Far Cry 2: 720p, but no 60 frames a second

jade0732 - 450 days 20 hours ago

so true

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

Maldread - 450 days 19 hours ago

Agreed. I would guess it`s 30fps though. Let`s just hope it`s locked at 30fps and it will be fine.

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report

JsonHenry - 450 days 18 hours ago

I am more interested to see what the graphical settings are compared to the PC version maxed out.

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report

mariusmal - 450 days 19 hours ago

umh... good luck trying to find a tv that does that :D
ask tony start to make one for you :D cheers mate

Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report

dude_uk - 450 days 19 hours ago

they did.. and its called motion flow..

thank you come again =D

Agree(2) | Disagree(2) | Report

dude_uk - 450 days 16 hours ago

ye, there is... your brain... it's walking backwards from a place called intelligence

Agree(1) | Disagree(3) | Report

mepsipax - 450 days 5 hours ago

the human eye can't even see at 120fps so unless you are a robot or alien than 120fps doesn't matter besides, everyone can tell far cry 2 is meant for the pc and 360, they hype the 360 version and show off the prettiness of the pc version, but where's the ps3? I'm guessing they couldn't figure out the cell things, well I'll get it for PC anyway, unless the mapmaker is console exclusive which in that case I'll get it for 360,

Agree(0) | Disagree(3) | Report

xg-ei8ht - 450 days 19 hours ago

Shame forza2 looks like crap. craptastic@60fps.

Agree(10) | Disagree(6) | Report

mariusmal - 450 days 19 hours ago

yup it looks bad i'll admit. but the game is great nonetheless. i prefer a racing game at 60fps with average graphics than the opposite.

but then again i see that ppl here don't think other ppl are entitled to their tastes and opinions.

Agree(4) | Disagree(0) | Report

mariusmal - 450 days 15 hours ago

yeah i know the drill. nice to see someone agrees

Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report

perseus - 450 days 19 hours ago

Really? Are you a tester?

Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report

Fishy Fingers - 450 days 18 hours ago

Cheboury

When and where have you played it? Because honestly I think your talking complete rubbish, the game (PS3 version) has only been shown hands on to select bunch of industry types and only a very small amount of early build footage has been shown.

Please explain or I will continue to think your talking rubbish.

Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report

Ghoul - 450 days 18 hours ago

some say it "suffers" from its softness

I say it "benefits" from the softness, i prefer the softness of the ps3 way more then the clinical 360 look

Agree(4) | Disagree(3) | Report

perseus - 450 days 8 hours ago

You know, claiming something on the internet is a complete waste of time without proof. For example,

I am the President of the Switzerland!

See? Meaningless. Show proof, or shut up.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

Yipee Bog - 450 days 6 hours ago

I am the president of Finland, but only on the weekends

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

Charmers - 450 days 18 hours ago

Nah you want to do what I do, run the folding at home gpu client to use up all those spare frames per second that are frivolous. It's funny really I can run all console ports max settings at 1680 x 1050 and still run the gpu folding client. The only game that loses fps rates is Crysis and Warhead.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

Ju - 450 days 14 hours ago

Ever played UT3 ? (on a console, I have to add).

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

blindfromthesun - 450 days 14 hours ago

Check out this article:

http://www.videogaming247.c...

Good to know the frame rate is good. Otherwise, another game I won't be buying.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

SIX-0-3 - 450 days 12 hours ago

not buying a game becuse the fame rate is twitchy....................... ................What has this world come to.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

pixelsword - 450 days 5 hours ago

Ratchet and Clank Future ran at 60 fps, but HAZE didn't; so it really depends on the experience of the programming team.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

mepsipax - 450 days 5 hours ago

while the ps3 can handle all these things at once, it is divided amongst the cells losing processing power on each cell, much like a dual core or quad core cpu, the 360 is known for it's graphics programming but can have trouble running things like lots of physics and events, it's hard to say who is the winner, we'll have to wait for next gen to see, I think the ps3 is very powerful and more powerful than the 360, but currently I'm having a way better experience with the 360. oh and if Deus Ex 3 is dumbed down because of the consoles than I'm going to kill M$ and Sony

Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report

SIX-0-3 - 450 days 12 hours ago

I could care less what the frames per secound is, as long as the game is fun and looks good it's a buy for me.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

sit down droid - 450 days 12 hours ago

i think the eye can register 60 frames a second. thats why games dont go above 60fps. it is pointless cause you cant see it :)
dont take my word for it though

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

baseballkid721 - 450 days 11 hours ago

if you showed me a game running at 30fps and 60fps, i can tell which is which.

60fps runs A LOT smoother than 30fps. look at last year's madden 08 on PS3 and 360, compare rainbow six vegas 2(360 version, of course) to cod4. my point is that you can see the difference between 30fps and 60fps.

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report