• 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 3: xbox 360 vs PC compared side by side

After 7 years, pc games should be radically different compared to an ancient xbox or PS3. This video just shows how much we are getting screwed. Yeah its a little sharper on a computer with $800 worth of video cards... yipee.

If I showed my friends this, they'd prefer the xbox version that doesn't need to be installed, tweaked, DRM'd etc...
 
The difference between the PC and xbox versions were extremely dramatic in that video. I know it's expected, but the PC version demolishes the 360 by a factor of 100 - and that is only at a 1080p resolution. The PC can go higher than still. Far more than any multi platform game i've seen prior.
 
Insomniator said:
After 7 years, pc games should be radically different compared to an ancient xbox or PS3. This video just shows how much we are getting screwed. Yeah its a little sharper on a computer with $800 worth of video cards... yipee.

If I showed my friends this, they'd prefer the xbox version that doesn't need to be installed, tweaked, DRM'd etc...
Click to expand...

This. It looks like a port. It is much better but not enough to justify the price difference.
 
I think you both needs your eyes checked !

Random rant, not directed at either of you: i'm so sick of PC snobs complaining about their games not having a checklist of 200 DX11 features in games. Sometimes I feel like there is a subset of PC users who don't actually game, but just stare at graphics and benchmarks....it's like this entire subset of PC gamers don't even care about a core game being good. If it doesn't have tessellation it sucks. If they can't use it for benchmarks it sucks. Gameplay doesn't matter to these people.

I think the graphics are pretty awesome in the PC version 😛 That isn't my primary concern however. I want good gameplay as in C1/CWH, and NOT crysis 2.
 
Insomniator said:
After 7 years, pc games should be radically different compared to an ancient xbox or PS3. This video just shows how much we are getting screwed. Yeah its a little sharper on a computer with $800 worth of video cards... yipee.

If I showed my friends this, they'd prefer the xbox version that doesn't need to be installed, tweaked, DRM'd etc...
Click to expand...


Looks at the Crysis 2 benchmarks...you could easily run it @ 16x12 in DX11 - Ultra Setting - HQ Textures with a GTX570 that was ~$300 at the time.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/crysis_2_dx11_vga_and_cpu_performance_benchmarks,8.html

I anticipate the same will be true for Crysis 3 and a hd7950 or a nicely overclocked 7870 XT which runs between $215 - $250.
 
Last edited:
aaksheytalwar said:
This. It looks like a port. It is much better but not enough to justify the price difference.
Click to expand...

Justify what?

Last time i checked my PC wasnt limited to crap games with poor visuals and a subpar media experience with a 40$ a year fee to even get online.

My PC is GOD compared to the Crap Box Miss Sixty.
 
Definitely a difference, but nothing that wows me.

Had liked to see a low vs console comparison, seeing how high the minimum requirements are compared to the other games
 
Insomniator said:
After 7 years, pc games should be radically different compared to an ancient xbox or PS3. This video just shows how much we are getting screwed. Yeah its a little sharper on a computer with $800 worth of video cards... yipee.

If I showed my friends this, they'd prefer the xbox version that doesn't need to be installed, tweaked, DRM'd etc...
Click to expand...

Installed Tweeked DRM'd?

You will find that it DOES need to be installed to a degree on console. There is no DRM on any game that i can remember that stopped me playing a legit game on PC. Also no tweaking needed just set to Very High and play.

Also my 7970 was £300 with VAT which is actually about $387 and plays at 1900x1200 which is close to double the xbox screen resolution at 60FPS and not 30FPS like console.

Oh and it doesnt look like crap like the console version and if your friends chose an xbox then i pity the fools.
 
blackened23 said:
Sometimes I feel like there is a subset of PC users who don't actually game, but just stare at graphics and benchmarks....it's like this entire subset of PC gamers don't even care about a core game being good. If it doesn't have tessellation it sucks. If they can't use it for benchmarks it sucks. Gameplay doesn't matter to these people.
Click to expand...

No one is criticizing the gameplay yet. Of course most PC gamers care about gameplay. The issue with Crysis 3 is it runs like a dog, and yet doesn't have next generation graphics either. It would be completely different if the graphics were amazing and it ran at 30-40 fps on a GTX680. Also, I think because Crytek pushed the graphics standard with FC1 and Crysis 1, we expect them to do so again. We also know that if Crytek pushed PC graphics to the next level, it would be great for the industry. Wouldn't you have wanted a game like Far Cry 1 to look like Crysis 1? No doubt gameplay trumps graphics. Many PC gamers love games like Braid, Limbo or Mark of the Ninja, but also appreciate graphical progress, especially after the hype Crytek created. What hype? This:

"Nothing will beat Crysis 3′s graphics for at least two years" ~ Source

Also, it would be nice to be able to use GTX680 SLI for next generation graphics, not only to deal with a 20-30 fps hit of MSAA/SMAA!

Either Crytek is trolling us with the Beta or my expectations for the game were out of touch with reality after all the hype they created. I haven't seen a single impressive Crysis 3 gameplay video or an in-game screenshot.

If you remove the MSAA/SMAA, the game looks like Crysis 2 to me!

1080P Everything on Low (no MSAA/SMAA)

Crysis3-multiplayer-beta-maximum-setting-screen.jpg


1080P Everything on High (no MSAA/SMAA)

Crysis3-multiplayer-beta-minimum-setting-screen.jpg


I smell Crysis 2 all over again graphically. I hope the gameplay is better than C2 however. 🙂
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure if this is the case, but in quite a few games the visuals will be intentionally reduced in multiplayer as to maintain a reasonable performance level. Either way it blows the 360 version out of the water...
 
RussianSensation said:
Either Crytek is trolling us with the Beta or my expectations for the game were out of touch with reality after all the hype. I haven't seen a single impressive Crysis 3 gameplay video or an in-game screenshot.

If you remove the MSAA/SMAA, the game looks downright ugly!


I smell Crysis 2 all over again.
Click to expand...

I can't spot a single difference in the two screenshots you provided.
 
tviceman said:
I can't spot a single difference in the two screenshots you provided.
Click to expand...

Mostly because it's using the same textures in both screenshots, and it looks to be low. It doesn't change textures until restarted. It's also picky about when you make the changes, sometimes it won't modify it's settings file and load the different textures.

This is a MP beta, it has no tessellation, no PADM, a lot of stuff is left out for performance. Look at the 7 Wonders videos, show me anything from Crysis that comes close; or the single player footage, CE3 is on another level right now.
 
tviceman said:
I can't spot a single difference in the two screenshots you provided.
Click to expand...

There are differences.

Look at the pipe on the left, 2 rings are completely missing on low. Also shadows are missing on the trees at the back.

My guess is that certain areas will have other entire textures missing also.

This would be a better comparison on Low vs Very High and an area with more going on.

The engine will have an idea how much it can get away with on each part of the map and will scale those areas up and down depending on how easy that area is to render.
 
Actually the XBox version looks AMAZING considering it's on 8 year-old hardware. The PC version is extremely disappointing. I got the beta installed this afternoon and it literally looks the same as Crysis 2. The PC version is almost identical to the XBox 360 version except for higher resolution rendering and high-resolution textures. This is pathetic.
 
MrK6 said:
The PC version is almost identical to the XBox 360 version except for higher resolution rendering and high-resolution textures.
Click to expand...

Isn't that the point? Look the same except one looks better? The pc one looks amazingly better and I was actually disappointed with the xbox one considering games like Battlefield 3 look halfway decent on it. Crysis 3 on the xbox almost looks like it was rendered 6 years ago with the hardware. For the pc it doesn't look bad (it's actually pretty good), but I would be a little happier if it looked as good as the hardware demands suggested.
 
You guys are kidding yourself if you think this makes the PC look good. The game basically looks the same on an 8 year old xbox.

Its just a higher res, and brighter. Meanwhile multiple GTX 680's are required to max this thing out. Xbox is basically the same game on what, a crippled x1800xt?
 
Insomniator said:
You guys are kidding yourself if you think this makes the PC look good. The game basically looks the same on an 8 year old xbox.

Its just a higher res, and brighter. Meanwhile multiple GTX 680's are required to max this thing out. Xbox is basically the same game on what, a crippled x1800xt?
Click to expand...

I pretty much find this statement unbelievable, it looks a LOT better
 
The description states that the highest settings were used with the highest FXAA setting. I'm seeing some pretty bad aliasing on the PC side in some of the scenes so I don't think everything is at its highest as is stated.
 
Blech, the 360 looks blurry and low res. I'm guessing that the effects differences with lighting and physics mostly kick in with lots of action, whereas this video was done mostly with just standing around while nothing is happening. It did seem like there was a good deal more foliage (and the foliage had more motion to it) on the PC.

But there was another thing. The 360 doesn't have butterflies! Surely this is unaccepatable and a reason to buy the PC version!
 
Two observations

1) The graphics do look better on the PC. People here that cannot see the difference are either blind or not watching the video in 1080p full screen.

2) The graphics don't look that good. Certainly no better than Crysis 2 imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top