Killzone 3 vs. Crysis 2: Screenshot comparison

Games Aktuell has done a screenshot comparison between Killzone 3 and Crysis 2. Check these screenshots comparing the two visual blockbusters.

[LORD-PHOENIX]

im sorry but i dont even need to click the link to know this is unnecessary,or which game looks miles better

anyway in crysis im getting some terrible pop up and the re-spawn points are annoying,how can i re-spawn right infront of a enemy?

[FanboyPunisher]

Even better, when you turn around to go fight back across the map, 15-25 yards out from a side of the map people will spawn, causing for shitty game play thats more frustrating then fun.

[piroh]

another Exclusive vs. Multiplat comparison. i wonder which game is more beautiful...

[LORD-PHOENIX]

i will say graphics wise the games poor in comparison to cryteks hype machine,BUT the more im playing the more im getting into it, apart from respawn points im enjoying it

[vsr]

@ All Gamers

This proves only tech specs will NOT show a quality of game. The Skills of developer shows that.

Eg- U3 on PS3 trumps 95% of PC games
GOW / FF / MGS /GT all quality games showed on "inferior" PS2.

Developer Skills > Tech Specs

[nveenio]

I think that the two should be compared PS3 to PS3. It's stupid to pit a PS3 game against a PC game that fewer than 10% of PCs will be able to run at the level Crysis 2 has been shown at.

[DualConsoleOwner]

KZ3 looks miles better than Crysis 2 on console.

Man.. the difference is so big that even KZ2 looks far better than Crysis 2 console version.

[Kalipekona]

They look pretty close to me.

[WhiteNoise]

@vsr

"U3 on PS3 trumps 95% of PC games "

Rofl.

http://forums.n4g.com/tm.as...

@jammydude
"Asus G73JH "

lol

What is that, a laptop?

lol.

I don't know how to tell you this, but despite what they told you in the store, it isn't good. a 1.6ghz i7....mine is running at 3.84ghz and not only that, but it is much faster clock for clock with higher cache as well. aka your laptop is a POS.

[jammydude]

@whitenoise
Yup, it looks better than most of those screenshots for those games do too :)
At least I can admit it :P I'm not all high and mighty about my Asus G73JH
LMAO!
You really think that my laptop isn't good? xDDDDDDD
You're clueless.
2.8GHZ I7 CPU, 5870m graphics card, 8gb DDR3 memory...
Really?
No, really? AKA your mentality is a POS.
I can run Crysis with no mods with all settings @ very high @ 1920*1080 at 45-55 fps....

[geodood]

@Whitenoise
If you think that laptop is a "POS" then you're a f*cking idiot.
My mate has one and he can run Crysis in 1080p all very high with 4xAA with no lag spikes. The cruncher is that it costs £600. Just looked through your comment history and I think it's safe to say you spent at least £3000 on your rig (including screen). Owch. Especially considering he can max every game you can. Way to look like an idiot when talking about something you yourself are fanboyish about.

[ManGastaS]

Crysis 2 owns this one!!!

[WhiteNoise]

@geodude.

Let me educate you

"The mobility 5870 has 800 stream processors versus 1600 in the desktop and it also comes with much lower clocks, so it is approximately comparable to a 5750 in desktop terms."

It performs less than half as good as a 5870. and a 5870 CANNOT run crysis at the frame rates you are lying about. You would be lucky to get 25 frames on all high at 1080p in crysis.

Either you are playing at 1280x720, or you are just full of $#!+.

http://www.techpowerup.com/...

A 5870 ( desktop variety, which is more twice as powerful ) gets 40 frames at 1680x1050 on very high with 4aa which performance wise is about the same at 1080p with no aa on very high.

Half those results, that is what your PC can achieve.

AND that is with a much much much faster CPU.

Your CPU is 1.6ghz....i.6ghz is half the stock speed of a current i7, let alone with an overclock.

Laptops are $#!+ for gaming. I know it's hard for you to comprehend because the dot point on the box said it was 'teh bestest gaming laptop' but even a low end PC with a 3 year old quad and a current entry level card would run circles around that 'PC'.

Please don't compare a laptop with a gaming PC, let alone those screenshots which are 1080p maxed in dx11 with 32csaa...

here are the specs of your modile gpu
5870mobile GPU

core700
memory1000
coreconfig800:40:16
pixel/s 11.2
texture/s 28
gb/s 64

Now here is LAST YEARS ENTRY LEVEL DESKTOP GPU
ATI5750

core700
memory1150
coreconfig720:36:16
pixel/s 11.2
texture/s 25.2
gb/s 73.6

In that same bench mentioned above in the link above, a gtx465 which is far more powerful than a 5750, gets only 24 frames at on very high at 1680x1050 with 4aa...

Like I said, you are full of $#!+

[geodood]

@ Whitenoise
This is going to be satisfying

Here, let me educate you

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Yeah that's right a 5870 running crysis in Very high @ 4xAA in 1080p with no lag. The guy's laptop I mentioned can run it like this (when overclocked and with a lower FPS but still above 30) owch. As for the CPU running at 1.6GHZ.... you do know it can perform a stable overclock to 2.8ghz right? LOL.
You really have no idea what you're talking about.

You then went on to call the 5750 " LAST YEARS ENTRY LEVEL DESKTOP GPU"
I really rest my case.... If you think the 5750 is an entry level GPU you're an idiot. Heard of the 5650? 5730?
LOL
Sorry if it broke your assumption that laptops are crap for gaming but anything that comfortably runs crysis in 1080p all very high with ANY AA is a VERY capable gaming machine. Calling it a POS is just f*cking ignorant and imbecilic. The fact that you spent ~£3000 on your rig just shows how stupid you are.

[WhiteNoise]

@Geodude

You are a fu<king moron

a 5870 is NOT THE SAME AS A MOBILE 5870.

You know absolutely nothing about PC components or PC gaming.

My GPU wipes the floor with a 5870 and it does not get the frames he claims to get on a GPU half as powerful as a desktop 5870.

Desktop 5870 specs:

850 1200 1600:80:32 27.2 68 153.6

Mobile 5870 specs
700 1000 800:40:16 11.2 28 64

I'll just let you look ar that for a moment so you can see that it is LESS THAN HALF AS POWERFUL AS A 5870 which is exactly what I said above.

Now again. Here is the mobile 5870 compared to the 5750

Mobile 5870 specs
700 1000 800:40:16 11.2 28 64

desktop 5750
700 1150 720:36:16 11.2 25.2 73.6

There we have it, simple FACTUAL information. You have no idea what you are talking about neither do the 3 console retards that agreed with you. his mobile GPU is LESS powerful than a 5750

Now I will link you to a hardware review of the 5750 because a a console gamer you have no idea of the chronology of hardware releases

http://www.guru3d.com/news/...

"it is now time to review the Radeon HD 5750, ATI's most budget DX11 card available at this time. "

At it's time of release it was the WORST PERFORMING CARD ATI MADE IN THAT SERIES.

It was also the cheapest, somehow I think that fits into the category of 'budget'.

So his card is slower than last years budget/entry level/current POS card.

AS the benchmarks in the link I posted show...a gtx465 which is FAR more powerful than a 5750 ( which again, I need to repeat because your simple mind cannot grasp this ) which is MORE powerful than his crap laptop GPU only gets 25 frames at a lower res than he is claiming to be using ( 1680x1050 in the bech, he claims to be using 1920x1080.

So HE IS NOT PLAYING AT THOSE SETTINGS OR THOSE FRAME RATES AND LIKELY NOT AT THAT RESOLUTION.

Here is a bench of a 5750( which again; is better than his card ) running crysis on very high...

http://benchmarkreviews.com...

20.2 frame average, it seems like someone was lying and a certain console only jackass bought it...

GTX465 = 25 frames, so yeah that means that both he and you are full of $#!+ and also morons.

[gamesmaster]

PC fanboys for the loss.... way to get obsessed with your machine much.

[Afterburn]

Lmfao. Its like watching the av guy from family guy fight with himself. Sorry guys no offense just struck me as very funny reading this.

[geodood]

Whitenoise, you're a goddamn idiot. I link you a video showing crysis benching with 4xAA, 1080p res and all very high on a 5870 at above 40fps... so you then tell me it couldn't get above 27... right.
You then fail to realise that his laptop is overclocked, the cooling system on the G73JH is very efficient and the graphics card/ processor (and even ram) can be cranked up quite high without any crashing.
Just go on youtube and find videos of it playing crysis at 1080p, all settings on very high for yourself. You're a complete idiot who spent £3000 at least on a gaming PC and wrote a wall of text in dispute over the internet - and you're still wrong. Again, playing crysis on very high at 1080p with ANY AA (heck, even with no AA) is very impressive. Calling it a POS for doing so shows your ignorance and stupidity

[TKCMuzzer]

This PC argument is hilarious, I luckily don't have time to be that obsessed. One thing I do know is that my PS3 has the same spec as my brothers PS3. This is good for developers as they don't have to worry about his being able to run Killzone 3 like mine. Simples.

[Istanbull]

Killzone 3 wins. It looks phenomenal.

[AndrewRyan]

No shit.

A multiplaform game (console) VS PS3 exclusive.

Which wins?

[Perjoss]

@ AndrewRyan

I dunno, not all ps3 exclusives look great, in fact some look terrible

[TheFanboySlayer]

@Perjos

Which ones look bad?

[RevXM]

Istanbull:
Agree. atleast Console version of crysis2 VS Killzone 3.
I havent seen any clear PC footage that I know so I wouldnt know 100% for sure of how it would compare to pc,
But I wouldnt be suprised if it looked 2 times better on pc again.

But it is too early for Comparisons I think.
KZ3 1 month to go.
Crysis 2 2 months(?) to go.

Getting both day 1.

[Perjoss]

@ mawiko

Haze and Resistance 2 are no way in the same league as games like GoW3 and Uncharted2.

edit: also, GT5 is quite a let down unless you are in photo mode.

[awiseman]

Its a beta. Remember that Bungie's definition of a beta (usually better than most other devs finished games :P) is not what other devs define as a "beta" We will have to wait and see. I just played the "beta" of crysis 2 and I am kind of dissapointed.

[shadow2797]

What does Bungie have to do with anything? The two devs are Guerrilla Games, and Crytek.

[the_best_player]

http://i53.tinypic.com/i3w2...

http://i51.tinypic.com/116m...

[iamnsuperman]

Crysis 2 looks good but I am not sure I like the environment direction they went with Everything looks too pristine.

[ATiElite]

I agree it's like some crayola pascal colored city. This is supposed to be New York, where's the grit and spit on the sidewalks at.

Way too shiny and clean.

[morganfell]

That is the problem with Crysis. It is the issue with the graphics in several other high end game engines as well. A great amount of detail and fidelity doesn't necessarily translate into a great looking game. I look at Crysis on any setting an my thoughts are still, "It looks like a video game"

This is where titles such as Killzone 3 and on the PC games like Operation Arrowhead (Arma II) outshine others.

[IcarusOne]

So...you're saying Killzone looks less like a video game than Crysis?

[ATiElite]

Morganfell

Morganfell has a great point so don't take it out of context. Crysis 2 looks like shiny crap while Killzone 3 and Arma II OP have a more realistic look and feel to the graphics. The world is not all shiny clean and brand new like Crysis 2. You gotta show the grit and dirt like Killzone 3 and ArmA 2 or better yet Bad Company 2 and all the dirt and dust blowing around.

[IcarusOne]

I think it's personal preference. Just because Minority Report depicts a shinier, cleaner future than Blade Runner doesn't make it a less enjoyable film.

[SnakeMustDie]

I want to see how it compares to the first Crysis

[mittwaffen]

Much more narrow areas of game play likely due to consleitis again, unless they designed the game twice over (Once for consoles, then PC's) which they didn't. The game will not come close in quality, scale, because of the consoleitis direction they took.

Its like Battlefield, 1942/BF2 are still the kings; because of the time and quality put into the direction of PC. The console versions are OK, but have terrible disconnect with what really made BF great which i know is because of the shitty hardware limitations that consoles have (Ram/Vram/ Not having upgradeable tech). Console tech is almost 6 years outdated thats HUGE in terms of what PC gamers have today.

Multiplatform is terrible for PC game design, and will always be bad.

PC Systems (Common)

6-core(/6 hyperthreading -- High end/AMD(Without HThreading)
4-Core(/4 hyperthreading)
4-6Gbs RAM
786-1500MB's Vram (Video card based obviously)
500-1000+GB's HDD space

Consoles

Triple core (360)
Single core + 7 SPU's (PS3) (May be off on the SPU count)
512MB ram (360)
256/256(Ps3)
HDD's 120gb average

Thats just simplified, thats not taking into account optimizing clock rates (Doing more operations per clock)on the CPU/GPU's is another huge factor. Example, Current gen I7's vs last gen i7's running at the same speed roughly 20% faster; this is over ONE YEAR. Imagine 6 years like in the consoles case..its not even funny to argue any differently, simple facts.

We have the ability to create games that are far beyond what we have on PC today, but because of the LCD (Lowest common denominator) consoles prevail. PC gamers get the back seat and get many shoddy poorly optimized games that have fewer and fewer development dollars put towards PC development.

LCD is what rules the business side of game design.

[Nicaragua]

That same LCD also affects PC's internally so its not all the fault of the big bad consoles.

A mere fraction of all PC's in existence will have all the features you mention (4-6gb's ram, 1000-1500mb vram, and 8 threads on a general purpose CPU).

PC's are just as bad to each other as consoles are bad to PC's.

[DigitalRaptor]

If console development is holding the PC back, then the 360 is definitely holding the PS3 back.

[mittwaffen]

Common as in

-Most common PC's sold in stores like BB/FS, Newegg, etc. If you buy a new PC what you'd end up getting.
-Common from everyone I know (Having built many of them) and the systems they own.
-Common to what costs are to the above when building your own.

Hell i worked at BB while saving for college, I know what I sold during this time, you can even do this...go onto one of the most 'user friendly' game services STEAM and view their survey, it'll have deflated numbers due to the nature of some steam games (It doesnt weed out the baddies) but it will give you a good idea of where communities are at H/W wise.

[Arksine]

Mittwaffen, since you worked at BB, I'm sure you are aware that well 99% of those PCs are sold with Integrated Graphics (and most of those will be Intel IGPs, the worst kind). They can play WoW..thats about it. Nothing new.

In other words, the common PC is what is holding PC gaming back, not consoles. Developers have a wide range of hardware they are attempting to support. There is a reason a PC game states "minimum requirements", or as you state it, the "LCD".

[ATiElite]

Sorry but the average PC set up is...
2 core 2.8ghz CPU
3 gb DDR 800 ram
512mb GPU vram

Not too many people have a 6 core Intel seeing how they cost $975 EACH. 4 core AMD run games better than 6 core AMD's but most games don't use 4 cores properly and dual core CPU's are so cheap...Jackpot.

As a PC enthusiast gamer I use to hate consoles because I thought they were holding PC gaming back. WRONG!! DX9 is holding PC gaming back along with DX10 sucking but now DX11 has corrected all that so PC gaming will improve.

[Bolts]

I'm sorry but you're wrong. PC games have been poorly optimized for a long, long time before the consoles. In fact the last well optimized game that I can remember is probably Quake 1 when using OpenGL, pretty much every PC game after that were poorly optimized. Even Half Life 2 ran like shit when it first came out.

[mittwaffen]

You're really going to argue with me?

in my first post I said this is gamer pc's, and common PC's which would be relating to their systems.

Most gamers I know build their systems so even BB/FS would not be in the loop. However you know what GPU tech for a gamer = aftermarket meaning if they buy their system from BB, pricematch a video card and have it installed for free.

Yeah its pretty simple and can add 60-250 to the cost, but at this cost range provide gpu horsepower around the range I originally stated.

Lose the short term memory guys, you people need to get caught up on Prices of parts, 6 cores AMD actually run faster than the 4 cores from benchmarks and more so when overclocking.

1000-1500Vram isnt much champ, most cards 120> are getting this, or near this today when their made.

Also, apparently you cant read as I stated intel 6 cores are high end meaning high price ranges. Then added the AMD 6core to the mix, saying that people have them, their getting them and let alone this MILLIONS more PC gamers than their are Console (360/PS3) users combined.

Why even argue, its the Mitt..you should know better.

http://software.intel.com/e...

[units]

not good comparison

[Shaman]

I don't know if its because of bad captures but those look extra bad.KZ3 looks a bit better but it also looks pretty bad here....
Give me new consoles ASAP.

[Fishy Fingers]

I thought the same, the captures are terrible.

[kneon]

Still image comparison is stupid anyway, I don't play jpeg games, I play video games.

What really matters is how things looks when playing the game, not when you take 1 frame and analyze it to death.

[JsonHenry]

Horrible pictures, both games looks great though considering the hardware running them.

However, I agree with Shaman.. it is time for new consoles when this is the "best" looking games being released.

[starcrafter]

@jsonhenry
Crysis 2 is not the best looking game being released and Killzone 3 looks great for a game on any platform. Not just on consoles.

[moparful99]

One thing is apparent, the lighting and shadows in kz3 are spectacular.. I cannot wait to see this game in action..

[The real killer]

You are just a fanboy, get over it!!

OT:

Why is everynody deney that Killzone 3 look miles better than a multiplat version?

We all know that PS3 exclusive always trump 360 in grafichs/Phyischys and Ligting aspect, don't be ignorant fanboys.

That's allready proven years after years, and still those idiot's from fanboy come here.

Shaman, you are the worst fanboy here, always deney without single argument, and if you come with argument, you get the PC version allong to comparing with the PS3.

You just pitty fanboy just all those pitty fanboys still thinking that multiplat beat PS3 exclusive.

[Kalipekona]

Really? Most PS3 exclusives look pretty average. Quit pretending that all PS3 exclusives are something special. Nothing could be further from the truth. A couple Ps3 exclusives look great, most don't.

[jarrod1981]

thank you kalipekona, you are right. the ps3 has been out for over 4 years now and it has 3 or 4 games that can be bragged about but everyone acts like every game on the system is untouchable even against the best games on pc which is funny.

[Daz]

Here we go again :(

[TKCMuzzer]

My sentiments exactly. Give me my PS3 sitting under my tv for nice casual gaming any day.

[ME1989]

Terrible comparison.

I always think screenshots don't do any game justice. Seeing them in motion always looks much much better.

[Daz]

Very true . Anyway both look good to me.

[jammydude]

Well that just makes it even more obvious - Crysis 2 is a huge letdown graphically (on consoles) it's so far from the best looking console shooter it's ridiculous - no AA, massive tearing, poor foliage.... and to top it off it now plays more like COD :/
http://www.videogameszone.d...

[talltony]

I said It was going to be like this. a year ago! So many fanboys calling me out back then. But i knew the whole time it was going to be a let down graphically on consoles.

[Kalipekona]

Have you played it, talltony? I doubt it.

If you had played it instead of making assumptions based on screenshots, you would know that it is a fantastic looking game.

[talltony]

Have I played it? Gamertag talltony see for yourself. Playing it now. It's fun, it copies cod alot but yea you know the graphics are overhyped but it seems to play pretty smooth.

[MGRogue2017]

Killzone 3 wins.

I played the Crysis 2 demo just now.. I was like -_- .. "alright, shoot him.." move onto next enemy... etc etc.. Very quiet, doesn't feel or sound like a battle is going on.. And graphics look very glitchy.

I remember playing the Killzone 3 beta a while back, My eyes were always like O_O through the entire match. Bullets, grenades exploding all over the fucking place, I love it!

And the motion blur, graphics, lens flare all look amazing.

[lugia 4000]

Everything has bugs. Killzone 3 had some bad framerate lag.

Disagrees? Lol at the fanboys

You were saying that the alpha build didn´t have framerate lag? Inside houses there was about 20fps.

[TKCMuzzer]

"about" I like your attention to detail.

[Pixelated_Army]

@lugia

KZ3 had zero frame rate issues stop making shit up.

[MerkinMax]

No joke. I know this is because it's the alpha build, but don't be so confident that you are right.

[lugia 4000]

If that was fake I wouldn´t have agrees.
I played the alpha and I know very well what im talking about. Botzone was even worse.

[Pixelated_Army]

I loaded it up maxed out the player count(I usually play with default settings) and it did have a slight frame rate issue under heavy combat but it's not as dramatic as you people are describing.

"bad framerate lag" "Lag central!!!"

lmao

I can only imagine what you two think of BlOps; PS3 and PC users have been beta testing that pile of shit since it's release. Your comments are better suited for a game like BlOps than a amazing game like KZ3.

[MerkinMax]

I don't play with more than 8 bots, it really does make the game lag. It is NOT a joke. On Frozen Dam it lags alot. I bet those of you who disagree don't even have the Beta.

Also, don't change the subject to another game Pixelated. I have Black OPs, yes it lags, it doesn't make what I have personally witnessed with Killzone 3 change.

[TKCMuzzer]

You go on about the bots but I have to be honest, when playing online in the alpha code I had very little lag even with full rooms. Maybe it's a bot issue.

[theonlylolking]

Its only fair if you compare the PC version.

[pollocks]

How is that fairer?
We'll see anyway. If the console version looks this average graphically, my hopes for the PC version have just taken a plunge. Would be very weird if KZ3 actually did end up looking better than the PC version of Crysis 2

[Pandamobile]

Obviously the PC version of C2 will look better than KZ3. That's pretty much a guarantee.

Still interesting to see how the console versions stack up, though.

[theonlylolking]

Then why does KZ3 look better than crysis 1?

[Pandamobile]

From what I've seen, it doesn't.

I've yet to see a live demo though. I'll have to wait til the open beta to determine which looks better.

[Shackdaddy836]

@king
It doesn't... Go play the first Crysis on max settings before you make assumptions like that.

[theonlylolking]

@SHackDaddy836

I have and I still say KZ3 looks better.

[house]

why is it that ps3 exclusives always have to be compared to the "pc king" crysis i really have never seen an exclusive from 360 ever be compared to that game, just goes to show ps3 exclusives get more presser to do great and in my veiw they mostly always deliver

[ME1989]

Great, can't wait for the inevitable Crysis 2 PS3 vs. 360 flame battle articles....

ugh

[piroh]

sorry PC boys but KZ3 ftw
anyway Crysis 2 is very good for a multiplat

[iamgoatman]

Sorry PC boys? This is the console version being compared, KZ3 won't stand a chance against the PC version, and you've got to be pretty delusional to think otherwise.

[Justanothergamer]

What do you mean "PC boys"? It's the 360 multiplayer demo of Crysis 2 that is being compared here.

[hoops]

If you are saying the PC version of Crysis 2 wont compare to KZ3, then you need to lay down that crack pipe but fast..

[gamingisnotacrime]

but i know what game i pre ordered and cant wait to get my hands on.

KZ3

[lugia 4000]

Crysis 2 PC will destroy killzone 3. Comparing a beta version of the 360 against a PS3 is ridiculous.

[teedogg80]

Played it this morning and I gotta say it's a pretty good game. But KZ3 probably will be better IMO.

[visualb]

i don't care I get both =D horrible comparison though <_<

[Der_Kommandant]

Halo, come out wherever you are hiding...

[xtremegamerage]

mittwaffen

Not a bad argument, but flawed.

BF2 runs peachy on a 7series card maxed.

But remember when 1900xt,7800gtx etc were about, hardly anything was dual core gameplay wise. BF2 only needed 1core.

I think dirt,lost planet needed dual more then anything at the time.

As for 360, 6 hw threads is decent tbh.
PS3 using spu's is 8 hw threads.

Scale and graphics are another thing.

And before you moan about consoles being the lowest, that's complete and utter shit.

Maybe ask Nvidia,amd. To stop making very low end cards and slapping dx11 on them, as if you could play a dx11 game the way it's meant to be played on the low end, ROFL.

It's been this way forever.

Consoles may lack the AA/AF textures in places compared to a PC, but they lack nothing else.

[TheTruth89]

i agree

but you forgot that Cell SPU CAN help (and a lot) RSX)

Anyway.... there no comparison here...

Killzone 3 win, in every aspect!
Crysis is MONSTER GRAPHICS GAME, but only on PC (maybe PS3... if those bastards release a stupid demo!)

[tudors]

lol at the low res shots, GTFOOH

[thebudgetgamer]

pc fanboys.
http://images.cheezburger.c...
http://dot-me.of-cour.se/fi...
http://images.icanhascheezb...

[Darkfiber]

Is it 2002? Do people actually find these funny anymore?

[thebudgetgamer]

i dont know, i giggled a little.

[PR_FROM_OHIO]

Here we go again!! Crysis 2 will not look better than Killzone 3 period!!!!! Crysis was made for PC's not consoles where as Killzone 3 was made especially for the PS3 so Killzone 3 will play and look better then Crysis 2 on the PS3!!!!

[Darkfiber]

Wow, they both look good and have completely different art styles. One is photo-realistic and the other has a comic book style palette and shadowing with cartoony looking enemies and are therefore hard and pointless to compare effectively. Who knew.

Oh wait, this is N4G, I mean "LOL U GUYZ R COMPARING A 360 EXCLUSIVE TO A PS3 EXCLUSIVE U GUYZ R SO DUM PS3 IZ TEH BEST EVAR BCUZ I LIKE IT THAT MAKES IT TEH BEST A 360 GAME CUD NEVAR BEET A P[S3 GAM E EVAR U GUYZ R DUM IS NO COMPARISON"

(And yes, I'm well aware that Crysis 2 is not really a 360 exclusive.)

[insomnium2]

You should also be aware how things were in 2005-2007. You embarras yourself with comments like that and not knowing how things were a few years back. smh.

It was the x360 fanboys and the media who started talking down on the PS3 based on early lousy ports. You might keep your mouth shut if you had been here wittnessing all the insanity in the early days of this generation.

I just love all these smartasses who know nothing about the things that went on here in 2005-2008 and still come here crying about this place being a PS3 fanboy land. WHERE THE HELL WERE YOU A FEW YEARS AGO? Ignorant people are ignorant.

[ATiElite]

your so right, N4G use to be 360 fanboy heaven as every article ridiculed the PS3 and of course PC gaming was dead.

Killzone 2 made many people go whoa but Uncharted 2 leveled the playing field while God of War 3 gave PS3 fanboys the green light to act how 360 fanboys did between 2005-2008.

oh and PC gaming is still dieing a slow horrible death....LMAO :) sarcasm there.

[baodeus]

@insomnium2

well u just confirmed that N4G is ran by ps3 fanboy. LOL.

Actually, i'm starting to like this console wars, get to see all the most outrageous, hypcrite, all the worst of nongamers in one spot is priceless.

[Darkfiber]

No, I am well aware of how it was before. Everyone said the PS3 would never be any good or ever have good games, etc etc. It was funny how shortsighted people are. It was obvious that good games would start coming to PS3 eventually, and they have. Trust me, I've been defending my PS3 since early 2007. There's a difference between defending against shortsighted comments and being a completely blind, rabid fanboy. I hated the 360 fanboys back then just as much as I hate the PS3 fanboys now. You know why? Because it's pointless. Nothing is stopping you from enjoying games on every platform but your own stupidity. I would never say something like "Killzone 3 is better than Crysis 2 just because it's on PS3 and PS3 RULZZZZ" like half the comments on here. I have more sense than that. That is about the dumbest comment anyone can put on a site like this yet 100 people agree with them. There is no reasoning or logic behind. There is no objective look at both games, comparing the strengths and weaknesses of both. There is no in-depth analysis of the game engine, graphics, animations, lighting, story, gameplay mechanics, etc etc etc. There is only "IT'S ON THE PS3 ONLY THEREFORE IT IS BETTER" comments.

Also, calling me ignorant when you have no idea "where I was" during 2005-2008 is ignorant itself, because in this case you couldn't be more wrong. Fanboys are stupid no matter what they are fanboys of. And honestly, I don't really give a shit "how things were" back then. Why does that make it somewhat more acceptable than how PS3 fanboys on this site are now? "Oh the 360 fanboys did it back then so we're allowed to do it now and if you don't agree with that you are ignorant, waah waaah waaaaah". Grow the fuck up.

[insomnium2]

I only called you ignorant due to the tone in your "voice".

I do agree on many points you said and see you in a different light after you clarified stuff for me.

I agree it's utterly idiotic to come here and talk bs just like it was back then, it is now. I feel most of the ps3 fans on this site have simply jumped on the x360 hate-bandwagon after the tide started to turn in 2008. They are not justified to start with that since they haven't been around here when the reason for most of the attacks nowadays started happening.

If you were here you know how bad it was. I feel that I (as a person who have seen it all happen since 2005) have the right to call out the I-told-you-so's that goes on around here since I've had to put up with such blind biased idiocy for so long (3 full years atleast). All of us "old" members do since we all know how it was back then. All the new ps3 fanboys are BS. I've called out them several times since I can pinpoint with atleast 98% accuracy all the new and young fans who in reality don't know anything about the stuff they are saying. All they do is hate for the sake of hating.

I do think I can call out the original bs fanboys who were among them who started this mess in 2005. I think It's justified to say "I told you so" if the case in hand is that I was right afterall (as it many times is). I don't see how that is related to groing up.

[ILLINOIS]

There is no console game that looks as good as Killzone 3. That is no secret. Watch gameplay of Crysis 2 and you will see a huge difference in the two games. Nothing new at all.

[Darkfiber]

Really? I don't see a huge difference at all. Maybe I need to put "ps3" in my name, then I will magically see this "huge difference" you are talking about.

[Yehshuah]

n4g is filled with alot of ps3 fanboys. they support their exclusives only.

[ps3rider]

Indeed you are so clever to admit that we have a good quality of exclusive. instead of leaving silly comments, you can go and get busy with playing halo and i hope u can reach

[baodeus]

it is kinda pointless to keep comparing games pictures.

1. It doesn't say anything about how the game actually run in motion.
2. Fanboys will never admit (using excuses like only exclusive can push consoles, do you guys ever consider developers a possibility for how the game looks?). There are already game that look better than any exclusive so far on consoles and it is a multiplat form (RE5). Don't believe me, then how about posting up any videos or screen shots if you preffered and see how they stack up to RE5 (texture, lighting, etc...).

[milkyway]

WTF!? WAT HAPPENED TO RICOS AFRO!?????

[milkyway]

oh and is that a new exo i see there? :D

[joshvaliant]

Guys...come on, please stop arguing without using logic to support your arguement. For those that do, cudo's, for those that don't, son I am dissapoint. Yes this looks great, but none of you know the trechary commited in the 2nd game unless you've played Killzone 1 and the psp version. They killed off Templar, the main fucking character. Thats bad enough for me to stop playing killzone 3, and whilst I'll still rent it for some good linear gameplay, it still can't match the graphical power of Crysis 2, or even crysis 1 for that matter. It might look better than crysis 2 on the ps3, cause it's crytechs first game on the consoles, but even thats yet to be seen. And if any of you have seen the best of the best footage of crysis 1 and know the the technical specs, then you know that crysis is in fact graphically better, and theres no arguing with that because its the truth. Those who do argue simply don't comprehend all the technincal data and detail that does into it all because you ps3 gamers not pc gamers. And theres nothing wrong with that, and I'm not saying that killzone 3 in not gonna be a good game, its everyones personal opinion. Cudo's to Valve for trying to bridge the gap between ps3 and pc gamers. -editor at www.hookedgamers.com

[chidori666]

omg Why are theese stupid PC fanboys coming on here anyway? Bashing the graphics of Killzone 3 when PC has probably about 3 shooters if not less that tops theese graphics..

[joshvaliant]

If you actually read my comment, then you would see why your both ignorant, and stupid.

[DeathMetal1474]

Kilzzone is a linear scripted corridor shooter, no destrucion, no environment interaction, pre rendered backgrounds, no real time anything. It's walk stright forward and shoot. with that shallow of gameplay it should look good.

[XabiTheHumble]

LOL this is like the 8th comment I have seen of yours today crying about Killzone 3. Are wez upset that Crysis 2 on consoles looks like cwap? XD

[hellzsupernova]

actually killzone 3 does have destruction....learn before you troll

[Thoreau]

ok ok, we all knew a game dev'd for a specific console would look better than a game that is multiplatform. nothing new under the sun here.

[zero_cool]

Both are looking solid & play solid from what ive seen so far also here ya go people...

http://www.airbornegamer.co...

http://www.play-mag.co.uk/w...

Disagree all you want & spout all the lame non sense you want these pictures tell the story & the last stage for these games is touch up work before both games launch.

[jalen247]

From the game play and pics that I have seen of Crysis 2 (360), I would honestly say Killzone 3 looks a lot better.

And yes we already know the PC version of Crysis 2 on Max settings on a beastly gaming pc will look better than Killzone 3...

But ask yourself this...would Crysis 2 running on similar settings to Killzone 3 on PS3 (720p, 30FPS, similar graphics card) look better than Killzone 3...I think we all know the answer to that...NO

[DeathMetal1474]

killzone is like the most linear game ever with tons of scripted sequences. Can you blow up objects in KZ? Are there multiple mission paths? Building Destruction? Sandbox elements where you can go any where you want? NO!!!! You can walk forward that is it.

[zero_cool]

no you fail now expect it & move on!

[DeathMetal1474]

what are you like a 10 year old retard? Was not even replying to your comment, but your name is fitting.

[strickers]

Yes,there is some dynamic scenery in KZ3.Look at the MAWLR vid and the previous game had it too.Some of KZs levels are pretty damn huge,especially in 3.I've seen both and KZ3 looks quite a bit better.Crysis 2 looks good but lacks the wow factor.

[orange-skittle]

KillZone is linear and ZERO COOL must be fanboy to think otherwise. The game is completely story driven and doesn't have multiple paths or areas. But so does CoD, BFBC, and Halo...in story mode. As for multiplayer, we can all agree that DICE brought something new to the table. GG didnt do anything really special except show us great graphics can be achieved on a larger scale. The only problem with that was that destructible environments, player controlled vehicles, and gameplay took a backseat to achieve that.

[Neko_Mega]

Don't really care, both games are fun and like someone said. It should be Crysis 2 PS3 Vs KillZone 3 PS3.

Anyways I'm getting both.

[Firstkn1ghT]

Judging from those screenshots, Crisis 2 might look better. Killzone 2 in these screenshots look pretty bland. Some plain looking textures.

They could of done a better job on selecting screenshots for both games.

[strickers]

Textures in KZ are very good.

[Firstkn1ghT]

Not in those screen shots.

[josephayal]

Call of Duty vs Crysis
KillZone 2 vs Killzone 3

[Bolts]

Who the hell took these shots? They're crap. It's like they're comparing these two games to see which one suffered the most from their shitty screens.

[Whackedorange]

Must be a complete moron to not understand that a game that is specifically made for one system looks better than a multiplattform title

[Nexy]

It's pointless.

First, the low-res screens show absolutely nothing.
Second, crowds of mindless PS3 fanboys will be screaming K3's screens look million times better without looking at anything at all anyway so... what's the point?

Oh, right n4g is a PS3 fanboys' site.

[neoandrew]

a) crysis 2 is sure the better one, the problem is watch b)
b) this is multiplayer demo, multiplayer has always lower details, demo is not the final code compilation

So the conclusion is - U CAN'T COMPARE THIS SCREENS !!!

[orange-skittle]

I dont need a screenshot to prove to me what I PLAYED yesterday and this morning. Hands down, KillZone's graphics are better. I WILL NOT be picking this up day one, so I thank EA for the early demo. Bulletstorm was more fun. This game is CoD and Halo put together. It's a spray first, roof top leaping, activate shields and invisible camo melee fest. Then they include the kill cam with CoD button layout, perk system, and an awkward grenade throw. The grenades are so awkward...no one uses it. Wait for a price drop. This will fail like MoH

[Wikkid666]

Regardless of which one looks better... still doesn't help the fact that Crysis 2 is garbage. Played the demo and 2 minutes later deleted it. Waste of a 15 minute download.

[neoandrew]

So kz3 is garbage also.

[Wikkid666]

Don't know... never played it

[neoandrew]

You think "2 minutes later deleted it" means playing ?

[Xander756]

I think Crysis 2 looks better because the game actually has colors in it.

[LMS]

Vanilla crysis 1 looks better than anything the ps3 or xbox360 can or ever will do...it's 4 years old

http://forums.bit-tech.net/...

with reality, natural and extreme graphics mods it shreds anything the ps4 will do for the first year

metro2033 looks better than anything the ps3 or xbox360 can or ever will do...

http://forums.gametrailers....

there will NEVEr be a strategy game on ps3 or 360 that looks, plays and runs half as good as starcraft 2, 2010 game of the year

http://www.sc2blog.com/2007...

lol...now look at xbox360 supreme commander

http://screenshots.teamxbox...

it looks like a wii game

so, sorry, killzone 2,3,4, will not touch 1200p,32x anti aliasing, 120 frames per second EVER!!!

[mbmanhattan]

Im sorry! i love my ps3 but this game doesn't look that good. Crysis 2 has maps that looked liked they have been lived in.

Killzone maps look like well, videogame maps from the 90's. Room with all the same shit all using the same textures. Boring! uncharted 3 will be great but not this

Look at this map of the SHIP PIER and tell me it doest look more interesting http://n4g.com/news/687453/... GO skip aroung the killzone 3 map video every scene look the same. Click aroung the crysis level every spot looks dif. bathroom coffee shop a boat etc.