Crysis 2 Graphics What? Killzone 3 Still Best Looking FPS

There has been lots of talk around the web regarding the Crysis 2 PS3 and Xbox 360 comparison, some say the Xbox 360 version looks better, while others claim that the PS3 is far superior. While it’s great to have these types of arguments right before the game releases, let’s not forget that the truth is…Killzone 3 wipes the floor with the Crysis 2 console screens and remains the best looking FPS on a console this generation. Here is proof.

[Prcko]

defenetly,killzone looking much better!!!
exclusives FTW!!!!!

[Pixelated_Army]

Agreed. No this isn't an opinion this is fact! Cry2 looks amazing but KZ3 is just unfucking believable.

The fact that so many people are disagreeing is just so sad.

[Active Reload]

"Crysis 2 Graphics What? Killzone 3 Still Best Looking FPS on the PS3"

Fixed!

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

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

Crysis wins hands down!
I put HD vids of both games there. Crysis 2 smokes KZ3, it's no contest!

Oops, here is a better one...

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

I wonder what people will say when the PS3 version of Crysis 2 will outsell KZ3. And the selling point would be what? Yes, graphics!

[Pixel_Pusher]

He's comparing Crysis SP against KZ3 MP... what? The funny thing is is that KZ3 MP still looks better than Crysis 2 SP! haha Good times. : )

And I think pretty much everyone here is talking about the console versions and not the PC of course.

[plb]

Thing most forget is Crysis 2 is all real time effects

[malamdra]

I'm 6 hours into the single player on the 360 and I can confirm without any doubt that Killzone 2 and Killzone 3 look and play better

screenshots can be deceptive but when you see it on you TV it becomes clear as day

having said that, I can also say that this is probably the best looking game on the 360

[Active Reload]

^^^PLB
Exactly! And it's an open sandbox, not linear. Everything is dynamic, while KZ3 is 99.9% static and pre-scripted!

"(lets try keep things friendly guys no need to get your feelings involved over a non issue like video games)."

Why even say that? I didn't detect anyone catching feelings over the issue. But then again, it's not easily detected through screens, lol.

[Pixel_Pusher]

@Active Reload

Crysis vets would disagree with you on that, I think they would say that Crysis 2 compared to Crysis 1 is extremely linear. Also Crysis 2 isn't really a true sandbox game it's more a mix between the two. Still it's pretty cool and I wished KZ3 would have taken this same approach.

[FACTUAL evidence]

Active reload is trying so hard to get people to agree that Crysis on consoles look better than kz3...just stop please. KZ2 looks even better than crysis 2.

[malamdra]

@Active Reload

I played most of the single player and I can tell you that it's not a sandbox game by any standars

it's more open than Killzone with bigger enviroments but it's still scripted and linear, in fact after the first few hours where you play in the city it started to remind me a lot of the first Resistance

but in any case the game style is not an excuse, this thread is about which one looks better and it's undoubtly Killzone 2 and 3

[SnakeMustDie]

@Active Reload

Crysis 2 is no longer a sandbox shooter. I would probably call it a linear shooter with occasional vast areas and multiple paths but people would rather call it a semi-sandbox shooter.

Can you climb those buildings you see in Crysis 2? No.

Can you swim the ocean that you see in Crysis and Crysis Warhead? Yes.

Regarding your comment about everything is dynamic in Crysis 2 is false. I just saw a huge downgrade from a technical breakthrough of a game. Crytek even showed from the tech demo that they are using both baked and dynamic lightning/shadows for rendering. So much for "Everything is dynamic".

The only limitation Crysis 1 and Warhead had is that you cannot climb mountains. Compared to both, Crysis 2 is very linear.

The only vast sandbox-like level Crysis 2 SP had is the Wall Street level where you start at the roof of a building and can also traverse the ground if you drop.

Crysis 2 pales in comparison to Crysis 1 and Warhead like Dragon Age 2 to Origins. Both improved on the flaws on their predecessors but broke a lot of good things that the series used to have.

[DatNJDom81]

It says a lot when tqcast, a known pro 360 site, says that a PS3 exclusive is better than any xbox game. End statement.

[starchild]

@malamdra

As if anybody would believe you. You have always been a 360-basher and we're supposed to believe that you have already played Crysis 2 on your 360? Sorry, I don't buy it for one second. It's just a poor attempt to slag off Crysis 2.

I don't know how the console versions will fair and ultimately I don't care. Maybe they will be better looking that Killzone 3, maybe they won't. Maybe the PS3 version will beat the 360 version, maybe the 360 version will beat the PS3 version. All I know is that the way you fanboys bicker about such small differences is just stupid. The PC version of Crysis 2 utterly demolishes Killzone 3 from every angle.

Oh and another thing. I know that even if another console game, either a multiplat or 360 exclusive, does end up looking better than Killzone 3, you guys still won't give it credit for doing so. You will still claim Killzone 3 looks better to the end of the earth, because you guys aren't concerned with the truth, you are concerned with being fanboys and hyping up "your" console no matter what.

[baodeus]

@pixel, nalyd-nolat

Then perhaps instead of just confronting other about how kZ is mile a head of anything else in graphics, because they won't listen, perhaps you should explain the technical aspect, and give comparison between why KZ is technically superior to anything else out there (Crisis 2, Halo Reach, Resident Evil 5, Lost Planet 2, etc...)

1. Texture
2. AA
3. Scale
4. Frame rate
5. Lighting
6. Amount of polygons rendered on screen
7. Physics
8. AI
9. How 3D or Split screen coop would affect the game.
10. Visual goal (realistic vs. visually artistic)
11. Technical issues (any thing as observed).

Cause people won't understand until you guys give clear explanation instead of just spouting out that KZ look the best, like it look the best in what and why? You can't just judge a game by how it looks on the outside, but not considering what is running underneath. You have to go beyond that skin layer to understand why it is technical marvel right?

Unlike other idiots u were talking about, i'm willing to listen to your technical expertise on the matter.

If you make such claim, you should be able to explain it. Simple right? That is all im asking for. I even sort out all the list of things for discussion.

@neomatrix909
"cause EVERYONE already knows KZ3 craps on Crysis 2 on consoles." who is everyone, you mean people on n4G? How can everyone already know since Crysis 2 hasn't even come out yet? not that many people playing KZ3 either, so i'm wondering who is everyone you are talking about. Can you just i mean at least give me some sort of list or examples or something.....c'mon you guys are all intelligent peep here, so explaining and supporting your claims w/ legit facts wouldn't be too hard wouldn't it?

[HolyOrangeCows]

Anyone who claims otherwise hasn't played Killzone 3 and Crysis 2.

I've said it once, and I'll say it again:
Crysis 2 is sub-HD on both consoles, lacks AA, has pop ins like crazy, and a poor latency.
I don't give the slightest of craps that Crysis has "Teh lighting effextz!!" when the game is both blocky and technically unsound.

LOL @ people calling Crysis 2 "open world"
It's a linear game with some opened up areas.
Besides, Killzone 3 had plenty of massive areas (which you'd know if you'd played the game).

[malandra]

@starchild

I do have a 360 and I played Crysis 2 SP in it, just to prove let me right something that can only be written if you played it:

-there's a lot fo falling from platforms through the game but there's one section that after sniping like 20 soldiers from a rooftop in front of a bank that before jumping down the street you have to activate the shield or you'll die and have to do the spining part again, and it's annoying as hell because since by that time you already falled from many ledges without dying there's no way to know that that time is different

-there's a whole mission that you have to kill dozens of soldiers because the guy that helps you a left written msg on his apartment saying where he was going to hide and you have to get there and detroy the msg before they find it, after you destroy the msg you have to fight a chopper from the apartment using regular rifles

hope that's enough to believe me that I played it, although I can't think of a way to show that it was on the 360

but if you believe me now, believe this: the game does NOT look better than Killzone 2 or 3, or Uncharted 2 or God of War 3 of even the first Crysis, but it is the best looking 360 game

this might sound bad but I think that people that only has a 360 will be very impressed with this and will find it hard to believe that are better looking games available and released years ago for that matter, but there are

[humbleopinion]

@baodeus
I don't think that any KZ3 fanboy will bother answering your question. If they do, they might actually have to face the fact that KZ3 isn't as masterful as they were claiming.

Hell, I didn't play Crysis 2 on consoles yet, but when I tried theoretically compare Killzone 3 and Halo Reach based on these questions - Reach easily came on top. It obviously doesn't mean that KZ3 is bad, but it just shows how powerful the Halo Reach engine is - something that some people seem to forget.

@malandra:
There's an easy way proving to starchild that you did play this game on the 360: point him to your gamerscore. So... where is it?

[joab777]

People may argue but its a fact that k3 looks better in multiplayer. It has been stated that crysis 2 single player is better than MP graphically so i will wait and see but i doubt it. K3 was built specifically for the ps3 and i promise u that if crysis 2 had been built that way,the console difference would b very noticeable. IMO, this does not happen for a few reasons. Developers that do not work strictly w ps3, take shortcuts because it is quite time consuming. Guerilla worked w naughty dog who works w insomniac to help each other understand the ps3 better. K3 is not just the culmination of guerillas work but the work accomplished by a host of Sony companies. It is the best looking fps on consoles. Also, i believe that is would actually hurt companies to make an fps that looks much better on ps3, which can b done, as the majority of fps gamers play on the 360. Hopefully Dice changes that and gives consumers the best game possible.

The amazing thing about k3 is that its MP doesn't lose any graphical fidelity while running at a constant 30 fps. The environments aren't simple, variety is everywhere. Also, it is so smooth w great sound making it the most immersive fps on consoles to date. Many may not like its exclusivity or how it plays out w classes etc., but its quality is 2nd to none, including reach. It is hard for ppl to see because halo has become part of our gaming marrow. IMO, crysis 2 falls off when it enters MP, graphically, but also its animations, its movement etc. It isn't bad, but it isn't k3 or halo, or cod. I can't pinpoint it, but something about those 3 is simply smoother. But, i am a fan of fps's and i hope i change my mind, not about the graphics, they are not there, but the gameplay b/c level 50 is alot of matches. I believe the single player itself may b better than k3 as i was a little disappointed. We will see.

[sjaakiejj]

@PLB

I think you need to go back and do your research.

1) Strictly speaking, even if its scripted, everything in Killzone 3 and Crysis 2 is real-time
2) Crysis 2 does just as much in Real-Time (from your definition of the word) as Killzone 3 does, no more and no less.
3) Going by your definition of real-time, no game does much at all in real-time, 90% of the graphics are smoke & mirrors.

[badz149]

Reach is better looking over KZ3? LOL just as I was thinking fanboyism can get any lower, you came up and has proven me wrong! just stop, lol!

I won't comment about Crysis 2 and KZ3 as I haven't play C2 yet but Reach? you got to be playing KZ3 on a black and white tv to ever think that Reach looks better!

[humbleopinion]

@badz149:
Unless you are able to make a coherent and valid argument, it's you coming out as a fanboy.

Did you bother to read @baodeus comperison criteria? If so, how about informing us what is so great about Killzone VS Reach in that regard?

Here's the quick rundown of his criterias and what's
1. Texture: Reach has far better textures. This can easily be seen on characters up close
2. AA: Killzone 3 method (MLAA) seems to offer better smoothing, but shows more edge artifacts in some cases. Both produce artifacts when compared to MSAA that other games (Uncharted, COD) offer, but KZ3 is probably better than Reach in the bottom line.
3. Scale: Reach shows far bigger scale
4. Frame rate: From what I've seen, both offer pretty solid and consistent framerate
5. Lighting: Both can render tons of lights, but Reach offers HDR lighting and Killzone 3 does not.
6. Amount of polygons rendered on screen: Reach was claimed to push over 4 million Polygons in a frame. I don't know what's the top for Killzone but DF articles showed some scenes rendered with around 1 Million polygons, which is a lot less.
7. Physics: Reach offers better physics including vehicle physics with more interactions on screen (as can be seen in forge mode). Also, KZ3 doesn't offer any water physics interactions (no splashes when shooting bodies of water for example).
8. AI: Reach AI is considered to be the best in the industry. KZ3 is not bad at all(big improvement over KZ2 with melee) but it still simply doesn't cut it when compared to the hugh AI battles in Reach (with over 40 active AIs on screen).
9. How 3D or Split screen coop would affect the game: both offer very good split screen implementation for co-op. Halo also offers co-op campaign of up to 4 players, while killzone is the only of the two that offers 3D integration - but at a great cost.
10. Visual goal (realistic vs. visually artistic): I say that both have a very defined artistic vision and performed very well. When you see a Halo screenshot you know it's a Halo game and not some generic FPS, and when you see Killzone you know that it's a Killzone game and not some generic FPS. Both really fulfilled the artistic vision IMO.
11. Technical issues (any thing as observed): I don't think any of them had problematic technical issues on launch (except for maybe online networking code and small balancing issues). Both fared really well and are considered quite bug free from lunch.

Perhaps baodeus left out some criteria (which you are free to mention here), but I was refering directly to his comment.
If you think that there are any other attributes that favor killzone (I can think of at least 1: 10% resolution gain) then you are freely welcomed to add them. But when I look at these side by side, Halo Reach comes on top. Care to explain why you feel differently?

[badz149]

that will only make your claim more ridiculous! seeing them side by side, how can you say that Reach looks better than KZ3 with a straight face? come on

there are scenes where you fight like 40 enemies on screen in Reach but enemies in Reach never look as good and detail like the Helghast troops. if number is everything to you, then I guess Heavenly Sword with hundreds of enemies and 99 nights 2 with its "1 mirrion troops" are better than both Reach and KZ3? FAR FROM IT!

KZ3 is touted as the best on console up to this point for a reason and it's the same reason Reach doesn't get the same recognition! being more open world and has more enemies at once compared to the other doesn't really fit into the equation when talking about which one looks better. at the end of the day, KZ3, while has less features compared to Reach, I'll give you that, is THE better looking and at the moment hold the crown for console graphic king!

[humbleopinion]

"you emphasize on putting them side by side
that will only make your claim more ridiculous! seeing them side by side, how can you say that Reach looks better than KZ3 with a straight face?"
That is the perfect example for an absolutely pointless comment...

After this comparison that I just pointed to, you fail to mention any technical feat that makes Killzone 3 looks better, or point to any valid comparison that will prove your point. But you still repeat it like a broken record.
You fall to the easiest fallacy: that repeating something enough times will somehow make it true regardless of what is presented in front of you.

To the point: The characters in Reach just look better, both in terms of polycount and textures. I don't see a point going over this again since there was already an eye opening discussion about this in the B3D forums, where both games were analyzed and Reach screenshots demonstrated that it has better models and textures:
http://forum.beyond3d.com/s...
You can read about it and post your comments
there if you feel differently *AFTER YOU MANAGED TO READ IT*. But be warned that in the B3D forums people tend to relay on factual information, so just repeating the same line with nothing to back you up will not make a strong point there. It's not typical the N4G crowd.

"being more open world and has more enemies at once compared to the other doesn't really fit into the equation when talking about which one looks better"
Of course it does: having more things on screen and showing a greater visible fidelity has an obvious hugh impact on what looks better in the buttom line. Imagine playing Killzone with just 1 enemy at the time and arenas and visibility limited to 10 meters in front of you. That wouldn't look as impressive as what you see now.

Also, take it to the extreme: try comparing these FPS to fighting games like Fight Night for example: it's obvious that FN shows very detailed models with sophisticated full body animation that FPS games can't compete with, but FN doesn't offer the same scope: it's just two boxers, a ring and some background crowd. It doesn't look as impressive as a vast and busy warzone scenes that FPS games like Halo and Killzone offer.
On the other hand you have games like HS or Dynasty warriors with tons of enemies on screen. But these enemies are just texture replicas with no independent AI and no indistinguishable visibility (and sometimes no physics). Their AI is as meaningful as pieces or rocks layed on the ground, and it's not even close in scope to what you see and experience in games that offer proper AI.

So it's all part of the package when talking graphics, and one has to weigh in pros and cons. So far you claimed that KZ3 is vastly superior but (just like anyone else with a similar opinion that was confronted here) you weren't able to back this up with anything other then saying "it's superior because it's superior and that's it".

[Dee_91]

they both look good very good to me omnom nom nom
Crysis is hands down the best looking multiplat.
the artistic style between kz3 and cry2 are very different so its kinda dumb comparing how they look :/
as for the technical aspect
i have no clue :D

[Redman22]

"How many times will you play the SP.. once, twice? MP is where you'll be spending most of your time. So the PS3 will have the better version. WIN muahahaha!"

http://i.imgur.com/RUyUj.pn...

http://i.imgur.com/6FOSG.pn...

pics from 360 demo
http://img195.imageshack.us...
________________
pier 17

http://www.megaupload.com/?...

skyline

http://www.megaupload.com/?...

[El Nino]

@ Active Reload, sorry to kill your buzz bro but thats no better than mw2 on consoles..

[badz149]

I also see that there's no point continuing this as we are clearly not in the same ballpark. I was strictly talking about the look of both games where I stand by my claim as I see it - KZ3 looks way better, no question about that! but you are talking from technical standpoint, which is about things that are 'behind the curtain' and not things that are really visible for your eyes to see. I'm not a reviewer that give scores for every aspect of a game. I'm just a gamer who calls it as I see it. games like Reach may have tech not used in KZ3, but when they are presented in front of my eyes, although Reach has things going for it, against KZ3, graphic certainly is not 1 of it!

nice talk though.

[Amphion]

Yeah guys seriously... Crysis 2 looks amazing on 360 but it doesn't come close to Killzone 3. That game is the pinnacle of console graphics by a pretty comfortable margin.

It's adorable that 360 fans have chosen this graphically wattered down PC game to represent them against a monster like Killzone 3 but it's a bit embarrassing as well.

I guess this is the sign of the times for 360 fans. They have a very dry year coming up with only 2 exclusives with somewhat unimpressive graphics.

[MysticStrummer]

Sign of the times indeed. It's funny though. This is right up there with calling Forza a sim.

[strifeblade]

yeh its too bad that crysis 360>crysis ps3

dont cry too much

graphically gears 3 is going to be amazing... ill let you in on a little secret, will score and rank higher than killzone 3 guaranteed, dont fool yourself to think otherwise

after all gears 1 and 2 scored over 93% on gamerankings and gears 3 will follow suit
no doubt, hahah killzone scores 90% for the first and 87% for the second on the same site
take that

[Amphion]

@strifeblade

No one is disagreeing with you that Crysis 2 on 360 is (probably) better than its PS3 cousin. We just think Killzone 3 still looks better than both of those SKUs.

No one is claiming that Gears 1, 2 and potentially 3 is a bad game. We just think its graphics are inferior to that of Killzone 2 and 3.

I love the lack of reading comprehension of some N4G members. You tell them that Killzone 3 is a technically better looking than Crysis 2 and Gears 1/2/3 and somehow that becomes a debate of which Crysis SKU is best and whether or not Gears 3 will have a higher Gamerankings score.

Um...that's a wonderful little statement, but what the f*ck does it have to do with Killzone 3's unbeatable graphics?

[Nolando]

from what ive seen of gears of war 3, it can compete pretty well graphically with KZ3, so idk where this guy comes off saying tis graphically unimpressive.

[kikizoo]

Striefblade, crysis is globaly the same on both consoles...and it's ridiculous to talk about scores from differents hardware, and different games (compare 3rd personn shooter if you want, and uncharted say hello to gear..), gears on ps3 would score 1 or 2 points under the xbox score it will have.

by the way, the subject is kz3/crysis graphics, not Gears", another big hope for xbox fanboyz to have a game who can compete graphicly with ps3 exclusives (after halo3, alan wake, crysis :))

"but when I tried theoretically compare Killzone 3 and Halo Reach based on these questions - Reach easily came on top."

LOL.

[negative]

@MysticStrummer LAME. Get past it troll.

[jjohan35]

I stopped caring which game looks better. Crysis 2 > Killzone 3 for one reason alone... you can't stay invisible indefinitely in Crysis! There is a practical COST to every 'perk' you choose to do in Crysis. The classes in KZ3 are so broken like staying invisible forever in the corner of a room with an assault rifle or being completely useless as a medic. I don't doubt that GG will fix all the bugs and network issues in KZ3, but they seem indifferent to the various gameplay issues and class balancing issues over at their official forums.

[ipe]

well digital foundry, lens of truth all said the kz3 is still the one to beat, so i really dont get all these articles about crysis on consoles.

[MysticStrummer]

Selective perception. Both sides of this "war" are guilty of it. If LoT and/or DF back up their agenda, they'll bring it up all over the place like it's the Word of God. If those sites don't back up their agenda, they ignore it and keep babbling.

[RBLAZE1988]

Personally...I thought that killzone 2 looked better than killzone 3. There were some parts in K3 that looked magnificent but I think overall killzone 2 looked better. The jungle part had some of the best graphics tho. I think Crysis 2 is on par and probably looks more realistic than killzone 2 and 3 so I would say they are both graphics kings, Crysis 2 for realism and global illumination and lighting and killzone 2 for its stylized graphics. I really can't say that killzone 2 or 3 looks better or worse but they have such different styles you can't just lump it into 1 looks better than the other. Killzone looks more like cartoon style real and crysis 2 looks more realistic. Nobody can disagree and say that I am wrong here. I am simply stating fact.

Also as a side note...all the images that the website used for killzone 3 are all bullshots released way before the game came out while the crysis 2 images are from old builds of the demo. Why do these terrible article still populate this site. N4g will never be taken seriously like this.

[ngecenk]

well i think kz3 is way better vissually than kz2. its just kz2 has the wow effect at its time since it shines compared to other games. kz3 is still the best graphic but it did not has the wowomfg effect like kz2 did.

and for everyone thinks kz3 has been beaten graphically by cysis 2... cmon. just play the MP and you'll see.

[kikizoo]

Stop being delusional, even when they are comparing kz3 mp to crysis sp, kz is better, it's just impossible for a multiplatform or xbox exclusives to compete with ps3 graphics kings (like uncharted, gow, kz, etc)

[RBLAZE1988]

@ kikizoo you are the one that is delusional. Not once in my post did i say crysis2 was better looking. I said it was more realisticand killzone more stylized but your blind full on ps3 agenda led you to post something unrelated. I have played all those ps3 exclusives cause i only have a ps3 and played the best of 360 when i had it and crysis 2 is at the top along with killzone and uncharted. Killzone and uncharted have that high end cgi look while crysis 2 has a more photo realistic look. Next time read and stop being so ignorant.

[El Nino]

You obviously haven't played blood gracht or corinth on kz3 because they look so much better than the kz2 version.

[lelo2play]

"Crysis 2 Graphics What? Killzone 3 Still Best Looking FPS"

Lets wait for the PC version...

The tittle should be fixed...
"Crysis 2 Graphics What? Killzone 3 Still Best Looking FPS on the PS3"

BTW... can we compare a open world FPS to a linear FPS in graphics ?

[Perkel]

Crysis 2 is no open world/sandbox so you can compare...

[starchild]

Compared to the utter linearity of Killzone 3 it sure is. Crysis 2 gives you a lot more freedom both vertically and in terms of the size of the explorable areas.

Crysis 2 has a much more advanced lighting system. HDR, Global illumination, a massive number of dynamic soft shadows, and multiple light sources all make Crysis 2 stand out. Killzone 3 really only shows off the last of those features. That is, they both use deffered rendering to allow for a huge number of light sources. However, Killzone 3 lacks HDR and Global Illumination, and doesn't have nearly the same number of dynamic shadows being cast throughout the environment.

Crysis 2 has better physics. No argument here.

Crysis 2 has much better water. It looks much better from a visual perspective, but it also has much more interaction. For example, when I shoot the water in the Icy Incursion level in Killzone 3 there is no reaction what so ever--no splash, no ripple, nothing. When I shoot the water in Crysis 2 there is a realistic splash and ripple effect. I can also dive into the water and swim underwater, all the while enjoying some superb light refraction effects.

Textures between the two games on consoles is about on par.

Character models are better in Crysis 2.
Crysis 2 character model: http://img25.imageshack.us/...
Killzone 3 character model: http://www.play-mag.co.uk/w...
No contest, Crysis 2 wins hands down.

Neither game on consoles is really that great in terms of anti-aliasing. To my PC gamer eyes they both have a hideous amount of jaggies. But I know console gamers are used to that.

Crysis 2 also uses a greater diversity of material shader effects. The specularity and shine of a car, for example, looks much different than a brick wall in Crysis 2. Objects in Killzone 3 tend to have more of a sameness about them, as if everything were being molded out of the same material.

Killzone 3 still looks very good overall. But comments to the effect that it "destroys" Crysis 2 on consoles are pure bunk. I'm not saying the reverse is true either. The fact is, they are both in the same ballpark. Even if one looks better than the other it isn't going to be by much.

Crysis 2 on the PC, running on a good rig, well that is another story. I'll likely be playing at 60fps, 16xAAF, and much higher settings for anti-aliasing, lighting and effects. Even the Crysis 2 multiplayer demo is vastly superior to Killzone 3.

[xAlmostPro]

Crysis 2 is NOT open world stop talking crap.. assassins creed, grand theft auto, oblivion etc they ARE open world aka you can go where you want, when you want..

This is not the case in Crysis 2.. It's still scripted levels, you just get to go your own way which always leads to the place you have to go.. so you can go up those stairs or jump in the water and swim across and up the ladders that take you to the same place.. it's not open world, it just has multiple paths.

@Starchild well done sherlock, of course the PC version will look better than console killzone 3. Fact is the console version of crysis 2 doesn't look as good as killzone 3.

You can go on about how the water looks better.. How there's better forms of lighting..

Fact is though although crysis 2 does these well, there's never anything happening.. the water just sits there always calm, until you jump in or shot it.. it ripples then it's calm again.. the KZ3 water is flowing, swooshing around causing huge waves etc.

The lighting technique in crysis 2 may be better, but again it's used for nothing it's always froma 'sun' source.. where as outside lighting in killzone is caused by multiple things then you have snow and snow blindness etc then indoor you have all the dust particles etc.

Crysis 2 is pretty, but lacks immersion the only time things happen in crysis 2 are scripted moments, where your shooting AI or your doing the action, nothing else is ever going on..

Also Kz3 doesn't drop graphically in multi-player.. :)

Crysis 2 PC>Killzone 3 but that's just completely obvious.

Killzone 3>Crysis 2 console

P.S proof that crysis 2 is not open world http://www.youtube.com/watc... <if that's open world so is killzone 3, if you've played kz3 you'll know that you get to walk around in that manor at certain parts of the game

[zeddy]

i just had a couple of hours on the 360 with cry2 and though its the best looking game on the 360 its not mind blowing. kz3 looks better and it doesnt even come close to god of war 3.

[VenGencE999]

You know if more of you spent your free time earning extra cash you could buy both and spend more time playing games rather than fighting over each others opinion.

Do none of you not realize you can't win an argument of opinion? Or do you all just like to pee on each others shoes for the hell of it?

I think Ms pac-man is the best looking game in the world, you're going to waste your time telling me it's not? This isn't a fact, it's an opinion. It might suck but, it's still mine and to hell with you if you don't agree!

play games, have fun

[palaeomerus]

I own KZ3 and have preordered Crysis 2 and Crysis 2 is looking better than KZ3 from the videos out. That's just the way it is.

[kikizoo]

Yeah palaeomerus (without ps3), but only for fanboys living in opposite world, just read the title "Killzone 3 Still Best Looking FPS
": that's just the way it is, and only most hardcore denial boys, or boys with bad eyes or TV are disagreeing with that fact.

[Shaman]

Why didn't he put any direct feed SINGLE PLAYER shots?Stupid,biased N4G.Try to tell yourselves what ever you want but Crysis 2 is best looking game on consoles.In SP I mean,in MP not even close.
Anyway,first direct feed SP shots of 360 and PS3.

360
http://i1199.photobucket.co...

PS3
http://i1199.photobucket.co...

360
http://i1199.photobucket.co...

PS3
http://i1199.photobucket.co...

Thank you for your attention :D

[WetN00dle69]

You are very welcome good sir! And thanks for the pictures. The console version looks mighty fine.

[Shaman]

Oh yea...new night time 360 footage.Guys,look at that lighting.

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

[WetN00dle69]

HOT DANG does that look amazing!
Thanks for the video Shaman.

[Ju]

Hm...so much for fully dynamic lightning, huh? 2:35...three characters walk right by a lamp...no shadows what so ever. Can't be "that" dynamic, can it?

[Pandamobile]

Not every light source casts a shadow. That would be incredibly expensive to render. The console versions of the game have less in the way of shadowing compared to the PC version.

All of the point lights, headlights, etc cast shadows in the PC version on hard-core settings.

When I was dicking around in the CE3 Sandbox I found that there's simply a check box in the properties tab for each light source. In that check box, you just click for which configs the light will cast shadows in. All of the important lights, such as those that light whole rooms have shadows enabled for all configs (low, consoles/medium, high, very high). Stuff like the lamps only have shadows on high, and very high spec.

[RatherHavaBigGirl]

fk the fanboys, for me, crysis 2 looks better. kz3 looks good but crysis 2 looks better to me

[eliasg]

fanboys reactions are always... fanboys reactions

Crysis 2 > Killzone 3

[lil Titan]

57 people are in denial and need there eyes checked

[tordavis]

Wow I didn't know you guys had the game already.

[TheLastGuardian]

Prcko, you mean PS3 exclusives FTW!

[Focker420]

We already know this.

[Flexatron]

On console it may be the graphics king but not when compared to PC. Besides, for Crytec's first try on ps3 and 360, I would say they did a pretty damn good job.

[xAlmostPro]

It's complete common sense that the PC version looks better than console games though, it doesn't need to be said.

[DrRichtofen]

This article is pointless

[Rage_S90]

amen to that but at least it makes the comments section give me lulz

[KrystofKage1]

Agreed. What good is graphics if there is no innovation in gameplay? That's like having a super model girlfriend who is dead in the sack.

[MoreRPG]

people care too much about graphics

[hiredhelp]

i care about graphics yes ill come right out say it first thing i look for is graphics. i dont pay few hundreds for console for old graphics. i got my psp for that exception of god of war ghost sparta wow.

[VenGencE999]

I hope you have tons of fun playing graphics

[PotatoClock]

Hes obviously the kind of person who can stare at a pretty picture all day.

There are so many great games that don't even get close to the power of graphics these days but are much more incredible games. Buldurs Gate 2 anyone?

[hiredhelp]

wow looks like i got a few responses.
firstly if you go out a pay money you cant afford on a console with a crazy price tag like i did on ps3 come out at £600. and say oh dont matter about graphics you be lying.
also i may come across like the rest dont matter dead wrong. gameplay is very important but lets face it most of recent games are all sameish so were the play in that. but there are some games that offer a little extra. my point was to MoreRPG.
i care about graphics. but i also like to see good gameplay thats why i dont have a stack full of ps3 games cos im always keeping the ones that have that mix. and sell the ones that are bad to go towrds another game.

[Imalwaysright]

A bad game with best graphics in the world at the end of the day will still be a bad game. A good game with crappy graphics at the end of the day will still be a good game.

[MoreRPG]

a good game with crappy(well not so crappy)graphics Fallout 3

[guigsy]

I'd rather play the one with the better gameplay.

[EXID]

i agree~ graphics are important now but they can only get you so far... apparently the people who disagree should be watching pixar movies instead of playing games. i could care less which of the two actually looks better 'cause i'll end up playing the one that's more fun in the end. like honestly, i can go back and play xenogears and ff:tactics, and i know for a fact they'd be more fun than a lot of the games out now. neither use real-time lighting, or dynamic lighting, or aa, or any of that. we should be playing games for fun at this point. graphics are just gonna keep getting better anyways, so what's the point of arguing over this now?...

[palaeomerus]

No, people care too much about lying to themselves about the supposed huge graphics lead of the PS3.

But then they have to lie to themselves because reality simply doesn't match up to their wild expectations.

The systems have ALWAYS looked pretty similar and always will. But some fools can't handle that obvious fact, so they squeak and moan about how KZ2,3, God of War, Uncharted 2 supposedly have "UNBELIEVABLE GRAPHICS" and about how Crysis 2 and Rage and Gears of War 3 all only look average or worse.

Sadly they just make utter make utter fools of themselves in this delusional process.

[tudors]

Looking at those screens KZ3 looks like a cartoon compared to Crysis 2, that's actually what I thought when I viewed them.

Updated with new Crysis 2 pic because the original gif didn't work.

[hiredhelp]

crysis 2 no matter how you feel . is a contender for killzone 3. they dont a amazing job. i love killzone 3 working my way towrds a platinum. but the use of the ps3 makes this game look as good as killzone 3 oh god cant beleave i just said that. im gonna get ass kicked.

there both very very good we should be glad to have both games simples. ok ass whooping time.

[Dead_Cell]

If it wasn't for the gun I would have mistaken Crysis for Kane and Lynch. It looks terrible.

[DaTruth]

I don't think that got your point across... at all! Unless your point was that cartoons look way better than reality!

I'm actually amazed that you could think that! Making a statement one way and then offering evidence in opposition to your intended point!

I've been day one for Crysis 2 for months, but I'm not blind!

[lugia 4000]

Crysis 2 PC > Killzone 3
And whoever says the contrary is an idiot.

[rdgneoz3]

Crysis 2 PC > KZ3 > Crysis 2 console

[theonlylolking]

How could someone disagree to that? KZ3 easily looks better than crysis 2 on consoles. I have seen the youtube videos of retail console gameplay . Now do not say youtube even in hd does not look the same as the real game. Crysis 2 on consoles is in sub HD so there would not be any real difference.

[Pixel_Pusher]

Now this is something I want to see just for kicks KZ3 vs PC Cry2 . Just to see where KZ3 stands against the almighty Crysis 2.

[plb]

I have KZ3 and played the PC demo of Crysis 2 and C2 blows it out of the water easily. No point in comparing the obvious. PS3 is 5 year old tech. Doesn't make KZ3 a bad game though.

[Manibi97]

Did you read the article? At the end it said Cry2 on PC beats KZ3. The article was referring to the console version.

[Silly gameAr]

@lugia

I'll just throw PC in there to calm my nerves a bit.

[SnakeMustDie]

You are stating the obvious. Just like me stating that Killzone 3 > Crysis 2 consoles graphically.

[HellzAssassin]

No shit, sherlock. That's not the debate here...

[DaTruth]

I know it hurts you PC fanboys feelings, but nobody cares about your platform! As much as you guys keep trying to pull yourselves into the console war, your articles don't generate hits, so no website will bother!

Everybody owns a PC and no fanboys have to justify their purchase; This is not 1985, owning a PC needs no justification and nobody feels bad about purchaing a PC over anything else, that's why there's no television versus radio fanboy wars!

[Ducky]

That's exactly the point.

When the console fanboys bicker between themselves on who's platform has a game with a 5% higher pixel count, the PC fanboys butt in to show (whether on purpose or indirectly) that those arguments are pants-on-head retarded.

It's like two people arguing over who has a faster bicycle while they both own a car, not realizing that what they're arguing about is such minute differences that wouldn't even be noticeable in a practical setting.

[Ducky]

... am I the only one who doesn't see much of a difference at all?
Not sure how people make their own conclusion seem like it's not a close call. O.o

Also, what's with the KZ background on that site? ... and the Crysis ad on the top. =/
Kinda makes it look dubious.

[tudors]

I think Crysis 2 is going to run away with the best looking FPS, not long to find out.

[Rage_S90]

its not the best looking on consoles imo and on pc there is a little game called battlefield coming ;)

[tompoulo]

I also think it will take the crown of best graphics, in my opinion Crysis 2 beats anything out there right now, maybe Battlefield 3 will take the crown later(will have to see the console versions first since not a lot of people have nasa pc's).

Of course Killzone 3 is also a stunner!!! Both games are amazing in the graphics department but i think Crysis 2 is more open, everything is real time and it is a HUGE game too!!!

Crysis 2 - consoles gameplay video not PC
http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Killzone 3
http://www.youtube.com/watc...

[tompoulo]

Actually video that really makes the games visuals shine is the following(i think it has already been posted)
SPOILERS(even though it is actually the level from E3)
http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Yeah it is the Xbox360 version!!!(at 6:35 a xbox live friend pops up online so it is not PC with controller) It is linear in that part but DAMMMMMMMMMMM... It is the best looking segment in any game ever!

[Fo7a]

kz3

[HungPHATx]

No question that KZ3 is the best looking console FPS WE'VE seen !

[RyuCloudStrife]

"In conclusion, whether you buy it for the PS3 or Xbox 360, the game will look great, but just remember that there is a bigger beast out in the wild. UNLESS YOU GET THE PC VERSION OF COURSE. But you decide."

yep eat it, love it haters

[tudors]

@HungPHATx I disagree.

Just these pics alone show it otherwise.

http://n4g.com/comments/rel...

[HungPHATx]

Everything look good in screenshots ! Give me video

[Firstkn1ghT]

Hmmmmmm....what are sony fanboys going to say? LOL!

Seriously, here comes another known sony fanboy site with damage control. Kz3 does some things right but the game has extremely horrible textures giving the whole game a blurry look. I'm sure sony fanboys are going to still believe that kz3 has the best textures ever but they're just lying to themselves. Crysis 2 has a much razor sharp cleaner look. Easily wins hands down.

[achira]

kz3 has the sharpest textures of any console game. you didnt even play it.

[Firstkn1ghT]

LOL! I rest my case! :)

[tompoulo]

Massive LOL! Seriously the way the comments evolved was so funny!

Firstn1ghT wrote:
I'm sure sony fanboys are going to still believe that kz3 has the best textures ever but they're just lying to themselves.

achira replied to this:
kz3 has the sharpest textures of any console game.

Firstn1ghT replied:
I rest my case

HILARIOUS! Maybe it's just me or the beers i was drinking earlier but i LOLED so hard with this!!!

[lodossrage]

Normally, the first one's crying about "Sony Fanboys" saying this, that and the third, are the xbox fanboys that pretty much do the same.

And as per usual, said 360 fanboy clings to the multiplatform game considering he/she doesn't have an exclusive to call their own.

Firstknight, you can sit here and tell yourself whatever you want to help you justify your xbox ownership. But much unlike yourself, I don't need to do that, I have killzone 3 and I plan on having crysis 2, probably the xbox version at that. I already know which one looks better. Psst, hint : it can only be found on one platform

And let me just say this now, don't waste your time or mine mailing me

[wages of sin]

I think some of you get high...a lot.

Crysis 2 on consoles and pc looks better than KZ3, and yes I have the game (psn: BookofJob)KZ3 looks amazing but Crysis2 looks that much better.

Haters gonna hate (i.e., SDF)

[Killzoned]

Am not even going to lie, but the Crysis 2 comparison on that website shows PS3 Crysis 2 looking better than the 360 version.

[WetN00dle69]

Look at Shaman's pics and you shall see that the PS3 and 360 version look about the same except for the PS3 blurriness that we all know and somewhat love.

[Nes_Daze]

Nothing new here, I wish a GTA5 announcement would arrive already so it can eclipse all these comparisons and flamewars.

[MysticStrummer]

These comparisons and flame wars will be eclipsed by the next set of comparisons and flame wars, whether it's GTA5 or something else. This is N4G. OT - How anyone can say C2 on consoles looks better than KZ2 or KZ3 is beyond me. It looks very nice, but not that nice. Also... lol at the PC folk. Leave no console article untrolled, fellas.

[LMS]

crysis 1 annihilates killzone 3
http://www.incrysis.com/for...
(scroll down a bit for screens)

crysis 2 on all platforms looks better than killzone 3

crysis 2 on pc maxed out will shred anything the ps4 or xbox720 comes out with for the first year

[Killzoned]

No idea why you've come here just to show some Crysis 1 Pics. Yes Crysis 1 is a beast, its much more of a monster compared to Crysis 2.
Crysis 2 isn't as demanding as Crysis 1, As a PC gamer this is a DOWNFALL MATE
I maxed out Crysis 2 MP on hardcore settings with over 150fps.

[RyuCloudStrife]

on mushrooms

[Gamer_Z]

@LMS

Thats Crysis 1 dude, Crysis 1 beats all other games graphics wise even Crysis 2 so your point is kinda mute.

[jbiz320]

Both have amazing console graphics.. the question is which one PLAYS better.. Stopped getting sucked into this pointless debate.

[WetN00dle69]

Why cant we just like both games and their graphical awesomeness rather than make these useless articles?

[Kingdom Come]

Perhaps console, but not including the PC version of Crysis 1 and 2, they are the Kings overall. Plus Killzone brags Console graphics but doesnt have the gameplay to back it up.

[Insanelyman]

NO WAY! Crysis 2 owns Killzone 3. So you guys are telling me CGI looking graphics are better looking then real life looking graphics. Killzone 3 does look amazing and we all know that but Crysis 2 is way better looking.

Real life > CGI like

[MysticStrummer]

lol You think that looks like real life? Are you on a steady diet of shrooms? C2 looks nice and we all know that but KZ3 is better looking. Talking about the console version of C2 of course, which this article is about, not that the PC folk seem to care.

[Insanelyman]

Where in my comment does it say that I was talking about PC huh? Obivously you are on the shrooms and need a steady diet. Next time read slowly and understand what someone writes before you start thinking what they wrote.

P.S. Get your eyes checked out.

[NotSoSilentBob]

Crysis 2 Graphics What? Killzone3 still best looking FPS ON CONSOLES.

[fullmetal297]

Crysis 1 with mods will always be the best looking game IMO. May not have the production value of console exclusives but is made very well for a smaller budget.

[Gamer_Z]

This is pointless if you cant tell KZ3 looks better then Crysis which isn’t even an opinion its fact then you shouldn’t even bother looking at these screens because your clearly are blind or blinded by fanboyism.

[Black102WingS]

Crysis shouldn't mess with killzone 3 in the console department.

[Axonometri]

My Daddy has a bigger ___ than your Daddy! Yes he does! Yes Yes Yes.. Bigger plus infinity...

This is what I read in comments above... for the most part.

[IQUITN4G]

KZ3 doesn't feature large play spaces but rather directed tighter areas. People really are missing the point about how much more this allows- yet Crysis 2 still manages to look absolutely stunning and all with a lot more dynamic lighting as well.It's no suprise that all that impressive tech is wasted on those that wont understand the differences

Some gamers associate great graphics with heavily directed camera pans and that's KZ3's thing- dynamic play spaces, lets be honest now, are not.Very little of the enviroment can be interacted with

[MysticStrummer]

Not many seem to give MAG a pass for having huge levels and 256 players in a game. Just sayin. The bottom line is both KZ2 and KZ3 look better than either console version of C2.

[Sharky5]

i own all systems...and love'em all, but u ps3 fanboys just wanna stay blind to the facts...

[sourav93]

I own all systems too. My hex core gaming rig reigns over all of my other systems. But, if I forget about my beast for one moment, then the true fact is that killzone 3 does look better than crysis 2 on any CONSOLE platform. And no, crysis 2 is definitely not a sandbox. If you say it is, then I recommend you look up the definition of sandbox. Peace.

[P_Bomb]

Opinions are not facts.

[lodossrage]

the fact that people disagreed with that statement shows how infantile most here at n4g are.

he's right, opinions AREN'T facts

[hoops]

KZ3 looks better than Crysis 2. Its a given. Anyone saying otherwise is fooling themselves. This should not be a debate at all. Just look at the comparison videos. KZ3 looks better.

Now saying that, how would KZ3 look if it had the same type of large level designs as Crysis 2 AND ACTUALLY use HDR in real time with Real time Global Illumination that KZ2/3 does not have with the type of interaction with the enviroment? I think the results would be different....
The technology behind the Cryengine is more advanced than the engine used in KZ3.
If Crytek wanted to have the best looking game they could have opted to do what GG did with KZ2/3.
Use NAO32. Use LDR. Do not use real time global illumination. Not make the levels so big. Reduce the interaction with the environment to a minimum. Etc.
KZ3 looks better than Crysis 2 but what Crytek has going on with the engine is amazing considering how the game looks on consoles....and IMO they fucked up the PC version by concentrating on the Xbox360 version and then porting it to the PC.
This is wht pisses me off with Crytek. Otherwise what they done with this engine for consoles is short of amazing.

[Optical_Matrix]

Definitely the best looking FPS on consoles without a doubt. Not sure how anyone with eyes can say otherwise.

[xtreampro]

If Crysis 2 was a PS3 exclusive they'd be praising it like it's a PS4 launch title.

[Insanelyman]

You are so right and since its not they cannot accept the fact that a multiplatform game looks better then killzone.

[winflasher0]

No, you just can't accept the fact that Killzone 3 looks better than crysis 2 on consoles.

[P_Bomb]

@xtreampro, Insanelyman, Menorasta

Yeah, because you always hear about how MAG, Socom Confrontation, Haze, Afrika, Last Rebellion, Yakuza, 3D Dot Game Heroes, Warhawk etc are the best damn looking games ever. Always. Ever. /s

I feel dumber for having read this thread lol. So much drama, over a multiplat' no less.

[lodossrage]

"If Crysis 2 was a PS3 exclusive they'd be praising it like it's a PS4 launch title. "

And on the flip side, look at the way you people from the "other camp" cling to and praise crysis 2 because you have no exclusive to cling to and praise

And since you people love to pixel count, when lens of truth compared crysis 2 to killzone 2, it wasn't even able to out do killzone 2's graphics. so what makes you think you're beating out kz3

[baodeus]

@lodossrage

First it is lens of lies (you guys said it yourself, not me), so now they are correct? But just to hell with it, KZ2 does look better than KZ3 (it doesn't have to do split screen, 3D and such).

@windflasher
why don't we ask LOT to compare like arcade game that ran at 1080p at 120fps to KZ3, and see how that turn out. What do subHD and HD actually means?

FACTS needs to be proven, not just saying it and it is not like you guys have credibility anyways. I want proof (tech discussion in details).

This is a reassurance topic, and i hope u fanboy can keep it up. Keep telling yourself that nothing beat KZ, UC, GoW like 100 times each day, you know it might works. Almost there guys, keep it up.

[lodossrage]

"I" never said anything. Unlike most here I don't pixel count here. You all here swear by Lens of Truth and Digital Foundry all day. So I figure why not use it since everyone swears by it any other time, why should now be any different?

And from what I've seen (since I have BOTH KZ2 and KZ3) I can safely say KZ3 looks better than KZ2. And the best part is, I don't need any website to "verify" it for me. I have both to do that for me just fine

[MeNoRasta]

I bet if crysis2 was a ps3 exclusive, all ps3 fanboys would give the game a little more credit.
But being its a multi plat its gonna get hate.

[lodossrage]

And being that xbox fanboys have no exclusive to call theirs at the moment, they cling to it like no tomorrow and give it too much credit.

So at the end of the day, your point is?

[firetaw]

i dont have time to look at all those different screenshots!!! just put all 3 version side by side for similar shots and ill be happy.

[ColecoVision]

Anytime someone goes to the "here's proof" on the internet, that someone is immediately discredited.

[iNMyFiN4LH0uR]

you have no credibility if you speak ill about killzone 3 and its visuals, the game has mind blowing graphics. call of em fanboys lads, but some of us have ps3s, 360s i myself included and rest assured, killzone 3's level of detail in those war torn envoirnments is an achievement in graphics, every reviewer raves about it, everyone who played it does. But those who quite can't understand is those who are bitter about the inability to play a ps3 exclusive.

[Legendary-Status]

lol haha what ever KZ3 hand's down & the funny thing about it is that GG is not done...it keep's getting better until they reach max perfection...KZ4 should come out with the PS4 as a launch title and smack everybody in the face haha...this argument about C2 vs kz3 on Console's I don't have to repeat myself no more is plain STUPID! just like I been hearing people say Gears3 will be better than Uncharted3 in the Graphics Department.. yeah in their DREAMS..

[The_Ultimate_Guy]

" let’s not forget that the truth is…Killzone 3 wipes the floor with the Crysis 2 console screens and remains the best looking FPS on a console this generation. "

Just another Sony Fanboy trying to pass off his OPINION as Fact.

It is NOT "truth" as shown in the quote.

This "article" loses all credibility as soon as he said "Truth" followed by "Killzone 3 wipes the floor".

Sony fanboys are Pathetic. Just sad.

P.S. IMO Crysis 2 looks better than Killzone 3.

@ winflasher0

"The FACT is killzone 3 looks better that crysis 2 on consoles."

Thank you for showing the ignorance of Sony fanboys. You're clearly a devoted member of the Sony Church.

Once again, "opinion" is not "fact" and I think you're wrong. Crysis 2 is the best looking FPS this gen on either console IMO.

So now, and the rest of your Sony brethren can take MY opinion and stick it up your butt.

[winflasher0]

LOL keep your opinion to yourself. The FACT is killzone 3 looks better that crysis 2 on consoles.

[hoops]

KZ3 does look better...

...and it should. It lacks HDR, and most of its lighting is not in real time.
Does not have the size of the levels in Crysis 2 and does not have Real time global illumination among other things. So give Crysis 2 some credit.
It does not look as good, but the engine is doing more.

[WetN00dle69]

You should take your own advice! You should keep your opinions to yourself. It is not a fact that Killzone 3 looks better than Crysis 2 since we all have different tastes and see things differently. I say both games look amazing others will say Crysis 2 looks better while many(PS3 fanboys.) will say Killzone 3 does..........it will be an never ending loop full of opinions and not facts! May you all have a great night.

[The_Ultimate_Guy]

"You should take your own advice!"

This comment makes absolutely no sense. My advise was for typical Sony fanboys to stop presenting their opinions as if they are some kind of fact hence why I said "IMO I think Crysis 2 looks better than KZ3, which means I am following the "advice" (which really isn't advice but more an observation) that I am giving or in this case pointing out.

@ winflasher0

What does "sub HD" have to do with how great a game can look on screen? Did you forget that MGS4 is also "sub HD"? So now suddenly MGS4 is an ugly game? Use your head winflasher0 and stop being so delusional.

[winflasher0]

Did you forget crysis 2 is sub HD? Then again you have no games to compare with KZ3, so you defend a multiplat you probably won't buy.

[AnxietyAttack]

Rage and Gears 3 will look better than both anyway.

[xtremegamerage]

I think it's all to do with style. Art etc.

Crysis 2 & Killzone 3 are completely different.

Crysis 2 goes for a realistic type city look with excellent lighting.

Killzone3 goes for stylized look, has different lighting, but still manages to look fantastic, with alot going on.

I love the look of both tbh, and that's what's best about gaming, different engines bring different looking games/graphics etc.

I don't want one engine used for everything.

There is no fact that one looks better then the other, it's what you enjoy looking at that matters.

On the subject of crysis, i would not even call that openworld. More open island.

Trees,Trees,mountains,water,t rees,mountains,trees.

Go to far in the water, you'll die in either games.

Yes it's more open, but you still have to complete objectives, otherwise you cannot progress(linear)

Love the games, but i wish people would stop talking BS.

[Masterchef2007]

For me Killzone 3 looks better than Crysis 2. Everyone knows that the best looking games are exclusives. And i am talking about both platforms not just the PS3.

[vandal GAB]

Wow the KZ3 fanboys resorting to using a multi player screen of the Crysis beta lol, and also showing the PS3 version running on a later build than the xbox you fools. Get over it your crown has been taken by Crytek. A multiplat game looks better than one of your mighty exclusive lol at you now. I must admit I do admire your loyalty to Sony they have you completely brain washed hahahahah!

[josephayal]

Crysis 2 its the best looking Multiplat, but KZ2/KZ3 looks 3X better

[Father Murder X]

Fight Night CHampion kills all games so far this gen. Uncharted 2 included.

[34543534798]

Crysis 2 console ports are retarded
looks like shit
and that's just talking about the graphics

Killzone 3 looks and IS a better game

^fact

[Doc_Splice]

Fuckin' ell, hate to break it to you guys but it's a bloody OPINION for the most part on which looks 'better'.

[Master_S]

KZ3 loook good in PS3,BUT GENERAL CRYSIS 2 IS THE BEST.

[rlm41]

Get over it fanboys. Killzone aint the greatest thing to ever happen.

Crysis 2 is technically more advanced than Killzone 3, has a more open world, fantastic visuals and is pushing both the Xbox 360 and PS3 to their limits.

Go have a look at wikipedia at all of the things that the CryEngine 3 is capable of and doing in Crysis 2. The Killzone 3 engine doesn't even come close, sure it has a nice art style but that is about it. The same thing will probably happen with Codename Kingdoms and will probably end up looking better than both of these games seeing how Crytek will have more experience, feedback and knowledge from Crysis 2.

[Enjoi1870]

Killzone 3 isn't even close to the greatest game

[hoops]

You are preaching to the choir. The reality is Crysis 2/Cryengine is performing tasks the KZ3 engine is NOT doing. However if you state this on this site, you lose bubbles and get disagrees up the ying yang.
All one has to do is research the capabilities of the Cryengine then listen to what GG said what the game engine for KZ2/ does and its capabilities.
At that point you will see that the Cryengine is performing tasks above and beyond what the current KZ3 engine is doing.
Now I await losing bubbles for stating this.....

[Enjoi1870]

No that would be killzone 3..........not saying its the best game lol cause its diffently not even close....but seems everyone only cares about who has the best graphics and not gameplay.....but o well killzone 3 will always win is graphics to ps3 fans like myself....

[lee_ten]

i agree. :)

[LMS]

killzone 3 uses 540p grainy ass smoke effects to try to hide the low res textures and MASSIVE jaggies everywhere,
the only way the game was even playable for me was hooking it up to my 24" monitor so it would minimize the terrible aliasing

on my 50" panasonic it looked awful

[blakstarz]

what site or information shows that it does? Every site says its running at 720P.

[blakstarz]

If all these disappointing screen-shots of the PS3 version represents the final build, then YES, KZ3 mops Crysis 2 all over the floor, but GG knows the PS3 inside out , so Crytek would have to really do their homework to claim they are really pushing the PS3, but they really are not because this title is multiplatform, so they are never going to tap all the resources their is on the PS3.

[Renewman]

While Crysis 2 is going to be a beast of a game for Crytek's first outing for the PS3, Killzone 3 still sets the benchmark for console FPS at the moment. Anyone saying that KZ3 looks terrible is seriously trolling and just mad that no one agrees with their opinion. I've played it in both 3D and on my own 52" Bravia and in some levels my mouth dropped at the textures and overall presentation of the game. PS3 fanboys need to give Crytek credit for what they managed to do with the PS3 and 360 fanboys need to stop getting up in arms over the fact that you disagree with Crysis 2 being below KZ3. Mark my words, the same crazy 360 fanboys in here will do the same thing when Rage, Brink, etc. comes out. People just hate to be wrong.

[Ashriel]

ugh, what a shitty comparison o_o

[tubers]

KZ3 looks really good!

What really looks better is "subjective".

Killzone, even with so much less color palette has an amazing artstyle.

Crysis 2 (on consoles), even with horrible texture and object pop ins is more photo-realistic and a much much wider color variety.

Up to you guys.

[Haseo106]

the only FPS shooter that can have a chance to beat Killzone 3 is Battlefield 3. The trailer shows how awesome its graphic is. Crysis 2 is nothing compared to Killzone 3!

[cstyle]

crysis 2 looks better. Ive played KZ3 and only seen video of crysis 2 and can tell even by that its better.

[waterboy]

note 98% of posters here are pc fans anyway

[iamgoatman]

I can't tell if you're just putting on this facade in order to live up to your username, or if you are really that thick. Either way it suits you.

[sp1deynut]

Sony fanboys are so funny....and delusional.

[blakstarz]

I guess the same thing can be said about 360 fanboys and PC fanboys too....don't forget to include them.

[Tigan]

killzone 3 is one blurry mess. In no way does it look better than crysis 2. It's worse than killzone 2 i would say.

[zero_cool]

Get your eyes & your brain checked you got serious issues!

[Adolf]

Crysis 2 looks better.Just click at kz3 screens in article-sprite fire (lol in 2011), blur, lowres textures...

[zero_cool]

Another person that needs their eyes & brain checked!

[Adolf]

Another person from sonyworld with sonyeyes and sonybrain.Whats new in your world?Did Gabe announce HL3 as PS3 exclusive?KZ3 sells over 10 million copies yet?

[Xi]

horrid comparison, a static scenery shot with next to nothing in it compared to action shots with explosions going off.

I'm not going to say either is better, all I will say is that this comparison is garbage.

[baodeus]

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

This is pretty insane, usually i don't care much for graphics, but this look really good and intense. I guess it isn't next gen until EA (cryteck and Dice say so). I can't believe that x360 and ps3 can ran something like this (hence that joke at the beggining of the game: can x360/ps3 play crisis).

[imt558]

C2 Sub-HD graphics vs. KZ3 HD graphics??? C'mon, no way.

Btw.. If you don't know which game has better graphics ( C2 Or KZ2 or KZ3 ), go read KZ2, KZ3 and C2 article on Digital Foundry. Than you will know.:-)

[baodeus]

i know, i read it. DF was looking at the C2 multiplayer demo didn't they? They were hoping to see more of the impressive tech from crytek in the finish version sp.
1. They were comparing an old built of multiplayer cs2 (not sp) to kz2.
2. From looking just at those videos, are there more things going on in KZ3 than Crysis 2 (physics, scale, enemies, particles, lighting, textures, interactive environment, etc...) or KZ is much more linear and scripted (some of the most impressive sequences are on rail right)?

Didn't u read their tech analysis of kz3 as well, it actually doesn't do much more than kz2 (beside using MLAA, but that doesn't work in everything except like in the swamp/jungle stage, GG used entirely differed lighting not dynamic lighting, the framerate is actually slower than kz2 but the movement in the gun is faster making it looks as though the framerate improve but it isn't, GG also have problem maintaining textures and frame rate in split screen mode and especially 3D, GG used really low resolution for the environmental effects). It is not like KZ are perfect in everyway, it has some major down sides to it as well to achieve that looks (think of GT5 where they sacrifice almost everything to get non native 1080p resolution for the cars).

Now think of Halo Reach using HDR, differed lighting, similar particles effect, larger scale, more enemies at onces, better texture overall, similar AI, and also do 4 people split screen no problem (given it ran a little below HD) i'm not even sure if KZ is better than halo reach (the look of halo is unique and may not be as pleasing to look at as KZ, but don't underestimate the tech that ran underneath it.)

U know there are arcade games that ran at 1080p at 120fps, so does it mean it is better than KZ? If you look at what is running underneath, the HD resolution actually doesn't mean anything.

So games like CoD: mw ran at 600p but double the frame rate of kz2 at 60fps (rendering double that of KZ), so what does that means?

It really depends on what developers goal and how they want their game to ran. Again, the hardware is about the same, how the games ran or looks really depends entirely on developers.

[Killzone3___]

Both have different type of graphics so it's not fair comparing both , crysis 2 graphics are great , you people are really complicated , some people say graphics doesn't matter but when they have a good graphic games they say graphics does matter ...

graphics doesn't matter if it doesn't effict on the fun , nintendo-sega-ps1-ps2 proves that , if the game have good gameplay and a good enouph graphics the graphics doesn't matter , look at ps2 games , alots of games don't have the best graphics but did that effict on the fun?.. i'll say yes but it only effict alittle , same with any game out there ...

but that doesn't mean developers get lazy on making the best graphics they can , if someone have a good idea don't waste it by making crap graphics , it does effict a little , try to take advantage of the idea and make the best of it....

[NVIDIAGeek]

Battlefield 3 IS THE KING! It ain't KZ3 nor C2.

[NathySW]

Just LOL.. KZ3 is made look good with all the motion blur.. but yea crysis is ment to be a PC game.. dumbed down for all the cheap ass consoles

[MARKUS_MAX1MUS]

It Disgusts me as a gamer to see the shallow Trolls that buy games for graphics.

If your one of these people who goes out and buys a game just because the graphics look good your a tool.

What you people dont seem to understand is the "Wow factor" that great graphics have, wears off after 20 minutes of playing the game. After that 20 mins if the gameplay is shallow and doesnt have a good feel I put it down.

[FrigidDARKNESS]

i would say Crysis2 have better colors on screen that is easy on the eyes. KZ3 have those monotone colers that dominate the screen gtay brwn and the new color lime green.

[ManiacMansion]

PS3boys will search for excuses the whole GEN.

Fact is, that MS could expand their Userbase by 50% while SOny lost 50% of their fanbase.

Games like RAGE will own everything... 60 FPS > KZ3

[killalot100]

come on man dont let fanboys get to you. Rage runs at 60 fps on ps3 to. Shit they had it running at 60 fps on ps3 first. gears of way 3 looks great, killzone 3 looks great, crysis on both consoles looks great. Wish one looks better is up to you and you only. I just want better quality games tho

[Timactionfigures]

It never ceases to amaze me the arguing that goes on over graphics in games!

Surely there is room in the world for many games to look great! I will have both Crysis 2 AND Killzone 3 on PS3.....and not for a moment will I care which looks better...they both look GREAT!

[killalot100]

Both the console crysis demos looked ok but killzone 3 as of right now is the best looking console fps. I dont get how people are saying that game looks like shit while the other looks great? Do they really look THAT much better from each other? To me though Killzone 3 MP sucks ass right now, it very broken right now from class balancing issues to lag and so on. Dont believe me go to the killzone forums. http://community.killzone.c...

Cant say so much about Crysis MP because its not out yet but the demos/beta wasnt great either. Games are looking better but the quality of them are going to shit lately. I will no longer support low quality games.

[nevermore]

I'm getting pretty tired of seeing the words Killzone every where someone says graphics.

[killalot100]

still not as bad as crysis 1 though. Tho topic could be about best CONSOLE graphics and crysis 1 on the pc will still be mentioned to death

[theone26]

Agreed, killzone 3 is still the king.
Here's a better comparison, kz3 clearly looks better.
http://i56.tinypic.com/29oj...

[undercovrr]

Kz is darker and gives the illusion that it is better looking since Crysis 2 looks more 'cartoony', but that is not true. I'm not a graphics expert, but If you look at the recent gameplay videos of Crysis 2, it looks REALLY good. Granted, I can't judge how it is compared to Killzone until I have the game in my hands, but I see all these ps3 fanboys saying Killzone 3 looks MUCH better than Crysis 2. That is not true, they look really close, even if Killzone 3 is better looking (which i'm not saying it is).

[tudors]

@theone26 got to take my hat off too you for at least showing great screens, but I don't think it helped your argument.

[fullmetal297]

Crysis with mods is the king <333
http://www.youtube.com/watc...

[bobrea]

Who gives a shit? It's all about gameplay and PREFERENCE. I like KZ3's multiplayer better than Crysis 2's, but I'm not running around like this is some bullshit dick measuring contest and acting like graphics are the only thing that matters. You retards make me sick, and I'll probably get banned for saying that but I honestly couldn't care any less at this point.

[led1090]

check out this video....and then tell me killzone 3 looks better

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

[TacoBurrito]

LOL. If crysis2 were a PS3 exclusive and it looked exactly the same, these FANBOYS would be saying the opposite spit.

[GarandShooter]

And so would you. Funny how hypocrisy works, ain't it?

[InnerScar]

This article is just crazy, they compare the (crappy) Crysis 2 multiplayer demo with screenshots from the retail version of Killzone 3... A real fanboy article.

Take a look at this Crysis 2 trailer from the singelpayer, running on Xbox 360. It is unbelievable!

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

[DigitalPiracy]

Comparing a multiplat to an exclusive = fail. Crysis 1 looks better than both.

[bozebo]

what?

the killzone screenshots provided looks like ass compared to the crysis 2 screens for 360 and ps3.

[Arkhamz]

The graphics are brilliant in killzone 3 but you need to remember that graphics don't make the game. Look at crysis 1, amazing graphics..mediocre gameplay and I kinda feel the same way with killzone 2

[aia12]

graphics dont make a game but crysis 2 on consoles destroys killzone 3 and all other ps3 exclusives this is a fact

[zero_cool]

Cryek deserve to be criticized for shooting their big mouths off & failing to to live up to the hype they generated so they get no mercy in playstation community court room!

[aia12]

crysis 2 destroys killzone 3 graphically. I guess the 360 can handle all ps3 exclusives(but they'll have to be on 5-8 dvds though lol) . sony fanboys are insane to deny this looks like they are sexually attracted to their ps3s

[HaVoK308]

Because 2 colors is so fun to look at. There is no argument...it's a subjective and very personal preference.

LoL at the fan nerds above!

[masa2009]

That comparison is bull. It makes for an easy punchline but lacks any kind of journalistic slant.
By all accounts Crysis 2 will have much larger level design KZ3, which is strictly a scripted corridor shooter.
Crysis will have much more verticality, many more environmental interactions, as well as non linear gunfights.

KZ3 looked great for the most part, but it was as formulaic and restrictive as they come. I own a PS3 but I’m not gonna defend that kind of exclusive that brings nothing to the table, based on glitz alone.

I must admit that Crysis 2 looks a bit underwhelming on the PS3, but let’s see Guerilla achieve the same kind of level design and we’ll talk.

[blakstarz]

I'm sure KZ3 looks better than Crysis, for one thing GG knows the hardware VERY well obviously whereas Crytek probably doesn't. Second of all, KZ was build for the PS3 in mind and from the ground up, Crysis 2 wasn't, so no brainers on this outcome.

[aia12]

when will you realize that the ps3 specs sony gave was a lie ? game devs only has access to 6 of the cells 8 spus so the computational power available to developers is 178.8GFLOPS which still destroys the 360s cpu but the 360s gpu destroys the ps3's gpu(yes the rsx is MUCH weaker than xenos) crytek and IBM have mentioned this looks like you weren't paying attention. the rsx is so weak that you actually have more graphics work running on the spus than on the actual gpu itself which is only used for core rendering why EVERYTHING else is put on spus.

[blakstarz]

How is the RSX weak when its a newer Rambus than what is in the 360? And not only that the 360's memory is shared access for CPU and GPU which reminds me like how low budget E-machines with a shared memory video card whereas the PS3's memory is straight dedicated, so I don't know how people get off thinking that the 360 is THAT powerful, don't get me wrong, they both are, but its obvious each one is compromising something.
Just because the 360 has 512, its DDR3 and the fact that its shared access is a disadvantage, XDR is much faster and new, however, the PS3 uses the other 256MB towards GPU and that is DDR3 but not comprised with sharing anything, which is why people that think just because the PS3 has the 512MB split, doesn't make it look weak or inferior, just structured differently.
Now did Sony lie about their specs in the beginning..yeah they did, but overall power of the PS3 is definitely obvious.

[sethbalmore]

crysis2 shitkicks blurzone3, no contest

[strawberry9]

who gives a crap.... why does everything have to be a competition between you people...

[russo121]

xbots trying hard, hein? i don't understand is the so called pc gamers. do they feel threatned? why? maybe because the difference between kz3 and c2 in pc not so evident?

PS: don't take it personal - just asking.

[CaptainGreece]

Killzone 3 looks better but the Ps3 version of Crysis 2 looks awesome too.

[Undeadwolfy]

Okay, Im sorry but this is pissing me off now. WHY THE HELL ARE PEOPLE LINKING YOUTUBE VIDEOS? It doesn't help your argument whatsoever. You need actual source videos in their original uncompressed state to prove your point. Even when its true that Crysis PC version looks better than any FPS on consoles, linking a YouTube video doesn't help support your argument!

Killzone 3 is the best looking FPS on consoles. PERIOD. PC will always be superior in the graphics department for any game, PERIOD. However, the fact that a console with an older graphics card being used in conjuntion with Cell can produce the visuals it does, you have to admit is pretty amazing.

Nothing comes close to Killzone 3 graphics on console (FPS) wise. FACT
/Rant

[Sieg]

I'm not going to lie. KZ3 looks amazing and so does Crysis 2. But we're talking about console version of Crysis 2. As far as we know, KZ2 run at 720p and maybe the same for Crysis 2. As for PS3 and 360 version, both could be identical but run at different setting due to the hardwares. Let me tell you this now, no matter what system you play Crysis 2 on, it will look great. Some textures might be better but it's not going to stop you from playing it. If the textures are too much for, buy it for pc and run it with a ridiculous resolution with 8x or more AA or AT and be happy with it.

[jalen247]

Crysis 2 is the best looking multiplatform game.

Whether or not it looks better than Killzone 2/3 is debatable. But it is definitely worthy of discussion and in the same league.

I am a PS3 fan and I think PS3 fanboys should stop being in denial. Screen shots and game play footage don't lie. Crysis 2 console versions are definitely worthy of comparision to Killzone 2/3.

Crysis 2 on consoles may be sub-HD and run at a lower framerate than Killzone 3 and have jaggies whereas Killzone 3 barely has any jaggies. But the graphics are definitely in Killzone 2/3 league.

Killzone 3 is the overall winner because it is the more polished product over all....with higher resolution...higher frame rate...MLAA...better post processing effects and textures....etc...

[IHateYouFanboys]

Crysis 2, on the 360 at least, looks better IN MY OPINION than Killzone 3 does. on a technical level it is streets ahead of KZ3 too. ill explain my reasons for both my opinion and the technical side:

- Lighting: Crysis 2 uses Global Illumination, HDR, and goes for realism. it has god rays where god rays should be, the GI created dynamic shadows on everything all the time, and the HDR adds a lot to the realism. Killzone 3 has no Global Illumination, uses lots of pre-baked lighting/shadows (which isnt a bad thing, most games do because it makes sense), has no HDR, and has God Rays where they shouldnt really be (and doesnt have them where it should, like when you have your gun up against light sources partially obscuring the light source).

- Aliasing: both have their problems, but the MLAA being used for Killzone 3 just doesnt have anywhere near the same effect that it did in a game like God of War 3 because of the camera. in God of War 3 it smoothed edges brilliantly because the edges didnt move very quickly due to the fixed camera angles and the design of the levels (being mostly organic it wasnt all sharp edges and straight lines). Killzone 3s levels all feature mostly straight edges and lines due to it being in cities/buildings etc. when the cameras moving all over the place quickly and often, the MLAA just doesnt appear to hold up. one glimpse at any set of stairs in KZ3 proves this - its jaggie central. Crysis 2 uses 2 different types of AA, and from what ive seen first hand, they provide a less aliased image.

- Effects: Crysis 2 has a great use of depth of field, Killzone 3 seems to have eliminated this effect all together for some weird reason. looking down the sights of a gun in KZ3 doesnt give any depth of field blurring, leaving the entire screen in focus.

Crysis 2 uses per object motion blur brilliantly. killzone 3, again, seems to have eliminated most of this.

and little things like how when you cloak in crysis, you actually see your hands/gun go invisible, whereas in Killzone 3 the screen just goes green and a bit dark around the edges. why arent your arms/legs/gun invisible?

Killzone 3 really was a big step backwards graphically from Killzone 2 in every way apart from texture detail, which was greatly improved.

now personally, i prefer the realistic art style of Crysis 2 over the stylized look of Killzone 3. i love Killzone 3s style, but it looks quite cartoonish (Killzone 2 didnt, so im not sure why they went in that direction).

and on the technical level, well theres no question that Crysis 2 beats the pants off Killzone 3. the only thing that Killzone 3 has over Crysis is the native resolution, but that is pretty much not even worth mentioning. give me 1154x720 with global illumination, hdr, etc over 1280x720 with none of that any day. resolution isnt the be all and end all of graphics, its actually one of the most unimportant things.