what has better technical graphics

I'm starting to believe that saolin is actually Peter Molyneux himself! :o

I mean seriously, as much as I like Fable and its artstyle, it's more comparable to Wii games than Crysis.

there is no contest between fable2 and crysis. artistic..sure, but technically, Crysis is far ahead of Fable2 and some features in Crysis are not even possible to render with the fable 2 engine, I'm amazed at the amount of people who voted for Fable2 given this is a technical question (those who didnt do it just to look stupid).

Even UE3.0 surpasses Fable2's engine (given whether or not the developer knows how to use UE3.0).

This is not a topic about artistic merit, but if it was, Fable2 would win simply because Crysis doesn't try to be artistic, it tries to be realistic, and obviously doesn't take place in a fantastical environment à la WoW or Fable or Witcher.

WARxSnake

Sorry, there is NOTHING much more impressive in Crysis than Fable 2, the lighting is as good, the light beams better, the grass seems better too, the trees are far more detailed, and the size huge

You might say Crysis has even bigger stages, better charatcer models by far and a bit more detail counting what you see further away, but that is all, techically Fable 2 does look on par, and in some aspects better

I'm starting to believe that saolin is actually Peter Molyneux himself! :o

I mean seriously, as much as I like Fable and its artstyle, it's more comparable to Wii games than Crysis.

EntwineX

HAHAHA, no game comes close to Fable 2 graphics, only Crysis compares, and not so well in all aspects either

As for Wii, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, you are trying the worst damage control i have seen EVER !!!!

just because fable2 has HDR bloom up the wazoo and decent textures doesnt make it the best looking game.WARxSnake

I agree, just because it has

- 20+ trees around, all UBER detailed, with each leaf visible, and casting shadows on ground and other leaves

- full grass coverage of ground, with grass, flowers, and small detail, rock, undergrowth, bushes etc etc

- light beams, that MOVE with the sun motion and filter through rees and leaves

- amazing lighting that makes everything stand out, and not feel last gen like Olbivion lighting

- amazing 100% perfect shadows from EVERYTHING onto everything else, that again stretch and move as the sun does

- vast landscpaes with all the above, fully dunamic day/night cycles always in motion

- great textures

it can't be called great looking, it looks so bad indeed. how did i miss that ?

[QUOTE="WARxSnake"]just because fable2 has HDR bloom up the wazoo and decent textures doesnt make it the best looking game.saolin323

I agree, just because it has

- 20+ trees around, all UBER detailed, with each leaf visible, and casting shadows on ground and other leaves

- full grass coverage of ground, with grass, flowers, and small detail, rock, undergrowth, bushes etc etc

- light beams, that MOVE with the sun motion and filter through rees and leaves

- amazing lighting that makes everything stand out, and not feel last gen like Olbivion lighting

- amazing 100% perfect shadows from EVERYTHING onto everything else, that again stretch and move as the sun does

- vast landscpaes with all the above, fully dunamic day/night cycles always in motion

- great textures

it can't be called great looking, it looks so bad indeed. how did i miss that ?

I'm still waiting saolin. 86% vs. 14%,but Fable 2 still wins right?

[QUOTE="WARxSnake"]just because fable2 has HDR bloom up the wazoo and decent textures doesnt make it the best looking game.saolin323

I agree, just because it has

- 20+ trees around, all UBER detailed, with each leaf visible, and casting shadows on ground and other leaves

- full grass coverage of ground, with grass, flowers, and small detail, rock, undergrowth, bushes etc etc

- light beams, that MOVE with the sun motion and filter through rees and leaves

- amazing lighting that makes everything stand out, and not feel last gen like Olbivion lighting

- amazing 100% perfect shadows from EVERYTHING onto everything else, that again stretch and move as the sun does

- vast landscpaes with all the above, fully dunamic day/night cycles always in motion

- great textures

it can't be called great looking, it looks so bad indeed. how did i miss that ?

crysis does all that and a hell of a lot more. You just described 5% of the vegetation and lighting system in Crysis.

[QUOTE="saolin323"]

[QUOTE="WARxSnake"]just because fable2 has HDR bloom up the wazoo and decent textures doesnt make it the best looking game.WARxSnake

I agree, just because it has

- 20+ trees around, all UBER detailed, with each leaf visible, and casting shadows on ground and other leaves

- full grass coverage of ground, with grass, flowers, and small detail, rock, undergrowth, bushes etc etc

- light beams, that MOVE with the sun motion and filter through rees and leaves

- amazing lighting that makes everything stand out, and not feel last gen like Olbivion lighting

- amazing 100% perfect shadows from EVERYTHING onto everything else, that again stretch and move as the sun does

- vast landscpaes with all the above, fully dunamic day/night cycles always in motion

- great textures

it can't be called great looking, it looks so bad indeed. how did i miss that ?

crysis does all that and a hell of a lot more. You just described 5% of the vegetation and lighting system in Crysis.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA !!!!!!!

5% ???

Ok, then name the other 95%, if you can that is

Perhaps you need to take a look at the poll, Saolin, though even without it's quite obvious to anyone without fanboy goggles that while Fable 2 is a good looking game, it doesn't hold a candle to Crysis in terms of technical graphics. Artistically, yes, I'd definitely say Fable 2 comes out on top, but to believe that its technically on par, or much less, surpasses Crysis in terms of technical graphics, you'd have to be handicapped in either the area of eyesight, or intelligence.

Oh, and this is from someone who absolutely loved Fable, even though it fell short of what its original vision was, and who is going to love part 2 as well, especially with all of the additions. Its one of the very few games that'll actually find me on the 360, but still, you've got to look at it realistically and without the fanboy goggles.

Is that really all fable 2 has to offer?!?!?! WOW thats utterly sad!!!

[QUOTE="EntwineX"]

I'm starting to believe that saolin is actually Peter Molyneux himself! :o

I mean seriously, as much as I like Fable and its artstyle, it's more comparable to Wii games than Crysis.

saolin323

HAHAHA, no game comes close to Fable 2 graphics, only Crysis compares, and not so well in all aspects either

As for Wii, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, you are trying the worst damage control i have seen EVER !!!!

[/spoiler]

Here are some screenshots you should compare Fable 2 with... Crysis wins by a mile.

Here are some screenshots you should compare Fable 2 with... Crysis wins by a mile.

DragonfireXZ95

He won't listen,he'll just post that same picture for the 10th time and claim it looks better. But damn,those are probably the best Crysis shots I've ever seen! I envy that computer.

There isn't any comparison.. Although I think the art style of Fable is my most favourite in any game, Crysis looks much more realistic, if that is what you mean by *technical*.

Both are beautiful, but there's no debate about which looks more real.. I find that if you want to imagine how real a game is, you can do it by imagining what your reaction would be to the graphics in real life.. For example I would be much more convinced by a character from Crysis walking down the street, than I would by one from Fable, even thought I prefer Fable..

[QUOTE="WARxSnake"][QUOTE="saolin323"]

[QUOTE="WARxSnake"]just because fable2 has HDR bloom up the wazoo and decent textures doesnt make it the best looking game.saolin323

I agree, just because it has

- 20+ trees around, all UBER detailed, with each leaf visible, and casting shadows on ground and other leaves

- full grass coverage of ground, with grass, flowers, and small detail, rock, undergrowth, bushes etc etc

- light beams, that MOVE with the sun motion and filter through rees and leaves

- amazing lighting that makes everything stand out, and not feel last gen like Olbivion lighting

- amazing 100% perfect shadows from EVERYTHING onto everything else, that again stretch and move as the sun does

- vast landscpaes with all the above, fully dunamic day/night cycles always in motion

- great textures

it can't be called great looking, it looks so bad indeed. how did i miss that ?

crysis does all that and a hell of a lot more. You just described 5% of the vegetation and lighting system in Crysis.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA !!!!!!!

5% ???

Ok, then name the other 95%, if you can that is

yeah be my guest and go and actually study game engines, if you REALLY think fable2's engine is better you REALLY have no idea what you are talking about.

Crysis uses lighting on a massive scale, using dynamic lighting everywhere, which means there are no lightmaps and there are no baked lights, which is still the case for games like Fable2.

Crysis only relies on 'live' lighting, which is incredibly taxing for graphics cards. This lighting system in turn ensures that every single object in the game world casts shadows on other objects and the environment, as well as self shadowing which means that an object will cast a shadow on itself given its complex shape. Thus all shadows are actively generated and nothing is baked in and ready to load in memory.

You want to talk about vegetation? sure.. provided you actually understand anything I say in the next few phrases. If you don't, you already have no place talking about what game engine is better than others.

The shaders used for vegetation in Crysis use features that until now have only existed in CG pre-rendered movies. Sub Surface Scattering, for one, is an algorithm in a shader which is based on values and a guide map. Using the value and the map (which resembles any specular map), you have the ability to assign depth and translucency to your textured objects.

What SubSurfaceScatering does is tell the lighting how to react when it passes through translucent and semi-transparent objects, such as leaves on a tree or plant, or human skin, or wax-like objects. Thus you can tell the lighting, through the shader of the object, how deep the object is, how easy it is for light to pass through it, how many times light bounces in the object, and what color passes the lighting has to go through when it penetrates the object.

So for a skin shader for example, you tell the lighting to pass through the skin of a character only in thin areas like the nose, ears, fingers, and in those locations, the light will glow within the skin with a red tint, simulating blood.

If you still dont understand me (for whatever reason i think you still dont), if you have a flashlight at home,go to your bathroom, close the door, make sure its dark, then turn on your flashlight and cover it with your fingers or the palm of your hand. See, skin is naturally translucent in shallow areas, and thus lighting passes through the skin and illuminates your blood.

This is what Crysis does with the help of CryEngine2 for skin, vegetation (leaves that pass-through light), and any object that is translucent or has refraction properties. Even PVC bottles in the game use advanced calculations to simulate light passing through.

here are some examples of sub surface scattering, the first picture being from crysis:

If you equip your gun with a laser sight, go to any shack, find a PVC bottle, and point your laser on the bottle, you will see the laser bouncing off and inside the bottle with proper real-world optical physics, using refraction maps.

again, as you can tell from the LOTR picture, this feature has been a CG-prerender specific effect, and is used in moves in a more advanced form of course, but crysis is one of the first to support the feature, along with UE3.

Also, crysis probably has 70% more vegetation density at all times compared to the sparse environments in Fable2. This means that the amount of calculation with respect to not only the lighting itself, but how its supposed to pass through all kinds of vegetation, have shadows casted from the vegetation, and it being casted onto other trees, its an insane amount of calculation.

Also theres more "coverage" as you call it, of grass and all kinds of organics in crysis than in Fable2, and crysis doesn use insanely low culling distances (objects popping in and out) to hide objects.

Vast Landscapes? yeah i think the open-world aspect of Crysis speaks for itself on that front..

crysis has day/night, and weather . even stalker has weather.. lol.. day/night really isnt a huge feature to fapfapfap on anyway, its whether or not the lighting is dynamic and whether it follows the day night settings. (and weather in the case of crysis).

amazing lighting - yeah i already talked about that.

light beams -

okay, you need to understand something. light beams can be recreated in a DS or PSP game. all it takes are 1x1 plane-polygons with transparent gradient textures on them, lol! light beams, muzzle flashes, ambient lighting, if a game is willing to cheat enough, all this can be done with transparent polygon planes.

Crysis on the other hand uses volumetric lighting to acheive this, i.e. crysis doesnt "cheat" like most last-gen games.

i wont mention all the other ground breaking features Crysis uses (that have only really been used in CGI until now), since you didnt mention them yourself, but if you want to bring it up I'll be more than happy to explain how crysis owns anything else in that respect.

I'm talking of course about Micro-triangle displacement, and parallax mapping, which puts normal mapping to shame.

anyway, back to my original point that fable 2 does none of this, and if it does, its not to the scale or accuracy of crysis. all fable 2 does is cute HDR and some dynamic lighting, hurray.

you probably cant even tell me what HDR really is or how it works, right?

and no, knowing what the initials stand for doesnt mean you know what HDR is.

also you probably dont know what lightmaps are, and baked lighting, and comparing those to dynamic lighting.

i think its time for you to google this crap.

Well, after the last pics and info, i have to admit Crysis looks impressive

Maybe i am wrong, and Crysis does push more, and is just that Fable 2 uses most of Crysis effects, and almost as good lighitng/shadows/light beams, combined with the amazing art i like more than any game, that makes me think it looks so much better overall

Still it is by miles the closest thing to Crysis, nothing looks as good as any of the games, bar maybe Far Cry 2, which feels a lot emptier than both though

Still, Fable 2 has 9 months of more polish to go

The post above me though is wrong

Fable 2 does use REAL volumetric lighting, does not immitate it at all, and all those move with the sun, it is every bit as incredible as in Crysis

Also the vegetation is HUGE in Fable 2, hosts of trees, full grass coverage, flowers, etc, it is just FULL of foligage, so the above statement that Crysis has more foliage just does not stand, that forest pic is FULL of foliage, you can barely put more stuff there, would not make sense even

Also EVERYTHING in Fable 2 casts a shadows EVERYWHERE too, same as Crysis

So, all in all, EVERYTHING Crysis does in lighting, Fable 2 does, bar one, subsurface scattering, which is minor IMO

The post above just proves that Crysis does not do much more than Fable 2 does, at all

[QUOTE="WARxSnake"]just because fable2 has HDR bloom up the wazoo and decent textures doesnt make it the best looking game.saolin323

I agree, just because it has

- 20+ trees around, all UBER detailed, with each leaf visible, and casting shadows on ground and other leaves

- full grass coverage of ground, with grass, flowers, and small detail, rock, undergrowth, bushes etc etc

- light beams, that MOVE with the sun motion and filter through rees and leaves

- amazing lighting that makes everything stand out, and not feel last gen like Olbivion lighting

- amazing 100% perfect shadows from EVERYTHING onto everything else, that again stretch and move as the sun does

- vast landscpaes with all the above, fully dunamic day/night cycles always in motion

- great textures

it can't be called great looking, it looks so bad indeed. how did i miss that ?

Look at the jagged trees in Fable and say without laughing it looks better then Crysis.

Crysis wins easily.

[QUOTE="saolin323"]

[QUOTE="WARxSnake"]just because fable2 has HDR bloom up the wazoo and decent textures doesnt make it the best looking game.Saturos3091

I agree, just because it has

- 20+ trees around, all UBER detailed, with each leaf visible, and casting shadows on ground and other leaves

- full grass coverage of ground, with grass, flowers, and small detail, rock, undergrowth, bushes etc etc

- light beams, that MOVE with the sun motion and filter through rees and leaves

- amazing lighting that makes everything stand out, and not feel last gen like Olbivion lighting

- amazing 100% perfect shadows from EVERYTHING onto everything else, that again stretch and move as the sun does

- vast landscpaes with all the above, fully dunamic day/night cycles always in motion

- great textures

it can't be called great looking, it looks so bad indeed. how did i miss that ?

Oblivion is 2 or 3 generations behind in graphics than Fable 2, do not bring that old gen game into this cobersation, we talk herer about games with REAL 3d trees, that each leaf cast a shadow, REAL shadows that stretech and move, REAL lighting, that does not make trees look totally black in one side etc

Oblivion looks old gen comparing to Fable 2, and no, mods do not add anything other than some better textures

In short, do not spread BS about things you have no idea about

Me dying in crysis

/THREAD

Well, after the last pics and info, i have to admit Crysis looks impressive

Maybe i am wrong, and Crysis does push more, and is just that Fable 2 uses most of Crysis effects, and almost as good lighitng/shadows/light beams, combined with the amazing art i like more than any game, that makes me think it looks so much better overall

Still it is by miles the closest thing to Crysis, nothing looks as good as any of the games, bar maybe Far Cry 2, which feels a lot emptier than both though

Still, Fable 2 has 9 months of more polish to go

The post above me though is wrong

Fable 2 does use REAL volumetric lighting, does not immitate it at all, and all those move with the sun, it is every bit as incredible as in Crysis

Also the vegetation is HUGE in Fable 2, hosts of trees, full grass coverage, flowers, etc, it is just FULL of foligage, so the above statement that Crysis has more foliage just does not stand, that forest pic is FULL of foliage, you can barely put more stuff there, would not make sense even

Also EVERYTHING in Fable 2 casts a shadows EVERYWHERE too, same as Crysis

So, all in all, EVERYTHING Crysis does in lighting, Fable 2 does, bar one, subsurface scattering, which is minor IMO

The post above just proves that Crysis does not do much more than Fable 2 does, at all

saolin323

All of what you said it nice and great, but the 360 can only do so much.

I feel it's going to be a very long time before the graphics of Crysis are surpassed.Shad0ki11

Well until the next crysis comes out.

[QUOTE="Rougehunter"][QUOTE="saolin323"]

Always keep in mind, Crysis is a final optimised game, Fable 2 pic will get 9 more months of work until release

But Fable 2 light beams, shadows and detail is definatly way ahead IMO, and is a given, Crysis is old now, Fable 2 is coming later, so was a given that would look far better

saolin323

hahaha, you are 100% wrong, check video diary #4 in their official site, the world now is huge, connected and there are no paths like Fable 1, you can jump ALL fences you see, unlike Fable 1, and only mountains are a barrier, like Crysis anyway

THAT is why those graphics are so amazing, they are not only better than Crysis, but in as huge spaces

I voted for crysis not knowin that stuff... so i find my vote to be misplaced. Fables got a cool art style to. Not 100% realistic. you know what i mean ?

its obvious that those arent 360 screens.Frier6000

Oh, yes they are, in fact one of them was from a 100% real time video they have from GDC

Why don't people give up. CryEngine 2 is the most techincally superior engine on the market and wont be passed for awhile. It will only be passed by another graphics engine that will first appear on the PC.Wasdie

Why don't you just give up the hype ? Looking at the pic of Fable 2 above, makes Crysengine look ordinary

What if it has as extra subsurface scattering, and a bit better visibility etc ? The MAJOR things, like the lighting, shadows, light beams, volumetric effects, super detail close up are ALL there on Fable 2, unless you have something to counter from those

That forest looks as spectacular technically as ANY Crysis forest, maybe is less in scale, MAYBE, because we have not seen the full visibility they go, but there is not much things different than Crysis forests, the lighting is 100% there, the shadows are there, the grass/trees are there, so what IYO sets Crysis forests apart ?

Can i get just ONE real answer ? With proof and pics ? Plus those Crysis pics are downscaled, can we have the REAL full resolution ones, downscaling pics make them have 100000x Anti Aliasing, the game DOES NOT look that way, those pics are the only means of PC people to "prove" Crysis looks so good, well, it does not

Again, post some REAL Crysis pics, not supersampled ones, you may fool the others here, but i know how those pics are produced, and i know in reality Crysis looks nothing like this

crysis has better technical graphics

but i prefer Fable's fantasy art style

akif22

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]Why don't people give up. CryEngine 2 is the most techincally superior engine on the market and wont be passed for awhile. It will only be passed by another graphics engine that will first appear on the PC.saolin323

Why don't you just give up the hype ? Looking at the pic of Fable 2 above, makes Crysengine look ordinary

What if it has as extra subsurface scattering, and a bit better visibility etc ? The MAJOR things, like the lighting, shadows, light beams, volumetric effects, super detail close up are ALL there on Fable 2, unless you have something to counter from those

That forest looks as spectacular technically as ANY Crysis forest, maybe is less in scale, MAYBE, because we have not seen the full visibility they go, but there is not much things different than Crysis forests, the lighting is 100% there, the shadows are there, the grass/trees are there, so what IYO sets Crysis forests apart ?

Can i get just ONE real answer ? With proof and pics ?

Sorry, but it's not possible to convince someone who's unwilling to be persuaded.

You need to get yourself checked if you picked Fable 2 over Crysis, those 16 of you.

Even if Fable 2 is fantasy based, there is still realism associated with it, and for that matter, it's a difference in art style/animation. Even with that being said, Crysis crushes Fable 2 in the palm of it's hand like a huge pro wrestler squeezes the crap out of a marshmellow.

Just to throw my own two cents, I think Fable 2 is an ugly, ugly looking game. It looks no better than an upgraded World of Warcraft, and heck that's hella old in terms of graphics. It looks horrible, and if it is released this year, it'll get crushed by others in terms of graphics.

You need to get yourself checked if you picked Fable to over Crysis, those 16 of you.

Even if Fable 2 is fantasy based, there is still realism associated with it, and for that matter, it's a difference in art style/animation. Even with that being said, Crysis crushes Fable 2 in the palm of it's hand like a huge pro wrestler squeezes the crap out of a marshmellow.

Just to throw my own two cents, I think Fable 2 is an ugly, ugly looking game. It looks no better than an upgraded World of Warcraft, and heck that's hella old in terms of graphics. It looks horrible, and if it is released this year, it'll get crushed by others in terms of graphics.

elbow2k

Thank you.

[QUOTE="saolin323"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]Why don't people give up. CryEngine 2 is the most techincally superior engine on the market and wont be passed for awhile. It will only be passed by another graphics engine that will first appear on the PC.HeroOfCows

Why don't you just give up the hype ? Looking at the pic of Fable 2 above, makes Crysengine look ordinary

What if it has as extra subsurface scattering, and a bit better visibility etc ? The MAJOR things, like the lighting, shadows, light beams, volumetric effects, super detail close up are ALL there on Fable 2, unless you have something to counter from those

That forest looks as spectacular technically as ANY Crysis forest, maybe is less in scale, MAYBE, because we have not seen the full visibility they go, but there is not much things different than Crysis forests, the lighting is 100% there, the shadows are there, the grass/trees are there, so what IYO sets Crysis forests apart ?

Can i get just ONE real answer ? With proof and pics ?

Sorry, but it's not possible to convince someone who's unwilling to be persuaded.

I am NOT unwilling, ok ?

For starters i want some 720p in game Crysis pics, to compare with, not downscaled pics that lok vastly better, and nothing like this in reality

Then let's take it feature by feature, counter any if you are serious about it

Fable 2 has

- full grass coverage like Crysis

- full shadows that fall on grass, looking as amazing

- perfect shadows from EVERYTHING on everything else, 100% defined by geomerty, leaves etc

- light beams that move as the sun does

- indirect light beams that move as the sun does, volumetric effects

- great textures

- vast detail around, grass, flowers, trees with hosts of leaves you can see each, vasting shadows on other leaves, trees ands ground/grass

So, here you go, i AM willing to be convinced, what TECHNICALLY sets apart Crysis from the above effects Fable 2 uses ?

I want some REAL anwsers and some REAL 720p in game Crysis pics

[QUOTE="HeroOfCows"][QUOTE="saolin323"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]Why don't people give up. CryEngine 2 is the most techincally superior engine on the market and wont be passed for awhile. It will only be passed by another graphics engine that will first appear on the PC.saolin323

Why don't you just give up the hype ? Looking at the pic of Fable 2 above, makes Crysengine look ordinary

What if it has as extra subsurface scattering, and a bit better visibility etc ? The MAJOR things, like the lighting, shadows, light beams, volumetric effects, super detail close up are ALL there on Fable 2, unless you have something to counter from those

That forest looks as spectacular technically as ANY Crysis forest, maybe is less in scale, MAYBE, because we have not seen the full visibility they go, but there is not much things different than Crysis forests, the lighting is 100% there, the shadows are there, the grass/trees are there, so what IYO sets Crysis forests apart ?

Can i get just ONE real answer ? With proof and pics ?

Sorry, but it's not possible to convince someone who's unwilling to be persuaded.

I am NOT unwilling, ok ?

For starters i want some 720p in game Crysis pics, to compare with, not downscaled pics that lok vastly better, and nothing like this in reality

Then let's take it feature by feature, counter any if you are seriosu about it

Fable 2 has

- full grass coverage like Crysis

- full shadows that fall on grass, looking as amazing

- perfect shadows from EVERYTHING on everything else, 100% defined by geomerty, leaves etc

- light beams that move as the sun does

- indirect light beams that move as the sun does, volumetric effects

- great textures

- vast detail around, grass, flowers, trees with hosts of leaves you can see each, vasting shadows on other leaves, trees ands ground/grass

So, here you go, i AM willing to be convinced, what TECHNICALLY sets apart Crysis from the abov Fable 2 uses ?

Uncharted has those too, pretty much. And do we dispute that Crysis looks better than Uncharted? No, it's simply understood.

[QUOTE="saolin323"][QUOTE="HeroOfCows"][QUOTE="saolin323"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]Why don't people give up. CryEngine 2 is the most techincally superior engine on the market and wont be passed for awhile. It will only be passed by another graphics engine that will first appear on the PC.HeroOfCows

Why don't you just give up the hype ? Looking at the pic of Fable 2 above, makes Crysengine look ordinary

What if it has as extra subsurface scattering, and a bit better visibility etc ? The MAJOR things, like the lighting, shadows, light beams, volumetric effects, super detail close up are ALL there on Fable 2, unless you have something to counter from those

That forest looks as spectacular technically as ANY Crysis forest, maybe is less in scale, MAYBE, because we have not seen the full visibility they go, but there is not much things different than Crysis forests, the lighting is 100% there, the shadows are there, the grass/trees are there, so what IYO sets Crysis forests apart ?

Can i get just ONE real answer ? With proof and pics ?

Sorry, but it's not possible to convince someone who's unwilling to be persuaded.

I am NOT unwilling, ok ?

For starters i want some 720p in game Crysis pics, to compare with, not downscaled pics that lok vastly better, and nothing like this in reality

Then let's take it feature by feature, counter any if you are seriosu about it

Fable 2 has

- full grass coverage like Crysis

- full shadows that fall on grass, looking as amazing

- perfect shadows from EVERYTHING on everything else, 100% defined by geomerty, leaves etc

- light beams that move as the sun does

- indirect light beams that move as the sun does, volumetric effects

- great textures

- vast detail around, grass, flowers, trees with hosts of leaves you can see each, vasting shadows on other leaves, trees ands ground/grass

So, here you go, i AM willing to be convinced, what TECHNICALLY sets apart Crysis from the abov Fable 2 uses ?

Uncharted has those too, pretty much. And do we dispute that Crysis looks better than Uncharted? No, it's simply understood.

You did not answer my questions above, plus do not bring Uncharted in here, this one is so many MILES behind any of those two games, that is not to be mentioned here, that game looks like a joke comparing to either Fable 2 or Crysis

It did not have volumetric lighting, not grass like that by any stretch of the imagination, not as many things around, there were no forests, jsut some crap looking trees around levels, with minimal detail, the world did not have dynamic shadows, or real volumetric effects, and the levels were tiny and empty, Fable 2 forests are HUGE, with a host of trees around you can actually see, not see far away in a wall around you, grass that covers everything, shadows that move and from each leaf, volumetric light beams moving as the sun moves etc

Uncharted looks like a REALLY old gen title comparing to Fable 2, so just do not try to confuse things, and answer the above questions

It's amazing how people can so vehimently support a game that hasn't come out yet, is being developed by a man who notorious for not coming through with all his promises, and is on a console with clear limitations; when in stark contrast, we've seen and have heard that Crysis is the benchmark for graphics, has proven to create one of the most visceral enviroments ever seen in video gaming, and to boot, has yet to be matched in terms of pure scale by any game.

Wait until Fable 2 comes out before you say anything, then sit back and let it be crushed by Crysis. You must either be a raging fanboy, or in clear disillusion to think that Fable 2 is better looking than Crysis. It saddens me actually.

[QUOTE="HeroOfCows"][QUOTE="saolin323"][QUOTE="HeroOfCows"][QUOTE="saolin323"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]Why don't people give up. CryEngine 2 is the most techincally superior engine on the market and wont be passed for awhile. It will only be passed by another graphics engine that will first appear on the PC.saolin323

Why don't you just give up the hype ? Looking at the pic of Fable 2 above, makes Crysengine look ordinary

What if it has as extra subsurface scattering, and a bit better visibility etc ? The MAJOR things, like the lighting, shadows, light beams, volumetric effects, super detail close up are ALL there on Fable 2, unless you have something to counter from those

That forest looks as spectacular technically as ANY Crysis forest, maybe is less in scale, MAYBE, because we have not seen the full visibility they go, but there is not much things different than Crysis forests, the lighting is 100% there, the shadows are there, the grass/trees are there, so what IYO sets Crysis forests apart ?

Can i get just ONE real answer ? With proof and pics ?

Sorry, but it's not possible to convince someone who's unwilling to be persuaded.

I am NOT unwilling, ok ?

For starters i want some 720p in game Crysis pics, to compare with, not downscaled pics that lok vastly better, and nothing like this in reality

Then let's take it feature by feature, counter any if you are seriosu about it

Fable 2 has

- full grass coverage like Crysis

- full shadows that fall on grass, looking as amazing

- perfect shadows from EVERYTHING on everything else, 100% defined by geomerty, leaves etc

- light beams that move as the sun does

- indirect light beams that move as the sun does, volumetric effects

- great textures

- vast detail around, grass, flowers, trees with hosts of leaves you can see each, vasting shadows on other leaves, trees ands ground/grass

So, here you go, i AM willing to be convinced, what TECHNICALLY sets apart Crysis from the abov Fable 2 uses ?

Uncharted has those too, pretty much. And do we dispute that Crysis looks better than Uncharted? No, it's simply understood.

You did not answer my questions above, plus do not bring Uncharted in here, this one is so many MILES behind any of those two games, that is not to be mentioned here, that game looks like a joke comparing to either Fable 2 or Crysis

It did not have volumetric lighting, not grass like that by any stretch of the imagination, not as many things around, there were no forests, jsut some crap looking trees around levels, with minimal detail, the world did not have dynamic shadows, or real volumetric effects, and the levels were tiny and empty, Fable 2 forests are HUGE, with a host of trees around you can actually see, not see far away in a wall around you, grass that covers everything, shadows that move and from each leaf, volumetric light beams moving as the sun moves etc

Uncharted looks like a REALLY old gen title comparing to Fable 2, so just do not try to confuse things, and answer the above questions

You're a very sad person. You also didn't ask "questions" but asked a single question. "what TECHNICALLY sets apart Crysis from the abov Fable 2 uses ?" The simple fact of the matter is, the engine used in Crysis is simply the most advanced piece of technology possible to use for a game's graphics right now. And yes, it looks better than Fable 2. If you cannot see for your own eyes the gap in visuals these two games have, then I'm afraid we're done here. If you were to see a picture of Crysis running in 720p with details on max, you would still deny that it looks better than Fable 2. How you can possibly make such claims is beyond me. The fact of the matter is, they just don't compare. You have over 130 people who essentially think you mad for your ridiculous claims. Can those winning the poll by 90% be so far off, especially when it comes down to a simple visual test? I think not.

You're a very sad person. You also didn't ask "questions" but asked a single question. "what TECHNICALLY sets apart Crysis from the abov Fable 2 uses ?" The simple fact of the matter is, the engine used in Crysis is simply the most advanced piece of technology possible to use for a game's graphics right now. And yes, it looks better than Fable 2. If you cannot see for your own eyes the gap in visuals these two games have, then I'm afraid we're done here. If you were to see a picture of Crysis running in 720p with details on max, you would still deny that it looks better than Fable 2. How you can possibly make such claims is beyond me. The fact of the matter is, they just don't compare. You have over 130 people who essentially think you mad for your ridiculous claims. Can those winning the poll by 90% be so far off, especially when it comes down to a simple visual test? I think not. HeroOfCows

You see, all you are trying to do, i avoid my DIRECT question

I am sure in hype Crysis looks a lot better, in REALITY it does not look much better, i see as good lighting, shadows, light beams, volumatric effects, grass, trees in Fable 2, from the pic i posted, and i am waitiing for you to prove what i see is not real, a thing that IMO is impossible

o, will you give it a try ANSWERING my questions than AVOID them ?

LOL

One in ten voted Fable 2. Let me have some of whatever it is you guys are passing around.

I rekon Fable 2, because Crysis had pretty much no limitations on hardware specs where as fable 2 has to be built using the 360 limitations. Barknip

Wouldn't that mean that Crysis has better techincal graphics?