Looks about average. I must admit, Crysis from 2007 still blows this away in terms of graphics, textures and overall quality...

Looks about average. I must admit, Crysis from 2007 still blows this away in terms of graphics, textures and overall quality...

Totally agree environment wise Crysis 1 from 2007 looks better. But the characters, gun models, effects like rain and motion blur here look better in this game. To me I think its just that palm tree always look nicer than normal tree so I think its a bit bias towards Crysis anyway lol

Looks about average. I must admit, Crysis from 2007 still blows this away in terms of graphics, textures and overall quality...

You read my mind there..

Hopefully if optimized on a decent level this game would be good, not only for fans. If graphics are even only above average BUT the AI,animations,stealth system and overall gameplay is great then it will be awesome.

Looks good enough. Less effort on graphics, more on gameplay, story, length and so.

Are you guys looking at this through rose tinted glasses? The environments and lightning look a lot more detailed than Crysis...

Sorry, but people need to stop bringing up crysis 1. Frankly it looks pathetic compared to most games out today. Only thing crysis had was detailed foliage NOTHING ELSE. Everything else in game looked piss poor, ie, vehicles, buildings, objects, NPCs, etc. Has anyone even ran this game recently to see for themselves?

Sorry, but people need to stop bringing up crysis 1. Frankly it looks pathetic compared to most games out today. Only thing crysis had was detailed foliage NOTHING ELSE. Everything else in game looked piss poor, ie, vehicles, buildings, objects, NPCs, etc. Has anyone even ran this game recently to see for themselves?

Agreed, I onto brought it up due to the other posts.

oh boy I absolutely loved the first game, but 2 was such a humongous disappointment! So I sure hope 3 redeems the franchise. :beer:

Great screenshots, it doesn't make things looks the best but for once it looks like actually proper gameplay screenshots. I agree about Crysis looked dated now though so no idea why people bring it up, and since this is using a much newer version of Cryengine there is no way this looks worse.

Great screenshots, it doesn't make things looks the best but for once it looks like actually proper gameplay screenshots. I agree about Crysis looked dated now though so no idea why people bring it up, and since this is using a much newer version of Cryengine there is no way this looks worse.

Two things, and these are feelings: I have never liked the bloom or edge reflection in the new version of Cryengine. There is something that screams "DX10" in those two areas in the current version, which sends me back to Crysis 2 and looking at the red tinge that was on every glinted surface. If you look at a light on a whiteboard head on you will not see the light reflected, but increase your viewing angle and you get a glint, just you do with any surface that has a high reflectivity to it. Other surfaces like this are glass, water and chrome. Each of them glint beyond a certain angle, and Cryengine overexposes this and adds a red tinge to the edge of the polygon surface. This is a hold-over from the DX10 days and looks more dated with each passing year. Despite having PBR and realtime reflections, Cryengine has a bloomy look to it which is not as good as other engines. Cryengine3 (for some unknown reason) has issues with these two areas, and I suspect is down to rendering algorithms/DirectX programming code left-over from prior versions that other engines like UE left behind and re-wrote for DX11 from scratch, instead of perhaps bolting on PBR and RTF to the existing code. Crysis did not have this problem, and feels more organic and natural; especially with FSAA/SS as opposed to FXAA or Temporal... Just the way I feel about it, pay no mind.

Great screenshots, it doesn't make things looks the best but for once it looks like actually proper gameplay screenshots. I agree about Crysis looked dated now though so no idea why people bring it up, and since this is using a much newer version of Cryengine there is no way this looks worse.

I dont think people are refering to overall visual fidelity (texture iq etc) and graphical features (tess, light shafts, Ao etc) of the new variations of CryEngine, but more the natural look of Crysis 1 in comparison to the hyper appearance and concept art look of the later games and other titles that use the new versions of cryengine. Art direction is one thing, but alot of games these days seem to be more interesting in cramming graphical features in hopes that itll sell more. Sure, they're games and they're meant to be nice to look at, but its one thing to call out crysis for not looking all that when gamers have been saying for years now that C1 was nothing but a tech demo, when in fact, that is far more true of Sniper Ghost Warrior. SGW is some of the most appallingly bland since the reboot of Soldier of Fortune. Crysis, regardless of its visuals is a far more engaging game. Anyone who thinks otherwise doesnt know how to play Crysis 1 properly.

None of that stuff is important though, it's either technically better or technically worse as personal preference varies from person to person. Gameplay wise i personally think both games are very mediocre, so have never invested enough time to find out which one is worse.

None of that stuff is important though...

Yet, you want to discuss it...

No, point it out.