Support NeoGAF

[Tom Penny]

Its not possible for God of War 3 to look better than Uncharted 2 because God of War 3 renders larger areas.

It's not possible because it doesn't look consistently great as UC2 looks. There are considerably more Meh looking areas in GOW3 then in UC2. UC2 is a more polished game on all levels.

 

[Mudkips]

When I think about Crysis, I can't help but think about Adam Sessler's review of it. You can hype the graphics but the rest of the game not so much.

Forward to about 1:45 to see the broken AI, physics and some weird glitches.

http://g4tv.com/videos/19156/crysis-review/

Bububu MY play through was flawless! Amazing AI, engaging gameplay, SUIT POWERS, realistic physics, and amazingly optimized and bug-free performance.

Can't believe people have deluded themselves into thinking the above.
And of course, "if you don't like it, it's because your PC can't handle it!". No, it's because it's shit. My PC could handle it back then, and it it can handle it more so now. That doesn't stop it from sucking all ass in terms of optimization. That doesn't fix bugs. That doesn't make the game fun.

Worse than the MGS4 defense force.

 

[jett]

Depends where you draw the boundaries of 'artistic'.

The high end Sony stuff is notable not just for the technical quality of their rendering or whatever, but perhaps also more especially for the depth and detail of the asset production that goes into them. Is that part of the 'art' end of things? Like, UC2 is simply ridiculous. There's just so much unique incidental detail that's modeled to a ridiculously high degree. So much effort put into every little asset in a scene, regardless of how much or little attention it'll get from the player. That's not just a technical accomplishment but a more general production accomplishment overlapping tech and art resources. But it all adds in to the end visual result and 'how good' the game looks - and was probably the single most impressive aspect of that game's visuals (to me anyway).

This is what, IMO, is defining a new meaning of 'high end' : not just the quality of your engine or rendering, but the depth and breadth of what you feed into it asset wise. We've seen smaller devs on relative shoestring budgets who can compete on the former, just pure rendering quality delivered by their engine (and that's awesome) - but shortcomings on the latter end are starting to drag down the resulting product relative to this new 'high end' that's rather resource-intensive and costly to play in.

To put it another way, if we took the UC2 engine...it would be perfectly possible to make something that rendered just as well as UC2, that used the processing power just as much, but that overall didn't 'look' nearly as good as it. And not just because of more qualitative things like art direction, but because of slightly more quantitative things like how detailed assets are, how many of them there are, how 'unique' a set of assets in a given scene are etc. The richness of your data, in other words, whatever the direction you were going for artistically. Up until relatively recently, the high-end in terms of data richness was in reach of pretty much any dev, because of technical constraints. Those with the scope for higher budgets couldn't really flex those budgets because the hardware was imposing a cap on everyone. Now though, with tech constraints raised and people getting comfortable with hardware, you're starting to see the difference between those with budgets and those without, and it is impacting the overall impressiveness of end products independently of technical competence - like I said, creating a new type of high end where well-resourced developers with the right tools/organisation/motivation are pulling ahead in noticeable/impactful ways that have little to do with pure 'technical quality'.

Anyway, I digress...

Nice post.

 

[Always-honest]

some people seem to think that a game has to have brushstrokes to be artistic.

my guess is that these are the same people that print photos on canvas.......

 

[mujun]

I meant artistic in the sense of compositional coherency in various scenes in levels, smart use of color and polygon budget and level rendering. Hopefully that simplifies enough for you to understand.

Just Cause 2, Demon's Souls, Metro 2033 and Call of Juarez 2 all have an "artistic" beauty to them. Your definition of it sounds a bit too strict to me and not what the majority would define it as. Anyway, semantics.

Nice post.

If longwindedness impresses you. The art that goes into making what you see versus the artistic value in what you actually see.

 

[BobsRevenge]

Bububu MY play through was flawless! Amazing AI, engaging gameplay, SUIT POWERS, realistic physics, and amazingly optimized and bug-free performance.

Can't believe people have deluded themselves into thinking the above.
And of course, "if you don't like it, it's because your PC can't handle it!". No, it's because it's shit. My PC could handle it back then, and it it can handle it more so now. That doesn't stop it from sucking all ass in terms of optimization. That doesn't fix bugs. That doesn't make the game fun.

Worse than the MGS4 defense force.

... yeah, I had a blast playing the game on low-medium settings at 1024x768 with a mediocre frame-rate. It was the best FPS I had ever played then, and it still is now. The gameplay is the high-water mark of the genre.

I'm tempted to say this comes down to opinion, but deep down I believe you are objectively wrong.

Your avatar looks stupid and your mother is fat.

 

[rollingstart]

... yeah, I had a blast playing the game on low-medium settings at 1024x768 with a mediocre frame-rate. It was the best FPS I had ever played then, and it still is now. The gameplay is the high-water mark of the genre.

I'm tempted to say this comes down to opinion, but deep down I believe you are objectively wrong.

Your avatar looks stupid and your mother is fat.

yeah, I first played Crysis on lowest settings and it ran like shit and I still enjoyed it a lot.

And about the AI, yeah, it's shit. It's a case of "I don't like it, but I understand" because the staggering amount of options you have to take on enemies and scope of each level is a lot more complex than some of the other games you guys talk about. Even Halo, which allows for a lot of freedom compared to the average shooter today, doesn't have as many factors going on that would confuse the AI.

It's not just with Crysis, it's with pretty much any game that allows that level of freedom. Far Cry 2 is another game that has woefully bad AI. Just Cause 2 and STALKER also fit this mold. Even Assassin's Creed games fit this.

It's not so much an excuse as an understanding as to why it sucks, and for the most part it is easy to ignore while playing since it doesn't have a huge impact when you actually play. It's at least not as important as something like FEAR that relies on tight intense combat against the AI, or to look at a negative, the Splinter Cell Conviction demo where the AI is almost nonexistent (apparently gimped for the demo).

 

[EmCeeGramr]

I did the same thing as Bob's Revenge and linkzg. My PC is decent at best, and playing Crysis on Medium (with a few things set to high) and a middling framerate was a fantastic and fun experience.

I never had any of those bugs, either.

 

[BobsRevenge]

yeah, I first played Crysis on lowest settings and it ran like shit and I still enjoyed it a lot.

And about the AI, yeah, it's shit. It's a case of "I don't like it, but I understand" because the staggering amount of options you have to take on enemies and scope of each level is a lot more complex than some of the other games you guys talk about. Even Halo, which allows for a lot of freedom compared to the average shooter today, doesn't have as many factors going on that would confuse the AI.

It's not just with Crysis, it's with pretty much any game that allows that level of freedom. Far Cry 2 is another game that has woefully bad AI. Just Cause 2 and STALKER also fit this mold. Even Assassin's Creed games fit this.

It's not so much an excuse as an understanding as to why it sucks, and for the most part it is easy to ignore while playing since it doesn't have a huge impact when you actually play. It's at least not as important as something like FEAR that relies on tight intense combat against the AI, or to look at a negative, the Splinter Cell Conviction demo where the AI is almost nonexistent (apparently gimped for the demo).

The AI is pretty good most of the time. The only time it really breaks down is when there is a stationary machine gun, or something in the vicinity.

But regardless of that, it's really fun to play around with. Even when it's being dumb. Which is the most important thing.

Also, Far Cry 2's AI is really underrated. The fact that if I injure someone, that AI is smart enough to crawl behind cover (and not just some pre-baked cover square script box thing) facing away from me, and then bring his pistol out to shoot me if I come hunting for him, is amazing by itself. But then, if another AI was present he might've come and picked that dude up and carried him to cover? You don't see that in any other game unless it is scripted. Far Cry 2's AI really does some surprising things, and from just looking at their intelligence, they really stand out.

They also aren't nearly as perceptively gimped as most games.

edit: There is no defense for the suicide drivers though. That makes no sense. :lol

 

[Salz01]

It's not possible because it doesn't look consistently great as UC2 looks. There are considerably more Meh looking areas in GOW3 then in UC2. UC2 is a more polished game on all levels.

I agree with this post wholeheartedly.

 

[A.R.K]

I had my doubts about this BS PR from Crytek about PS3 version setting the bar and now this confirms it:

console-versions-identical

No way it would be the best looking game on PS3, if the 360 and PS3 versions are identical. It might be even worse than the 360 as we have seen with most multi titles. I have my doubts it would beat the previous high standards of PS3 exclusives (KZ2, UC2, GOW3) without Crytek pushing the limits of PS3 and doing something exclusive for its development. I'll eat my crow if Crytek surpasses these titles.

What a load of crap Crytek!

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

I had my doubts about this BS PR from Crytek about PS3 version setting the bar and now this confirms it:

console-versions-identical

No way it would be the best looking game on PS3, if the 360 and PS3 versions are identical. It might be even worse than the 360 as we have seen with most multi titles. I have my doubts it would beat the previous high standards of PS3 exclusives (KZ2, UC2, GOW3) without Crytek pushing the limits of PS3 and doing something exclusive for its development. I'll eat my crow if Crytek surpasses these titles.

What a load of crap Crytek!

So you've basically concluded that everyone who has seen the game first hand is just flat out lying, on the assumption that there is zero possible way that a 360 game could look better than UC2 and GOW3.

I can't wait for the reviews on this one. And RAGE (the game).

 

[Draft]

I had my doubts about this BS PR from Crytek about PS3 version setting the bar and now this confirms it:

console-versions-identical

No way it would be the best looking game on PS3, if the 360 and PS3 versions are identical. It might be even worse than the 360 as we have seen with most multi titles. I have my doubts it would beat the previous high standards of PS3 exclusives (KZ2, UC2, GOW3) without Crytek pushing the limits of PS3 and doing something exclusive for its development. I'll eat my crow if Crytek surpasses these titles.

What a load of crap Crytek!

:lol

Wow.

 

[Mad_Ban]

In this interview from PSU (yeah I know they're hardly reliable, but the interview seems genuine) Frank Kitson from Crytek mentions this:

PSU: Do you foresee any disparities between the PS3 and 360 versions of the game?

Kitson: I think they'll be indistinguishable. I think the intrinsic quality that exists in both of them [will come across fully]. You know, if you want to take a razor's edge and shave the minor, minor points, the hardcore techies [may notice something], but yeah, I think they'll be indistinguishable. There won't be any difference.

Source

Aren't those tiny differences the ones we note and cause huge furores over?

 

[LabouredSubterfuge]

In this interview from PSU (yeah I know they're hardly reliable, but the interview seems genuine) Frank Kitson from Crytek mentions this:



Source

Aren't those tiny differences the ones we note and cause huge furores over?

Yup. And my pixel arrangement is undoubtedly better than your pixel arrangement.

 

[Dennis]

PSU: Do you foresee any disparities between the PS3 and 360 versions of the game?

Kitson: I think they'll be indistinguishable. I think the intrinsic quality that exists in both of them [will come across fully]. You know, if you want to take a razor's edge and shave the minor, minor points, the hardcore techies [may notice something], but yeah, I think they'll be indistinguishable. There won't be any difference.

:lol Damn, its like he is almost begging for those 3000% zoom pics.

 

[A.R.K]

So you've basically concluded that everyone who has seen the game first hand is just flat out lying, on the assumption that there is zero possible way that a 360 game could look better than UC2 and GOW3.

I can't wait for the reviews on this one. And RAGE (the game).

:lol
Wow.

oooo touched some nerves there brothas ;P ..

As I said, I have my doubts but we'll see. The history so far this gen supprts what I said. 99.99999999% of time for multi titles if devs don't take time to do something extra for PS3, games are not that technically impressive like the PS3 exclusives. Just the facts.

 

[danwarb]

oooo touched some nerves there brothas ;P ..

As I said, I have my doubts but we'll see. The history so far this gen supprts what I said. 99.99999999% of time for multi titles if devs don't take time to do something extra for PS3, games are not that technically impressive like the PS3 exclusives. Just the facts.

The game could be as 'technically impressive' as PS3 exclusives, and identical across the consoles, for all we know.

 

[Kibbles]

I had my doubts about this BS PR from Crytek about PS3 version setting the bar and now this confirms it:

console-versions-identical

No way it would be the best looking game on PS3, if the 360 and PS3 versions are identical. It might be even worse than the 360 as we have seen with most multi titles. I have my doubts it would beat the previous high standards of PS3 exclusives (KZ2, UC2, GOW3) without Crytek pushing the limits of PS3 and doing something exclusive for its development. I'll eat my crow if Crytek surpasses these titles.

What a load of crap Crytek!

:lol

 

[JDSN]

I had my doubts about this BS PR from Crytek about PS3 version setting the bar and now this confirms it:

console-versions-identical

No way it would be the best looking game on PS3, if the 360 and PS3 versions are identical. It might be even worse than the 360 as we have seen with most multi titles. I have my doubts it would beat the previous high standards of PS3 exclusives (KZ2, UC2, GOW3) without Crytek pushing the limits of PS3 and doing something exclusive for its development. I'll eat my crow if Crytek surpasses these titles.

What a load of crap Crytek!

:lol

 

[GHG]

I had my doubts about this BS PR from Crytek about PS3 version setting the bar and now this confirms it:

console-versions-identical

No way it would be the best looking game on PS3, if the 360 and PS3 versions are identical. It might be even worse than the 360 as we have seen with most multi titles. I have my doubts it would beat the previous high standards of PS3 exclusives (KZ2, UC2, GOW3) without Crytek pushing the limits of PS3 and doing something exclusive for its development. I'll eat my crow if Crytek surpasses these titles.

What a load of crap Crytek!

My god... :lol

Now I remember why i normally stay away from console game threads.

 

[Tom Penny]

I had my doubts about this BS PR from Crytek about PS3 version setting the bar and now this confirms it:

console-versions-identical

No way it would be the best looking game on PS3, if the 360 and PS3 versions are identical. It might be even worse than the 360 as we have seen with most multi titles. I have my doubts it would beat the previous high standards of PS3 exclusives (KZ2, UC2, GOW3) without Crytek pushing the limits of PS3 and doing something exclusive for its development. I'll eat my crow if Crytek surpasses these titles.

What a load of crap Crytek!

Word. That Alan Wake game looks pretty tight in the graphics department though. Secondly I believe 2 different teams are working on the X360 and PS3 versions and tweaking their game engines accordingly for each platform. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. They could be lying but Crytek is pretty into pushing tech...

 

[TacticalFox88]

I had my doubts about this BS PR from Crytek about PS3 version setting the bar and now this confirms it:

console-versions-identical

No way it would be the best looking game on PS3, if the 360 and PS3 versions are identical. It might be even worse than the 360 as we have seen with most multi titles. I have my doubts it would beat the previous high standards of PS3 exclusives (KZ2, UC2, GOW3) without Crytek pushing the limits of PS3 and doing something exclusive for its development. I'll eat my crow if Crytek surpasses these titles.

What a load of crap Crytek!

 

[Nizz]

In this interview from PSU (yeah I know they're hardly reliable, but the interview seems genuine) Frank Kitson from Crytek mentions this:



Source

Aren't those tiny differences the ones we note and cause huge furores over?

I hope Crytek do pull off complete parity between the console versions. I don't really mind if one version has slightly more bushes in Central Park. As long as both run at a solid 30fps (which it seems like they're dead set on) I'm a happy man.

I just really hope the game kicks ass. I've heard a lot of positive things about the Crysis games so far. I also really, really hope they offer at least 4-5 different controller pre-sets. IMO, one of the biggest sins a dev can commit is permanently binding ADS/shooting to the L2/R2 buttons instead of L1/R1 on PS3.

But there's nothing wrong in my book with adding another pretty game to the collection. GoW 3 and Killzone 2 wowed me (I don't own Uncharted 1&2 yet) and I expect Crysis 2 to do the same.

 

[Tom Penny]

But there's nothing wrong in my book with adding another pretty game to the collection. GoW 3 and Killzone 2 wowed me (I don't own Uncharted 1&2 yet) and I expect Crysis 2 to do the same.

Your a terrible human being.

 

[danwarb]

:lol Damn, its like he is almost begging for those 3000% zoom pics.

In their lighting presentations they've mentioned things like "half-resolution rendering mode" for VPL rendering to bring a scene up to speed on PS3.

Differences like that will likely go unnoticed, unless you know what you're looking for.

 

[fizzelopeguss]

Who gives a toss about graphics, super suit Super Suit SUPER SUIT.

 

[feel]

I had my doubts about this BS PR from Crytek about PS3 version setting the bar and now this confirms it:

console-versions-identical

No way it would be the best looking game on PS3, if the 360 and PS3 versions are identical. It might be even worse than the 360 as we have seen with most multi titles. I have my doubts it would beat the previous high standards of PS3 exclusives (KZ2, UC2, GOW3) without Crytek pushing the limits of PS3 and doing something exclusive for its development. I'll eat my crow if Crytek surpasses these titles.

What a load of crap Crytek!

Wow. Don't look at the any recent Alan Wake video, your mind might not be able to comprehend what's going on and explode.

 

[mintylurb]

No doubt.

All of them bar a couple of games are good games. I don't think anyone is doubting that. Certainly not me.

But most people have read into my post as a slur on Uncharted 2, which it wasn't. It wasn't even about Uncharted at all, it was about Sony exclusives in general and how they're viewed and talked about on GAF.

Even IF he was right in what he said about the difference between UC1 and 2 (which he wasn't, which is why I said I neither agreed or disagreed with him), he shouldn't have bothered saying anything derogatory about such a high profile Sony exclusive because regardless of whether it was the truth or not, he would have been looked upon as an idiot.

The 'typical' reaction to MY post (which thuway demonstrated with perfect timing) was to take it as an affront to Uncharted 2, which it wasn't.

Which basically illustrates my point in the first place.

Tall poppy syndrom is a common human trait, the more something is built up, the more people set out to cut it down. If the Sony 1st party exclusives weren't so overly hyped, there'd be less trolls trying to cut them down. If anything, the opposite would occur.

I'm not expecting that behaviour to change here, but I'm just sayin.

Posting something negative about any high profile exclusive or multi-platform games will get a rise out of gaffers. That isn't just exclusive to gaf ps3 fans. Take a look at this alan wake thread. This one poster had a dissenting opinion on the game's graphics. He was swiftly mocked and labeled as a fanboy.

As for sony's 1st party games being overhyped, there's certain truth to that sentiment. But you could also say that if the usual suspects weren't so keen on downplaying sony's 1st party games, take pot shots at sony fans for their enthusiasm then just maybe some sony fans will be less inclined to overly hype their anticipated games which in turn could lead to more civil and constructive discussions.

 

[Zenith]

Crysis 2 is the best looking game on console. Boom.

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=242227

well that takes care of that.

 

[Unknown One]

I've played the shit out of Uncharted 1/2 and GOW3. I can say Uncharted 2 looks better marginally. Some of the character models of GOW3 looks low quality compared to Kratos. Uncharted 2 was a whole lot more consistent which is why I put it above GOW3. If only Uncharted 2 had the MLAA, it'll probably be minor difference though.

 

[mintylurb]

In their lighting presentations they've mentioned things like "half-resolution rendering mode" for VPL rendering to bring a scene up to speed on PS3.

Differences like that will likely go unnoticed, unless you know what you're looking for.

You mean this?

And the final LPV rendering stage is much faster on PlayStation 3 because we use half-resolution rendering mode with MSAA remapping trick.

I still think, overall, Crysis 2 360 version will look and perform marginally better than the ps3 version. I just hope my 5850 can handle Crysis 2. ;/

 

[JB1981]

Just Cause 2, Demon's Souls, Metro 2033 and Call of Juarez 2 all have an "artistic" beauty to them. Your definition of it sounds a bit too strict to me and not what the majority would define it as. Anyway, semantics.



If longwindedness impresses you. The art that goes into making what you see versus the artistic value in what you actually see.

Nah his post was definitely better.

 

[RubberJohnny]

I had my doubts about this BS PR from Crytek about PS3 version setting the bar and now this confirms it:

console-versions-identical

No way it would be the best looking game on PS3, if the 360 and PS3 versions are identical. It might be even worse than the 360 as we have seen with most multi titles. I have my doubts it would beat the previous high standards of PS3 exclusives (KZ2, UC2, GOW3) without Crytek pushing the limits of PS3 and doing something exclusive for its development. I'll eat my crow if Crytek surpasses these titles.

What a load of crap Crytek!

You mock this guy, but this is what this thread has been about since Page 1 when someone said how it'd only been demoed on a 360 so far.

There's loads of people who think like this waiting in the wings, this one just said it out loud.

 

[[Nintex]]

I had my doubts about this BS PR from Crytek about PS3 version setting the bar and now this confirms it:

console-versions-identical

No way it would be the best looking game on PS3, if the 360 and PS3 versions are identical. It might be even worse than the 360 as we have seen with most multi titles. I have my doubts it would beat the previous high standards of PS3 exclusives (KZ2, UC2, GOW3) without Crytek pushing the limits of PS3 and doing something exclusive for its development. I'll eat my crow if Crytek surpasses these titles.

What a load of crap Crytek!

And now there's a circus in town.

 

[jaypah]

*checks thread title* hmmmm. Crysis. PS3. Graphical Ceiling.

oh man, like fish in a barrel. well on topic i hope that the framerate is decent on consoles as i don't have a gaming PC.

 

[Nizz]

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=242227

well that takes care of that.

I love this part:

Yet picking and listing the ingredients does a disservice to the overall cocktail of visual splendour. It's the way everything hangs together that made us want to check round the back of the screen to see if the leads were running to a 360 or a nuclear-powered PC.

This engine/game must be a beast. Damn, I can't wait to get my hands on this!

 

[Classic24]

hey guys so im assuming this game runs at 30 fps locked on consoles/??? also no MLAA on ps3 huh? sucks.

 

[aeolist]

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=242227

well that takes care of that.

I totally agree with everything this man says

It's eerie

 

[charsace]

Crytek is one of the few companies people should listen to when they boast about graphics.

 

[HK-47]

I can see Crysis 2 is gonna be the gift that keeps on giving in terms of hilarious whining.

 

[JDSN]

Crytek is one of the few companies people should listen to when they boast about graphics.

Thats the thing about this thread that surprises me, its like people have never heard of the damn company and are acting like its a newcomer, I wonder if console-exclusive RPG fans will act the same in the case The Witcher 2 is announced for the consoles.

 

[darkwings]

Just Cause 2, Demon's Souls, Metro 2033 and Call of Juarez 2 all have an "artistic" beauty to them. Your definition of it sounds a bit too strict to me and not what the majority would define it as. Anyway, semantics.

Just Cause 2 is using the most impressive large scale game engine today imo

 

[HK-47]

Thats the thing about this thread that surprises me, its like people have never heard of the damn company and are acting like its a newcomer, I wonder if console-exclusive RPG fans will act the same in the case The Witcher 2 is announced for the consoles.

Maybe. The ME2 fans might.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Crytek is one of the few companies people should listen to when they boast about graphics.

I'll believe them when they talk up how great the PC version will be. But nothing they've shown us gives me any reason to buy into what they're saying about console versions. The tech demo they showed off for consoles had no AA and a completely unacceptable framerate. Not exactly something to go crazy over.

 

[adamsapple]

Gamespot have a new preview up for the 360 version.

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/crysis2/news.html?sid=6257424&mode=previews

they say it looks impressive.

 

[ZephyrFate]

Just Cause 2 is using the most impressive large scale game engine today imo

I can DEFINITELY agree with this. It's fucking beautiful.

 

[JDSN]

Maybe. The ME2 fans might.

ME2 fans give me a weird look when I mention Baldur's Gate, so dont even get me started.

 

[Darkman M]

I can see Crysis 2 is gonna be the gift that keeps on giving in terms of hilarious whining.

.

 

[Rikyfree]

After seeing the MLAA in GoW3, if your company is touting its love for the PS3, you better make damn sure that's in there. If not there's some minus points headed your way. This of course I am applying to all titles after the first half of 2010.