Crysis = Killzone 2.....

Wait until the full game comes out. You'll be surprised. I also like it on how that second picture of Crysis shown their looks like Crysis when I turn my settings to medium. DX9 anyone?-CheeseEater-

I thought the same thing when i saw the 2nd pic lol.

[QUOTE="Zeliard9"]

Already noted to be mainly differences in time of day, lighting levels, and fog settings. All fairly easily customizable. Someone figured as much and cooked these up in only one hour in the sandbox after seeing that comparison pic:

http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/7197/65285399et6.jpg

http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/7020/43856945qe4.jpg

http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/6/12451430gf4.jpg

And a neat video:

http://www.glassedgestudios.com/Verw3948JungleFight.wmv

By the way, I can guarantee you that bottom picture in the comparison is not maxed out. I mean look at the leaves on the bottom. Wtf is that? Anyone who runs the game on very high can tell you it looks much better than that.

Hell, here's a pic of the vegetation I took from the *beta* (you can tell on me, the game comes out in a week), which doesn't have all the graphical settings the demo has. Compare the leaves in my pic to the bottom one in the comparison

bignice12

QFT

Anyone think that the top picture is just on ULTRA? Something that isn't yet implemented in the game due to hardware limitations but will be later through patches?

I admit that I was hoping to see things like that in the demo, that's why I was a bit dissapointed (in terms of graphics).

Already noted to be mainly differences in time of day, lighting levels, and fog settings. All fairly easily customizable. Someone figured as much and cooked these up in only one hour in the sandbox after seeing that comparison pic:

http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/7197/65285399et6.jpg

http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/7020/43856945qe4.jpg

http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/6/12451430gf4.jpg

And a neat video:

http://www.glassedgestudios.com/Verw3948JungleFight.wmv

By the way, I can guarantee you that bottom picture in the comparison is not maxed out. I mean look at the leaves on the bottom. Wtf is that? Anyone who runs the game on very high can tell you it looks much better than that.

Hell, here's a pic of the vegetation I took from the *beta* (you can tell on me, the game comes out in a week), which doesn't have all the graphical settings the demo has. Compare the leaves in my pic to the bottom one in the comparison pic:

Zeliard9

Nice, What are your specs?

That's the Gamespot picture of very high vista settings. You were saying? :? I noticed this downgrade from the original showing a long time ago but the hermits swore up and down that "PC games are never downgraded". WRONG!

JiveT

Doctored pics =I downgrade , those early shots are just the same, but posed.

Its like Models in magazines ... they dont look THAT shiny / pefect in reality now do they?

First pic looks sick!!!! Second pic looks worse than HAZE!!!Gamersince81

The first pick looks like real world video. The second pick doesn't. Not even close. In any case, if you have the system to play Crysis, the game is going to look incredible. I'm just waiting for the score for this game so I can watch the forums light up.

People like the TC make me sick. I can tell you havent been following crysis very long. First of all we havent even seen the game with full effects yet. So wait until the actual game comes out. But wait dont I remember Yeril saying that they will make patches so that crysis can take advantage of better hardware. Also PC games dont get downgrades. Even still crysis is the best looking game the generation so far.

[QUOTE="Velocitas8"]

[QUOTE="Lonelynight"]/threadGamersince81

Indeed..Zeliard's post made this thread obsolete.

For future reference: PC games are scaleable and don't get downgraded.

I concur, Crysis beats out HAZE in graphics!!!

Why is Haze being mentioned in the same sentence as Crysis. Haze will be horrible in every department. Crysis is a Ferrari and Haze is a tricycle.

insulting crysis graphics and saying killzone is better, lololol.

what's next? Killzone has better sp than half life 2

Killzone has better mp than halo 3 and Cod4.

Dont make me laugh. Kilzone's fame is blown way out of proportion, just like the old killzone

Even Timeshift looks better than Crysis. wok7

Just another fanboy whining his heart out because the game isn't on his system...:?Ogre_Mage

Nice, What are your specs?

Hellsing2o2

Q6600 @ stock speeds, 2gb DDR2 RAM, Vista Ultimate x86, 8800 GTX @ 626/2000

I play with everything on very high except shadows (on high) and I used to also turn down post-processing to high, until I realized that wasn't really necessary since it's the "very high" motion blur setting in particular that causes the big performance hit in post-processing. So I just turned motion blur to its "high" value through the configs. Which means no object-based motion blur, which kinda sucks, but it's worth it for the FPS, of which I get 25-35 @ 1680x1050.

Everyone **** at Sony of showing what was obviously a CGI trailer, however noones **** at Crytek for lying...

Grantelicious

/THREAD

Go look at the recent feature Gamespot put out about the details on Crysis. That second picture is BS and if you don't think so, then you are one hating gamer.elbow2k

You should just link or post the picture.

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]

[QUOTE="Gamersince81"]First pic looks sick!!!! Second pic looks worse than HAZE!!!saolin323

Nah, that's impossible.

Btw, that second screen is BS.

Actually the first pic is BS, the second is like how it looks on my DX9 pc in max

[QUOTE="Zeliard9"]

Already noted to be mainly differences in time of day, lighting levels, and fog settings. All fairly easily customizable. Someone figured as much and cooked these up in only one hour in the sandbox after seeing that comparison pic:

http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/7197/65285399et6.jpg

http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/7020/43856945qe4.jpg

http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/6/12451430gf4.jpg

And a neat video:

http://www.glassedgestudios.com/Verw3948JungleFight.wmv

By the way, I can guarantee you that bottom picture in the comparison is not maxed out. I mean look at the leaves on the bottom. Wtf is that? Anyone who runs the game on very high can tell you it looks much better than that.

Hell, here's a pic of the vegetation I took from the *beta* (you can tell on me, the game comes out in a week), which doesn't have all the graphical settings the demo has. Compare the leaves in my pic to the bottom one in the comparison pic:

Lonelynight

/thread

agreed, just have to look at the ground texture to know this isn't maxed out.

Even Timeshift looks better than Crysis. wok7

Everyone **** at Sony of showing what was obviously a CGI trailer, however noones **** at Crytek for lying...

Grantelicious

[QUOTE="Lonelynight"][QUOTE="Zeliard9"]

Already noted to be mainly differences in time of day, lighting levels, and fog settings. All fairly easily customizable. Someone figured as much and cooked these up in only one hour in the sandbox after seeing that comparison pic:

http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/7197/65285399et6.jpg

http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/7020/43856945qe4.jpg

http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/6/12451430gf4.jpg

And a neat video:

http://www.glassedgestudios.com/Verw3948JungleFight.wmv

By the way, I can guarantee you that bottom picture in the comparison is not maxed out. I mean look at the leaves on the bottom. Wtf is that? Anyone who runs the game on very high can tell you it looks much better than that.

Hell, here's a pic of the vegetation I took from the *beta* (you can tell on me, the game comes out in a week), which doesn't have all the graphical settings the demo has. Compare the leaves in my pic to the bottom one in the comparison pic:

3picuri3

/thread

agreed, just have to look at the ground texture to know this isn't maxed out.

still doesnt look like early vids though :| it is downgraded, it looks great but still a downgrade.

I think Killzone 2 was a little closer to the original CGI.

This is bad! This is a PC game! I hope it gets better.

Rikusaki

Like hell it was.

still doesnt look like early vids though :| it is downgraded, it looks great but still a downgrade.amorbis1001

Am I the only one who thinks haze looks great? black_awpN1

I can only play at medium settings if I want a decent frame rate cause I have a 8800 gts(320mb)

At high settings I get lag

[QUOTE="Rikusaki"][QUOTE="bearbones"]

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]Bioshock is 2 syllables.

BIo

SHock
jg4xchamp

1. Bi
2. o
3. shock

LOL

no, the word is pronounced "Bi-Oh-SHock" thats 3 sylables

[QUOTE="black_awpN1"]Am I the only one who thinks haze looks great? Vandalvideo

i seez u vandal!! get on teh steamz or else ill sent the blus after you!

[QUOTE="black_awpN1"]Am I the only one who thinks haze looks great? Vandalvideo

dude, nothing looks crysis good.

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="Rikusaki"][QUOTE="bearbones"]

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]Bioshock is 2 syllables.

BIo

SHock
shadow_hosi

1. Bi
2. o
3. shock

LOL

no, the word is pronounced "Bi-Oh-SHock" thats 3 sylables

it 3 sylables omg, wat did they teach him in the secon grade.

I can only play at medium settings if I want a decent frame rate cause I have a 8800 gts(320mb)

At high settings I get lag

Big_Gamer_Al

I can only play at medium settings if I want a decent frame rate cause I have a 8800 gts(320mb)

At high settings I get lag

Big_Gamer_Al

i got the GTX 712MB or whatever and i run ultra high no prob :D

i [QUOTE="l-_-l"][QUOTE="Big_Gamer_Al"]

I can only play at medium settings if I want a decent frame rate cause I have a 8800 gts(320mb)

At high settings I get lag

shadow_hosi

[QUOTE="Big_Gamer_Al"]

I can only play at medium settings if I want a decent frame rate cause I have a 8800 gts(320mb)

At high settings I get lag

l-_-l

i got the GTX 712MB or whatever and i run ultra high no prob :D

bs you run it on ultra high on 8800GTX 712MB, this game was made to be somewhat futureproof -- the highest settings get crap performance on the best of rigs. the only way i'd believe you have it running well is if you showed me fraps video. it has been stated by the devs several times that the ultra high settings will cause performance issues on the best rigs out there today, and this was intentional... so the game could continue to show graphical improvements with newer video card chipsets.

the HIGHEST fps I've seen with an 8800GTX 712 and quad core was about 20fps, high end around 30, low end in the 10s. i've been in beta, i've seen numerous fraps videos / screenshots to back this up.

anyone claiming to run this game on maximum settings with current tech is either a) lying, or b) spent 5000$ on their system and are running 8800 SLI with Quad Core and the newest / fastest OCZ ram with a 10,000 rpm HD as the pagefile drive :)

FYI I ran the beta and SP demo on this system:

AMD FX2 6000+ dual core @ 3.2 each core

BFG 8800 GTX OC 768

2 gigs OCZ

Vista x64

7200rpm 300gig SATA

so yeah, i think i have some idea regarding how the game runs on the 8800, if you are running it at something reasonable like 40+ stable FPS please tell me your magical secret, because 100s of us on the official forums are stumped ;)

[QUOTE="shadow_hosi"]

i [QUOTE="l-_-l"][QUOTE="Big_Gamer_Al"]

I can only play at medium settings if I want a decent frame rate cause I have a 8800 gts(320mb)

At high settings I get lag

3picuri3

[QUOTE="Big_Gamer_Al"]

I can only play at medium settings if I want a decent frame rate cause I have a 8800 gts(320mb)

At high settings I get lag

l-_-l

i got the GTX 712MB or whatever and i run ultra high no prob :D

bs you run it on ultra high on 8800GTX 712MB, this game was made to be somewhat futureproof -- the highest settings get crap performance on the best of rigs. the only way i'd believe you have it running well is if you showed me fraps video. it has been stated by the devs several times that the ultra high settings will cause performance issues on the best rigs out there today, and this was intentional... so the game could continue to show graphical improvements with newer video card chipsets.

the HIGHEST fps I've seen with an 8800GTX 712 and quad core was about 20fps, high end around 30, low end in the 10s. i've been in beta, i've seen numerous fraps videos / screenshots to back this up.

anyone claiming to run this game on maximum settings with current tech is either a) lying, or b) spent 5000$ on their system and are running 8800 SLI with Quad Core and the newest / fastest OCZ ram with a 10,000 rpm HD as the pagefile drive :)

there as much future potential, its called "adding graphical content" at a later date updates can be put out to make it even better, and yes, i can run ultra high, ill even ger you a screeny

there as much future potential, its called "adding graphical content" at a later date updates can be put out to make it even better, and yes, i can run ultra high, ill even ger you a screeny

shadow_hosi

I can run it at ultra high too, but the FPS isn't stable in the least. this is why I said I'd only take a fraps video from you :) I can stand still anywhere and make people think I'm getting 40-50fps on Ultra high, but when you start to move it's a different story.

and no, my rig was only $1600

amd x2 64bit 3.0 i beleave

2GB ram

Gefroce8800 GTX 712mb

MSI k9agneo2 mobo

and no, my rig was only $1600

amd x2 64bit 3.0 i beleave

2GB ram

Gefroce8800 GTX 712mb

MSI k9agneo2 mobo

shadow_hosi

yeah, im sorry - but based on my experience with this game and reading about others experiences there is no way in hell you're getting a stable playable fps with that system. it's the same system as mine except for the mobo, and it's a 768mb card I think, i've never heard of a 712.

when i say playable i mean constant 40fps, never dipping in to the 20s, 10s, with a max in the 50s to 60s.

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="black_awpN1"]Am I the only one who thinks haze looks great? shadow_hosi

i seez u vandal!! get on teh steamz or else ill sent the blus after you!

[QUOTE="shadow_hosi"]

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="black_awpN1"]Am I the only one who thinks haze looks great? Vandalvideo

i seez u vandal!! get on teh steamz or else ill sent the blus after you!

Kirk whomped you, your k/d ratio could use a lotta work, lol.

Kirk whomped you, your k/d ratio could use a lotta work, lol.3picuri3

[QUOTE="3picuri3"]Kirk whomped you, your k/d ratio could use a lotta work, lol.Vandalvideo

i'm just teasing :P team deathmatch is where it's at imo :)

[QUOTE="Hellsing2o2"]

Nice, What are your specs?

Zeliard9

Q6600 @ stock speeds, 2gb DDR2 RAM, Vista Ultimate x86, 8800 GTX @ 626/2000

I play with everything on very high except shadows (on high) and I used to also turn down post-processing to high, until I realized that wasn't really necessary since it's the "very high" motion blur setting in particular that causes the big performance hit in post-processing. So I just turned motion blur to its "high" value through the configs. Which means no object-based motion blur, which kinda sucks, but it's worth it for the FPS, of which I get 25-35 @ 1680x1050.

thanks for the info. btw.. sanbox kicks a-- :)

The first screenshot was taken in motion.

The second one was static.

That's one heavy and pretty good looking effect less - motion blur.

The first one was taken on Ultra details.

The second one is... what? Low, medium? There's no way that those are very high or even high details.

Demo didn't have Ultra detils.

The full game will.

Yes, it'll kill every possible machine out there, and it'll be the best looking game for the next three (or more) years.

Crysis on high and/or/even medium settings looks better than 90% of current-gen console titles out there.

Long story short, your screenshot comparison fails miserably.