Brewology

You're right: Most games that focus too heavily on graphics usually fail in other sections of the game. But, that's the same thing in most games. If you take some FPS's, sometimes the developers worry about the weapons too much and the level design is crap. For a good game, it needs to be ballanced and every aspect of the game needs to be appreciated and looked at and weighed in. Of course, to any rule, there are exceptions...

since we are talking about Graphics here anyone think LA Noire will set the standard for realism in games now?

^ lol

But really, I'd like to say I'm much more interested in the actual game play than graphics but in Nintendo's case the graphics are just wayyyy too behind for me to adequately enjoy the game. I mean I'd rather play a game on my cell phone than any "current" gen nintendo game.

On a side note, anyone else let down on Crysis 2's graphics for the 360 compared to the pc version? I'm sure it will stay as a sort've "benchmark" for gaming pc's as well as FFXIV now imo, but the 360 demo just wasn't what I expected. Im going to assume the ps3 version looks pretty awesome though?

It's not much of a letdown ace, since we already know PCs can handle a LOT more that the Xbox can, what were people really expecting, the Xbox is a six year old console... Seriously.

PC games have better graphic depending on ur graphic card
me n my bro both play SC2 but myn better graphic then he is
my laptop have duel 1Gig ATI radeon HD 4870 with crossfire graphic card
with i7 processer and 8gig ram
i forgot what he haves lol but his is a PC
iv playd L4D on PC and Xbox and PC is better on graphics

Play Cysis maxed out, you can easily with that rig. Or even better, play Just Cause 2. No current console supports DX10 either, which is what makes Crysis so amazing to look at.

i did lol

Well yea I know, but Crysis 1 still looked better on my computer which only had a 8600GT 1GB, 2.5Ghz Dual Core AMD X2, and 2GB of ram. That was a good little bit ago, and I knew the 360 version couldn't touch the PC version yet it was still a let down for me at least...

There there ace, at least you still have 1080p... Oh wait, that's PS3, sorry.

I'm kind of surprised a 4870 could run Crysis maxed. What resolution?

I am kind of known around here for having a good PC. I have a quad phenom II @ 3.6ghz each core, 8gb DDR2 800mhz RAM, and a 4890 1gb graphics card. The 4890 is a beast, truly. Glad I went with this one instead of waiting.

I can play Crysis 1 and Crysis Warhead at absolute maximum graphics (all enthusiast settings) and with full motion blur at a resolution of 2048 x 1152. It's a mind-f*** playing such a graphically intense game, but Crysis itself falls short, in my opinion, as being too easy. I will admit, however, that the enemy A.I. is absolutely miserable in Crysis most of the time, so if tweaked, that could make things much better.



Crysis 2 simply cannot run on the 360 or PS3 well. My guess is that it will be locked at 30 or 45fps with low to medium graphic settings when compared with PC. The PS3, even though it has more power, is much like the 360 in the sense that they both have 256mb of graphics memory. If you're a PC kind of person and you've tried playing Crysis on multiple rigs for benchmarking/ testing purposes, as I have, let me tell you one thing: Crysis chews up graphics memory faster than BKF downs whoppers... and that's saying something. Having only 256mb of graphics RAM for our current generation games is appalling, in my opinion. I say so not because 256mb is necessarily bad, but it's already "behind the times" from day one. Before the new systems came out, I had already had a PC with SEVEN AND A HALF GIGS more system RAM and FOUR TIMES MORE graphics memory. Not only that, my graphics memory is two generations BETTER and runs at higher frequencies than even the PS3 memory which is better than 360. The stats for that are below.

256MB XDR Main RAM @3.2GHz -CPU
256MB GDDR3 VRAM @700MHz-GPU

-DarkPacMan77-

I gave up my 4890 1gb for a 335m, a huge drop in performance, but I can handle it, I don't game much anymore anyway (the last few weeks being the exception) I got a good chunk-a-change for my rig in the end, so I'm happy. That card gave me a good year and a half of service, which is quite alright.

Dang, sad to hear diehard. Guess it's not so bad if you don't game so much anymore, but my 4890 rig beat out Q's rig in the Final Fantasy 14 benchmark test, and he paid about $600 more (at least) for his rig than mine, so I'm floating by pretty happy still.

-DarkPacMan77-

I think I paid $359.00 Canadian for my 4890 when it first came out. Decent considering $1.00 CAD was around $0.84 American then.

Is that why my Xbox looks like sh*t when I have it set to 1080p?

It looks better at 720p no sh*t lol

@pun haha

I know the memory is pretty terrible in the consoles, but for $300 I guess you can't expect too much. Aside from the graphics the gameplay fell short as well, but it was a multiplayer demo so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. For the demo though I felt like I was playing the first Bad Company demo at first, which isn't a good thing.