Crysis 2, do we still think best looking game on consoles?

I got them from here :http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=419413&page=11

Ehh, I don't know, I've been playing the beta and the graphics are definitely of the best on consoles but not the undisputed best on consoles like it was hyped by Crytek and on SW,

and we havent seen the PS3 version either.

what do other people think

Bad pic and on top of that it was taken from the MP

SP looks way better. as for online those graphics make it mp

graphic king

The pics looks ok to me, i belive that u2, kz3 and also GoW3 are going to look better. we have to wait

Bad pic and on top of that it was taken from the MP

SP looks way better. as for online those graphics make it mp

graphic king

Medic_B

After playing the MP demo, I have to say it looks quite bad. I expected quite a lot better, at least from the graphics. Oh well. Still is a ton of fun.

I think, that it's going to look better than the current console graphics king, Uncharted 2. But it's going to fall short of killzone 3.

These are my own direct feed captures. But really screens are not a good representation of how the game will look on your HDTV. I've seen many games that look horrible in screens UC2 being one of them, but when you actually play it, it looks fantastic. Now I do agree that the graphics were over hyped, though I have not seen any SP footage. But still I dont think the game will end up looking better than Killzone 3.

MP wont be graphics king thats for sure.Free Radical just made Crysis 2 look like COD but SP will be different story.Those captures IMO are a bit meh because its very compressed so here are newer few.

MP wont be graphics king thats for sure.Free Radical just made Crysis 2 look like COD but SP will be different story.Those captures IMO are a bit meh because its very compressed so here are newer few.Bus-A-Bus

so then it's confirmed that multiplayer is very downgraded from the campaign?

I've always thought Killzone 3 looks better. I just want to see the PC version maxed so I can stare in awe at how amazing it looks

no way after seeing the 360 footageKevinButlerVP

[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

MP wont be graphics king thats for sure.Free Radical just made Crysis 2 look like COD but SP will be different story.Those captures IMO are a bit meh because its very compressed so here are newer few.theuncharted34

so then it's confirmed that multiplayer is very downgraded from the campaign?

Not that but i think that desing of the MP maps are faaar inferior than SP.In comparison with SP there is MUCH less decals in environment,not much light sources,aniamations are stiffier etc.In SP there is ALOT of fire,smoke,burning cars,water flowing from tops of buildings,god rays etc.It all makes up for better looking game than MP.

For example this map...Its very badly designed.LOD is quite bad because you can see as far as your eyes go but there are only 3D boxes of buildings with repetitive low res textures patched on them,a bit stupid design decision.Look at latest KZ3 mp map...Designers carifully placed streets and buildings so that you can't have view like in RDR but you will get better visuals here on the other hand thats not the case.I already read in one mag preview that MP was worse looking ...

Here is one example from KZ3...

Notice the rocks on the right edge of screen that look low poly and boxish?Well GG carefully covered everything with smoke and fog and it looks nice and not distracting while Crytek UK placed the same like boxes of buildings on blue sky and lets you look at them while they clearly look unimpressive,consoles just dont have enough power to render alot of complex geometry.

Given that the impression most console gamers have of their games, either being bullshots or a upscaled image at a distance, I don't think they are very good at judging a games quality from direct feed shots. Chances are, they will have a false impression of what games look like on consoles; and will be over criticial when seeing direct feed of any game. Because it doesn't match the perceived impression created from promotional material and distance viewing.

I am so disappointed by this demo. The graphics are ok, i guess... But the gameplay, it feels so slow, so streamlined! They say the big deal about the game is the nano-suit but they have stripped it down into mediocrity. I mean, what is the big deal now? In power mode you run as fast as any CoD guy, leap the same heights as master chief and is as strong as any other game with this dumb one-punch kill mechanincs. There is really no difference, the nano-suit is pointless.

No I played the demo today very disappointing.

For a console game it looks good, but Its easy to see where Crytek cut some corners. Im getting the PC version, but the console version looks amazing "relatively speaking"

Wow they really ned to fix up the buildings in the distance :?

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

MP wont be graphics king thats for sure.Free Radical just made Crysis 2 look like COD but SP will be different story.Those captures IMO are a bit meh because its very compressed so here are newer few.Bus-A-Bus

so then it's confirmed that multiplayer is very downgraded from the campaign?

Not that but i think that desing of the MP maps are faaar inferior than SP.In comparison with SP there is MUCH less decals in environment,not much light sources,aniamations are stiffier etc.In SP there is ALOT of fire,smoke,burning cars,water flowing from tops of buildings,god rays etc.It all makes up for better looking game than MP.

For example this map...Its very badly designed.LOD is quite bad because you can see as far as your eyes go but there are only 3D boxes of buildings with repetitive low res textures patched on them,a bit stupid design decision.Look at latest KZ3 mp map...Designers carifully placed streets and buildings so that you can't have view like in RDR but you will get better visuals here on the other hand thats not the case.I already read in one mag preview that MP was worse looking ...

Here is one example from KZ3...

Notice the rocks on the right edge of screen that look low poly and boxish?Well GG carefully covered everything with smoke and fog and it looks nice and not distracting while Crytek UK placed the same like boxes of buildings on blue sky and lets you look at them while they clearly look unimpressive,consoles just dont have enough power to render alot of complex geometry.

that's what I was thinking too. The buildings look very boxy and noticable in these multiplayer video's. and I see lower res textures than in the single player trailers, and overall it's just less impressive. The campaign should look up to par with killzone 3 though.

I can't wait to see this game on my pc :D

Consoler: graphics graphics graphics

Me: why don't you get a PC if you like graphics?

Consoler: WTF, what does that have to do with anything, you can keep your "tech"

Me: I'm going to system wars to rip on consolers

I am so jealous of those who can play it, knew I shouldn't have left my 360 at home - and then I have to endure a painfully long download (how big is it?). I'll just have to do more 50 lap races round Daytona :P :(Ravensmash

1.8 gigs

[QUOTE="Ravensmash"]I am so jealous of those who can play it, knew I shouldn't have left my 360 at home - and then I have to endure a painfully long download (how big is it?). I'll just have to do more 50 lap races round Daytona :P :(Fizzman

1.8 gigs

If we are going by the demo, then absolutely NOT. Killzone 3 is miles ahead in terms of MP graphics. Crysis 2 looks like a disaster online.

If we are going by the demo, then absolutely NOT. Killzone 3 is miles ahead in terms of MP graphics. Crysis 2 looks like a disaster online.

Blazerdt47

The game looks great -- the water is very impressive -- but I don't think it will be the best looking game on consoles. It'll be in the top five, but I think Gears of War 3 will take that title.

The game looks great -- the water is very impressive -- but I don't think it will be the best looking game on consoles. It'll be in the top five, but I think Gears of War 3 will take that title.

iAtrocious

Gears 3? No way in hell an Unreal Engine game is getting a GFX king crown. Even with this "updated" UE3.5, it still looks like it falls short from what I've seen of KZ3, UC3 and Crysis 2. It still looks great, though.

It'll probably be between Killzone 3, Crysis 2, Uncharted 3 and Rage, I reckon.

[QUOTE="iAtrocious"]

The game looks great -- the water is very impressive -- but I don't think it will be the best looking game on consoles. It'll be in the top five, but I think Gears of War 3 will take that title.

BigBoss154

Gears 3? No way in hell an Unreal Engine game is getting a GFX king crown. Even with this "updated" UE3.5, it still looks like it falls short from what I've seen of KZ3, UC3 and Crysis 2

It'll probably be between Killzone 3, Crysis 2, Uncharted 3 and Rage, I reckon.

this.

I think for the underdog category though resistance 3 and gears of war 3 still look mighty impressive.

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

MP wont be graphics king thats for sure.Free Radical just made Crysis 2 look like COD but SP will be different story.Those captures IMO are a bit meh because its very compressed so here are newer few.Bus-A-Bus

so then it's confirmed that multiplayer is very downgraded from the campaign?

Not that but i think that desing of the MP maps are faaar inferior than SP.In comparison with SP there is MUCH less decals in environment,not much light sources,aniamations are stiffier etc.In SP there is ALOT of fire,smoke,burning cars,water flowing from tops of buildings,god rays etc.It all makes up for better looking game than MP.

For example this map...Its very badly designed.LOD is quite bad because you can see as far as your eyes go but there are only 3D boxes of buildings with repetitive low res textures patched on them,a bit stupid design decision.Look at latest KZ3 mp map...Designers carifully placed streets and buildings so that you can't have view like in RDR but you will get better visuals here on the other hand thats not the case.I already read in one mag preview that MP was worse looking ...

Here is one example from KZ3...

Notice the rocks on the right edge of screen that look low poly and boxish?Well GG carefully covered everything with smoke and fog and it looks nice and not distracting while Crytek UK placed the same like boxes of buildings on blue sky and lets you look at them while they clearly look unimpressive,consoles just dont have enough power to render alot of complex geometry.

I second this. KZ2 and KZ3 destroy crysis in visuals.

Until the game(s) get released, they will never be considered the best looking games on consoles.

The FINAL release of any game and us gamers experimenting with the game will prove true...

There is no way to declare a best looking game when a game isn't even finished. That said, I never thought the Crysis 2 console game stood a chance as the developer is untested on consoles.

I'll wait until March 22nd before I pass judgement on the graphics. I expect them to be as good if not better than Killzone 3, but there's really no point in judging them based off a multiplayer beta. The campaign is what you want to observe, graphic wise. Let's just wait.

Consoler: graphics graphics graphics

Me: why don't you get a PC if you like graphics?

Consoler: WTF, what does that have to do with anything, you can keep your "tech"

Me: I'm going to system wars to rip on consolers

haberman13

PC gamer: PCs are better because they destroy consoles graphically.

Me: How come the games PC gamers play the most often look much worse than alot of modern console games? Counterstrike, WoW, TF2, diablo 2, starcraft 2 etc.

PC gamer: wtf does that have to do with anything... Need moar SLI!

Me: Im going to system wars to rip on PC gamers.

Too much texture and shadow pop in but overall looks fantastic. Im expecting the final version to get rid of those problems.

[QUOTE="haberman13"]

Consoler: graphics graphics graphics

Me: why don't you get a PC if you like graphics?

Consoler: WTF, what does that have to do with anything, you can keep your "tech"

Me: I'm going to system wars to rip on consolers

markinthedark

PC gamer: PCs are better because they destroy consoles graphically.

Me: How come the games PC gamers play the most often look much worse than alot of modern console games? Counterstrike, WoW, TF2, diablo 2, starcraft 2 etc.

PC gamer: wtf does that have to do with anything... Need moar SLI!

Me: Im going to system wars to rip on PC gamers.

not sure if serious. also, team fortress 2 may look better than all console games when @ max settings and running 8xMSAA and 1080p.

Not sure why you listed starcraft 2 as it beats all console games graphically.

These screenshots are MP, SP will look better but I'm not sure if it's the [console]graphic king or not.

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

MP wont be graphics king thats for sure.Free Radical just made Crysis 2 look like COD but SP will be different story.Those captures IMO are a bit meh because its very compressed so here are newer few.Bus-A-Bus

so then it's confirmed that multiplayer is very downgraded from the campaign?

Not that but i think that desing of the MP maps are faaar inferior than SP.In comparison with SP there is MUCH less decals in environment,not much light sources,aniamations are stiffier etc.In SP there is ALOT of fire,smoke,burning cars,water flowing from tops of buildings,god rays etc.It all makes up for better looking game than MP.

For example this map...Its very badly designed.LOD is quite bad because you can see as far as your eyes go but there are only 3D boxes of buildings with repetitive low res textures patched on them,a bit stupid design decision.Look at latest KZ3 mp map...Designers carifully placed streets and buildings so that you can't have view like in RDR but you will get better visuals here on the other hand thats not the case.I already read in one mag preview that MP was worse looking ...

Here is one example from KZ3...

Notice the rocks on the right edge of screen that look low poly and boxish?Well GG carefully covered everything with smoke and fog and it looks nice and not distracting while Crytek UK placed the same like boxes of buildings on blue sky and lets you look at them while they clearly look unimpressive,consoles just dont have enough power to render alot of complex geometry.

...

[QUOTE="markinthedark"]

[QUOTE="haberman13"]

Consoler: graphics graphics graphics

Me: why don't you get a PC if you like graphics?

Consoler: WTF, what does that have to do with anything, you can keep your "tech"

Me: I'm going to system wars to rip on consolers

theuncharted34

PC gamer: PCs are better because they destroy consoles graphically.

Me: How come the games PC gamers play the most often look much worse than alot of modern console games? Counterstrike, WoW, TF2, diablo 2, starcraft 2 etc.

PC gamer: wtf does that have to do with anything... Need moar SLI!

Me: Im going to system wars to rip on PC gamers.

not sure if serious. also, team fortress 2 may look better than all console games when @ max settings and running 8xMSAA and 1080p.

Not sure why you listed starcraft 2 as it beats all console games graphically.

really thismay look better than all console games? :|

and SC2 looks good from afar, but far from good. But even so... prior to SC2, SC1 was one of the most played PC games... and that beast was incredibly ugly.

EDIT: and i should also throw the witcher into the fray... also not very pleasing to the eyes.

I think lighting is quite nice.And gun models...and post processing.Lows are terrible art style,AF and stupid design of map.

Just tried the demo...terrible. Control lag, clunky, just bad. Talk about dissapointing. If I buy it at all it'll be on PC.

First off that's a tv shot. Second, the game looks better in motion. I haven't really seen any of the open areas yet but I am to believe that like Crysis 1, this is no corridor shooter.