[360, PS3] Crysis 2

Hmm, i was speaking of the "look" of the game, not framerate when I said "smooth". I do see how the polygon count in some of the soldiers is a bit on the low side, but I own crysis and warhead and too me they don't have as real a feel. Maybe it's the camera motion/excessive DOF or something. Not sure exactly what it is but for sure it looks great to me. I'm sure the PC version of Crysis 2 will be breathtaking.

 

So the 360 iteration of the engine is ahead of the PS3 at this point, but I thought they leading on PS3? Perhaps because it's shader heavy game Xenos works better than RSX.

And do we have any actual screens/videos from the console renditions?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cpRankWNbQ

And yeah, after so much bragging that all versions are identical, it does seem the PS3 version now is lagging? I'm not putting too much stock in though, it's inconclusive. Maybe Crytek just really has arbitrarily chosen 360 for a few previews. Also I thought one of the previews was of the PS3 version?

 

I read somewhere that they said the versions are identical to the consumers, but the pros may be able to pick something out. ^_^

I believe one of the earlier demoes was in PS3. They claimed that the PS3 version can do more physics, and is closer to the PC version. Perhaps they have put more effort in the 360 version since then.

 

The link about PS3 demo ? It's probably somewhere in this thread. I remember there is another thread that talks about the engine. May be it's in that one instead.

 

They said it will be same on both consoles.

They also said it will best looking console game and no one can top them as they have maxed out consoles

The tech videos and the latest trailer looks great but nothing what other consoles games can't do I think

 

Well for being the best on specific console they have to keep each console's pros & cons in mind and have to build according to that, showcasing the best capabilities of each console & hiding the worst; this would mean there ought to be some differences. If they are identical then you know they are cutting back to the lowest common denominator. Ah well maybe best looking multiplatform

 

I suppose these are gameplay screenshots from the console version because they don’t seem to have AA.








http://www.pcgames.de/Crysis-2-PC-2...InGame-Screenshots-706499/galerie/1275356/#tp

 

Well, there are genre specific engines (e.g., GT5). Titles like GoW3 also focus on their own visual concept (like giant moving set pieces, and a fluidal camera) to create the spectacles. I don't know if it make sense to make a broad claim like what they did. I guess it must be very good looking, for the press to get wow'ed.

In any case, developers will learn to be more efficient over time. They will also learn how to generate more impactful visuals with the same (or lesser) resources. I personally think that the Halo Reach and KZ2 trailers are more appealing than the above Crysis video, but that's just me with limited exposure.

 

I don't remember which one, but one of those previews point out that they didn't had any special reason to show the game on 360 only, they just felt like it, and weren't ware of the size of the console wars they would start by doing so... And that after the presentation, to prove their point, they did show 360 and Ps3 side by side and they were identical.

That looks terribly bad XD

Even his arm seems totally flat. If that's from consoles i would say its from before the textures have loaded, because his arm for instance looks a lot better than that on previously released trailers.

 

Don't care how much tech its using in those two shots but those...are just plain ugly in every possible way, even by console standards. uggh !
The textures just look like an ugly blob of liquid Tar & the suit textures are just too flat, I don't think its suppose to look like that...maybe a streaming bug ?
And lastly lots of shimmering in the aliased edges.

Still KZ2,FC2 & Reach for me !

 

All you have to do is watch the video to see it looks great. Jpegs set to compression= 80%=meaningless. I can find (or make) bad, nay terrible, pics of ANY game.

The photos above still look quite good actually as a whole. But low res jpegs highly compressed from a further offscreen poor quality vid will make a game look bad.

Those are gameplay "screens" from the low res offscreen GDC tech video. Already linked in one of my posts recently via youtube. Capturing screens from a low res video is one sure way to make any game look bad, when normally it's bullshots that are posted.

Even in those pics, some of the texture models look bad but the gun model is very impressive.

Here are some more traditional screens. http://www.incrysis.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=851&Itemid=1 I think if you want to compare it with other games using those posted screens, maybe screencap those other games off gametrailers flash videos for a better compare :0 And even then you will not be approaching that low quality.

But I'm not saying it's all roses with the game. Some of the rock textures look rather plastic there. Definitely the worst looking area of the vid.\

 

Those new pics are not from the GDC video because in that it shows what is going on like procedural destruction in words.

 

Yeah they are. That GDC 2010 technology trailer vid is released today in direct feed I guess, missed that:

Gametrailers <<still rather crap quality even in "HD"

IGN <<HD download for insiders.

Dont see the free true HD version download Gamersyde usually offers up yet.

Interestingly the IGN preview noted that so much smoke and rubble is kicked up by the destruction in the game that it possibly serves the effect of keeping draw distance manageable.

 

How can alpha texture help reducing the draw distance..what's ign smoking ?

Btw people check this out:


The thing to notice here is the hand, compare it to the new screenshots from the video...massive difference, yet both are running on consoles & the one with better hand is from a much much older build. Something tells me its all because of a texture streaming bug.

 

I'd have to agree. I think it looks OKAY'ish, but if that's what was shown to the press, I don't think it looks nearly as good as they made it out to be. Unless there's some sort of texture streaming issue in those shots.

 

Like some folks here, I am extremely dissapointed (I know I should not, because it is far to early to judge the game and everything...but it is how I feel!) with the trailer. The pics posted here look like Conduit pics-what the!? ...this happens when you show the game to in an early state!

I know I will get heavy beating: but the smoke effects, particles and god rays breaking through thick fog/smoke ... go play KZ2 guys...nothing new!

For me it is also clear that the PS3 version is behind now...and that it will lack when the game is released (I think this should not be too suprising, if one follows this forum) - they show the Xbox360 version because they want to impress the media, and it is obvious that they think that with the actual PS3 version people are less impressed.

Everytime a MP dev constantly iterates: "all console versions look identical", "PS3 version looks great", "all the same", "there are some instances where the PS3 excels the Xbox360"...

But as everytime, I hope that this time the dev is not lying, I hope that this time Crytek is different, and that maybe this time, the PS3 version can keep the pace as promised!

 

Well it is more detailed. Though dunno why supposedly a 'streaming bug' would affect the arms and weapon that are static in memory since they never LOD.

http://www.gamersyde.com/pop_images_cryengine_3-10245-4.html
http://www.gamersyde.com/pop_images_cryengine_3-10245-7.html