Support NeoGAF

[metareferential]

Yes, the 360 beta was confirmed running at 1152x720.

Despite its technical prowess and Crytek's claims, there are better looking shooter on both platforms, even in their online portion.

Kz3 (and UC2) of course on the ps3; on the 360 some Halo Reach maps are definitely better looking (like Reflections).

We'll see how the singleplayer compares.

 

[Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew]

Fucking ugly. Played one round and it's CODBro with Cloak. Deleted right away.

 

[RebornYeti]

Man, what a horrible demo.

- Framerate less than 30 FPS.
- Dips even lower when that alien ship arrives
- Laggy as all hell

Ugh.. and to think I was super pumped about this game.

 

[RyanardoDaVinci]

Played 3 or 4 matches, gameplay doesn't do a thing for me. Next week I'll see what SOCOM is like (hopefully I can dig it), but if it's no good for me, then it's looking like a long, long wait until Uncharted 3 beta/release.

P.S.
I liked the bobbing of the HUD the most.

 

[Makoto]

Finally got into a game and wow, you guys weren't kidding. The framerate is capable of just being abysmal at times. Aim assistance also seems a lot less sticky than it is on PC (lol). Well, I'll keep playing this demo but props to Crytek for saving me the cash that might have been spent pre-ordering this game.

 

[Ozzykamikaze]

Are the servers garbage or is nobody playing this game? Tried several times to get into a match with no luck. This is probably a bargain bin game for me anyway but I was hoping to give the PS3 demo a final crack at me. The PC demo was ok after all.

 

[arnoldocastillo2003]

Yeah from Nebula at B3D:

Post by NotTarts
"PS3 version just looks incredibly blurry and washed out, to be honest. If rumours are right, 1152x720 for the 360 and 1024x720 for the PS3. That's just really bad; very, very poor promotion for CryEngine 3."

I didn't post it before becouse things might have changed but since this PS3 demo is from final code and it does seem sub-HD I'll post it. This was present in config files from beta.

//officially approved, saves 14 mb and 4 ms rsx
r_ConsoleBackbufferWidth = 1024

Also for the XBOX360 resolution:
Cvar command list specifies 1152x720

 

[Gram Negative Cocci]

Hey Crytek!

How about forgetting about PC and PS3 and releasing Crysis 3 only on Xbox 360/ Kinect and sparing us the embarrassment.

 

[lowrider007]

Just had a few more rounds, then immediately after I booted up the PC version, WOW, what a difference, it's like a whole other game, trust me, the PC version ain't half bad after directly playing a console version, just make sure to disable v-sync for more responsive controls.

 

[Meijimasha]

I was just playing this on PS3. Having played all 3 demos these are my thoughts.

-PS3 version is faster and far more responsive
-PS3 has a LOT less texture pop in
-PS3 version is WIDE and STRETCHED compared to the 360 version. Its really noticeable with the shotty
-CODBro: Future Warfare
-360 version has a better framerate
-PS3 version seemed to dip in framerate every time I used an ability
-Hit detection sucks shit
-Melee is the most inconsistent crap I've ever seen
-More sticky aim than the 360 version as far as I can tell
-Matchmaking and parties are easier than on LIVE.

 

[MustacheBandit_]

lost a sale for me. there is no reason it should perform this badly on the PS3.

 

[Commanche Raisin Toast]

Just had a few more rounds, then immediately after I booted up the PC version, WOW, what a difference, it's like a whole other game, trust me, the PC version ain't half bad after directly playing a console version, just make sure to disable v-sync for more responsive controls.

yeah the PC version plays pretty damn smooth. i haven't tried the hardcore graphics mode or whatever but advanced looked great. didn't feel like aim assist did anything though.

i'll try the PS3 version when i get home, but all i can really do is compare it to the videos of SP mode on PS3 i saw recently. they looked great, so if MP doesn't look as good then oh well.

 

[Khronikos]

I'm sorry but the overhype on this is fundamentally wrong. This looks like crap. All this talk and yet here we have a blurfest that looks like shit imho. Yes, some things are done right but what the hell does this do at all to stand out from anything? At least KZ3 owns graphic wise despite some minor jaggies. This not so much. You can really see how outmatched these guys will be when serious devs (meaning they do more than just graphics) get their hands on better hardware. Got network errors and I don't even want to try anything else out. Failed. This game gets the delete after tomorrow. To think some people and their bullshit it looks better than KZ3. Yeah, in your fucking dreams.

Yes, the PC release will look nice in 1080p but that is about it imo. I think if you give Naughty Dog and the like a PC and Crytek would not even register 3rd place. KZ3 has a lot of problems yet KZ3 pees all over this tripe.

 

[scitek]

Just had a few more rounds, then immediately after I booted up the PC version, WOW, what a difference, it's like a whole other game, trust me, the PC version ain't half bad after directly playing a console version, just make sure to disable v-sync for more responsive controls.

The PC version ain't half-bad compared to any other game, TBH. Aside from the issues when signing up for an account, the game plays smooth and looks better than most of the competition. I wasn't able to get into a game on the PS3 tonight, I'll try again tomorrow. However, even the menus are blurry as fuck. Seriously, the scaling sucks. (I was running at 1080p)

I'm sorry but the overhype on this is fundamentally wrong. This looks like crap. All this talk and yet here we have a blurfest that looks like shit imho. Yes, some things are done right but what the hell does this do at all to stand out from anything? At least KZ3 just owns graphic wise. This not so much. You can really see how outmatched these guys will be when serious devs (meaning they do more than just graphics) get their hands on better hardware.

Stop with the "do more than just graphics" garbage. I'm tired of Crytek Frankfurt being shit on like they can't make a good game. Crysis was an excellent game even on low settings. Killzone and the CoDs don't have shit on its gameplay. Seriously.

 

[BruceLeeRoy]

So funny...Just finally downloaded it only for comparisons sake and it looks just as mediocre as the 360. Anyone claiming this is the best that either console can do is nuts.

 

[BeeDog]

It's a bit disheartening to hear all these negative impressions (can't test the demo myself). Has the OG pixel-counters had their say yet?

 

[arnoldocastillo2003]

Yeah the thing is that CRYTEK once told that CRYSIS 2 will surpass the graphics presented by games nowadays and to tell you the truth this would had been possible like before Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2 (Playstation Wize).

 

[strata8]

So funny...Just finally downloaded it only for comparisons sake and it looks just as mediocre as the 360. Anyone claiming this is the best that either console can do is nuts.

I wouldn't really say the 360 version was mediocre, just inconsistent (like all versions of the game). Some parts looked stunning, others just eh.

 

[A.R.K]

so any idea if this code is close to release or old? I hope it is old and not representative of final code.

Else get back to work Crytek.

 

[arnoldocastillo2003]

so any idea if this code is close to release or old? I hope it is old and not representative of final code.

Else get back to work Crytek.

It has been confirmed that is the final code release, at least for the PS3 version.

 

[SapientWolf]

I'm sorry but the overhype on this is fundamentally wrong. This looks like crap. All this talk and yet here we have a blurfest that looks like shit imho. Yes, some things are done right but what the hell does this do at all to stand out from anything? At least KZ3 owns graphic wise despite some minor jaggies. This not so much. You can really see how outmatched these guys will be when serious devs (meaning they do more than just graphics) get their hands on better hardware. Got network errors and I don't even want to try anything else out. Failed. This game gets the delete after tomorrow. To think some people and their bullshit it looks better than KZ3. Yeah, in your fucking dreams.

Yes, the PC release will look nice in 1080p but that is about it imo. I think if you give Naughty Dog and the like a PC and Crytek would not even register 3rd place. KZ3 has a lot of problems yet KZ3 pees all over this tripe.

I think Crysis might have slightly better particle effects. That's gotta be worth a special mention, at least.

I think the PS3 must be a pain to program for. Most of the devs that pull off good multiplatform releases treat it as the target platform. Most PC-centric or 360-centric houses outsource for it or just throw their hands up in defeat.

 

[arnoldocastillo2003]

Don´t know if this is true but:

The resolution of Crysis 2 for PS3 is the same as Red Dead Redemption:
RDR = 1152x640 = 737,280 pixels
C2 = 1024x720 = 737,280 pixels

 

[conman]

Perfect example of why not every game needs a demo. The final release might be better than this, but now those of us who've played the demo won't even bother to check.

 

[threenote]

Crytek continually fails to deliver. They are the best at breaking promises.

 

[supermackem]

Wow alot of hate for this game on all platforms it seems, i have to say i thought it was a good shooter on both the 360 and ps3. Its not goty but i thought it was pretty soild game, looks pretty close to me having played all three demos now, two on xbox and one on ps3 in motion i couldnt really tell the difference but i guess stills will show otherwise. Didnt they pass the mp off to another studio?, i know alot of teams do this now but i never like it i expect the sp to be better looking than mp.

 

[Unknown One]

Perfect example of why not every game needs a demo. The final release might be better than this, but now those of us who've played the demo won't even bother to check.

Its good for a consumer standpoint. A lot of PS3 player bought a sub par performing game (COD Blops) and a demo of that game would have saved them some money.

 

[sleepykyo]

Don´t know if this is true but:

The resolution of Crysis 2 for PS3 is the same as Red Dead Redemption:
RDR = 1152x640 = 737,280 pixels
C2 = 1024x720 = 737,280 pixels

Really? C2 seems quite a bit blurrier than RDR. Is some psychological effect/visual trick seeing as RDR has a similiar ratio as a 16:9 tv, while C2's ratio is more like a warped 4:3?

Also does it mean that 737,280 is some sweet spot for the PS3? I'm not really tech inclined.

 

[MalboroRed]

The lighting is fantastic, but the playability is pretty terrible, it's a great tech demo, not so much as an actual MP game, maybe they should have just concentrated on single player.

 

[Khronikos]

I disagree heavily on the statement that Crysis does anything that fundamentally trounces KZ3. Sure, you can run a bit out in the open. It's a great game but surely neither does anything better with story and at this point KZ3 at least tries to tell something decently. It might fail but.... Anyway, gameplay wise Crysis is above average but surely nothing special. There were some decent sequences but KZ3 especially has a lot of great sequences in between some mediocre stuff. I am not saying either is that great but fundamentally Crytek and GG are nowhere in the same vicinity as Naughty Dog or their ilk, who are few sadly, when it comes to putting together a coherent piece. And even ND was hardly decent with U1. That story was horrible in a lot of parts with the villains. It looks like in 3 they finally might get their villains down perfectly.

Anyway, Crytek is basically graphics plus some decent gameplay as was KZ2 and even 3. But this does not go for the consoles at all. The multiplayer is ehh quite lacking in how it feels to play. Sure, KZ has some problems after launch when the guys are doing hookers and blow on vacation(already stop now GG!) and have not the time to patch very quickly, but the game turns out great after a couple months. The sounds of the guns and feel of the guns are damn near perfect in KZ3 as is the balance on the weapons. Their maps and MM may need some serious work but everything else is very good. And GG's multiplayer looks so much BETTER than this it's not even funny. I cry and weep when people in the fanboy domain try to take KZ3 with this garbage. Never. Not even close imo. The textures and the atmosphere are basically in an elite class on consoles. Check out the sky in Corinth Highway and tell me you are not smiling. Crysis 2 don't have that stuff on consoles anyway and even the PC release doesn't have that sort of artstyle that I enjoy.

 

[strata8]

Resolution isn't the problem:

(both of these shots are scaled to 1280x720)

PC, 1024x720, Medium settings with MLAA:

PS3, 1024x720, unknown AA:

 

[Zen]

I almost feel like, if Crysis 2 is suppose to be bringing PC to consoles and with no compromises, than give us the option to toggles graphics and settings for ourselves. It's clear (at least in the state of this demo) that they're throwing too much at both the 360 and PS3; maybe it's not optimized enough, and maybe they're just trying to do too much, but the users shouldn't have to suffer for their ambition.

Uniquely to Crysis 2 there are a number of features that are bleeding edge stuff and probably the main culprits (although I still maintain that every compromise they've made has ended up worse due to their own decisions with choosing what AA to go with, and the settings of their lighting, so forth).

Give us the OPTION to toggle on or off the following:

Global Illumination (replace with simpler lighting)
Per Object motion blur (replace with general motion blur)
HDR (well this wouldn't really cause problems)
Bokeh DOF (replace with less expensive variant)

The thing that annoys me (relatively) about Crytek is how they talk like they think their shit doesn't stink. They're always claiming this or that about cutting edge performance and credit where it's due they have a great engine for high spec machines, but they go in all cock sure about how they're going to bring CryEngine 3 to consoles and it will revolutionize the console market, and this is what they end up with to showcase their engine?

I'm sure Unreal Engine 3 could implement the same effects with similarly disastrous results, but the thing that really gets me is that the game they're using to showcase CryEngine 3 on consoles has made decisions that only make any technical compromises they've had to make even worse.

They talked about how they discovered a secret way of doing 3D that has no performance impact, and then call out other devs. Except the method of doing 3D on consoles is nothing but a 2D pop out show that has been known about for years.

All they said that they were going to push graphics on consoles far beyond what they currently are at, yet there are better looking shooters on the 360 and PS3 that are Multiplatform at that.

I think Mark Rein said it right when he talked about how the Crytek guys had yet to ship a game on consoles using CryEngine 3, and that speaks for itself and to wait and see.

Given that MLB has had realtime GI running at 720P and 60FPS since like 09, I'm not even convinced that Cryteks implementation of the various techs in Crysis 2 are necessarily the paragon of efficiency (even the up-scaling in this demo is average).

 

[arnoldocastillo2003]

Ok what the hell is your point, is Killzone 3 better than Crysis 2 from a graphic point of view?

My Answer: YES

Now, is Killzone 3 better than Crysis 2 form a gameplay point of view?

My Answer: Well it depends with taste and in the end depends of playing the final release of the game before making such assumptions.

 

[supermackem]

Having played a few more games i would like to add it does look a bit more blurry than the 360 version framerate looked about the same, i liked the ds3 more on this game than the 360 pad and the sound when running etc i hadnt heard the woooshing sound at all coming out of the 360 version on the same tv.

 

[Khronikos]

Yeah, horrible on the PS3. This sad game should be passed off in 2011. There is no excuse anymore. But with these multiplats it looks like they refuse to do separate code work that is any kind of benefit for the PS3. The only thing you can do is start from the ground on the PS3 and then port I guess but they seem to not want to do that for some reason. But don't lie to us. This looks like crap. And I am sorry but Crysis has never been anything remotely cool online so where and the hell does this come from that it's better than Killzone. KZ2 was awesome and if maps get sorted out with KZ3 it's even better. Crysis never did and never will compare. Pure hype from PC only dudes who must stare at HD foliage like its a god given ability to hold and cast lightning. This hype has now been said to translate to 360 fanboys. Real 360 fans should see through this....

 

[arnoldocastillo2003]

Resolution isn't the problem:

(both of these shots are scaled to 1280x720)

PC, 1024x720, Medium settings with MLAA:

PS3, 1024x720, unknown AA:

First: I presume you are using and AMD gpu because of the MLAA option.
Second: In my humble opinion you can never compare a PC game versus a CONSOLE game because of the difference in hardware
Third: Yeah its really fuck up the version of PS3 with all the noise and blurry IQ.

 

[-Pyromaniac-]

Wow this game looks bad.

 

[LyR]

Resolution isn't the problem:

(both of these shots are scaled to 1280x720)

PC, 1024x720, Medium settings with MLAA:

PS3, 1024x720, unknown AA:

tbh. like most games it looks a lot better in motion than still pictures ... if you can call 15 - 20fps motion

 

[Gram Negative Cocci]

When Crysis got released it instantly became the Holy Cow of PC gaming and source of continuous envy from console gamers. 4 years later it is still the best looking game on the market, all hardware combined.

Now with Crysis 2 Crytek gets shit on by:

- PC gamers for basically porting this game to the PC from 360 and failing to deliver AT LEAST Crysis-level graphics not to mention all they could do with 4 years of PC hardware improvement
- PS3 gamers, for being liars with their GFX promises and a game that looks like shyte on the platform
- 360 gamers don't give a shit about this franchise as they play GoWs, CODs and Halos.

A company being once always mentioned in positive light with a game that was a benchmark of PC power for nearly 4 years and is still unmatched now gets ridiculed by 3 fanbases.

When Crysis 2 bombs Cervat Yerli will probably ask himself: "was it worth it?"

 

[AltogetherAndrews]

Stop with the "do more than just graphics" garbage. I'm tired of Crytek Frankfurt being shit on like they can't make a good game. Crysis was an excellent game even on low settings.

Yep, yep.

 

[strata8]

First: I presume you are using and AMD gpu because of the MLAA option.
Second: In my humble opinion you can never compare a PC game versus a CONSOLE game because of the difference in hardware
Third: Yeah its really fuck up the version of PS3 with all the noise and blurry IQ.

Nah, AMD's MLAA is pretty terrible (IMO), I just used Jimenez's MLAA on the screenshot. I'm not really comparing graphics quality, though, just IQ, so unless there's something different about console games that makes them look lower-res, I still think it's a pretty fair comparison.

 

[Zen]

Yep, yep.

You know I honestly disagree with that, but what ever. I never got the chance to play warhead though. To me Crysis didn't do anything noteworthy aside from the technology and scale of the location. The enemies were pretty uninspired to fight and everything was pretty linear (just with wide corridors as it were). It had some maliability, but all in all it was a very directed experience that didn't have great gameplay to its name.

 

[AltogetherAndrews]

I disagree heavily on the statement that Crysis does anything that fundamentally trounces KZ3. Sure, you can run a bit out in the open.

Anyway, gameplay wise Crysis is above average but surely nothing special.

There aren't enough rolleyes in the world. Seriously.

Have you actually played Crysis? I guess stuff like 'fuck it, I don't like tanks so I'm just going to make this tank mission a human tank mission' qualifies as "running a bit in the open."

 

[Zen]

Man if you really had the abilities of a human tank, Crysis would have been a lot better.

 

[sinnergy]

When Crysis got released it instantly became the Holy Cow of PC gaming and source of continuous envy from console gamers. 4 years later it is still the best looking game on the market, all hardware combined.

Now with Crysis 2 Crytek gets shit on by:

- PC gamers for basically porting this game to the PC from 360 and failing to deliver AT LEAST Crysis-level graphics not to mention all they could do with 4 years of PC hardware improvement
- PS3 gamers, for being liars with their GFX promises and a game that looks like shyte on the platform
- 360 gamers don't give a shit about this franchise as they play GoWs, CODs and Halos.

A company being once always mentioned in positive light with a game that was a benchmark of PC power for nearly 4 years and is still unmatched now gets ridiculed by 3 fanbases.

When Crysis 2 bombs Cervat Yerli will probably ask himself: "was it worth it?"

No one has seen the PC SP @ max..
I am a console gamer, I give a shit about MP, and I also play COD, Gears etc

 

[AltogetherAndrews]

Well, human mech. Armor ---> strength ----> armor and rocket launcher. Takes longer than just using a tank, but I'm happy that the game gave me the option. That's rare these days.

Point is, Crysis is about a hell of a lot more than "running a bit in the open." I thought the choice was actually down a bit from Far Cry, but the quality of the game mechanics and the suit made more of what was there.

 

[MisterAnderson]

Nah, AMD's MLAA is pretty terrible (IMO), I just used Jimenez's MLAA on the screenshot. I'm not really comparing graphics quality, though, just IQ

I keep seeing this term thrown around, what is IQ?

 

[Salacious Crumb]

I keep seeing this term thrown around, what is IQ?

Image quality.

 

[evolution]

I wish i could say i was impressed, but im not. A solid framerate at 720p is all that i ask for on PS3, it can't be that hard. I'll probably just get it on PC and rent the PS3 version if my buddies decide to get it.

 

[phosphor112]

Power of the PS3 shows, in sub HD and sub 30 fps.. and sub CODBLOPS graphics.

Seriously Crytek, how do you fuck up this bad?

 

[MisterAnderson]

Lol Crytek can't get a break. They better give PC version a shit ton of post-release support to make good on their PC fanbase. Looks like it's going to be the only fanbase they might have, and they're already getting a ton of shit from them as well for the consolization/lack of graphics options/DX11.