Discussion in 'Games' started by Ravenas, Jan 18, 2008.
Crysis coming to PS3, not Xbox 360
the 8 cores should help it to give out good frame rates. 3 core arent enough
lol, that is soo fanboy thing to say.
I don't even own a console. But hardware wise Xbox 360 is a more powerful console. Secondly the PS3 does not have 8 core, it has 1 core and 7 SPEs.
ha..thats why the ps3 caps at 30 fps and the xbox at 60.
good to know but i always said ps3 is the best but still i go wiht a xbox360
but i love boht
By all means, buy the console you feel has the better games. Out of curiosity though why do you feel that "PS3 is the best" - just wondering?
I have a PS3 and i can't wait for this. But the whole 8 core thing is BS, my Intel C2D Dual core CPU is more powerful then the cell or any console CPU. I still can't wait for it because then i can actually play it the way it should be played and not all laggy and ugly.
LMAO, 8 cores, thats some funny sh!t
Crysis on the PC will be nothing like PS3. Heck for the 99% who played Crysis on the PC was nothing like what most home PC's were capable of. Therefore a lose, lose situation all around
Oh wait, the game wasn't fun at all (for me).
Well least with the ps3 we might see Crysis run smoothly and look great instead of looking average n running slow as cus we dont have the hypothetical super future pc that can run it.
The cell processor is good.It'll take some time to shine though. Even the four cores of a quad aren't utilised properly. Hardware wise ps3 is more advanced(it was released after the 360). Give it more time.
But heck IBM still wins it makes the proccy's for all 3 consoles
mine runs crysis great and looks great to and my computer isnt even top of the line
Good for you
that link seems fishy. It doesnt suprise me that it came from a PS site with the wording they used. I think if it came out for console the graphics and physics in the game would have to be brought back alot, down to the point were it wouldnt look like crysis anymore. And then the game wouldnt be CRYSIS. Without all the eyecandy and nice effects I seen that game wasnt that special, rated on gameplay alone it was kinda boring.
30FPS cap is BS. How can AAA titles achieve 60FPS at full 1080p, while others (EA) cannot. Just tells you the EA has poor coders. As for Crysis coming to the ps3, i think its still a rumor.
what rez are you running at??
that information is on a website called "playstation universe"
and noone thinks this could just be said to hope that the ps3 comes up to challange what the 360 has done.
To put it into perspective, I originally played Crysis on a single core A64 @ 2.4Gghz with 1GB RAM, and an X800 card. I had everything at minimum settings @ 800x600. Guess what? It was still the most amazing looking game I'd ever seen and it looked better than any game graphically on either console (except for COD4).
The PS3 has something similar to a 7900GTX inside it, as well as a processor that will kick the shit out of a single core athlon. The only concern is one of RAM. The PS3 has 256mb XDR system RAM and 256mb gDDR3 RAM (I believe) of video RAM. That will be the struggle. However, after playing through Crysis and FarCry, doubting the capabilities of Crytek would be extremely silly and naive. Unless of course they dump the port onto some other developer, in which case we can only hope for a decent (not amazing) game.
well thats something, when i tried to play the game at 1280 x 800 (to try to run maxed out settings) I thought the game looked terrible compared to 1680x1050. And honetly it doesnt matter, it will never be as good on console as it is on PC
NVidia has said countless times that the graphics card in the PS3 can't be compared to any graphics card on the market. It has its own custom architecture. Everything about it is completely different. So, I have to disagree with you 100%.
i own neither.. and i probably never will. im pretty much done with sony...sans my favorite headphones. and until xbox sorts out its reliability issues. until then, i will play wii and pc.
the fps cap was just something that was touched on in some articles. true or not, there were some games where ps3 failed to deliver smooth rates consistently.
I played the demo of crysis, graphics impressed me for about an hour and on my X1950Pro @ 1280*1024 I could set all details to high and get around 30FPS. That said, after the inital hour the pretty factor wore off and it offered very little new over farcry, and I found the gameplay to be somewhat trite and very dull.
I agree, the gamplay was nothing special, but the graphics were amazing on my 8800 ultra.
*sigh* I long for the days of decent gameplay. Look at Painkiller, it didnt really do anything new, but gameplay was just damn fun.
On that note, Serious Sam!
Separate names with a comma.