these blind fanboys in the backhalls of SW im not inclinced to just limiting my opionions to the media. I can acutaly play these games on my own and make judgements .. Did you ever here me say UNC2 overall looks better then Crysis? No you didnt but I do feel it looks better then Stalker and ARMA2 and so does the rest of the media , other then the backhalls of SW nobody even brings those games up and dont tell me nobody reviewed them because every website did the fact is they just didnt like them much.

And yeh, let's compared a heavily marketed mainstream title, to a milsim game and one with about zero marketing. Seems fair. Go on any PC forum they're praised for their graphics.

You already have no credibilty for you claiming a car model in STALKER Clear Sky looked N64 level. Anyone with a GTX285 and 6 gigs of ram should know that isn't the case.

I disagree with Crysis on high settings looking better then any console title especially since the console version of Crysis is a mix of medium to very high settings.

Second I could care less how much cread you think I have , you exagerated your claims so I did the same thing , obviously antyhing that comes out today will look far better then the N64. If you take everything I say to serious then that sounds like a personal problem but the fact remains. Those games visually are not stunning and certainly not better then any console title and if your excuse is because they are not marketed well then try again. Blazeblue got nominted for best fighting game on almost every website ( have you even heard of the title) It even won on some and Demon Souls won GOTY here on gamespot and yet it is for a very niche market. The reason why nobody talks about stalker and arma2 isbecause in addition to not looking spectacular they were not great games plain and simple.

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]

[QUOTE="TheSterls"]

Well the reason varies for every game each year. Thats why you watch the awards and yes those were the reasons Gamespot and Gametrailers didnt give it to Crysis Warhead. They thought it was ridiculous you had to have an SLI system at the time to run it smooth on at its max settings which is expensive. As for the case of UNC2 they gave no such excuse they simply said it was the best lookin game around as did every other webiste, See the diffrence? And unlike most these blind fanboys in the backhalls of SW im not inclinced to just limiting my opionions to the media. I can acutaly play these games on my own and make judgements .. Did you ever here me say UNC2 overall looks better then Crysis? No you didnt but I do feel it looks better then Stalker and ARMA2 and so does the rest of the media , other then the backhalls of SW nobody even brings those games up and dont tell me nobody reviewed them because every website did the fact is they just didnt like them much.

TheSterls

And yeh, let's compared a heavily marketed mainstream title, to a milsim game and one with about zero marketing. Seems fair. Go on any PC forum they're praised for their graphics.

You already have no credibilty for you claiming a car model in STALKER Clear Sky looked N64 level. Anyone with a GTX285 and 6 gigs of ram should know that isn't the case.

I disagree with Crysis on high settings looking better then any console title especially since the console version of Crysis is a mix of medium to very high settings.

Second I could care less how much cread you think I have , you exagerated your claims so I did the same thing , obviously antyhing that comes out today will look far better then the N64 if you take everything I say to serious then that sounds like a personal problem but the fact remains Those games visually are not stunning and certainly not better then any console title and if your excuse is because they are not marketed well then try again. Blazeblue got nominted for best fighting game on almost every website ( have you even heard of the title) It even won on some and Demon Souls won GOTY here on gamespot and yet it is for a very niche market. The reason why nobody talks about those games is because in addition to looking nothign spectacular they were not great games plain and simple.

I've never exaggerated any of my claims, all i've said is that Arma II and Clear Sky have better graphics than any console game, which isn't an exaggeration. Saying the game looks like an N64 game compared to Uncharted 2 is ridiculous, even if you were 'joking', especially when i provided a screen shot that showed a car model with worse textures than the Clear Sky car.

Yeh, i've heard of Blazblue before. And Clear Sky got nominated for atmosphere. Nominations have nothing to do with anything. You're just basing things off how much recognition they get.

BTW, there is no console version of Crysis. There's a tech demo, but that's it.

[QUOTE="TheSterls"]

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"] Why does everyone seem to think you need to max the game? High settings are enough to make Crysis Warhead look better than any console game. That's bad reasoning, which is why you shouldn't trust 'gaming journalism' to always know what they're talking about and try to use it to back up your claims.

And yeh, let's compared a heavily marketed mainstream title, to a milsim game and one with about zero marketing. Seems fair. Go on any PC forum they're praised for their graphics.

You already have no credibilty for you claiming a car model in STALKER Clear Sky looked N64 level. Anyone with a GTX285 and 6 gigs of ram should know that isn't the case.

AAllxxjjnn

I disagree with Crysis on high settings looking better then any console title especially since the console version of Crysis is a mix of medium to very high settings.

Second I could care less how much cread you think I have , you exagerated your claims so I did the same thing , obviously antyhing that comes out today will look far better then the N64 if you take everything I say to serious then that sounds like a personal problem but the fact remains Those games visually are not stunning and certainly not better then any console title and if your excuse is because they are not marketed well then try again. Blazeblue got nominted for best fighting game on almost every website ( have you even heard of the title) It even won on some and Demon Souls won GOTY here on gamespot and yet it is for a very niche market. The reason why nobody talks about those games is because in addition to looking nothign spectacular they were not great games plain and simple.

I've never exaggerated any of my claims, all i've said is that Arma II and Clear Sky have better graphics than any console game, which isn't an exaggeration. Saying the game looks like an N64 game compared to Uncharted 2 is ridiculous, even if you were 'joking', especially when i provided a screen shot that showed a car model with worse textures than the Clear Sky car.

Yeh, i've heard of Blazblue before. And Clear Sky got nominated for atmosphere. Nominations have nothing to do with anything. You're just basing things off how much recognition they get.

BTW, there is no console version of Crysis. There's a tech demo, but that's it.

You posted screenshots that i disagree with and after playing all 3 titles I disagree even more. I question if you even own a PS3 to even make a logcial comparison.

Yes I base things off the awards they win when it comes to comparing certain merits of a game. I could come in here and say Haze was the best FPS ever yet nobody would take me seriously as the entire gaming media would disagree with me. Its the only way to seprate the fanboy babble here in SW and if those games won awards god knows you would be using it against me just like all the hermits did back in 2007 when Crysis swept the visual awardss category on most websites.

Yes there is a tech demo and digtal foundry did a comparison to see what the settings were to compare the pc version . Some of the ones I can remeber were medium textures, high backround geometry and very high lighting.

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]

[QUOTE="TheSterls"]

I disagree with Crysis on high settings looking better then any console title especially since the console version of Crysis is a mix of medium to very high settings.

Second I could care less how much cread you think I have , you exagerated your claims so I did the same thing , obviously antyhing that comes out today will look far better then the N64 if you take everything I say to serious then that sounds like a personal problem but the fact remains Those games visually are not stunning and certainly not better then any console title and if your excuse is because they are not marketed well then try again. Blazeblue got nominted for best fighting game on almost every website ( have you even heard of the title) It even won on some and Demon Souls won GOTY here on gamespot and yet it is for a very niche market. The reason why nobody talks about those games is because in addition to looking nothign spectacular they were not great games plain and simple.

TheSterls

I've never exaggerated any of my claims, all i've said is that Arma II and Clear Sky have better graphics than any console game, which isn't an exaggeration. Saying the game looks like an N64 game compared to Uncharted 2 is ridiculous, even if you were 'joking', especially when i provided a screen shot that showed a car model with worse textures than the Clear Sky car.

Yeh, i've heard of Blazblue before. And Clear Sky got nominated for atmosphere. Nominations have nothing to do with anything. You're just basing things off how much recognition they get.

BTW, there is no console version of Crysis. There's a tech demo, but that's it.

You posted screenshots that i disagree with and after playing all 3 titles I disagree even more. I question if you even own a PS3 to even make a logcial comparison.

Yes I base things off the awards they win when it comes to comparing certain merits of a game. I could come in here and say Haze was the best FPS ever yet nobody would take me seriously as the entire gaming media would disagree with me. Its the only way to seprate the fanboy babble here in SW and if those games won awards god knows you would be using it against me just like all the hermits did back in 2006 when Crysis swept the visual awardss category on most websites.

Yes there is a tech demo and digtal foundry did a comparison to see what the settings were to compare the pc version . Some of the ones I can remeber were medium textures, high backround geometry and very high lighting.

[QUOTE="TheSterls"]

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]

I've never exaggerated any of my claims, all i've said is that Arma II and Clear Sky have better graphics than any console game, which isn't an exaggeration. Saying the game looks like an N64 game compared to Uncharted 2 is ridiculous, even if you were 'joking', especially when i provided a screen shot that showed a car model with worse textures than the Clear Sky car.

Yeh, i've heard of Blazblue before. And Clear Sky got nominated for atmosphere. Nominations have nothing to do with anything. You're just basing things off how much recognition they get.

BTW, there is no console version of Crysis. There's a tech demo, but that's it.

AAllxxjjnn

You posted screenshots that i disagree with and after playing all 3 titles I disagree even more. I question if you even own a PS3 to even make a logcial comparison.

Yes I base things off the awards they win when it comes to comparing certain merits of a game. I could come in here and say Haze was the best FPS ever yet nobody would take me seriously as the entire gaming media would disagree with me. Its the only way to seprate the fanboy babble here in SW and if those games won awards god knows you would be using it against me just like all the hermits did back in 2006 when Crysis swept the visual awardss category on most websites.

Yes there is a tech demo and digtal foundry did a comparison to see what the settings were to compare the pc version . Some of the ones I can remeber were medium textures, high backround geometry and very high lighting.

I get a Red X when you post spoiler so im not sure what that is. How do you post pics on this forum of a game direclty to your pc? Im new to the forum but I can show you Crysis on my machine. Other then that I can answer any questions you have about it .

I have the EVGA GTX285 1GB of DDR3 .

I get a Red X when you post spoiler so im not sure what that is. How do you post pics on this forum of a game direclty to your pc? Im new to the forum but I can show you Crysis on my machine. Other then that I can answer any questions you have about it .

I have the EVGA GTX285 1GB of DDR3 .

TheSterls

Just post the url.

http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/1232/dscn1769mk51ov91.jpg

The variety of the places!! Surely, when at Crysis we spend 70% of the games in jungle, but at Uncharted 2 you visit many places, such as museum, jungle, train, snow, Nepal, etc. ihsanqueen

You can't jump from the train to the ground and visit the environment, whereas in Warhead you can jump from the train, steal a jeep, lumberjack some trees, punch some KPA soldiers and then jump again in the train.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuAiwVtd1ZQ

[QUOTE="TheSterls"]

I get a Red X when you post spoiler so im not sure what that is. How do you post pics on this forum of a game direclty to your pc? Im new to the forum but I can show you Crysis on my machine. Other then that I can answer any questions you have about it .

I have the EVGA GTX285 1GB of DDR3 .

AAllxxjjnn

Just post the url.

http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/1232/dscn1769mk51ov91.jpg

http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/6408/screenshot0001gz.jpg

Sorry that took so long it wouldnt let me post my 3d mark score . This is the orginal Crysis max settings no mods.

Arma 2 is beautiful in graphic's. Thats one game that requires a High end PC to run it too its full potential that also means more than 30fps which is more than the average player on that game.

having just beat u2, i found the graphics to vary some. granted, they varied from amazing to occasionally good, i was a little surprised because most people seemed to say that there was no difference in quality between cut-scenes and regular gameplay, and to me it seemed pretty obvious. overall, the graphics were console good. kinda reminded me of gears2. best single game story for a game this gen.

let's quit with this console game vs. crysis stuff. it's ridiculous.

It wotn let me post it says my linkn must start with Https or http :/

Sorry that took so long thats my benchmark info you will see my stats . I tried to tak a pic of the actual game with F12 but its not working im not sure what im doing wrong.

Anyway what do you play your PS3 on your pc monitor?

TheSterls

Talk about the quirks of fate, nothing screenshot related seems to work :roll:

The way that naughty dog has presented it makes it seem that way. I dont really like the comparisons to Crysis since theyre very different games. Not to mention created all very different hardware. I think ND should be commended for squeezing that much juice out of the ps3.

Lol, I think you need to learn teh definition of "graphics" as used in System Wars my friend.

Graphics are the technical aspects, such as resolution, texture resolution, LOD, etc, etc.

Not the variety of places :lol:

[QUOTE="ThePsTriple"]Uncharted 2 has better animations by a mile, theres no way anyone can dispute that, their probably the best animations ever in a game. Also lol at halo reach beating uncharted 2, it wont even beat uncharted 1.Vadamee

Halo3 is far behind UNC2 from every visual aspect other then scale that makes you sound ridiculous.

[QUOTE="TheSterls"]

It wotn let me post it says my linkn must start with Https or http :/

Sorry that took so long thats my benchmark info you will see my stats . I tried to tak a pic of the actual game with F12 but its not working im not sure what im doing wrong.

Anyway what do you play your PS3 on your pc monitor?

Mograine

Talk about the quirks of fate, nothing screenshot related seems to work :roll:

Maybe you should look at the post i edited about 10 mins ago I got my crysis pics to work but it wont let me post my 3d mark score. I just ran 3dmark 06 and got 15068.

[QUOTE="Snagal123"]

If your saying variety makes for good graphics then Uncharted 2 is not the winner at all.

Hitman Blood Money and SWAT4 kick its ass, every single level is 100% different to the last.

SPYDER0416

Its not just variety, its the graphics AND variety. Hitman was ok, but it didn't really kick off some Far Cry like graphics hysteria, same for SWAT 4. Uncharted 2 happens to have a variety of locations and graphics that are amazing combined with asuper smooth 60 fps. Of course like I said, while it makes for better environments and variety, Crysis still has it beat with the hyper realistic jungle.

I prefer UC2s visuals but Crysis still has better graphics.

Crysis graphics >>> Uncharted2 graphics.

They look MUCH better and Crysis is a HUGE game that you can explore and go anywhere. While Uncharted2 is very veyr linear.

Uncharted2 is a great game and probably the console graphics king, but Crysis is the overall graphics king, BY A LONG SHOT.

I can understand if people prefer the art design in Uncharted2, but TECHNICALLY its nto even close to Crysis graphics.

The variety of the places!! Surely, when at Crysis we spend 70% of the games in jungle, but at Uncharted 2 you visit many places, such as museum, jungle, train, snow, Nepal, etc. And dont forget Uncharted 2 has better animation too Although Crysis has better textures and lightning, but because of the variety of the places then Uncharted 2 is the graphic king for this generation until now...ihsanqueen

no uncharted has even problems to beat 10 years old games

and you never played crysis. you fight in the snow, in the aliens HQ, in the jungle and on the carrier

[QUOTE="SLIisaownsystem"]

no uncharted has even problems to beat 10 years old games

and you never played crysis. you fight in the snow, in the aliens HQ, in the jungle and on the carrier

toast_burner

Why not? Console gamers do after all judge the graphical quality of a game by whether or not it is 'HD graphics', what's more HD than 1080p?

I kid of course, but point out a problem with their graphical referencing in the process.

well Crysis with the mods and full settings is something to behold but my jaw did drop more playing UC2 than Crysis

[QUOTE="SLIisaownsystem"]

[QUOTE="ihsanqueen"]The variety of the places!! Surely, when at Crysis we spend 70% of the games in jungle, but at Uncharted 2 you visit many places, such as museum, jungle, train, snow, Nepal, etc. And dont forget Uncharted 2 has better animation too Although Crysis has better textures and lightning, but because of the variety of the places then Uncharted 2 is the graphic king for this generation until now...toast_burner

no uncharted has even problems to beat 10 years old games

and you never played crysis. you fight in the snow, in the aliens HQ, in the jungle and on the carrier

It was never supposed to be funny. Its just the truth. A 10 years old game has a higher resolution than new game from this HD Generation.

no1 cares abot graphicschunkymonkey313

[QUOTE="chunkymonkey313"]no1 cares abot graphicsArach666

And thats the funny part!

[QUOTE="Arach666"]

[QUOTE="chunkymonkey313"]no1 cares abot graphicsModern_Unit

And thats the funny part!

stop posting when you know uncharted 2 has better graphics. there was a previous post where this guy claimed cyrsis had better graphics and posted crysis pics. however when compared to uncharted 2 pics that someone replied with, it was obvious uncharted 2 had better graphics. stop complaining and talking about anything else. uncharted is more appealing to the eyes and has better graphics period. just stop this nonsense. pictures do not lie. thanks.pstripl3

UC2s animations are way overrated. They are good during the scripted cutscenes (go figure) but during gameplay they are not very realistic, fluid yes, realistic, no. The legs move like they are partially made of jelly. Crysis has better animations during gameplay, no contest. And don't confuse the scripted sequencesfor actual gameplay, just saying.

I have to say that the TC is on to something! I think that having more variety in environments makes the graphics better. Goldeneye 64 has more variety than Crysis! So Goldeneye = WIN! GOT HIM!

I have to say that the TC is on to something! I think that having more variety in environments makes the graphics better. Goldeneye 64 has more variety than Crysis! So Goldeneye = WIN! GOT HIM!

RobbRipken

The variety of the places!! Surely, when at Crysis we spend 70% of the games in jungle, but at Uncharted 2 you visit many places, such as museum, jungle, train, snow, Nepal, etc. And dont forget Uncharted 2 has better animation too Although Crysis has better textures and lightning, but because of the variety of the places then Uncharted 2 is the graphic king for this generation until now...ihsanqueen

I kid of course, but point out a problem with their graphical referencing in the process.

AnnoyedDragon

stop posting when you know uncharted 2 has better graphics. there was a previous post where this guy claimed cyrsis had better graphics and posted crysis pics. however when compared to uncharted 2 pics that someone replied with, it was obvious uncharted 2 had better graphics. stop complaining and talking about anything else. uncharted is more appealing to the eyes and has better graphics period. just stop this nonsense. pictures do not lie. thanks.pstripl3

The problem is that judging graphics quality based on output resolution makes absolutely zero sense. Increasing resolution doesn't magically make bad games look good.

Teufelhuhn

Exactly, yet when referring to graphical quality on consoles people often label it "HD graphics". This creating the assumption that resolution and graphical quality are tied together, so one would think higher resolutions = better graphics; which is actually quite the opposite on consoles.

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]
The problem is that judging graphics quality based on output resolution makes absolutely zero sense. Increasing resolution doesn't magically make bad games look good.

AnnoyedDragon

Exactly, yet when referring to graphical quality on consoles people often label it "HD graphics". This creating the assumption that resolution and graphical quality are tied together, so one would think higher resolutions = better graphics; which is actually quite the opposite on consoles.

Yes. Higher resolutions allow more detail to be seen. Consoles have to upscale actually lowers the detail because they have to double or quadruple pixel per pixel. Its alot like blowing up an small image into a large image making everything blurry. And it it also doesnot help when most demanding console games are sub HD just to even to able to play the game, then having to upscale makes it even more blurry.