Video of Cryengine 3 running on PS3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEw24335oWk&feature=player_embedded#at=19

i have to say that it looks amazing.

It looks ok.Nothing special like people make it be o.O

looks great but i think killzone 2 looks better.

When it does urban environments I don't think it looks all that different from Killzone 2 and with Crysis 2 being set in New York, well you get the idea.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEw24335oWk&feature=player_embedded#at=19

i have to say that it looks amazing.

ZoomZoom2490

That's an old and bad quality video. They've got the high res one on the CryEngine 3 page.

WOW people you just dont get it?It was tech demo a year old,made to run on consoles in less then 2 weeks,it is not optimized and its SANBOX,Crysis 2 wont be sandbox and will look better then this,now move along...

WOW people you just dont get it?It was tech demo a year old,made to run on consoles in less then 2 weeks,it is not optimized and its SANBOX,Crysis 2 wont be sandbox and will look better then this,now move along...

Bus-A-Bus

Crysis 2 might finally be the multiplat title to really show which console is more superior.. Final Fantasy XIII proved that PS3 has the more superior format with blu ray ofcourse. But if Crysis 2 looks better on PS3 then that could change the argument some.

It looks ok.Nothing special like people make it be o.O

Regisland

looks great but i think killzone 2 looks better.

toast_burner

OOOOMMMMMGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:evil: sry about that i just kinda blew a fuse. no offense dude lol

YO Toast Burner, REEECH LEWKS BETR DAN KILLZONE 2. And its in Alpha. EnjoyJ-Stantino

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

looks great but i think killzone 2 looks better.

OOOOMMMMMGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:evil: sry about that i just kinda blew a fuse. no offense dude lol

YO Toast Burner, REEECH LEWKS BETR DAN KILLZONE 2. And its in Alpha. EnjoyJ-Stantino

reach does not look better than Killzone 2. I dont even own a PS3 and i know that. its still using the halo 3 engine except much more optimized.

They said that they wanted to make it looks just as good on the PS3 as on the PC. Interesting. Does this mean the 360 version will be the inferior one for a change? After all, Crytek can obviously push both systems to their limits.

They said that they wanted to make it looks just as good on the PS3 as on the PC. Interesting. Does this mean the 360 version will be the inferior one for a change? After all, Crytek can obviously push both systems to their limits.

brickdoctor

They said that they wanted to make it looks just as good on the PS3 as on the PC. Interesting. Does this mean the 360 version will be the inferior one for a change? After all, Crytek can obviously push both systems to their limits.

brickdoctor

They said that they wanted to make it looks just as good on the PS3 as on the PC. Interesting. Does this mean the 360 version will be the inferior one for a change? After all, Crytek can obviously push both systems to their limits.

brickdoctor

actually there is documentation stating that the 360 version will have a slight edge over the PS3 in terms of graphics. Lighting and shadows, but the 360 version will preform much worse than the PS3 version. The PS3 version loads faster and does not throttle while the 360 version has a very high tendency to do so especially when rendering objects that pop out of nowhere such as debree etc. The graphical differences are very small though. Its something that the average gamer would notice only if that stared at the screen for 2 miniute in a stationary position.

[QUOTE="J-Stantino"]YO Toast Burner, REEECH LEWKS BETR DAN KILLZONE 2. And its in Alpha. Enjoypainguy1

reach does not look better than Killzone 2. I dont even own a PS3 and i know that. its still using the halo 3 engine except much more optimized.

Doesn't matter REACH could be the best looking game of all time and it wouldn't be accepted by SW.

[QUOTE="painguy1"]

[QUOTE="J-Stantino"]YO Toast Burner, REEECH LEWKS BETR DAN KILLZONE 2. And its in Alpha. EnjoyShoaka

reach does not look better than Killzone 2. I dont even own a PS3 and i know that. its still using the halo 3 engine except much more optimized.

*pic*

*pic*

Doesn't matter REACH could be the best looking game of all time and it wouldn't be accepted by SW.

oh i am completely aware of that. I was just pointing something out. Even though Bungie lied to me saying the graphics would beat KZ2 in the end its the gameplay that makes the game. The graphics are nice a clean enough for me (i know coming from me thats a surprise considering what i siad yesterday in the other Halo Reach thread, never did say i didnt like th game because of its graphics though, just said i was dissapointed)

WOW people you just dont get it?It was tech demo a year old,made to run on consoles in less then 2 weeks,it is not optimized and its SANBOX,Crysis 2 wont be sandbox and will look better then this,now move along...

Bus-A-Bus

WOW people you just dont get it?It was tech demo a year old,made to run on consoles in less then 2 weeks,it is not optimized and its SANBOX,Crysis 2 wont be sandbox and will look better then this,now move along...

Bus-A-Bus

its pretty amazing what they can get out of consoles.

The castle part at the end was the best. :3

WOW people you just dont get it?It was tech demo a year old,made to run on consoles in less then 2 weeks,it is not optimized and its SANBOX,Crysis 2 wont be sandbox and will look better then this,now move along...

WOW people you just dont get it?It was tech demo a year old,made to run on consoles in less then 2 weeks,it is not optimized and its SANBOX,Crysis 2 wont be sandbox and will look better then this,now move along...

[QUOTE="Silenthps"][QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

WOW people you just dont get it?It was tech demo a year old,made to run on consoles in less then 2 weeks,it is not optimized and its SANBOX,Crysis 2 wont be sandbox and will look better then this,now move along...

ocstew

* Player should be able to choose more freely how to approach a situation.

* Camarillo: "In the first Crysis, there were three ways to play: going rambo, stealthy or causing mayhem." Now, every attack shall be a new challenge for the player.

* New vertical gameplay: when in Crysis, you could only climb a car or a small hill, but now you've got more possibilities how to act.

* Not only you, but also the enemies use the different levels of the environment, shooting you from below or above.

and also

- Compared to Crysis there will be more freedom, larger gameplay areas and more tactical warfare.

- Nanosuit 2 will give players more freedom in how to tackle situations in the battlefield.

- The different aspects of nanosuit 2 are designed to further encourage experimental and fit-for-your-own-style usage of nanosuit's features.

- Cevat thinks that the weakest parts of Crysis were 1) the story, which lacked originality and details 2) the on-rails gameplay sty le in the end and 3) that there were no console versions.

- Compared to the majority of console games, the console gamers will see Crysis 2's freedom and openness as a new and interesting gameplay ****

- The player has again the freedom of choosing what weapons to use and how to use them, or how to take advantage of the environment.

- Crysis 2 will again feature the familiar "Veni Vidi Vici" (I came, I saw, I conquered) gameplay sty le

- Compared to jungle, urban environment offers more opportunities for gameplay based on vertical differences and the player will have more freedom to choose how to progress and plan out attacks.

http://www.incrysis.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=847

WOW people you just dont get it?It was tech demo a year old,made to run on consoles in less then 2 weeks,it is not optimized and its SANBOX,Crysis 2 wont be sandbox and will look better then this,now move along...

Bus-A-Bus

[QUOTE="J-Stantino"]YO Toast Burner, REEECH LEWKS BETR DAN KILLZONE 2. And its in Alpha. Enjoypainguy1

reach does not look better than Killzone 2. I dont even own a PS3 and i know that. its still using the halo 3 engine except much more optimized.

UM, you know reach look MUCH better in motion right? Also, The Halo REACH engine probably has less in common to the H3 engine than UE3 has to UE2.

[QUOTE="brickdoctor"]

They said that they wanted to make it looks just as good on the PS3 as on the PC. Interesting. Does this mean the 360 version will be the inferior one for a change? After all, Crytek can obviously push both systems to their limits.

toast_burner

How do you know it looks worse?

[QUOTE="painguy1"]

[QUOTE="J-Stantino"]YO Toast Burner, REEECH LEWKS BETR DAN KILLZONE 2. And its in Alpha. EnjoyMC3887

reach does not look better than Killzone 2. I dont even own a PS3 and i know that. its still using the halo 3 engine except much more optimized.

UM, you know reach look MUCH better in motion right? Also, The Halo REACH engine probably has less in common to the H3 engine than UE3 has to UE2.

[QUOTE="painguy1"]

[QUOTE="J-Stantino"]YO Toast Burner, REEECH LEWKS BETR DAN KILLZONE 2. And its in Alpha. EnjoyMC3887

reach does not look better than Killzone 2. I dont even own a PS3 and i know that. its still using the halo 3 engine except much more optimized.

UM, you know reach look MUCH better in motion right? Also, The Halo REACH engine probably has less in common to the H3 engine than UE3 has to UE2.

i compare with stills because with vids there is extra motionblur etc giving the illusion that the game looks good. play most racing games without out moving and ull notice the game doesnt look as good as it does when ur moving. im not saying theg game will be bad, infact im pretty sure it will be fun and i will be buying it. Im just pointing out that bungie lied when they siad they are giving the engine a complete overhaul.

[QUOTE="MC3887"]

[QUOTE="painguy1"]

reach does not look better than Killzone 2. I dont even own a PS3 and i know that. its still using the halo 3 engine except much more optimized.

painguy1

UM, you know reach look MUCH better in motion right? Also, The Halo REACH engine probably has less in common to the H3 engine than UE3 has to UE2.

i compare with stills because with vids there is extra motionblur etc giving the illusion that the game looks good. play most racing games without out moving and ull notice the game doesnt look as good as it does when ur moving

Reach doesn't have all that much motion blurr, it has alot of effects not present in pics though, also KZ2 can look pretty ugly in pics, but great in motion. Here is good reach shot:

Is technically the most advanced showcase on the ps3.

Forget Killzone2, uncharted 2, heavy rain... the cryengine is dealing with dinamic and real time computation is unprecedenty on the ps3.

While it is a little slow the showcase, the dynamic particles, shading, physics pretty much wins. Don't know if is the best looking game but is definitely the technically more advanced.

YO Toast Burner, REEECH LEWKS BETR DAN KILLZONE 2. And its in Alpha. EnjoyJ-Stantino

It looks ok.Nothing special like people make it be o.O

Regisland

[QUOTE="Regisland"]

It looks ok.Nothing special like people make it be o.O

II_Seraphim_II

http://www6.incrysis.com/screenshots/1pw36.jpg" alt=" " />

Tell me this looks worse than UC2

And yea this is 100% in game no photoshop

[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"][QUOTE="Regisland"]

It looks ok.Nothing special like people make it be o.O

ocstew

Tell me this looks worse than UC2

And yea this is 100% in game no photoshop

GoW craps all over the Cry Engine 2 in scale and detail. Finger Prints for my titans? Yes please!

Ingame, no photoshop:

[QUOTE="ocstew"]

[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"] I agree. Personally I think GoW3 looks more amazing...II_Seraphim_II

Tell me this looks worse than UC2

And yea this is 100% in game no photoshop

GoW craps all over the Cry Engine 2 in scale and detail. Finger Prints for my titans? Yes please!

Ingame, no photoshop:

*pics*

when u have a large object in 3d space such as the enemy u just showed us they require larger textures to cover the entire 3d mesh and look clean. you wont be seeing those finger prints on Kratos's hands at all because he is very small in comparison to all the other objects in the game. I would explain UVW mapping to you, but i dont think you will understand if u believe that those finger prints are there because the PS3 is better.

[QUOTE="ocstew"]

[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"] I agree. Personally I think GoW3 looks more amazing...II_Seraphim_II

Tell me this looks worse than UC2

And yea this is 100% in game no photoshop

GoW craps all over the Cry Engine 2 in scale and detail. Finger Prints for my titans? Yes please!

Ingame, no photoshop:

saying it craps all over CryEngine 2 and not just crysis is really foolish since anyone can just recreate that same titan on CE2 with out those atrociously low res textures, and have a much larger scale.

and having finger prints on something that huge isn't impressive, for something as large as that its pretty much necessary. I'd be more impressed with a high detail character like this.

[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"]

[QUOTE="ocstew"] Medium Crysis looks better than the both of them. Technically CE3 is the best by far, it's a fact. But I can say Super Mario looks better than Crysis, because of "art direction" too.

Tell me this looks worse than UC2

And yea this is 100% in game no photoshop

Silenthps

GoW craps all over the Cry Engine 2 in scale and detail. Finger Prints for my titans? Yes please!

Ingame, no photoshop:

saying it craps all over CryEngine 2 and not just crysis is really foolish since anyone can just recreate that same titan on CE2 with out those atrociously low res textures, and have a much larger scale.

and having finger prints on something that huge isn't impressive, for something as large as that its pretty much necessary. I'd be more impressed with a high detail character like this.

*pic*

lol his face is all like, "man i hate system wars"