Crysis 2 Graphics: PC Vs. Xbox 360

blurry lower rez graphics won't make a big difference with regard to what little gameplay it has.

i finished 80% of the beta leak, and it's meh for me.
 
RAMPAGEOH said:
While I think the PC version is more "lifelike" and detailed with better lighting I think the XBox version would be more easily playable duye to those very reason. There is something to be said to "dumbing" down the game for console players. It makes the game easier to play even if it is just in the graphics department. Unfortunately, for the PC gamer who wants the challenge and the full immersion something will be loss due to the cross port. Still the original Crysis was challenging for even most high end computers when it was released. Making it so the XBox will play it has to mean that most good gaming computers will handle it pretty well.
Click to expand...

It depends on what level of graphics whore you are. Metro 2033 ran pretty well on the X360, but it is pretty much a system killer if you want to run it at 1920x1080+ resolutions with graphics settings at very high with tessellation, advanced DoF, and MSAA also enabled. I see a bunch of hardware reviews that might enable very high along with MSAA, but don't touch the other options because they hit performance hard.
 
PC Version definitely looks superior but I think it could've been even more graphically impressive if it wasn't designed for consoles as well.
 
t84t9z.jpg


one things for shore, the Graphics rock.
,just look at how nice that pic is .i love motion blur ,it makes the Graphics look sooooo much better.
 
Considering the hardware of the Xbox360, Crysis 2 looks much better than I anticipated. Comparing it to the PC version is fun, put pointless nonetheless. It should come as no surprise, that if you have a mid-to-high end gaming PC, Crysis 2 will look better. Move along.
 
Well if you like a flat blurry low res and visually barren Crysis 2 game world representation, the Xbox is for you.

Spare-Flair said:
the video of the PC version is DX9 right?
Click to expand...

Yes. Just like the final game will be when it launches [crying]

Denominative Vomit said:
one things for shore, the Graphics rock.
,just look at how nice that pic is .i love motion blur ,it makes the Graphics look sooooo much better.
Click to expand...

Turn it off then... that´s what I do, I can´t stand motion blur either.


jo0minator said:
too much bloom
Click to expand...

Turn it off then, it really looks so much better without.

dr.kevin said:
fact:
pc is clearly superior in graphics, and that's the only thing that matters, because this game is only about graphics, and not gameplay.
Click to expand...

It plays pretty well for a demo actually. Not ground breaking bug free game play, but its actually fun once you tweaked it a bit.

Sir Stealth said:
I honestly doubt Crytek has any intentions of patching in DX11 and if they do it will be something thrown together to shut people up.
Click to expand...

These are my exact thoughts. There is no way they are doing a huge tessellation overhaul, sigh.

LeninGHOLA said:
Hard to tell the actual quality with those squashed, extremely contrasty videos. Obviously, the PC version looks quite a bit better, but how much better will it be at release?
Click to expand...

The difference despite the low dynamic range and wrong aspect ratio, is quite staggering and in your face IMHO.
 
Scottw said:
Run the PC version on a $300 PC and then compare... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

It may have been pointed out before, but this is a false comparison.

Most people need to have a computer whether or not they actually play games on it, so when they are spending $300 on an Xbox they are spending $300 ON TOP OF their computer.

A more apt comparison would be Xbox vs. computer with $300 video card.
 
The PC version felt like a TV with the sharpness setting cranked up too high. In some spots it was much better like floor and ceiling tiles and make some objects seem more 3 dimensional but the sharpness of everything seemed a little overdone.
 
I blame laptops and people with dual cores. No point produce top end graphics for PC games when 80% of your potential audience can't play them. When the next load of consoles come out, the majority of people will probably still be on their dual core ATI x34 geforce2000 series computers.
 
Consider this - that is the best the 360 will ever look. The PC isn't even breaking a sweat with a DX9 engine game. Too bad PC gamers get left with watered down console trash.
 
brownkc said:
The PC version felt like a TV with the sharpness setting cranked up too high. In some spots it was much better like floor and ceiling tiles and make some objects seem more 3 dimensional but the sharpness of everything seemed a little overdone.
Click to expand...
Didn't look overdone to me. It looked like higher resolution textures and far more accurate lighting techniques were used in the PC version. I'm not into blurry graphics. In my opinion, blur and hdr lighting is the new fog.
 
I find it ironic that the best looking Xbox title is one of the worst looking PC titles this year :p.

Nonetheless, they did do a fantastic job in terms of getting the xbox to display something that isn't an ugly POS.

The only difference - so far - is the level of texture quality. I can't wait for the DX 11 patch, but the entire game seems like it's going to be a let down, unfortunately.
 
Oh, and PS, all you PC gamers bitching and moaning about Crytek's "console-itis" as of recent, well, you're not making any sense by boycotting the PC version. If you want PC games, vote with your wallet and BUY pc games. Show Crytek there's money to be made in the world of PC gaming. Boycotting a company because - they made a decision where the money lies - is petty and hilariously unproductive.
 
Arcygenical said:
Oh, and PS, all you PC gamers bitching and moaning about Crytek's "console-itis" as of recent, well, you're not making any sense by boycotting the PC version. If you want PC games, vote with your wallet and BUY pc games. Show Crytek there's money to be made in the world of PC gaming. Boycotting a company because - they made a decision where the money lies - is petty and hilariously unproductive.
Click to expand...

Yet, if you buy something that was clearly designed with console in mind, publishers will realize they can sell "least effort" ports to PC as well. Crysis 1 made a ton of money for Crytek.

Not saying this is a console port, I haven't seen enough to determine. Just saying the logic is flawed.
 
Buying mediocre PC games does nothing to positively impact the state of the industry. All it indicates is an acceptance of mediocre PC games, reinforcing the idea that publishers can put out unremarkable products and still make money.

The message we need to send is that we want good products: buying mediocre and bad products does us absolutely no good. Crytek is well aware of the size of the PC gaming market and they certainly don't need us to tell them how big it is, so the argument that we need to buy mediocre games to demonstrate the proportions of the market and its profit potential is ridiculous.
 
phide said:
Buying mediocre PC games does nothing to positively impact the state of the industry. All it indicates is an acceptance of mediocre PC games, reinforcing the idea that publishers can put out unremarkable products and still make money.

The message we need to send is that we want good products: buying mediocre and bad products does us absolutely no good. Crytek is well aware of the size of the PC gaming market and they certainly don't need us to tell them how big it is, so the argument that we need to buy mediocre games to demonstrate the proportions of the market and its profit potential is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

While this is true nitpicking every single fucking PC game we get is worse than just buying it.

The other side of the coin is that you need to understand the reality here. Whether you like it or not boycotting games you think subpar will only send the message that profits on this platform are shit. The message you THINK you are sending by not what these people hear.

Like it or not if sales on the PC side suck they wont go dumping more money into it they will just say fuck it altogether.

Its a double edged sword. Damned if we do damned if we dont. At least going the route of buying shitty console ports we will continue to have games released.
 
Not buying PC games just means the piracy numbers are higher and they should upgrade the DRM level to over 9000.
 
Disposed said:
While this is true nitpicking every single fucking PC game we get is worse than just buying it.

The other side of the coin is that you need to understand the reality here. Whether you like it or not boycotting games you think subpar will only send the message that profits on this platform are shit. The message you THINK you are sending by not what these people hear.

Like it or not if sales on the PC side suck they wont go dumping more money into it they will just say fuck it altogether.

Its a double edged sword. Damned if we do damned if we dont. At least going the route of buying shitty console ports we will continue to have games released.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a failed business model to me. If they say "fuck it, sales were mediocre on our mediocre game", they lose out on the extra money they could have made.

Maybe "we" do nitpick. Year over year, PC game sales are increasing, so what will the next excuse be? Since sales were very good for they PC exclusive Crysis, what kind of investment would it take for us to get what we want? 12 million copies sold?

I really have no idea if Crysis 2 will be consolized or not, I don't think we have enough info to make that final decision, but blaming the consumer for not buying something is outright illogical.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
Sounds like a failed business model to me. If they say "fuck it, sales were mediocre on our mediocre game", they lose out on the extra money they could have made.

Maybe "we" do nitpick. Year over year, PC game sales are increasing, so what will the next excuse be? Since sales were very good for they PC exclusive Crysis, what kind of investment would it take for us to get what we want? 12 million copies sold?

I really have no idea if Crysis 2 will be consolized or not, I don't think we have enough info to make that final decision, but blaming the consumer for not buying something is outright illogical.
Click to expand...

I didnt say the model was right its just the way it is.

If PC sales are bad its either because the PC as a gaming platform is dead or we are all pirates.

As long as the money is in consoles we will be second class citizens either way.
 
Feels like i did my part by cancleing my pre-order the day we got that terrible demo... I think a lot of people did. That should be the most clear message to Crytek that PC gamers don't want this kind of treatment.
 
Disposed said:
...boycotting games you think subpar will only send the message that profits on this platform are shit.
Click to expand...
There are a number of developers who've done exceedingly well in this market, and that fact is plain evidence that the PC market is not in some way "infected" by some inability to reap significant profits from it: it merely requires the right product. If that's not something Crytek can deliver (even though they have been delivering on it in years past), they would be wholly justified in removing themselves from the market entirely. And, frankly, I'm not sure I would mind if they did so at this point.

Disposed said:
The message you THINK you are sending by not what these people hear.
Click to expand...
That's not my problem. It's their business, their operation and their purpose to earn revenue selling their games; not mine. If they aren't getting the message, they're unbelievably stupid. The writing's all over the God damn wall on this one.

I really have no interest in financially supporting worthless developers just because they feel like dipping their toes in the water and taking a gamble on an unsure thing. If they can't pull revenue from it, that isn't my concern. I'll buy the games I want to play and won't buy the games I don't. As a consumer, that's my only 'job', and I'm certainly not about to throw Crytek a $60 pity fuck just because I think it's "good for the industry".
 
phide said:
If they aren't getting the message, they're unbelievably stupid. The writing's all over the God damn wall on this one..
Click to expand...

Not to mention the internet :p

I don't know how much more loudly and clearly we can shout it.

We want dedicated high end games designed to take advantage of the full capabilities of our computers, and we do not want them to resemble dumbed down console games or be ported from / co-developed for console platforms.

If we get the above we will come out and pay for it in droves. If we don't, don't bother releasing your putrid crap.
 
phide said:
There are a number of developers who've done exceedingly well in this market, and that fact is plain evidence that the PC market is not in some way "infected" by some inability to reap significant profits from it: it merely requires the right product. If that's not something Crytek can deliver (even though they have been delivering on it in years past), they would be wholly justified in removing themselves from the market entirely. And, frankly, I'm not sure I would mind if they did so at this point.
Click to expand...

In recent years the only ones that have really done "exceedingly well" in the PC market is blizzard. Pretty much every other PC exclusive sells about as well as a shitty console game does.


phide said:
That's not my problem. It's their business, their operation and their purpose to earn revenue selling their games; not mine. If they aren't getting the message, they're unbelievably stupid. The writing's all over the God damn wall on this one.
Click to expand...

The people that matter will never know. No matter how obvious it is to us, the bean counters in charge of these decisions will never really know why. They will pay analysts that know even less than they do and come up with an unrelated reason for the poor sales.

phide said:
I really have no interest in financially supporting worthless developers just because they feel like dipping their toes in the water and taking a gamble on an unsure thing. If they can't pull revenue from it, that isn't my concern. I'll buy the games I want to play and won't buy the games I don't. As a consumer, that's my only 'job', and I'm certainly not about to throw Crytek a $60 pity fuck just because I think it's "good for the industry".
Click to expand...

Nobody is asking you to do anything. I dont even blame you, i do exactly the same. I wont give my $$$ to shitty devs either but the reality is its not helping anything.

Like i said before damned if we do damned if we dont.
 
phide said:
Buying mediocre PC games does nothing to positively impact the state of the industry. All it indicates is an acceptance of mediocre PC games, reinforcing the idea that publishers can put out unremarkable products and still make money.

The message we need to send is that we want good products: buying mediocre and bad products does us absolutely no good. Crytek is well aware of the size of the PC gaming market and they certainly don't need us to tell them how big it is, so the argument that we need to buy mediocre games to demonstrate the proportions of the market and its profit potential is ridiculous.
Click to expand...


I agree 100%. However, and very unfortunately, sending that message will simply result in fewer (or zero) PC exclusive titles. Sales numbers don't lie.
 
Arcygenical said:
I agree 100%. However, and very unfortunately, sending that message will simply result in fewer (or zero) PC exclusive titles. Sales numbers don't lie.
Click to expand...

Meh. I think we do a good job of buying titles that are well made. I mean, the general consensus is that Crysis 1 was a glorified tech demo with no gampley, yet it sold 3 million in RETAIL alone. Add up the digital distribution sales, and I'm sure you're closer to 5 million. That is alot, especially for a game that caused so many polarizing opinions.

I think we are buying too much into big publisher/dev scapegoating. I buy a ridiculous amount of games, and so do most here.

A good example, in my opinion, is Risen and Risen 2. Risen sold OK, despite (or because of) following that Gothic formula that most diehards asked for. PB was able to make good money and are now finishing up what I would consider an AAA rpg title following that same Gothic formula (with pirates this time!). Catering to the mainstream would have hurt their sales, the "niche" following kept them afloat even after several fiascos from their old publisher.
 
Disposed said:
In recent years the only ones that have really done "exceedingly well" in the PC market is blizzard. Pretty much every other PC exclusive sells about as well as a shitty console game does.
Click to expand...

I recall reading that in 2010 alone Firaxis sold over 1 million copies of Civilization V (400k on Steam, 600k Retail)..

And that for a game that was pretty much universally called incomplete and horrendously buggy on release.

Can you imagine what a well written PC title could do?

Now I don't know how 1 million copies sold in just over 3 months compares to the console world, but it doesn't seem to shabby to me.
 
bucket said:
How 'bout we compare them after the PC version is completely finished,(i.e. DirectX 11)?
Click to expand...

WHY? WHY? Marty! Because the Doc just came from the future and there's something terribly wrong with your future self! The world ended in 2012 and Crysis Directx11 still wasn't out! We've got to go back into the future's past and fix it before it happens!
 
dandapice said:
LOL...Dearly beloved, we are gathered here today to pay our final respects to the PC as a gaming platform. Due to consoles becoming the next "big thing" for the corporate whores, we PC gamers are a dying breed. A truly sad time is coming....Are there ANY gaming software companies out there who actually still believe in the PC?.....
Click to expand...

I think your wrong here. This was said as far back as the 90s. Ironically though, new games are still being made 20 years later. I think as long as people are willing to pay the premium for pc gaming and computer hardware is used in other fields from medical imaging to computing sciences to reseach, hardware will continue to evolve.

A certain percentage of game-makers do consider their games to be a form of 'art' and in essense, even if only for personal use, want to see their game looking as beautiful as 'technologically' possible at the time. Whether that be seeing Harry Potter The Eighteen Year: University Post Gradudate Degree for Wizardry or Crysis 3, people would like to see their game looking fantastic rendered at 1920x1200 or greater with triple monitor, some add, all the detail sliders set to max so its using all those high quality models the artists made that had to be scaled down into oblivion to fit into a 256mb of video ram, etc.

It might not be every game comes to the PC. Infact, we might have to get used to the idea of running console games in 'emulators' for our PC put out by Sony or Microsoft to increase game sales with limited graphical options. In any case though, PC Gaming will remain in one form or another whether it be rigging up an emulator to have a really high native res its rendering at. IE all the upscaling that can be done to a ps2 game on a pc to make a ps2 game look a year or two better than it is.
 
OP20 said:
Feels like i did my part by cancleing my pre-order the day we got that terrible demo... I think a lot of people did. That should be the most clear message to Crytek that PC gamers don't want this kind of treatment.
Click to expand...

What's bad news for Crytek is I've heard a lot of console gamers saying the same thing. The demo was so attrocious on Xbox that many console gamers made up their mind not to buy this game also.

How inept can you be to release a bad demo? The demo is your #1 marketing tool. If anything, the demo should be so freaking polished that it outshines the actual game to tempt people into buying it.

It'd be like a McDonald's ad where the hamburgers actually look like they do in real life.
 
Disposed said:
Its a double edged sword. Damned if we do damned if we dont. At least going the route of buying shitty console ports we will continue to have games released.
Click to expand...

That's the problem with us PC gamers. We unfortunately have no clout in the gaming industry like console gamers do. If we decide to boycott a game, they don't care, we just won't get the sequel and their still making lots of money off the consoles instead. If we complain we don't get the DLC for a multiplatform game (which happens all too many times) that the console versions do, big freaking deal!

Now if the industry pisses off console gamers and they vote with their wallets, then they start to quake in their boots. With us, we're just a very tiny and ignored minority. If we dare to protest, the industry will just cut us off altogether from new releases.

In fact, we're supposed to be lucky at this point in time to even get ports from the consoles, to get scraps from the big juicy steak. :(
 
Stone Cold said:
Crysis2 is poorly optimized for the PC, that's the only reason it's "system intensive".



Thus, the PC version has the sharper image.
Click to expand...

Hello Stone Cold!

Please tell me what qualifies you to make the judgement that Crysis 2 is poorly optimised for the PC?

Then tell me the reasons.

Thankyou, bobthecoolguy.
 
A 720p comparison? Well, that's a waste. This test doesn't show the PCs true superiority, to do that at least run 1920x1080 on the PC version and 2x aa or something versus the console version which is not even true 720p only upscaled, from 1152x720.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top