» Wed Jul 29, 2009 2:26 pm
exactly that doesn't change what om saying and that the fact is the Xbox is higher resolution and doesn't need to be anti aliased so much thus better performance and a cleaner more crisp picture, while the PS3 and its "1024X720 (LESS 128 LINES) UPSCALED BY FRAMEBUFFER OF RSX TO 1280X720." is really not a good thing it effects the perfomance and picture and there is no need!
its just to make it appear worse than it actually is. the way they have stated that is trying to make it sound like a good thing for the PS3 and hiding the fact that it isn't.
I think your understanding of this situation is a little muddled.
Most games run at a minimum of 30 frames per second, which means the consoles hardware draws a frame (image) 30 times every second. Consoles are the same as film and TV. They create the illusion of a moving image by drawing many, still images, each one changing subtly different from the last, and displaying them in front of your eyes very quickly.
The amount of images a console can display per second is directly related to how powerful it's processing capabilities are. If you attempt to push the hardware too far, it takes more time for it to draw the image. Meaning you get less frames (images) per second. This means a slower, choppier looking game.
If you ran Crysis 2 on the PS3, as it does on the 360, you might (hypothetically) get 17-23 Frames per second. This would be unsatisfactory. You would notice the game looks choppy and slow. The moving image looks less smooth because there are less frames being displayed.
Crytek, to try and get a satisfactory number of frames per second out of the PS3 hardware, have chosen to render the image at a lower resolution. A lower image quality. Which means it puts less stress on those processors, so it can draw those frames more quickly. More frames per second, the smoother the moving image and gameplay.
At the same time, they may have elected to add more post-processing effects to try and make this lower image quality less noticeable.
So you see, the settings you are talking about changing, put more stress on the PS3's hardware. This means the PS3 would not be able to draw at least 30 frames (images) every second and you would get a slower looking, choopier game.
The reason why the 360 can do this and the PS3 cannot is because they technical way that hardware works is very different. Imagine trying to play the same song, but one instrument is a trumpet and one is a violin. If you know how to play the trumpet, it's going to sound great. But your Violin rendition will sound pretty bad.
And the PC, would be like a Trombone. Similar, but different. But the Violin again is a totally different type of hardware that has its own rules and methods of being played.
So when you take your song intended for Brass instruments and apply it to a woodwind one, you need to alter it to make it work right. If you forced the violin to play like a trumpet, it'd be bad. By lowering the resolution, Crytek is trying to make sure Crysis 2 sings an enjoyable tune.
And fanboys, this doesnn't mean the PS3 is "Less" just different. Some devs are GREAT with the Violin. Look at KillZone 3, Little Big Planet 2 and Uncharted 2. As I said, when they took the PS3 version of FFXIII and put it on the 360, the 360 version ran at a lower resolution. Cause a song meant for the Violin will too, sound crappy forced through a trumpet.
ANYways... I realise this is probably wall of texty and uber confusing and lame. But, I tried. lol