B3D News Item: Challenge: Find Differences between Crysis 2 Console SKUs

I'm willing to bet that it will look much better in person. I'm guessing the person who captured that video set the levels incorrectly in his equipment. Again, if you fix the gamma to match the 360's, I bet it will look almost identical. Someone did this with the MP comparison gif and the PS3 version looked just as good.

Here's a 1080p YT video of the PS3 version with the gamma more comparable to the 360's. gameplay starts around the 7:20 mark. I'm not gonna embed it because you should view it in full HD. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=srdnh416Wro

Looks great IMO.
 
Either way, I'm not gonna settle a version that renders 1024 x 720, it's just so wrong especially in 2011. I'll be most likely picking up the 360 version at this point.
 
Aside from gamma differences, the only difference I see is the better defined zebra crossing on the road which is better defined on PS3. BUT as always, how are they both running. YouTube vids looks ace so there's hope yet. Never been keen on the gamma issues of the 360 in general. The image may pop a bit more but the amount of detail lost in darker areas is just too much. I'm always amazed by how peeps seem to think it looks better.
 
Maybe once we get a proper DF article we'll see what issues they've had with the PS3.

We know that both versions looks pretty much identical (minus worse res on PS3 and probably worse AF on 360) but I still expect way worse framerate on PS3 (based on the demo of course).
 
I'm willing to bet that it will look much better in person. I'm guessing the person who captured that video set the levels incorrectly in his equipment. Again, if you fix the gamma to match the 360's, I bet it will look almost identical. Someone did this with the MP comparison gif and the PS3 version looked just as good.

Here's a 1080p YT video of the PS3 version with the gamma more comparable to the 360's. gameplay starts around the 7:20 mark. I'm not gonna embed it because you should view it in full HD. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=srdnh416Wro

Looks great IMO.

wtf even the installation in a video gameplay :LOL:
 
Aside from gamma differences, the only difference I see is the better defined zebra crossing on the road which is better defined on PS3. BUT as always, how are they both running. YouTube vids looks ace so there's hope yet. Never been keen on the gamma issues of the 360 in general.The image may pop a bit more but the amount of detail lost in darker areas is just too much. I'm always amazed by how peeps seem to think it looks better.
It doesn't help that a lot of PS3 captures look off (washed out) as well. When put up against the 360, it always looks extremely washed out, when it looks nothing like that in person. That's one of the reasons why games always look better on my TV (which is calibrated and I have all of my levels matched) than they do on videos... PS3 captures almost always look washed out. DF are the only people that do proper comparisons.
We know that both versions looks pretty much identical (minus worse res on PS3 and probably worse AF on 360) but I still expect way worse framerate on PS3 (based on the demo of course).
videos of SP look better than the MP (as far as framerate). Remember, the SP and MP were handled by different teams.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
OMFG, the effect of the sun when he leaves the building is just insanely jaw dropping. It's the PS3 version.., just sick. I'm typing this in between intermittent bursts of celebratory happiness because I am SO FREAKING AMAZED!!!!!!

360 MP night map


Cool MP map. I wonder why a lot of people reloads the magazines every time they fire a few shots into the air or an enemy, no matter what? In this sense, I find Gears of War quite original. Every time you perform a perfect reload there is an incentive to keep the clip as much as possible...until your weapon runs out of ammunition.

Fingers crossed SP PS3 does the business.

The map featured in the video would be certainly better for the multiplayer demo, in my opinion, than the skyscraper one. The full game is receiving a lot of praise from PS3 and 360 users alike, everywhere, :smile: and I still wonder how they decided to release a demo featuring that grotesque multiplayer map for both consoles and not, for instance, a small, 5 minutes long demo containing a very small part of the single player campaign.

Other than that, The PS3 version looks sometimes better than the 360 version, although the resolution alone is a big plus for this one, but still, there are some moments where PC and PS3 version look similar while the 360's one seems the alternative version and the one weird out of the bunch.

But then, I could say the same about the PS3 version because of it's resolution. Anyway, every version looks/is great and seems to play great on its own, though (by which I mean, when considered on its own merits alone; not "without" the differences, as you can't play it without that ; ) ) ;)

It seems to be totally addictive. All in all, this looks like a solid 9.5-10 game in my book, scoring wise.
 
Yes, very misused on consoles. Glad there are far better alternatives that give you much better results.

I'll bet depend more to the use of the high buffer than the GI, the choice of the resolution on the ps3... from now every transparancies seem pretty high for the sony hardware standard...
 
Yes, very misused on consoles. Glad there are far better alternatives that give you much better results.
I wouldn't say that...Thats how game is designed and if you want it on consoles then you will have to do everything that PC is doing.If anything,I would argue that they couldn't get any better results having played 360 version,brilliant.They certainly are notch higher than anyone that worked on that consoles and didn't have everything real time.
 
Yes, very misused on consoles. Glad there are far better alternatives that give you much better results.
Many SP maps have progressive time of day (as is standard with Crytek), so baked lighting isn't an option for them. Having everything in realtime is a core aspect of their design process, too.
 
We know that both versions looks pretty much identical (minus worse res on PS3 and probably worse AF on 360) but I still expect way worse framerate on PS3 (based on the demo of course).

As mentioned above, the single player footage looks much smoother. I can handle the screen rez being a bit lower, but not a MP style frame rate. It 'seems' my wish 'might' of come true.
 
I wouldn't say that...Thats how game is designed and if you want it on consoles then you will have to do everything that PC is doing.If anything,I would argue that they couldn't get any better results having played 360 version,brilliant.They certainly are notch higher than anyone that worked on that consoles and didn't have everything real time.

Many SP maps have progressive time of day (as is standard with Crytek), so baked lighting isn't an option for them. Having everything in realtime is a core aspect of their design process, too.
Far cry 2 on consoles does this far better with pretty much 1280 x 720 res and decent AA. Dunia engine may lack SSGI but everything is all realtime isn't it? Plus it's fully open world with tons more foliage, maybe Crysis 2 would look better using that engine instead you never know.
 
Will buy Reach on demand when it goes on sale :(
It's in the Games on Demand section already. A bit overpriced though because you can buy the retail game for 30-40€ at Game stores, and Microsoft price online is 60€, very unfair.

videos of SP look better than the MP (as far as framerate). Remember, the SP and MP were handled by different teams.
To make it clear,

Single Player Campaign -- Crytek Frankfurt (the mother company)
Multiplayer: Crytek UK (Timesplitters creators, old Free Radical)

Maybe Crytek would run into the same problem as Batman Arkham City developers, so they let two different teams handle the MP and SP of the game.

http://www.qj.net/ps3/games/rockste...arkham-city-would-have-affected-quality.html?

MP is okay with some effects toned down -I am guessing here, but this seems to be typical Crysis-, and this can be forgiven because they would need some extra processing power for MP in order to handle everything like they do in SP, as far as I know.
 
Far cry 2 on consoles does this far better with pretty much 1280 x 720 res and decent AA. Dunia engine may lack SSGI but everything is all realtime isn't it? Plus it's fully open world with tons more foliage, maybe Crysis 2 would look better using that engine instead you never know.
Doing all that far better?Well if it would do it far better at 720p than it would be safe to say we had best looking game on consoles for couple years now without knowing.I really hope you are joking because Far Cry 2 on 360 doesn't come remotely close to Crysis 2.Remotely.The fact that it has slightly higher resolution means absolutely nothing.

BTW that engine is updated Cryengine 1 by Ubisoft.
 
Back
Top