Did DICE just take the Graphics Crown away from Crytek?

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"][QUOTE="GeneralShowzer"] Please don't resort to petty insults. We've all seen just how consolised this game is. Crytek lied to our face how this game "Will blow everything away graphically " and "Be a true PC game".

Xtasy26

And what is wrong with expecting Crytek to raise the graphical bar once again like they did with Crysis 1. There has been at least 3 generations of GPUs that have come out since 2007 when Crysis was released. Not to mention most people have even more RAM typically 4GB. So, why not take FULL ADVANTAGE of these two to make a game that is mindblowing like Crysis 1 was? This is why PC gamers feel let down. The bar hasn't been raised like Crysis 1 did.

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"][QUOTE="GeneralShowzer"] Please don't resort to petty insults. We've all seen just how consolised this game is. Crytek lied to our face how this game "Will blow everything away graphically " and "Be a true PC game".

GeneralShowzer

[QUOTE="haberman13"]

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"] And it is all those things. Consolised is a baseless term. A great game is a great game regardless of platform. None of the complaits about Crysis 2 have anything at all to do with actual gameplay. You guys treat the game like it's a benchmark. i5750at4Ghz

Isn't the game a corridor shooter now? That is the impression i get.

Not to mention the graphics (in the demo) have a very "console" feel; not sharp and precise like a PC.

If you don't know what "console feel" is you haven't gamed enough on PC, so it doesn't really matter. Basically its the overbloom, washed out, DoF-laden abomination that makes the screen look like a film of oil was dumped over it. This allows the game to run on console, but on my high-res monitor looks terrible.

The beauty is, I don't REALLY care, because this demo saved me $50 (I'll buy it for $10 on Steam next winter)

[QUOTE="GeneralShowzer"][QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"] And it is all those things. Consolised is a baseless term. A great game is a great game regardless of platform. None of the complaits about Crysis 2 have anything at all to do with actual gameplay. You guys treat the game like it's a benchmark. AAllxxjjnn

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"][QUOTE="haberman13"]

Isn't the game a corridor shooter now? That is the impression i get.

Not to mention the graphics (in the demo) have a very "console" feel; not sharp and precise like a PC.

haberman13

If you don't know what "console feel" is you haven't gamed enough on PC, so it doesn't really matter. Basically its the overbloom, washed out, DoF-laden abomination that makes the screen look like a film of oil was dumped over it. This allows the game to run on console, but on my high-res monitor looks terrible.

[QUOTE="haberman13"]

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"] Not even close if anything you have more options and more terrain to play with. Again I have no clue what you mean by a console feel. Games are games. i5750at4Ghz

If you don't know what "console feel" is you haven't gamed enough on PC, so it doesn't really matter. Basically its the overbloom, washed out, DoF-laden abomination that makes the screen look like a film of oil was dumped over it. This allows the game to run on console, but on my high-res monitor looks terrible.

And you don't know what console feel means in relation to graphics?

Let me ask you this then: have you played on console before?

I have simultaneously played BC2 on PS3/PC - there is a dramatic difference in a console game and PC game; are you saying you haven't noticed this?

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"] And it is all those things. Consolised is a baseless term. A great game is a great game regardless of platform. None of the complaits about Crysis 2 have anything at all to do with actual gameplay. You guys treat the game like it's a benchmark. i5750at4Ghz

And what is wrong with expecting Crytek to raise the graphical bar once again like they did with Crysis 1. There has been at least 3 generations of GPUs that have come out since 2007 when Crysis was released. Not to mention most people have even more RAM typically 4GB. So, why not take FULL ADVANTAGE of these two to make a game that is mindblowing like Crysis 1 was? This is why PC gamers feel let down. The bar hasn't been raised like Crysis 1 did.

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"][QUOTE="haberman13"]

If you don't know what "console feel" is you haven't gamed enough on PC, so it doesn't really matter. Basically its the overbloom, washed out, DoF-laden abomination that makes the screen look like a film of oil was dumped over it. This allows the game to run on console, but on my high-res monitor looks terrible.

haberman13

And you don't know what console feel means in relation to graphics?

Let me ask you this then: have you played on console before?

They did, in spectacular fashion. As I said in the other thread, the next gen begins this year on PC.

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"][QUOTE="haberman13"]

Isn't the game a corridor shooter now? That is the impression i get.

Not to mention the graphics (in the demo) have a very "console" feel; not sharp and precise like a PC.

haberman13

If you don't know what "console feel" is you haven't gamed enough on PC, so it doesn't really matter. Basically its the overbloom, washed out, DoF-laden abomination that makes the screen look like a film of oil was dumped over it. This allows the game to run on console, but on my high-res monitor looks terrible.

The beauty is, I don't REALLY care, because this demo saved me $50 (I'll buy it for $10 on Steam next winter)

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"]

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

And what is wrong with expecting Crytek to raise the graphical bar once again like they did with Crysis 1. There has been at least 3 generations of GPUs that have come out since 2007 when Crysis was released. Not to mention most people have even more RAM typically 4GB. So, why not take FULL ADVANTAGE of these two to make a game that is mindblowing like Crysis 1 was? This is why PC gamers feel let down. The bar hasn't been raised like Crysis 1 did.

GeneralShowzer

I don't think so. CE3 could run that no problem.SaltyMeatballs

UE3 as well.. but of course we are referring to an actual game not really engines..

[QUOTE="haberman13"]

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"][QUOTE="haberman13"]

Isn't the game a corridor shooter now? That is the impression i get.

Not to mention the graphics (in the demo) have a very "console" feel; not sharp and precise like a PC.

DreamCryotank

If you don't know what "console feel" is you haven't gamed enough on PC, so it doesn't really matter. Basically its the overbloom, washed out, DoF-laden abomination that makes the screen look like a film of oil was dumped over it. This allows the game to run on console, but on my high-res monitor looks terrible.

The beauty is, I don't REALLY care, because this demo saved me $50 (I'll buy it for $10 on Steam next winter)

[QUOTE="haberman13"]

If you don't know what "console feel" is you haven't gamed enough on PC, so it doesn't really matter. Basically its the overbloom, washed out, DoF-laden abomination that makes the screen look like a film of oil was dumped over it. This allows the game to run on console, but on my high-res monitor looks terrible.

i5750at4Ghz

View to see fullsize.

no way does this even look better than the 1st crysis, its just detail being hidden by a lighting to make it look good. lets see if they can do bright colors when the game is released.

no way does this even look better than the 1st crysis, its just detail being hidden by a lighting to make it look good. lets see if they can do bright colors when the game is released.

gamespot4life

So did Crysis?

Seriously, turn off all of the higher end shading in Crysis 1, it really loses it's grpahics and the flaws come out.

Anyways BF3 just blew Crysis out of the water. Wait until we see buildings getting knocked down left and right.

AAllxxjjnn

... how come these aren't blurred by their horrid AA? Do they use MSAA in promo-shots, or what?

... how come these aren't blurred by their horrid AA? Do they use MSAA in promo-shots, or what?

psn8214

[QUOTE="psn8214"]

... how come these aren't blurred by their horrid AA? Do they use MSAA in promo-shots, or what?

AAllxxjjnn

Guess they implemented that recently then.

Someone did a comparison between the demo and Warhead.

http://www.giantbomb.com/crysis-2/61-26754/quick-crysis-warhead-vs-crysis-2-graphics-comparisons/35-484149/#4

Yea, don't know how viable this is. But Warhead blows it away.

Visuals alone don't make a game king imo, it needs something like physics in HL2 or scale in Crysis to really separate it from the rest. ManicAce

View to see fullsize.

AAllxxjjnn

Graphics are all nice and dandy but that bloom is ridiculous. It better be a way to turn it off.

I'm sorry but Killzone 3 looks better than BF3, which from the trailer should be the new Blur King. Although the scale of BF3 will be off the charts compared to Killzone 3 so I guess you can't really compare the two.shakmaster13

Keep telling yourself that.

The lighting alone in BF3 blows Killzone 3's out of the water, let's not even get started on the amount of objects, textures, and destructable enviroments all running at 60fps.

I'm sorry but Killzone 3 looks better than BF3, which from the trailer should be the new Blur King. Although the scale of BF3 will be off the charts compared to Killzone 3 so I guess you can't really compare the two.shakmaster13

[QUOTE="shakmaster13"]I'm sorry but Killzone 3 looks better than BF3, which from the trailer should be the new Blur King. Although the scale of BF3 will be off the charts compared to Killzone 3 so I guess you can't really compare the two.mitu123

Let's also not forget that BF3 is running at 60 (ish) FPS and at 1080p with AA and AF. The textures and AF in Killzone 3 are terrible.

Graphics are all nice and dandy but that bloom is ridiculous. It better be a way to turn it off.

edidili

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="shakmaster13"]I'm sorry but Killzone 3 looks better than BF3, which from the trailer should be the new Blur King. Although the scale of BF3 will be off the charts compared to Killzone 3 so I guess you can't really compare the two.Wasdie

Let's also not forget that BF3 is running at 60 (ish) FPS and at 1080p with AA and AF. The textures and AF in Killzone 3 are terrible.

[QUOTE="edidili"]

Graphics are all nice and dandy but that bloom is ridiculous. It better be a way to turn it off.

AAllxxjjnn

You can't tell what's wrong with it? I played the beta leak and it was like that all over the place, it did hurt my eyes. I don't understand why they thought it was better like this, is like they're going for a unique visual style instead of plain realism. I'd rather prefer a clear image and I'm pretty sure if not Crytek, modders will disable or lower it.

[QUOTE="edidili"]

Graphics are all nice and dandy but that bloom is ridiculous. It better be a way to turn it off.

AAllxxjjnn

It's not that bad in that image. In the demo it's horrible to the point where it interferes with the gameplay.

Crysis is a planned trilogy.

Crysis 2 took over 2 and a half years to make, maybe more.

It is hyped to surpass Crysis 1 in graphics because that game set the bar in graphics.

It's also developed on consoles and it shows in every area.

DX11 had to be patched.

This is why PC owners are upset, and I can't blame them, I don't hate the demo but it was clearly designed for consoles 1st, unlike BF3 which was designed for PC 1st. Now we must wait until the final build and when DX11 arrives to see if there's any hope left.

[QUOTE="Zero_epyon"][QUOTE="NaveedLife"]

No doubt, although I want to see some MP footage.

NaveedLife

That WAS campaign. They have co-op campaign and MP. MP is obviously the reason to buy it though and always has been.

Just like Crysis has always been a campaign game.. yet people are tossing Crysis2 under the bus for a multiplayer demo... :roll:

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]

View to see fullsize.

edidili

Graphics are all nice and dandy but that bloom is ridiculous. It better be a way to turn it off.

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"][QUOTE="haberman13"]

If you don't know what "console feel" is you haven't gamed enough on PC, so it doesn't really matter. Basically its the overbloom, washed out, DoF-laden abomination that makes the screen look like a film of oil was dumped over it. This allows the game to run on console, but on my high-res monitor looks terrible.

AAllxxjjnn

View to see fullsize.

Crysis and BF3 look about the same in screen caps. But in motion BF3 just looks far more organic. The animation are what make BF3 the better looking game imo.i5750at4Ghz

PC version of the Crysis 2 demo isn't impressive whatsoever.Zero5000X

Now they just used pc footage with dx11 enabled.

Crytek on the other hand.... provided a demo for crysis 2 that looks exactly like the console version, even blurry and neither the textures are as good as crysis 1 and neither they know what dx10/dx11 is.

Console versions of bf3 will look farrr worse.

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"] I've been gaming on PC since the mid 90's...Mozelleple112

View to see fullsize.

Nice downscaled picture you have their... hides all the graphical flaws... SHow a 1080p shot and it won't look that good.

Mozelleple112