[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

[QUOTE="GeneralShowzer"] But are there any direct feed screenshots from Crysis to compare ?

No, just some compressed trailer grabs and some bullshots Crytek released.

GeneralShowzer

No, but there are direct feeds from Crysis 1 which you can go by.

Also, that's one of the best looking areas of the game. Crysis 2 can be pretty inconsistent, so it's an unfair comparison.

You're the one saying we should use direct feed screenshots, there will be none available for Crysis until release.

And there was none available until Crysis 2 released. I just grabbed first shot I found on DF article that shows a lot of lines, figuring it wouldn't be good to show of I dunno, nanosuit hands or something.

Well resolution is exactly the same as Crysis 2 according to b3d, so thats how I think it will be on par. Also, Cryteks lead designer said they added couple techniques that bring performance higher, like occlusion culling and asset compression.

So, with the new lighting system and the new details added, will probably look way better than the PC version

That is amazing news for xbox360

[QUOTE="GeneralShowzer"]

[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

No, but there are direct feeds from Crysis 1 which you can go by.

Bus-A-Bus

Also, that's one of the best looking areas of the game. Crysis 2 can be pretty inconsistent, so it's an unfair comparison.

You're the one saying we should use direct feed screenshots, there will be none available for Crysis until release.

And there was none available until Crysis 2 released. I just grabbed first shot I found on DF article that shows a lot of lines, figuring it wouldn't be good to show of I dunno, nanosuit hands or something.

Well resolution is exactly the same as Crysis 2 according to b3d, so thats how I think it will be on par. Also, Cryteks lead designer said they added couple techniques that bring performance higher, like occlusion culling and asset compression.

This is a PC port, which Crytek didn't even want to attempt at first.

Wait and see, just sayan.

Look I don't know how it will turn out, but that the resolution is the same doesn't prove anything. Crysis 2 and it's engine was from the ground up made for consoles.

This is a PC port, which Crytek didn't even want to attempt at first.

Wait and see, just sayan.

GeneralShowzer

No. Crysis 2 was built from the ground up on the consoles. There are three versions of the CryEngine 3, one for each major platform. The PC verison was the last to get any real love becasue they were still working on DX11 effects for the entire engine. Now the SDK is out and the engine supports full DX11. It's much better than the CryEngine 2 in every way possible. Already maps the size of Crysis 1 are being made on the CryEngine 3 and run better while looking better on the PC.

The CryEngine 3 is a far superior engine. It has a brand new lighting system, full DX11 support, and just as many features as the CryEngine 2. Just becuase Crytek didn't use it right for Crysis 2 on the PC doesn't mean the engine was built for consoles.

Crysis on Consoles features Parallax Occlusion Mapping and 3D support

http://n4g.com/news/844427/crysis-on-consoles-features-parallax-occlusion-mapping-and-3d-support

"Crytek are truly wizards. They have managed to make the console version as good as the PC version. Crytek Tiago has confirmed that the console versions feature parallax occlusion mapping, in case you don't know what that is; it really brings depth to the graphics."

Epic win for consoles

Crysis on Consoles features Parallax Occlusion Mapping and 3D support

http://n4g.com/news/844427/crysis-on-consoles-features-parallax-occlusion-mapping-and-3d-support

"Crytek are truly wizards. They have managed to make the console version as good as the PC version. Crytek Tiago has confirmed that the console versions feature parallax occlusion mapping, in case you don't know what that is; it really brings depth to the graphics."

Epic win for consoles

loosingENDS

Aside from the lower texture resolutions, the lower screen resolution, the greatly reduced draw distance, the gimmped LoD system, and the less foliage... yea I guess it is just as good sa the PC version.

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

Crysis on Consoles features Parallax Occlusion Mapping and 3D support

http://n4g.com/news/844427/crysis-on-consoles-features-parallax-occlusion-mapping-and-3d-support

"Crytek are truly wizards. They have managed to make the console version as good as the PC version. Crytek Tiago has confirmed that the console versions feature parallax occlusion mapping, in case you don't know what that is; it really brings depth to the graphics."

Epic win for consoles

Wasdie

Aside from the lower texture resolutions, the lower screen resolution, the greatly reduced draw distance, the gimmped LoD system, and the less foliage... yea I guess it is just as good sa the PC version.

Looks stunning and with much better lighting to me and that is all that counts

Lets not forget that a few days ago Crysis 1 on consoles was though impossible even at lowest setting and now it runs with better lighing and very nice setting in everything else too

Looks stunning and with much better lighting to me and that is all that counts

Lets not forget that a few days ago Crysis 1 on consoles was though impossible even at lowest setting and now it runs with better lighing and very nice setting in everything else too

loosingENDS

Why is that all that matters? Objectively, if it has lower quality in other parts, the higher quality in one aspect wouldn't be enough to make it better. Oh wait, I doubt objectivity will make a difference to you.

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

Looks stunning and with much better lighting to me and that is all that counts

Lets not forget that a few days ago Crysis 1 on consoles was though impossible even at lowest setting and now it runs with better lighing and very nice setting in everything else too

lundy86_4

Why is that all that matters? Objectively, if it has lower quality in other parts, the higher quality in one aspect wouldn't be enough to make it better. Oh wait, I doubt objectivity will make a difference to you.

Wont make it worst either, dont forget that lighting is one of the major things that affect overall image quality and the major next gen point in games, the one that makes all the difference really

In short, Crysis 1 is not worst or better on consoles, it is just different and that is an unbelievable win for consoles and especially xbox 360

Looks stunning and with much better lighting to me and that is all that counts

Lets not forget that a few days ago Crysis 1 on consoles was though impossible even at lowest setting and now it runs with better lighing and very nice setting in everything else too

loosingENDS

Much better lighting? They removed some dynamic lights, increased the contrast and tone of current lights, and then upped the levels of bloom.

PC modders have been messing with the config files and ToD settings to get better results than what Crytek did. The whole reason they have to enhance the amount of bloom and change the contrast ratios is because of the amount of corners they need to cut. They need to mask tons of graphical defects with enhanced bloom.

Every shot I've seen of Crysis 1 on the consoles has a terrible LoD (level of detail) system for the distance. They had to up the amount of bloom coming from the sky to mask how much they have reduced geometries.

You're also looking at runnig around 30fps at 720p (if not lower) while PCs run Crysis at beyond default max settings at 60fps at 1080p with AA. Usually these versions of Crysis also have ToD tweaks to make the lighting look more natrual without increasing the amount of bloom to cover up bad textures.

Wont make it worst either, dont forget that lighting is one of the major things that affect overall image quality and the major next gen point in games, the one that makes all the difference really

In short, Crysis 1 is not worst or better on consoles, it is just different and that is an unbelievable win for consoles and especially xbox 360

loosingENDS

So does a lot of what Wasdie stated. Trust me, lighting is not something "that makes all the difference really". There are many aspects that improve overall image quality.

Crysis 1 on consoles is lower quality. It has better lighting, but it has a lot of things lowered to tailor to the consoles. There's nothing wrong with that, as it still looks great. It can't really be an "unbelievable win" if it's worse... That makes no sense.

[QUOTE="KarateeeChop"]

this could dethrone crysis 2 on the 360 as the current graphics king. :shock:

lucky_star

360 fans these days

I'm pretty sure Chop meant for consoles which I definitely don't think is an outrageous claim....

Say what you want about how the game stacks up against PC but these shots look fantastic for consoles.

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

Looks stunning and with much better lighting to me and that is all that counts

Lets not forget that a few days ago Crysis 1 on consoles was though impossible even at lowest setting and now it runs with better lighing and very nice setting in everything else too

Wasdie

Much better lighting? They removed some dynamic lights, increased the contrast and tone of current lights, and then upped the levels of bloom.

PC modders have been messing with the config files and ToD settings to get better results than what Crytek did. The whole reason they have to enhance the amount of bloom and change the contrast ratios is because of the amount of corners they need to cut. They need to mask tons of graphical defects with enhanced bloom.

Every shot I've seen of Crysis 1 on the consoles has a terrible LoD (level of detail) system for the distance. They had to up the amount of bloom coming from the sky to mask how much they have reduced geometries.

You're also looking at runnig around 30fps at 720p (if not lower) while PCs run Crysis at beyond default max settings at 60fps at 1080p with AA. Usually these versions of Crysis also have ToD tweaks to make the lighting look more natrual without increasing the amount of bloom to cover up bad textures.

Crytek said lighting is enchanced and i will go with that, they sure know their game better than us if you ask me

Plus the point remains, a few days back Crysis 1 was supposdly not possible on consoles, now it comes looking stunning and with its full scale and glory, making all the infinite posts about how weak consoles are very funny

Lets not forget the kind of money you had to spend back then to just make Crysis run at release with the worst lighting at a good setting

Considering all that, Crytek has yet again done the unbeleivable and what everyone said was impossible, same as with Crysis 2

Crysis 1 with enchanced cryengine 3 lighting, real particle explosions, occlusion and 3D support for consoles, stuff of legends

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

Looks stunning and with much better lighting to me and that is all that counts

Lets not forget that a few days ago Crysis 1 on consoles was though impossible even at lowest setting and now it runs with better lighing and very nice setting in everything else too

Wasdie

Much better lighting? They removed some dynamic lights, increased the contrast and tone of current lights, and then upped the levels of bloom.

PC modders have been messing with the config files and ToD settings to get better results than what Crytek did. The whole reason they have to enhance the amount of bloom and change the contrast ratios is because of the amount of corners they need to cut. They need to mask tons of graphical defects with enhanced bloom.

Every shot I've seen of Crysis 1 on the consoles has a terrible LoD (level of detail) system for the distance. They had to up the amount of bloom coming from the sky to mask how much they have reduced geometries.

You're also looking at runnig around 30fps at 720p (if not lower) while PCs run Crysis at beyond default max settings at 60fps at 1080p with AA. Usually these versions of Crysis also have ToD tweaks to make the lighting look more natrual without increasing the amount of bloom to cover up bad textures.

This is just not true...If anything they can add much more dynamic lights in console versions since CE3 is deferred lighting engine(like GTA IV and KZ2/3) they can add couple hundred light sources in one scene.Not in Crysis 1 on PC no, its forward rendering and there were couple dozens of dynamic light sources at most(1-24).

Eh, doesn't look that great. They need better screens.

Looking closly, i see much better HDR, evident occlusion in rocks not on PC and far far better exposion abnd particle effects than PC

Epic stuff, Crytek is graphics engine gods

Crysis on Consoles features Parallax Occlusion Mapping and 3D support

http://n4g.com/news/844427/crysis-on-consoles-features-parallax-occlusion-mapping-and-3d-support

"Crytek are truly wizards. They have managed to make the console version as good as the PC version. Crytek Tiago has confirmed that the console versions feature parallax occlusion mapping, in case you don't know what that is; it really brings depth to the graphics."

Epic win for consoles

loosingENDS

Looking closly, i see much better HDR, evident occlusion in rocks not on PC and far far better exposion abnd particle effects than PC

Epic stuff, Crytek is graphics engine gods

loosingENDS

What you see is more contrast, nothing more.

This is just not true...If anything they can add much more dynamic lights in console versions since CE3 is deferred lighting engine(like GTA IV and KZ2/3) they can add couple hundred light sources in one scene.Not in Crysis 1 on PC no, its forward rendering and there were couple dozens of dynamic light sources at most(1-24).

Bus-A-Bus

Even with deferred lighting, you can't just add tons of dynamic lights without a major performance hit. Deferred lighting allows for more than a handful of lights to be placed in a scene because of the way the lighting is calculated. So instead of having graphical flaws and glitches when you start adding tons of lights, deferred lighting allows the scene to handle all of the lights. Rendering them is a completely different story. Every light you add is going to take its toll on the hardware.

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

Looking closly, i see much better HDR, evident occlusion in rocks not on PC and far far better exposion abnd particle effects than PC

Epic stuff, Crytek is graphics engine gods

Wasdie

What you see is more contrast, nothing more.

Not really, the occlusion creates different contrast in the rock base on consoles rather clearly

Not really, the occlusion creates different contrast in the rock base on consoles rather clearly

loosingENDS

Um... there is no PoM on the rocks. PoM is only on flat surfaces. You'll see PoM on the ground with a lot of rocks or something like that. You can't do PoM on rock because of the small flat surfaces. You're seeing bumpmapping with higher contrast in the lighting. You can do bumpmapping on a more rounded surface. It's a known fact that Crysis 1 had a glitch with its rocks. The textures don't load properly on vanilla configs. Some tweaks fix that.

Crytek really screwed up the configs and ToD settings for Crysis 1. This also is a pretty known fact.

You should look up what PoM is. It's neat, but it's also outdated. We are moving on to tessellations which render faster and aren't "fake" geometries.

[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

This is just not true...If anything they can add much more dynamic lights in console versions since CE3 is deferred lighting engine(like GTA IV and KZ2/3) they can add couple hundred light sources in one scene.Not in Crysis 1 on PC no, its forward rendering and there were couple dozens of dynamic light sources at most(1-24).

Wasdie

Even with deferred lighting, you can't just add tons of dynamic lights without a major performance hit. Deferred lighting allows for more than a handful of lights to be placed in a scene because of the way the lighting is calculated. So instead of having graphical flaws and glitches when you start adding tons of lights, deferred lighting allows the scene to handle all of the lights. Rendering them is a completely different story. Every light you add is going to take its toll on the hardware.

Not really, dynamic lights in deferred shading games are not nearly expenisve as in forward rendering. You could hardly have more than 24 light sources in scene, in Crysis 2 night levels had more than 200 lights on consoles according to their artist post in crymod.com

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

This is just not true...If anything they can add much more dynamic lights in console versions since CE3 is deferred lighting engine(like GTA IV and KZ2/3) they can add couple hundred light sources in one scene.Not in Crysis 1 on PC no, its forward rendering and there were couple dozens of dynamic light sources at most(1-24).

Bus-A-Bus

Even with deferred lighting, you can't just add tons of dynamic lights without a major performance hit. Deferred lighting allows for more than a handful of lights to be placed in a scene because of the way the lighting is calculated. So instead of having graphical flaws and glitches when you start adding tons of lights, deferred lighting allows the scene to handle all of the lights. Rendering them is a completely different story. Every light you add is going to take its toll on the hardware.

Not really, dynamic lights in deferred shading games are not nearly expenisve as in forward rendering. You could hardly have more than 24 light sources in scene, in Crysis 2 night levels had more than 200 lights on consoles according to their artist post in crymod.com

From what i gather, even if both the more lights, better lighting and occlusion on console is true (which it is by what developers confirm), noone will actually admit it

Not after the million posts about how Crysis 1 is impossible on consoles

Looks bad. I played Crysis 1 looked great technically when I played it even on non-maxed out settings, but this doesn't look impressive at all to me technically. Too bad Crysis' art direction was almost non-existent anyways. Ultra-realism gets boring as hell and make those shiny high-res textures worthless IMO. Killzone 2/Uncharted 2 are still the best looking games to me. They're the best of both worlds IMO. Killzone 2 has that gritty dark "industrial wasteland" art direction that I like, while having some of the best animations, lighting, and special effects in all of gaming, and Uncharted 2 has a colorful variety of artistically amazing levels and a lot of stuff going on at once, while having great looking textures and smooth cut scenes. Crysis on the other hand was all about the CryEngine itself, and they should've spent more time on the poor animations and art direction because after the you start playing it for a while and the technical shine wears off, you're left with a very stale looking and playing game. The console versions will be completely worthless.Messiahbolical-

From what i gather, even if both the more lights, better lighting and occlusion on console is true (which it is by what developers confirm), noone will actually admit it

Not after the million posts about how Crysis 1 is impossible on consoles

loosingENDS

Crytek themselves said that Crysis in it's current form is impossible to do on the consoles. That was an absolute truth. Look at all of the changes they have had to make. Cutting down on the foliage and destructible trees, reducing texture resolution, reducing draw distances, reducing LoD. Quite a few changes if you ask me.

Those PC pics above are umbelievable :o

PAL360

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

From what i gather, even if both the more lights, better lighting and occlusion on console is true (which it is by what developers confirm), noone will actually admit it

Not after the million posts about how Crysis 1 is impossible on consoles

Wasdie

Crytek themselves said that Crysis in it's current form is impossible to do on the consoles. That was an absolute truth. Look at all of the changes they have had to make. Cutting down on the foliage and destructible trees, reducing texture resolution, reducing draw distances, reducing LoD. Quite a few changes if you ask me.

Draw distance is NOT lowered, look at trailer again, you can see the entire map. LOD changes are evident, and by that I mean shadows in the far distance don't get rendered on consoles but when you get close to them, its very obvious and it was like that in Crysis 2. There are destructible trees, at least there was in trailer.

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

From what i gather, even if both the more lights, better lighting and occlusion on console is true (which it is by what developers confirm), noone will actually admit it

Not after the million posts about how Crysis 1 is impossible on consoles

Bus-A-Bus

Crytek themselves said that Crysis in it's current form is impossible to do on the consoles. That was an absolute truth. Look at all of the changes they have had to make. Cutting down on the foliage and destructible trees, reducing texture resolution, reducing draw distances, reducing LoD. Quite a few changes if you ask me.

Draw distance is NOT lowered, look at trailer again, you can see the entire map. LOD changes are evident, and by that I mean shadows in the far distance don't get rendered on consoles but when you get close to them, its very obvious and it was like that in Crysis 2. There are destructible trees, at least there was in trailer.

That is what i see too, maybe it is lowered a bit, or there are less trees, but that is hardly a huge hit on graphics that look largly the same TBH, with better lighting, particls and occlusion

I the new pics i dont see the LOD or tree number downgraded almost at all

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

From what i gather, even if both the more lights, better lighting and occlusion on console is true (which it is by what developers confirm), noone will actually admit it

Not after the million posts about how Crysis 1 is impossible on consoles

Bus-A-Bus

Crytek themselves said that Crysis in it's current form is impossible to do on the consoles. That was an absolute truth. Look at all of the changes they have had to make. Cutting down on the foliage and destructible trees, reducing texture resolution, reducing draw distances, reducing LoD. Quite a few changes if you ask me.

Draw distance is NOT lowered, look at trailer again, you can see the entire map. LOD changes are evident, and by that I mean shadows in the far distance don't get rendered on consoles but when you get close to them, its very obvious and it was like that in Crysis 2. There are destructible trees, at least there was in trailer.

Look at some of the comparison pictures. There are far less trees and bushes (even after CryTom released the pictures). The trees that are there have been scaled back as well. The draw distnace looks lowered in some of the screens too (the one with the big alien). The effects have also been retooled down into Crysis 2 level effects. They had to remove all of the volumetric smoke effects that were in Crysis 1. Now they are 2D textures like they are in Crysis 2.

[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Crytek themselves said that Crysis in it's current form is impossible to do on the consoles. That was an absolute truth. Look at all of the changes they have had to make. Cutting down on the foliage and destructible trees, reducing texture resolution, reducing draw distances, reducing LoD. Quite a few changes if you ask me.

loosingENDS

Draw distance is NOT lowered, look at trailer again, you can see the entire map. LOD changes are evident, and by that I mean shadows in the far distance don't get rendered on consoles but when you get close to them, its very obvious and it was like that in Crysis 2. There are destructible trees, at least there was in trailer.

That is what i see too, maybe it is lowered a bit, or there are less trees, but that is hardly a huge hit on graphics that look largly the same TBH, with better lighting, particls and occlusion

I the new pics i dont see the LOD or tree number downgraded almost at all

How old is Crysis 1 now? Those screenshots look very unimpressive indeed, you would think that after this many years have passed they could make it look somewhat like the pc version.

[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Crytek themselves said that Crysis in it's current form is impossible to do on the consoles. That was an absolute truth. Look at all of the changes they have had to make. Cutting down on the foliage and destructible trees, reducing texture resolution, reducing draw distances, reducing LoD. Quite a few changes if you ask me.

Wasdie

Draw distance is NOT lowered, look at trailer again, you can see the entire map. LOD changes are evident, and by that I mean shadows in the far distance don't get rendered on consoles but when you get close to them, its very obvious and it was like that in Crysis 2. There are destructible trees, at least there was in trailer.

Look at some of the comparison pictures. There are far less trees and bushes (even after CryTom released the pictures). The trees that are there have been scaled back as well. The draw distnace looks lowered in some of the screens too (the one with the big alien). The effects have also been retooled down into Crysis 2 level effects. They had to remove all of the volumetric smoke effects that were in Crysis 1. Now they are 2D textures like they are in Crysis 2.

Yea, thats assets lod. LOD of trees had to be cut down, but draw distance is not cut out. Game works as good as we could even think of, thats a fact. If you are comparing it to highest settings sure you can say "they didn't exactly reach it",but as far as I remember majority of people beaten Crysis 1 on medium settings and they never nagged.

[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Crytek themselves said that Crysis in it's current form is impossible to do on the consoles. That was an absolute truth. Look at all of the changes they have had to make. Cutting down on the foliage and destructible trees, reducing texture resolution, reducing draw distances, reducing LoD. Quite a few changes if you ask me.

Wasdie

Draw distance is NOT lowered, look at trailer again, you can see the entire map. LOD changes are evident, and by that I mean shadows in the far distance don't get rendered on consoles but when you get close to them, its very obvious and it was like that in Crysis 2. There are destructible trees, at least there was in trailer.

Look at some of the comparison pictures. There are far less trees and bushes (even after CryTom released the pictures). The trees that are there have been scaled back as well. The draw distnace looks lowered in some of the screens too (the one with the big alien). The effects have also been retooled down into Crysis 2 level effects. They had to remove all of the volumetric smoke effects that were in Crysis 1. Now they are 2D textures like they are in Crysis 2.

I see 2-3 palm trees missing and 99% of the other ones be there, not a big difference if you ask me, definatly not something that looks far worst TBH, looks 99% same

Also i see full particle explosions and fire, then the simple textures in Crysis 1 and better lighting

Exactly what Crytek has confirmed really, it is all there

Yea, thats assets lod. LOD of trees had to be cut down, but draw distance is not cut out. Game works as good as we could even think of, thats a fact. If you are comparing it to highest settings sure you can say "they didn't exactly reach it",but as far as I remember majority of people beaten Crysis 1 on medium settings and they never nagged.

Bus-A-Bus

Trust me, I'm rather impressed they were able to get Crysis 1 working on the consoles. Now they have no excuse for the mess that was Crysis 2, absolutly none. Gives me hope for Crysis 3 though.

The fact still is the PC version looks quite a bit better and they did have to make quite a few changes to squeeze it onto the consoles. I think console players should be more worried about the changes to the nano suit and the possible removal of quick save and quick load, both which will dramatically change how the game plays.

That said, for $20 I'm probably going to pick this up on the 360 to play on my new TV. Lugging my PC over to my TV is a pain.

Not after the million posts about how Crysis 1 is impossible on consoles

loosingENDS

and it is still impossible on consoles with the same graphics like the pc venison.

the version of crysis that consoles get is with 1280x720, 20-30fps, medium-high(which is still behind the veryhigh and by extension from mods)

even a GPU from 2006 run crysis with better graphics than that.

How old is Crysis 1 now? Those screenshots look very unimpressive indeed, you would think that after this many years have passed they could make it look somewhat like the pc version.

tenaka2

That is cool, but a few days back those pics were

"showing the true power of PC"

"better than Crysis 2 will ever be"

"only possible on PC"

"not possible on consoles due to scale"

etc etc

People must decide what it is

I see 2-3 palm trees missing and 99% of the other ones be there, not a big difference if you ask me, definatly not something that looks far worst TBH, looks 99% same

Also i see full particle explosions and fire, then the simple textures in Crysis 1 and better lighting

Exactly what Crytek has confirmed really, it is all there

loosingENDS

There is much more than that missing. Grass, bushes, small trees, volumetric smoke. The only thing they "improved" was the lighting, and now it looks really unnatural, in some of the pictures at least. In others it looks fine.

Trust me. As soon as I can, I'll be making a graphical comparsion of the 360 and PC verisons. I'm sure somebody else will beat me to it though. You'll see the differences as I'm sure you've never played the PC version.

[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

Yea, thats assets lod. LOD of trees had to be cut down, but draw distance is not cut out. Game works as good as we could even think of, thats a fact. If you are comparing it to highest settings sure you can say "they didn't exactly reach it",but as far as I remember majority of people beaten Crysis 1 on medium settings and they never nagged.

Wasdie

Trust me, I'm rather impressed they were able to get Crysis 1 working on the consoles. Now they have no excuse for the mess that was Crysis 2, absolutly none. Gives me hope for Crysis 3 though.

The fact still is the PC version looks quite a bit better and they did have to make quite a few changes to squeeze it onto the consoles. I think console players should be more worried about the changes to the nano suit and the possible removal of quick save and quick load, both which will dramatically change how the game plays.

That said, for $20 I'm probably going to pick this up on the 360 to play on my new TV. Lugging my PC over to my TV is a pain.

I agree with you, Crysis 1 on highest PC settings is surely better than console version(much more so when resolution comes to play).

Here is 4 years old Cevat Yerli interview about console version. Notice he says that processing power in consoles is not the problem, but memory. And thats exactly how it turned out. Processing hungry parts(lighting,post processing and shading) are high, and memory hungry like foliage denisty and texture quality is not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVsT4D2_VTI

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

Not after the million posts about how Crysis 1 is impossible on consoles

MK-Professor

and it is still impossible on consoles with the same graphics like the pc venison.

the version of crysis that consoles get is with 1280x720, 20-30fps, medium-high(which is still behind the veryhigh and by extension from mods)

even a GPU from 2006 run crysis with better graphics than that.

Seems it is possible on consoles on a medium-high setting and that with huge draw distance, minimal hit on the very far vegetation, better lighting, far better explosions and particle effects and 3D support

Defiantly looks way better than on PC back then (vanila version)

Seems it is possible on consoles on a medium-high setting and that with huge draw distance, minimal hit on the very far vegetation, better lighting, far better explosions and particle effects and 3D support

Defiantly looks way better than on PC back then (vanila version)

loosingENDS

The reason why the lighting looks better is because Crytek really messed up the HDR configs and ToD settings. They are finally addressing that.

We have some mods that do the very same thing as what Crytek is doing to the console version. It's a night and day difference. I don't know how Crytek could have messed it up as bad as they did.

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

I see 2-3 palm trees missing and 99% of the other ones be there, not a big difference if you ask me, definatly not something that looks far worst TBH, looks 99% same

Also i see full particle explosions and fire, then the simple textures in Crysis 1 and better lighting

Exactly what Crytek has confirmed really, it is all there

Wasdie

There is much more than that missing. Grass, bushes, small trees, volumetric smoke. The only thing they "improved" was the lighting, and now it looks really unnatural, in some of the pictures at least. In others it looks fine.

Trust me. As soon as I can, I'll be making a graphical comparsion of the 360 and PC verisons. I'm sure somebody else will beat me to it though. You'll see the differences as I'm sure you've never played the PC version.

There are so few things missing, that is totally unoticable TBH, aside the obvious 3 palm trees, that could be rearranged anyway, it is a remake afterall

Also i think the volumetic smoke is only on console version, see the pics, the console pics have real particles and PC has a funny texture instead

Exactly what Crytek confirmed

The reason why the lighting looks better is because Crytek really messed up the HDR configs and ToD settings. They are finally addressing that.

We have some mods that do the very same thing as what Crytek is doing to the console version. It's a night and day difference. I don't know how Crytek could have messed it up as bad as they did.

Wasdie

I dont see occlusion on PC Crysis 1 pics at all, so it console one is defiantly looking superior

HDR is better too

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

The reason why the lighting looks better is because Crytek really messed up the HDR configs and ToD settings. They are finally addressing that.

We have some mods that do the very same thing as what Crytek is doing to the console version. It's a night and day difference. I don't know how Crytek could have messed it up as bad as they did.

loosingENDS

I dont see occlusion on PC Crysis 1 pics at all, so it console one is defiantly looking superior

HDR is better too

Do you know what kind of occlusion you are talking about?

I've already said the HDR is better on this new verisons becasue Crytek has finally fixed the mess they had with Crysis 1 vanilla on the PC, something modders did back in 2007.

There are so few things missing, that is totally unoticable TBH, aside the obvious 3 palm trees, that could be rearranged anyway, it is a remake afterall

Also i think the volumetic smoke is only on console version, see the pics, the console pics have real particles and PC has a funny texture instead

Exactly what Crytek confirmed

loosingENDS

You're absolutely wrong here with the volumetric smoke. You've obviously never played Crysis on the PC so you don't have any idea what you're talking about.

The console versions use a solid 2D texture for their smoke effects, that's what makes them look so sharpe. The PC version used volumetric effects. None of the screenshots here show them off, though you can clearly see more smoke effects in the picture with the big alien monster and the AA gun. All volumentric so you can see through parts of the smoke, like you would in real life.

The PC version has more natrual effects for the smoke (not explosions though, those are all hollywood), while the console versions uses a much more traditional approach.

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

The reason why the lighting looks better is because Crytek really messed up the HDR configs and ToD settings. They are finally addressing that.

We have some mods that do the very same thing as what Crytek is doing to the console version. It's a night and day difference. I don't know how Crytek could have messed it up as bad as they did.

Wasdie

I dont see occlusion on PC Crysis 1 pics at all, so it console one is defiantly looking superior

HDR is better too

Do you know what kind of occlusion you are talking about?

I've already said the HDR is better on this new verisons becasue Crytek has finally fixed the mess they had with Crysis 1 vanilla on the PC, something modders did back in 2007.

of course, i am talking about the extra contrast under the rocks and tank, where on PC look flat and same as the lit surface rather clearly

Also the shader on the rocks looks better on console, but that could be due to sun placement, i am not sure

Here is the volumetric explosions, not on PC and the occlusion

This gonna turn into another 1000 post threads? The game will be out very shortly , we will see and compare.. This is all useless. None of us have played the game and you can't trust, Crytek they are known for false advertising.GeneralShowzer

You mean like delivering 1000x more than anyone expected with Crysis 2 on xbox 360 ?

Of course, they should have advertised with 10x more huge claims than they did, so you can call that false advertising, but to their dissadvantage

of course, i am talking about the extra contrast under the rocks and tank, where on PC look flat and same as the lit surface rather clearly

Also the shader on the rocks looks better on console, but that could be due to sun placement, i am not sure

Here is the volumetric explosions, not on PC and the occlusion

loosingENDS

That's not volumetirc, that's the same 2D effects as used in Crysis 2. There is also no Parallex Occulsion Mapping in that picture either, just some bump mapping.

Now there are some smoke effects in that console shot, but the majority of that effect is a 2D effect. I have seen them with my own eyes in Crysis 2. They look exactly like that and they are not volumetric. Each of those clouds of smoke is actually a well designed 2d texutre + animation on the texture. If you were to see it in motion, you would see that it is a 2D effect.

That is volumetric, not just 2D effects overlayed on top of each other.

Now with this shot, you can tell the difference between volumetric smoke effects and just 2D textures.

this could dethrone crysis 2 on the 360 as the current graphics king. :shock:

KarateeeChop

[QUOTE="KarateeeChop"]

this could dethrone crysis 2 on the 360 as the current graphics king. :shock:

Mozelleple112

90% of reviews said Crysis 2 is console graphics king though