Look, gamers need to stop expecting this game to blow you away on consoles. Yes, Crytek is a great developer with unlimited resources, and knows how to make a game look beautiful. But it doesn't mean that five year old consoles don't have their limits. Don't give me that "haven't been maxed out" yet sh!+, because the truth is the only reason games on consoles have gotten to this point this generation is because of insane amounts of optimization. The hardware is pretty much shot. Too stubborn to believe me? Keep reading.
Understand while reading this article that I am in no way down talking consoles. They are just as important in gaming as a PC, if not much more important. Series such as Gears of War, Killzone, and Uncharted have really been a joy to play. But I'm just stating what everyone can already assume, that Crysis 2 will be an overall better experience on a computer.
1) It's multi-platform. Yes, the Cryengine 3 will look great on both consoles. But it simply won't be that amazing for those of us who have already been gaming on PC. The 360 and PS3 are very powerful systems, but just look at the hardware and you'll see how they can't match up with the latest gaming PC. The PS3's cell processor is still powerful and was way ahead of it's time, but now it's nothing that mid range and high end computers can't outperform easily while playing games. When I say outperform, I mean in terms of visual performance. There are many different ways to utilize a processor, and each has its strengths and weaknesses. We're talking about a GeForce 7900 GTX with a little overclock here and there, some slight differences between each console. So basically, you're comparing a 7900 GTX to...for example a $280 card, the Radeon HD 5850. There's a HUGE difference there.
2) Yes, it would be $1000 for a very high performing gaming PC (build it yourself), but 70% of you already have a PC with an unnecessarily powerful processor. A top of the line graphics card to go with it would set you back about $250-300. That price seems familiar, oh yeah! Because it's the same cost as the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. You can't use that as an excuse anymore, everyone reading this article on a desktop computer probably has at least a dual core processor.
3) Developers such as Crytek who have always developed for the PC don't just abandon it. When good games are optimized for PC and not just ported as many are...they are unbelievable. The real showcase here is the PC version. That WILL be mind blowing. Again, Crytek will put the same optimization into the PC version as the console version, which means it will have a very good chance to be the best looking game ever released, just as Crysis was for about 2-3 years.
4) Many people say they just don't like gaming on PC because most of their friends are on Xbox 360 or PS3. But seriously, this is Crysis 2, not Halo 3 or Halo Reach. Not all of your friends will have this game, and if they do, you'll be the one who's enjoying it more...on a PC. You will have no problem finding online servers to play in. And if you're looking for a more mature gaming environment, this is the place to go. By mature, I mean 16+. I was so relieved not to find the try-hard Halo player who yells at adults while his mom is calling him up for dinner in every single game.
Altogether, I can't recommend any other option than the PC version of Crysis 2. If you don't have a PC powerful enough, or cant justify spending a bit of money to spice your system up then go ahead and buy it on consoles. There's no doubt in my mind that it will be a great gaming experience on the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 as well. But for this game, I'll be sticking to my PC.
perfectly said.....i have an x box 360 and there are a few games with great graphic but on the other hand i have a monster for a pc which is way ahead of consoles so i'd rather go for the pc version which wil run without any prob on my computer
ReplyDeleteSame here. Crytek has also said that Crysis 2 won't be any tougher to run on PC's than the original. That's good news for us because I won't be getting a new card for a while.
ReplyDeleteI prefer consoles to PC, but I still know that PC's are much more powerful than consoles, I mean even though the 360 and PS3 are still very powerful, they don't compare to the PC's nowadays.
ReplyDeleteI agree!
ReplyDeleteCyrsis 2 on consoles looks like crap!
I don't like the way it looks, it looks too technical!
I'm sorry but Crysis 2 is not maxing out the ps3, and KillZone 2 still looks better! Or better yet Killzone 3.
Crysis 2 only has impressive destructive environments and physics. But graphical looks is not impressive!
It doesn't even look close to Cysis 1's minimum requirements!
Technically inept retard talking about things he doesn't understand.
ReplyDeletewhatamireading.jpg
well said but obvious none the less. i have a beast PC and all consoles and while i will be getting this game on PC i believe the console version will only be lesser graphically and if thats all you care about thwn you should not be gaming. while graphics are important, gameplay, story and voice acting are much more so and this game is set to great all around. so just get the game, it does not matter where.
ReplyDeleteWell said,but really doesn't all that go without saying? i mean it's "CRYSIS" XD but the cell prosscer is more powerfull then what you have made it out to be,and also the fact there designed for a different use then a normal CPU :P
ReplyDeleteerrr i mean without any prob on my computer and have better graphic than console.
ReplyDeleteabove comment was mine
"but the cell prosscer is more powerfull then what you have made it out to be,and also the fact there designed for a different use then a normal CPU :P"
ReplyDeleteYes I understand where you're coming from. But it's true that the cell would be more likely to face off against a GPU than a CPU. In that case, the cell would still be beaten though by modern GPU's.
yeah the cell procesor is very powerfull but in terms of graphics pc rules i mean we are talkin about graphics after allright????
ReplyDeleteyeah the cell procesor is very powerfull but in terms of graphics pc rules i mean we are talkin about graphics after allright????
ReplyDeleteYes, sorry for the confusion about the cell processor. I've fixed it to be more precise in terms of what I meant to say. It's a very powerful CPU in terms of GFLOPS (peak performance), but I'm comparing its ACTUAL performance compared to what current processors have accomplished.
ReplyDeleteyeah the cell procesor is very powerfull but in terms of graphics pc rules i mean we are talkin about graphics after allright????
ReplyDeleteI don't like gaming on the PC because of it's feel.... just everything feels like crap to me
ReplyDeleteyes, all 10 of you with a powerful enough computer to run crysis 2 at max will get better graphics. PC gaming is not in charge anymore though, and more attention is definitely going into the console games. I know that I'm more impressed by God of War 3 on my $650 50" lcd on my $300 ($950 total) ps3 than I will be with crysis 2 at max on a $1500 gaming rig on a $300 26" monitor ($1800 total). It's all relative bud, and your overly opinionated column here is bs for rich pc fanboys.
ReplyDelete"Crysis 2 on PC is the Way to Go"
ReplyDeleteno sh%t Sherlock...thats like someone pointing out that if you want to best driving experience you better pick a Ferrari over a ford torus
1. the graphics and physics and a.i. and native resolution of the console wont nearly be on par with the p.c. version
2. (and most importantly) unless the ps3 version uses the ps-move (the ps3's upcoming next gen controller) and the sub-controller then the nether one of the console version will match the precise control of a mouse
idk why everyone is saying its obvious, i mean yeah we know it will perform better but there are many great points that i never thought about in the article
ReplyDelete"but there are many great points that i never thought about in the article"
ReplyDeletelike...?
"but 70% of you already have a PC with an unnecessarily powerful processor. A top of the line graphics card to go with it would set you back about $250-300"
ReplyDeleteyeah basically anyone can get a good gaming pc now by buying a good graphics card, computers are almost as mainstream as a tv
My PC is 6 years old and I could afford at best a good computer from the year 2008 so that kinda pulled the carpet under your article.
ReplyDeleteyeah the cell procesor is very powerfull but in terms of graphics pc rules i mean we are talkin about graphics after allright????
ReplyDeleteyeah and gaming on console usually have a problem on runnin sub-hd sometimes. so venthough you have a hug lcd its useless.lol
ReplyDelete"My PC is 6 years old and I could afford at best a good computer from the year 2008 so that kinda pulled the carpet under your article."
ReplyDeletei don't think it was saying everyone, just most. not everyone can afford a ps3 or xbox 360 either.
yeah and gaming on console usually have a problem on runnin sub-hd sometimes. so eventhough you have a huge lcd its useless.lol
ReplyDeleteTrue, but I rather developers cater to my systems limit. Then I to cater to a developers. Any game being developed today will be developed with the card from tomorrow in mind.
ReplyDeleteThis is a convinience console gamers have that PC gamers don't. In today's economy I rather worry about deciding want game to get instead of god I hope I meet the minimum requirements.
"This is a convinience console gamers have that PC gamers don't. In today's economy I rather worry about deciding want game to get instead of god I hope I meet the minimum requirements."
ReplyDeleteNot a bad point at all but i still prefer the pc version if its available and it's not a mass online game like modern warfare 2 or halo
Crytek said there will be no ports so Crysis2 will look the same on all platforms.
ReplyDeletehey they said on both the ps3 and the xbox 360 wil look the same......however the pc version wil be the superior one.go check the net
ReplyDeleteHi randomtechblog,
ReplyDeleteThe cell processor is still more powerful than the newest PC processors, far more versatile for general applications than the newest GPUs.
Also, note that Sony designs their game system architecture from the ground up, raw CPU/GPU speed is less accurate means to gauge what system is capable of what when comparing to console with many independent powerful, fully-programmable pipelines to utilize.
PC does have better GPUs but the PS3 is overall superior for gaming because developers can focus on balance of framerate/visual quality while PC devs have to deal with frequent lowest common denominator issues (inc. sound, game control, driver latency, etc). PS3 devs also can microcode their NVidia GPU, which you can't apparently do on PC NVidia cards.
These are big deals.
njrabit
plug and play any day, THE CELLprocessor is only just begining to sing, people are no question about it underestimating its supreme dominance thats why the hard core so called pc gamers hate it, THE true hurts brothers, i've been an owner of a hi end pc, and was very dissatisfied with all the money i'd spent and time wasted.
ReplyDeleteIf all that is mentioned in the article is true, why is it that devs find it impossible to port games like Heavy Rain and Gran Turismo 5 to the PC? Why?
ReplyDeleteuberpix. a big lol to you. plydigital wanted to release a pc version of gt5 on pc on the chinese market if the ps3 didnt sell well in order to make a profit. my video card alone has much more transistor count then 10 ps3 alltogether and i play any game on full hd 8x aa 16 af 60 fps. i have a ps3 on the closet for 1 year
ReplyDeleterabit... get over yourself, god, its just a 7900gt on a low budget cpu. You really think this amazing cell is better than a core i5 or a core i7, or even a bloody phenom 2? PS3 is superior overall? Where do you get this shit? Do some research before you make a fool of yourself. And don't forget its the GPU that handles the graphics not the bloody CPU, so your amazing cell has very little to do with the PS3's graphic output.
ReplyDeleteSome people reading this seriously have the wrong idea. Everything this guy said is spot on in the article.
ReplyDeleteI play my PS3 more than my PC. Hands down.
But what you need to understand is that games like Metro 2033, Bad Company 2, and DiRT 2 are so much better on PC that they seem like a completely different game.
No graphics aren't everything, but when they're this much better, and the game is good to start with, it brings the entire environment to life. Games like Metro 2033 on PC scare the shit out of you compared to what you see on Xbox 360.
I'm sorry, but THE CELL in the PS3 is not the same iteration that IBM uses in their supercomputers. Yes, it is based on the same architecture, but it is much less powerful. Don't you understand it'd be impossible to sell if it was as powerful as you all say?
IF the cell was actually that powerful, then Sony wouldn't have put such low amounts of RAM and a shitty video card that bottlenecks the whole system.
The fact is, consoles can't compare. I don't care what anyone says. Don't give me some technical bullshit, because if it was true then we would have proof.
rightly said bro. and just to add dx11 well you can see the difference between dx11 and games running on dx9 on console.its not much now but soon....well you console fan boys will see.just sit and watch boys
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree that it will look better on PC, you clearly don't have a very deep understanding of console architecture or how modern console games are optimized for this hardware.
ReplyDeleteYour comparisons of console hardware to computer hardware doesn't apply. For example the 360 has an ATI chipset using EDRAM (not found on PC GPU's) which allows for such things as AA without a performance hit.
In consoles the CPU and GPU also work in tandem (for lack of a better word). This means the CPU can perform graphical calculations, while the GPU performs other graphical tasks, thus allowing you to effectively AND efficiently max out the hardware. Again, not possible on PC (to the same extent).
There is also no middle man OS like "Windows" and the games have a direct link to hardware (no need to use DLL's like on PC).
I am continually amazed at what a console can achieve. And bar the low resolution (which isn't very noticeable on a big TV anyway) a lot of console games (not ports) look very impressive. Considering Crysis 2 will run on a 4-5yr old console, I would like to see a $200 computer do the same.
Sorry s0cks, but if you compare a pc equiped with a 7950gt and a simple core 2 duo to a console, it will look the same as a console, if not better. There is no such thing as AA without a performance hit genius, most console games have absolutely no AA! And while the CPU can help with graphics performance, it is still the GPU that matters most, if anything a good CPU simply allows you to get the most out of your GPU. Ever used 3dmark cpu test? I'm guessing not. Familiar with a site called tomshardware.com? I hope not, cause if you are you are quite the disgrace.
ReplyDeleteRight now you can build a PC for $400 that would still be faster than a console, and this is a PC we're talking about, it can do much more than a console.
And please stop with this nonsense about maxing out hardware. The only advantage the console has is that every system is the same, meaning developers know what before hand what they are working with, and therefore know what they can and cannot do, allowing them to make games attractive enough given limited hardware, this is nothing new, it is not impossible on PC's.