They are good but I hate to admit it, Crysis 1 is
still more advanced overall than Far Cry 3. Ya, it lacks all the latest DX11 effects but does it look more realistic or less? For me Crysis 1 still looks more realistic/closer to real-life graphics, not to mention it has real physics effects on trees, buildings, explosions, something Far Cry 3 completely lacks. Even the bullet ripples in the water, explosions/smoke and vegetation are still superior in Crysis 1. Maybe it's because FC3 looks more a lot more cartoonist with such bright colours? I am not buying this as the vegetation is mostly static in it.
Most people never give Crysis the respect it deserves but when you compare FC3 to Crysis side-by-side, you have to wonder which of them is really a 2012 game?
FAR CRY 3 VS CRYSIS - BATTLE
There are also some hideous looking textures in FC3 for a 2012 game.
It's been 5 years since Crysis 1 was released and nothing truly blows it away!! Some games are better here and there and in some areas FC3 is better but overall it just isn't considering we are comparing a 2012 to a 2007 game.
Why isn't there a next generation game that looks like this out of the box?
http://www.overclock.net/t/1165090/your-best-skyrim-awesome-pictures/7070#post_18308022
Maybe my expectations are too high or consolitis is fully in effect. FC3 looks great compared to other 2012 games but it's because games like Black Ops 2 and Assassin's Creed 3 are so ugly in comparison that it skews the real advancement in PC graphics, or lack thereof.