Be relatively easy and not particularly expensive to create a machine 3 or 4 times more powerful then PS3 and 360. Even cramming in something like a radeon 5750 class GPU would provide considerable more performance for little cost- assuming nintendo compete @ 720p.
Of course, that would not actually compete with a cutting edge successor to PS3 and 360 in 18 months, if you expect them to use a high end GPU of the time, and deliver native 1080p games.
This stra...
When the N64 started to get games that required the RAM expansion pak, then many people became extremely annoyed. I remember the uproar from people moaning over perfect dark, where it was required to have the full game experience.
It was a mistake back then, and it would be a mistake now.
Not to mention that besides basic upgrades like additional memory, much else would be more difficult for users to replace themselves, and would almost certainly affect warra...
You bought a console. Don't complain about graphics in comparison to PC versions. It looks stupid. PC gamers have paid for the hardware and gained the knowledge needed to game on PC thus earned the right to better visuals.
Face reality JohnnyBadfinger- from the footage we have seen the PC version will be hugely superior to the console version, even without seeing the console version. Why? Simply because nothing on console presently looks close to it, not the best they hav...
Rare seemed to have a great deal of creative freedom under Nintendo, which was significantly strangled when Microsoft became their masters.
Maybe it would have been a different story if their first Microsoft game did not flop so badly commercially- Grabbed by the Ghoulies. Indeed, said game will probably go down in history as their first flop, after a virtually impeccable record under Nintendo it was an inauspicious start. Although GBTG was by no means a terrible game, it had...
The style and environment of the original Crysis would not lend itself well to a console. All that foliage and geometry, in huge draw distances and open worlds....it is telling that Crytek closed down the world massively when they brought Crysis 2 to consoles, and removed all the destructability etc
The kind of features that just eat up memory for fun. Crysis could easily use over 1GB video memory alone, and a bunch load more in system RAM.
This is a good game. I have really enjoyed the single player.
However.
There are reasonable points here if you have played the other two titles, which i have. It is just the city settings and hardware constraints have altered the way the game is, becoming less open and less destructible, so it limits your options somewhat. I found that being stealthy is much more effective and often the only way through in Crysis 2. Skirting the worst of the battles is someti...
How much do you think it might relate to developers asking for more space....?
What about the expected announcement of a new GTA game this year? If any game needs every kilobyte on the disc its that game. GTA4 was one of the first titles to barely fit on 360's disc format, it had to be squeezed and compressed to fit.
Microsoft know losing GTA to be a PS3 exclusive because of disc space would be a huge disaster.
Twas obvious to me that the texture resolutions were lower after just a few minutes of playing the game. Walking up to billboards or looking at number plates, getting close to brick walls etc made that very clear.
The game is kind of like Crysis with all the settings maxed, improved lighting, but texture setting set to medium.
Course this is why the game runs better! There is no wide use of 2048 x 2048 textures like the first two games- most of them are proba...
I would say most PC gamers have consoles too @ Bloodynapkin, and gamefly rentals or whatever it is called is not available outside the states, so your point is kinda moot there for the other 6.6 billion people on the planet or the people that want to BUY their games.....
I am really unsure why you just ranted about PC gamers in this topic. Honestly i have no idea whatsoever. PC gamers enjoy their PC games, the wide array of titles that are out there, as well as the higher pro...
It does look good on PS3 but in all honestly it only runs 1024 x 768, and its performance is less than perfect. The likes of KZ3 and Uncharted 2 run 1280 x 720 and Uncharted 2 in particular, performance is absolutely rock solid. The game just doesn't drop frames...
You could argue that Crysis 2 looks better than these games, but even if that is true, you have to admit that it has come at the cost of resolution AND framerate consistancy.
Is why i admire U...
It is of course double the price but its also at least quadruple the performance as a gaming machine zootang. Its also a fully functioning computer with a copy of the latest windows slapped on it. Multi format games are also on average 10-15 pounds a pop cheaper.
I can see why people would buy a console for its initial lower cost and for its simplicity, but nonetheless, a PC for games costing that amount and having that much performance is an attractive proposition. Even if i...
Or- How to empty your wallet faster than throwing it down the toilet and flushing lol
Seriously the only reason you need that setup would be if you have trip monitors for a grand total res of 7680x1600 and 3D vision.
The fact that three good 25 x 16 monitors on their own would set you back something like $3k means you have a hardcore PC addiction :-)
@ zootang
You can get a fairly good PC for 600 pounds these days. Certainly something that would run Crysis 2 far beyond the 720p/20-30 frames a second range the consoles do. You can find good guides online. This for example still works fairly well today.
http://www.tomshardware.co....
This is about 360-380 quid in UK prices. Toss in a...
PS3 gives away a bit of resolution but it does get back for that some instances of better effects. In either case the article identifies major, performance crushing areas of both versions anyhows.
I was pleasantly surprised how well it runs on PC, higher end stuff like 6970s and GTX570s have no problems with it on extreme and 1920 x 1080, most of the time averaging 60 frames a second and up if you have no vsync or a 120hz monitor like moi.
You can bet this to...
:-) thanks saved me the trouble of checking back to see if it was up. Both seem ok. PS3 is slower but Crysis was always one of those games you could play with a slower framerate even on PC because of the high quality motion blur.
24FPS was enough, more is obviously favourable but as long as the game is not dipping below that much then it is perfectly acceptable for a console game.
If you get on the site just post up the numbers here please? No doubt the site will be down for hour after hour and slow.....
Looks to me like PS3 sacrifices a little resolution against 360 so it can run assets closer to the PC version. It certainly looks more like the PC version and shares more of the effects. This can only really mean it is a tad better, PC is the definitive one the consoles are trying to ape so closest wins.
It will be performance however that really matters, so as long as they both run fine then that is what counts. Overall the differences are (as per usual) negligible and extre...
Its only tech BS if you are a complete nitwit and cannot understand it :-)
Framerates?
Speaking of the devil, Shift has twice as long to render a frame compared to GT5. That is, it runs only 30 frames a second and not 60 GT5 is designed at. Its also a 1280 x 720 game on console, whereas GT5 runs up to 1280 x 1080. That is 50 percent more resolution GT5 has to render.
GT5 is looking at a different aspect, faster framerates for faster response like the sim that it is, and higher resolution for crisper image quality. Shift could argua...
Its been FOUR bloody years since Episode 2 this October. :-(
However just recently i started Half Life 2 again with the latest fakefactory mod and it looks wonderful. Absolutely dying to play Episode 3 and finish this story arc. The amount of times Vavle have disappointed and frustrated me with announcements not relating to this