http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=es&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=es&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vandal.net%2Fnoticia%2F52302%2Fcrytek-muestra-crysis-2-en-playstation-3%2F

Attachments:

20101221151614_1.jpg [ 151.92 KiB | Viewed 565 times ]

Ewww Its just as bad as the 360 version...

Image quality is horrible.

It looks much better than that picture. Honestly. And yes, it was from that presentation.

Beautiful screens.

Beautiful screens.
I hope you're kidding.

What you’re looking at is the first ever in-game Crysis 2 PS3 screenshot.

We have to say it looks pretty good, check it out here. Taken from Cryteks 3D papers, looks great for a console version with proper lighting. We will update on the AA soon.
Yep, it does look excellent, what do you guys think? Tell us about it in the comments section.

Thanks Praveer!
http://www.gamersmint.com/first-ps3-screenshot-of-crysis-2

It looks pretty good！

for console really does looks amazing
dont see anything else close to that

/merged topics

It looks horrible Hope it's the quality of the pic itself and not the quality of the graphics. The PS3 as far more capable than that.

Looks grainy. Still buying it for PC lol.

I prefer not to have to deal with any potential hackers ruining my day in the future. I'm buying it for PS3.

I prefer not to have to deal with any potential hackers ruining my day in the future. I'm buying it for PS3.

Punkbuster.

Punkbuster is the core example of fail anti-cheat. I remember the Longpoke hack that devastated C1 for the first six months that the game came out. Punkbuster was absolutely ineffective in all aspects of its design because it would fail at stopping hackers. It still has problems to this very day with Crysis Wars regarding hackers.

Punkbuster is the primary reason I stopped playing any PC games that used it. Punkbuster is utter garbage as an anti-cheat software.

I'm not sure how the hell VAC works, but it seems to be doing a hell of a better job than Punkbuster, because I have never seen a wallhacker or aimbotter in Valve games since the early days of Steam and Counter-Strike 1.6 in the random servers that I join. I could hop onto CW right now and find one server out of twenty that harbors overt hackers.

PC first-person shooters? No thanks. I'll move onto a system that is more closed and difficult to develop hacks for. I could give 2 poops about mods, as long as I don't have to deal with griefers and hacker scum.

Hmm I never had a problem. Oh well =)

I'll stick with the PC version (been planning that all along), besides, I can't borrow a Ps3 all the time.

That is one beautiful screenie. Don't worry about the graniness, everyone. Games don't do that. Jpegs do. Just look at their company logo on the bottom-right!

It looks horrible Hope it's the quality of the pic itself and not the quality of the graphics. The PS3 as far more capable than that.
I cant understand why people saying this console shot looks bad.
It looks fantastic.
I never see this details like the sunrays in any other shooter.
And the PS3 cant do more.... Look at Killzone 3, looks like Killzone 2 with some particle mods. Nothing more.

It has been said in several interviews that the console versions will be "almost" indentical.
And i was totally right about ps3 gamers claiming that crysis 2 looks not as good as Uncharted 2 or Killzone.
( Though Its a very early judgement and a very half baked one too, because theres only one picture so far)
You can read it in the comment section from the article about the "first ps3 pic" someone posted earkier in this thread. Ps3 exclusives arent as technically great as most people think. Or how many of you checked every texture and every tearing-effect and every low AA edge in these games? I have anolysed Uncharted 2, Killzone 3 and Heavy rain... and i can tell the games are just dazzlers compared to Crysis. These games mask their medium- and low-end textures with an excessive use of shaders and blurred backgrounds to keep the draw distance short.
The "real" (non upscaled) resolution isnt more than 720p and aa and af are almost not existing.
So the PS3 isnt an unlimited hardware power monster as these gamers think and as Sony makes them believe.
I think the ps3 is up to 10% more performance than the 360.. but only if the game gets optimised for the complex cell structure. Because even the cell cant compensate the remaining weak hardware components.
If you want the game to look "way" better than the 360/ps3 version.. you guys have to spent 500-800 € for a Pc.

It has been said in several interviews that the console versions will be "almost" indentical.
And i was totally right about ps3 gamers claiming that crysis 2 looks not as good as Uncharted 2 or Killzone.
( Though Its a very early judgement and a very half baked one too, because theres only one picture so far)
You can read it in the comment section from the article about the "first ps3 pic" someone posted earkier in this thread. Ps3 exclusives arent as technically great as most people think. Or how many of you checked every texture and every tearing-effect and every low AA edge in these games? I have anolysed Uncharted 2, Killzone 3 and Heavy rain... and i can tell the games are just dazzlers compared to Crysis. These games mask their medium- and low-end textures with an excessive use of shaders and blurred backgrounds to keep the draw distance short.
The "real" (non upscaled) resolution isnt more than 720p and aa and af are almost not existing.
So the PS3 isnt an unlimited hardware power monster as these gamers think and as Sony makes them believe.
I think the ps3 is up to 10% more performance than the 360.. but only if the game gets optimised for the complex cell structure. Because even the cell cant compensate the remaining weak hardware components.
If you want the game to look "way" better than the 360/ps3 version.. you guys have to spent 500-800 € for a Pc.
I couldn't say it better. The Console-Wars have to end now. D:

Soo true Thx bigboulder.
But the sony fanboys will never accept that! and that makes me sad..

Crytek said that they are going to utilize the full power of both the cell and gpu of the ps3. Also maybe crytek will utilize the cell for aa. Don't forget ps3 has better memory than the 360 xdr & gddr3 vs gddr3. Also the edram is useless for higher resolution games so I wouldn't count it too much.


also here is a little comparison video of ps3 vs 360 using cryengine 3 for both versions

Indeed big boulder, no console game has beaten crysis 1, and never will until next generation. no matter how many wet dreams ps3 fanboys have in the meantime. Doesn't mean uncharted 2 isn't pretty of course, but only for a console game.

The one big advantage for the ps3 is physics which the ps3 has more of an architectural advantage then the xbox 360. It even comes on par with the pc when you see it that way.

dmankilla, you've never seen gpu physics in action have you?

The ps3 does indeed have more processing power than the xbox 360 for physics. however, does it have 2.4-3 terFLOPS kicking around? Nowhere near.