Find me a console game with a better texture then this one on PC Crysis 2

  • 164 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by mrfrosty151986 (526 posts) -

The detail:shock:

#2 Posted by GamerwillzPS (8530 posts) -

Lol.

No console game can match this. All of those textures are rendered under DX11.

#3 Posted by MaskedPlayer (979 posts) -

Stop stating the obvious.

No I am not jelly.

#4 Posted by bobbetybob (19171 posts) -
WOAH NO WAY PC HAS BETTER GRAPHICS THAN CONSOLES WOW SO ENLIGHTENING etc etc etc
#5 Posted by funsohng (27614 posts) -
Didn't you know? Blurred textures make it more cinematic!
#6 Posted by straightedge_X (737 posts) -
BREAKING NEWS! PCs can output better graphics than consoles!
#7 Posted by Inconsistancy (8091 posts) -
Comparing textures from a game that can use 2gb of vram to consoles with a grand total of 512. Who will win!?
#8 Posted by mrfrosty151986 (526 posts) -

Not a single post with pictures of Uncharted, Gears or Killzone, Are console sheep finally learning?

#9 Posted by the_bi99man (11047 posts) -

Not a single post with pictures of Uncharted, Gears or Killzone, Are console sheep finally learning?

mrfrosty151986

No, I think it's just that even they recognize trolling when it's this obvious. Even if what you're saying is completely true, this is still pretty lowbrow. I expect better from my fellow master racers.

#10 Posted by GamerwillzPS (8530 posts) -

Not a single post with pictures of Uncharted, Gears or Killzone, Are console sheep finally learning?

mrfrosty151986

Well, people aren't stupid enough to challenge consoles with PC.

It's basically like this...

20348110.jpg

#11 Posted by ultimate-k (2348 posts) -

That is impossible and you know it.

#12 Posted by muffin200 (733 posts) -

A better Find me might be.

Find a PC that cost $300 7seven years ago, has had no upgrades and can run that game.

#13 Posted by locopatho (20177 posts) -
Lol PC has better floors, stop the goddam presses.

A better Find me might be.

Find a PC that cost $300 7seven years ago, has had no upgrades and can run that game.

muffin200
This also.
#15 Posted by freedomfreak (39120 posts) -
Congratulations. That looks better than games running on 7-year old hardware.
#16 Posted by mrfrosty151986 (526 posts) -

A better Find me might be.

Find a PC that cost $300 7seven years ago, has had no upgrades and can run that game.

muffin200
Show me a console that launched 7 years ago that can do all the things a $300 PC can do.
#17 Posted by nameless12345 (15125 posts) -

saperman1.jpg

Superman64box.jpg

It's a better game than Crysis 2. :P

#18 Posted by muffin200 (733 posts) -

[QUOTE="muffin200"]

A better Find me might be.

Find a PC that cost $300 7seven years ago, has had no upgrades and can run that game.

mrfrosty151986

Show me a console that launched 7 years ago that can do all the things a $300 PC can do.

$300 PC's from 7 years ago are Home PC designed for something else completely. You are talking about Photo shop, Office and Goggle being better than yes of course it's because that what the PC was made to do. Consoles are made to play games with some other stuff tacked on. Which one has more uses outside of games? It's a agument that is a best made to distract from can a 7 year old PC run that can and at worst an argument made for the sake of arguing.

#19 Posted by HaloinventedFPS (4713 posts) -

New Hitman maybe?

Or does the PC version have much better textures?

#20 Posted by RyviusARC (4260 posts) -

Show me a console that launched 7 years ago that can do all the things a $300 PC can do.mrfrosty151986

Atleast my PC from almost 9 years back is still working.

Most people had to replace their 360.

Heck my Friend has already gone through 3 Xbox 360s and is on his 4th.

#21 Posted by ultimate-k (2348 posts) -

A better Find me might be.

Find a PC that cost $300 7seven years ago, has had no upgrades and can run that game.

muffin200

A PC from 7 years ago, could actually run games in naitive 1080p. Didn't consoles back then cost like $599 anyway?

#22 Posted by freedomfreak (39120 posts) -

[QUOTE="muffin200"]

A better Find me might be.

Find a PC that cost $300 7seven years ago, has had no upgrades and can run that game.

ultimate-k

A PC from 7 years ago, could actually run games in naitive 1080p. Didn't consoles back then cost like $599 anyway?

The Ps3 did.
#23 Posted by GamerwillzPS (8530 posts) -

[QUOTE="ultimate-k"]

[QUOTE="muffin200"]

A better Find me might be.

Find a PC that cost $300 7seven years ago, has had no upgrades and can run that game.

freedomfreak

A PC from 7 years ago, could actually run games in naitive 1080p. Didn't consoles back then cost like $599 anyway?

The Ps3 did.

Thank you, Captain Obvious.

#24 Posted by freedomfreak (39120 posts) -

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"][QUOTE="ultimate-k"]

A PC from 7 years ago, could actually run games in naitive 1080p. Didn't consoles back then cost like $599 anyway?

GamerwillzPS

The Ps3 did.

Thank you, Captain Obvious.

Did you miss the part where he actually asked something?
#25 Posted by GamerwillzPS (8530 posts) -

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"] The Ps3 did.freedomfreak

Thank you, Captain Obvious.

Did you miss the part where he actually asked something?

Everybody knows that PS3 had a $599 price tag to begin with.

It's been discussed to hell here in SW.

#26 Posted by freedomfreak (39120 posts) -

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"][QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

Thank you, Captain Obvious.

GamerwillzPS

Did you miss the part where he actually asked something?

Everybody knows that PS3 had a $599 price tag to begin with.

It's been discussed to hell here in SW.

And that makes it forbidden to reply to someone asking it? don't think so.
#27 Posted by GamerwillzPS (8530 posts) -

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"] Did you miss the part where he actually asked something?freedomfreak

Everybody knows that PS3 had a $599 price tag to begin with.

It's been discussed to hell here in SW.

And that makes it forbidden to reply to someone asking it? don't think so.

CaptainObvious.jpg

#28 Posted by Inconsistancy (8091 posts) -

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"][QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

Everybody knows that PS3 had a $599 price tag to begin with.

It's been discussed to hell here in SW.

GamerwillzPS

And that makes it forbidden to reply to someone asking it? don't think so.

--stupid picture--

So if someone asks a question, and the answer is obvious to 'you', it therefor must be obvious to everyone and whoever answers is Capt. Obvious?

#29 Posted by freedomfreak (39120 posts) -
Didn't expect anything else. Moving on.
#30 Posted by Michael0134567 (28651 posts) -
[QUOTE="freedomfreak"]Didn't expect anything else. Moving on.

Lol Will.
#31 Posted by GamerwillzPS (8530 posts) -

lol you guys.

SW as usual.

#32 Posted by freedomfreak (39120 posts) -

lol you guys.

SW as usual.

GamerwillzPS
Tell me about it.
#33 Posted by BlbecekBobecek (2685 posts) -

If you are referring to technical quality of the texture (i.e. resolution), your task is probably impossible to accomplish since consoles dont have enough RAM for such high res textures. Console textures therefore would probably look a bit more blurry.

Was there a point you wanted to prove, or did you really just want us to find you a picture?

#34 Posted by mrfrosty151986 (526 posts) -

:D

#35 Posted by AmazonTreeBoa (16745 posts) -

The detail:shock:

mrfrosty151986
Show me a console gamer that even gives a sh!t.
#36 Posted by straightedge_X (737 posts) -
I still don't understand the point of this thread. PC fanboys around here seem like they're desperate to prove something. Whether it's to everyone else, or to themselves I'm not quite sure of.
#37 Posted by mrfrosty151986 (526 posts) -
[QUOTE="mrfrosty151986"]

The detail:shock:

AmazonTreeBoa
Show me a console gamer that even gives a sh!t.

You do for posting that comment, especially swearing too...... :lol:
#39 Posted by Badosh (12727 posts) -
[QUOTE="mrfrosty151986"] You do for posting that comment, especially swearing too...... :lol:

An ellipsis is three periods, not whatever you did. Also, last time I checked Amazon is more of a PC gamer.
#40 Posted by nameless12345 (15125 posts) -

[QUOTE="mrfrosty151986"]

:D

asdfasdf

Inconsistancy

bullets

The texture's so good that the shell casings are 2d!

So?

Modern games are still rather low-poly.

Crisp texture > blocky 3D model, tbh.

Bring on voxels if you want full 3D graphics...

#41 Posted by Inconsistancy (8091 posts) -

[QUOTE="Inconsistancy"]

[QUOTE="mrfrosty151986"]

:D

asdfasdf

nameless12345

bullets

The texture's so good that the shell casings are 2d!

So?

Modern games are still rather low-poly.

Crisp texture > blocky 3D model, tbh.

Bring on voxels if you want full 3D graphics...

Voxels, why? Then you're going to have stupid little square bullets, unless you use a quadrillion voxels to define one casing instead of a 96 poly one.

#42 Posted by nameless12345 (15125 posts) -

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Inconsistancy"]

bullets

The texture's so good that the shell casings are 2d!

Inconsistancy

So?

Modern games are still rather low-poly.

Crisp texture > blocky 3D model, tbh.

Bring on voxels if you want full 3D graphics...

Voxels, why? Then you're going to have stupid little square bullets, unless you use a quadrillion voxels to define one casing instead of a 30~ poly one.

Voxels aren't geometry limited so a quadrillion voxels would be possible if you had a beefy CPU and lots of RAM.

They don't make any use of GPU acceleration, tho, and that's also the reason why they haven't established themselves.

But with modern GPUs supporting GPGPU, they could be used to render voxels too.

#43 Posted by Rocker6 (13358 posts) -

Comparing textures from a game that can use 2gb of vram to consoles with a grand total of 512. Who will win!?Inconsistancy

This...

What a boring and overused flame bait, please, find some new material...

#44 Posted by straightedge_X (737 posts) -

[QUOTE="Inconsistancy"]Comparing textures from a game that can use 2gb of vram to consoles with a grand total of 512. Who will win!?Rocker6

This...

What a boring and overused flame bait, please, find some new material...

This. Post something about corrupt mainstream media.
#45 Posted by Caseytappy (2131 posts) -

Foilage on the OP pic looks horrible though :?

#46 Posted by clone01 (24497 posts) -

Not a single post with pictures of Uncharted, Gears or Killzone, Are console sheep finally learning?

mrfrosty151986
Who cares, captain obvious?
#47 Posted by AktionJakson (337 posts) -

Attention people:

Please attempt to learn more than the word "textures" when describing the graphics of games, because here for example there is more going on then simply having the game display a high res texture. Consoles are perfectly capable of outputting high res textures in the right situations, but what you're also seeing in this particular screenshot is features of DX11 called tessellation and parallax occlusion mapping.

I hate reading this forum because nobody seems to know what they're talking about!

#49 Posted by AmazonTreeBoa (16745 posts) -
[QUOTE="AmazonTreeBoa"][QUOTE="mrfrosty151986"]

The detail:shock:

mrfrosty151986
Show me a console gamer that even gives a sh!t.

You do for posting that comment, especially swearing too...... :lol:

I am a hermit you clueless dumbass, so try again. Like I said, show me a console gamer that even gives a sh!t. You can't because they don't. Also, your reply leads me to believe you aren't to bright seeing that ignorance was the best response you could come up with.
#50 Posted by JasonDarksavior (9325 posts) -
Didn't you know? Blurred textures make it more cinematic!funsohng
OMG! Since when??