• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Crysis 2 Graphics - Are we too soon to hate ? Cryengine 3 shots within

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
no we re not.... BF3 is kicking crysis 2's behinde.

bf3hd1.jpg


bf3hd2.jpg



bf3hd3.jpg




Crysis 2 should have better grafics, its what made crysis 1 stand out.
 
Arkadrel said:
no we re not.... BF3 is kicking crysis 2's behinde.

(images)

Crysis 2 should have better grafics, its what made crysis 1 stand out.
Click to expand...
To be fair though, how can we be sure that those aren't bullshots as well?

Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge Battlefield guy and I'm totally on the bandwagon for BF3, and yes, it will most likely blow Crysis 2 out of the water. 🙂 I'm just saying though, for all we know all those BF3 "screenshots" are just PR images too.
 
james1701 said:
Batman AA has the push start button also, but there was never as much uproar over that as in this game.
Click to expand...

Only if you plugged in a 360 controller. Otherwise it said Click to Start, but you could also just press enter. There's a difference between having a start button, and blatantly saying "press start button" or "press start to begin"
 
natural environments are always going to be easier and more beautiful to replicate.
urban environments have alot of synthetic features that we see everyday that can be easily compared and nit picked about.

thats just my personal thought.

and those images are wayy too small and low res for me to even make an opinion.
 
Grooveriding said:
These are some shots using Cryengine 3 from GDC. Some are quite impressive imo. Obviously we've seen nothing like this in the demo, and these may be PR shots, but these are pretty nice imo.

It could be that Cryengine simply is not very impressive in an urban setting and indoor settings most of all, much like we saw in Crysis 1. These examples of Cryengine 3 are almost exclusively outdoor environments and are quite nice.

http://www.gamesblog.it/galleria/cryengine-3-03/

big_Image00021.jpg


big_Image00020.jpg


big_Image00015.jpg


big_Image00001.jpg
Click to expand...

yeah crysis always have beautiful lightning, but the screenshot is not that great compared the first crysis and after the fact that its already 4 years !!!!!!!!
 
LessThanDan said:
To be fair though, how can we be sure that those aren't bullshots as well?

Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge Battlefield guy and I'm totally on the bandwagon for BF3, and yes, it will most likely blow Crysis 2 out of the water. 🙂 I'm just saying though, for all we know all those BF3 "screenshots" are just PR images too.
Click to expand...

Have you seen the gameplay trailer?
 
Arkadrel said:
no we re not.... BF3 is kicking crysis 2's behinde.

bf3hd1.jpg


bf3hd2.jpg



bf3hd3.jpg




Crysis 2 should have better grafics, its what made crysis 1 stand out.
Click to expand...

Crysis was for the PC, Crysis 2 has to run on consoles and they provide the biggest market therefore there's a strong suspicion that Crysis 2 will not feature breathtaking graphics because consoles can't run them. That in case you hadn't realised (which I'm pretty sure you haven't) is the central thrust of this thread.
 
Oh my god BF3... At first glance it seems like youre playing a movie or something, the movement is so realistic

Wow, I havent been that impressed with graphics in years
 
RussianSensation said:
Just because CE3 can look amazing, it does not mean that the highest graphical effects that engine is capable of were actually implemented in Crysis 2. Perhaps DX11 will bring better quality textures, etc. compared to the Xbox360 version, the game looks only marginally better. How can an HD6970 at 1080p only look marginally better than the same game on the console using at best an X1950XT? We are probably talking 5-6x GPU processing power or more.
Click to expand...

looks like it's night, and day to me..

xbox 360
crysis-_-6_aiq3w11b.jpg


pc
crysis_demo___11_nmkdexhq.png
 
correct said:
looks like it's night, and day to me..
Click to expand...

There's a little difference, but... "night and day"? Really? All I can see is that the gun on the PC version is a bit more detailed. Other than that, they look nearly identical.
 
correct said:
looks like it's night, and day to me..
Click to expand...

The PC version looks cleaner, with a slightly more details, yet the DX9 textures on the PC still look sub-par for a 2011 game (looking at the railings, the floor, the buildings makes me sad after having anticipated this game for so long).

Texture Fill-rate performance
Xbox360 (X1950XT) = 10.0 GTexels/sec
HD6970 = 84.5 GTexels/sec (8.5x)

Umm....ya, basically Crytek put little effort into this game on the PC (unless DX11 patch is the surprise of the year :biggrin🙂.
 
i work in 3dCG and the only thing i am seeing is higher resolution environment color maps and better anti aliasing. The pc version has higher resolution normal maps on the gun which makes it look nicer, but other than that and the bad color/exposure balance on the xbox the 2 renders are the same. the only real poly difference would be the foliage seems to have higher res textures and possible a few more polygons.
 
RussianSensation said:
The PC version looks cleaner, with a slightly more details, yet the DX9 textures on the PC still look sub-par for a 2011 game (looking at the railings, the floor, the buildings makes me sad after having anticipated this game for so long).

Texture Fill-rate performance
Xbox360 (X1950XT) = 10.0 GTexels/sec
HD6970 = 84.5 GTexels/sec (8.5x)

Umm....ya, basically Crytek put little effort into this game on the PC (unless DX11 patch is the surprise of the year :biggrin🙂.
Click to expand...


Unless they did this on purpose, in dumbing the graphical detail down, to lessen requirements to run the game, due to mass complaints about the requirements of the its predecessor.

But I do agree. If that's the real detailing we'll get... seems pretty sub-par for 2011
 
Jacky60 said:
Crysis was for the PC, Crysis 2 has to run on consoles and they provide the biggest market therefore there's a strong suspicion that Crysis 2 will not feature breathtaking graphics because consoles can't run them. That in case you hadn't realised (which I'm pretty sure you haven't) is the central thrust of this thread.
Click to expand...

This is an odd statement given that BF3 is also going to be running on consoles. Why does the PC version Crysis 2 (so far) look inferior to BF3 if they both were also intended to have console iterations? My point is, BF3 apparently can have breathtaking graphics but also market towards console versions, yet the former touchstone of graphics game dumbs it down on all publicly available incarnations.
 
Last edited:
urban and indoor settings were mastered a long time ago, see half life 2.

realistic realtime rendering of trees was once basically considered a holy grail in 3d gaming but crysis 1 basically got that.

being crysis 2 is just a beta on DX9 or whatever, there is probably going to be lots of change until release, it's just interesting to see the thoughts and discussion about rendering particular settings go backwards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top