Support NeoGAF

[Eideka]

The GPUs we have today are way beyond what the 360/PS3 have.

Yeah but still usually the visual differences are not THAT huge, and this is the case here.

To be honest I don't demand a PC version to undergo a complete overhaul, I'm perfectly fine with a console versions enhanced with some bells and whistles but Crytek pushed it way farer than that.

 

[les papillons sexuels]

You have to remember that the Crysis games exist as showcase titles to sell the graphical aspects of CryEngine3 to future developers.

So it has to be part technical showcase, and part game. Well Crytek pushed more technical showcase than game this time around.

not at all, it has to showcase the engine, sure, but that can be dont tactfully and outside of direct gameplay. It's not hard to create a section of a level where the player is given time to roam and explore, the zelda games do this all the time, you have intense sections of gameplay (dungeons/firefight) then moments of pause and rest which allow you to reflect on the intense gameplay through contrasting game design. But that requires a lot of thought into how you design the encounters, something which I dont really experience in crysis, its more of a "do this, now this, now this" type of attitude. I think that attitude stems directly from them trying to shove as much visual garbage in the face of the player at all times to try and show off this engine, which is completely uneccessary.

IMO, i think it'd be better for crytek to build a fantastic game, then to build a fantastic engine from what they've learned while developing the game, so far every crysis game I've played (1, warhead and most of 3) seem to suggest they've been building the engine, and trying to create a game that goes with it. Each time I've walked away completely unimpressed from the visuals and the gameplay because of it.

 

[Reiko]

I guess so.

I think they are pretty close.

Are people forgetting that an actual level was removed from Crysis 1 on consoles? lol

 

[Goldrusher]

The PC version seems to have a different main character, our good friend cameraman:

Save the chromatic aberration for cut scenes.

 

[angular graphics]

The choice of 30 fps is not matter of art. It's a tech decision from what I know. Art design of a level it's how it looks; to me seems quite bland & uninspired where others game with the same setting are a lot more fascinating. What I see there is a lot of grass & some structure but without a great sense of the art. It's my feeling, but I don't feel great emotion or whatever the same scenario should give me.

It was just an example of how developers aren't always right.

Anyway, what I mean is it's perfectly fine you don't like how it looks, but saying some developers agree with your opinion therefore it's the "right" one, is just wrong.

 

[omonimo]

It was just an example of how developers aren't always right.

Anyway, what I mean is it's perfectly fine you don't like how it looks, but saying some developers agree with your opinion therefore it's the "right" one, is just wrong.

I'm not that sure what you trying to say but developers & art director are completely different beast. A game should be in part tech (developers) & in part art/gameplay. I'm not that sure you have understand what I mean. If you are trying to say Crysis 3 inspire great emotion seeing the level area, well, it's not what I feel. I have in mind the Bethesda game, where scenario poetic is really touchable. I'm not pretend the same, of course, but some of acceptable. What I feel on crysis 3 is ... nothing at the best & weird in others parts. Not needs just some element put here & there to call it art design.
Look again this:

Look in the sky, what is suppose to be? A great glasshouse? Whatever it's just horrible to see :\

 

[Trickster]

Wow at the gap between the PC and consoles. O_O

I expected the 360/PS3 versions to be a little closer.

Would you expect an 8 year old pc to run crysis 3 close to how a modern pc does?

 

[Eideka]

Would you expect an 8 year old pc to run crysis 3 close to how a modern pc does?

It could have if Crytek neglected the PC version for instance, hence why I'm impressed. I knew the "focus" on PC regarding Crysis 3 would yield interesting results but this is beyond what I expected.

Not that it matters anyway, it was just a mere observation. Even if Crysis 3 looked strictly identical on all platforms that would not have bothered me in the slightest.

I play games, not benchmarks.

Well it's in Crytek's best interest to show what their engine is capable of.

They could have waited for next-gen to do that, I think that it would have been a better option to make Crysis 3 a launch game for the next-gen consoles.

 

[Biggzy]

Yeah but still usually the visual differences are not THAT huge, and this is the case here.

To be honest I don't demand a PC version to undergo a complete overhaul, I'm perfectly fine with a console versions enhanced with some bells and whistles but Crytek pushed it way farer than that.

Well it's in Crytek's best interest to show what their engine is capable of.

 

[JB1981]

I'm not that sure what you trying to say but developers & art director are completely different beast. A game should be in part tech (developers) & in part art/gameplay. I'm not that sure you have understand what I mean. If you are trying Crysis 3 inspired to you great emotion seeing the level area, well, it's not what I feel. I have in mind the Bethesda game, where scenario poetic is really touchable. I'm not pretend the same, of course, but some of acceptable. What I feel on crysis 3 is ... nothing. Not need just some element put here & there to call it art design.
Look again this:

Look in the sky, what the is suppose to be? A great glasshouse? It's horrible :

So you think it's as simple as these guys just slapping some elements here and there and calling it a day ? Have you ever played a Crysis game before ?

 

[Skyzard]

The lighting look on the bald guy's head...is it dynamic? You see the shadows changing as he moves and talks in-game? Or just cutscene moments? Really impressive for current gen.

 

[Feindflug]

didnt the crytek guys say in, multiple interviews, that they consider 25 fps "perfectly fine"? no crytek: sub-hd visuals with a terrible framerate is not fine, no matter what unseen graphical effects you managed on the consoles.

I've played the 360 version on a friend and the game looks absolutely amazing plus the IQ is really good even though it's not running at 1280*720...it's the performance that is the problem with this game.

 

[Eideka]

The lighting look on the bald guy's head...is it dynamic? You see the shadows changing as he moves and talks in-game? Or just cutscene moments? Really impressive for current gen.

Cutscenes are done in real time, it's completely in-game on PC.

 

[omonimo]

So you think it's as simple as these guys just slapping some elements here and there and calling it a day ? Have you ever played a Crysis game before ?

Again it seems art design is something of alien for someone. In any case, I'm not talking of Crysis 1/2 (& yes, I have played both) but of the 3. In the first 2 game, art design is worth (although I found the games quite boring), but crysis 3 it's just so weird. I know one of the main art director he's passed to ND. It's something really notable in the new game setting, at least for me.

 

[Striek]

I think the art direction is stellar personally.

 

[omonimo]

I think the art direction is stellar personally.

Stellar? In what exactly. I'm just curios to know because is something I missed. Like I said, the big glasshouse is something of so weird & avoidable, personally. The rest of the game, it seems quite redundant & seen in a lot of the others fps game in the market. It seems a mixed bug of setting, to me.

 

[Skyzard]

Cutscenes are done in real time, it's completely in-game on PC.

Sorry I meant are the head shadows only that detailed during cutscenes? Other characters walking around while you are playing look similarly decent?

Looks great for in-game cutscenes of course.

 

[Reiko]

In what exactly. I'm just curios to know because is something I missed. Like I said, the big glasshouse is something of so weird & avoidable, personally. The rest of the game, it seems quite redundant & seen in a lot of the others fps game in the market.

Did you miss that New York is encased inside a giant Bio Dome?

 

[AppleMIX]

In what exactly. I'm just curios to know because is something I missed. Like I said, the big glasshouse is something of so weird & avoidable, personally. The rest of the game, it seems quite redundant & seen in a lot of the others fps game in the market.

The ruined city part looks god damn amazing and it not all about the polygons.

 

[omonimo]

Did you miss that New York is encased inside a giant Bio Dome?

I though it was the worst part.

 

[Cartman86]

Art isn't as subjective as people say. If that were the case then there'd be no point in making art. There are very evident levels of objectivity in art and design, if a tree doesn't look like a tree, then objectively it's a poor representation of a tree, regardless of the context.

Personally I dont mind the way crysis looks from a visual standpoint, but from a game standpoint I despise the way it looks. The videogame medium needs to play to its stengths visually, and those should derive from gameplay, the fundemental feature of games. Otherwise you get experiences that don't really benefit the game and graphics that actually hinder a game.

And yes, I'm an artist too.

Not true at all. There are an insanely wide range of artistic representations of trees. Given certain contexts some people are perfectly fine if something doesn't really look like a tree. There may certainly be objective areas in art (that color is red etc.) but in the end everyone experiences and appreciates the art differently. This is the definition of subjective. Doesn't even matter if 95% of people love it.

 

[omonimo]

Not true at all. There are an insanely wide range of artistic representations of trees. Given certain contexts some people are perfectly fine if something doesn't really look like a tree. There may certainly be objective areas in art (that color is red etc.) but in the end everyone experiences and appreciates the art differently. This is the definition of subjective. Doesn't even matter if 95% of people love it.

The art is not subjective. If it was subjective, the world would be full of excellent artists & bad artist not would exist.

 

[Striek]

Stellar? In what exactly. I'm just curios to know because is something I missed. Like I said, the big glasshouse is something of so weird & avoidable, personally. The rest of the game, it seems quite redundant & seen in a lot of the others fps game in the market. It seems a mixed bug of setting, to me.

In style, character design and world setting is all top notch and very well-realised.

What does your post even mean? I can't parse it, it sounds like gibberish instead of an actual reason.

I don't need new/different fantastical wank stuff to appreciate its art direction. Even if some of the settings are in other games, (you know, our world), its very well portrayed here. I guess 99% of movies have "redundant" art to you?

 

[AppleMIX]

The art is not subjective. If it was subjective, the world would be full of excellent artists & bad artist not would exist.

Art is competently subjective. Good artists and bad artists come from a community of people who decided what is good art and what is bad art.

If art is objective then please give me a concise definition of what is art.

 

[Kurdel]

I find it cheap how people keep trying to diminish the huge technical achievement this game realy is.

This game is absolutely jaw dropping at 60 fps on high settings on PC, and screenshots and videos cannot do it justice.

 

[omonimo]

In style, character design and world setting is all top notch and very well-realised.

What does your post even mean? I can't parse it, it sounds like gibberish instead of an actual reason.

I don't need new/different fantastical wank stuff to appreciate its art direction. Even if some of the settings are in other games, (you know, our world), its very well portrayed here. I guess 99% of movies have "redundant" art to you?

wat? Because I think Crysis 3 has bad art, mine are just gibberish? I though the emotion were part of game, you think it's a coincidence the game was so underscored to the review? I think what I said is quite valid.

 

[Shadow of the BEAST]

I find it cheap how people keep trying to diminish the huge technical achievement this game realy is.

This game is absolutely jaw dropping at 60 fps on high settings on PC, and screenshots and videos cannot do it justice.

Yet a game like deep down looks absolutely smashing on an shitty youtube stream.

 

[Corky]

Ugh that performance is terrible. Really though, devs really should aim at 30 fps locked ( when 60 is out of the question ) on consoles. That's why I love what Naughty Dog did with UC2, at the time a jawdropping game that somehow still managed to maintain 30 fps throughout like 99.99% of the campaign.

 

[omonimo]

Art is competently subjective. Good artists and bad artists come from a community of people who decided what is good art and what is bad art.

If art is objective then please give me a concise definition of what is art.

No, it's not exactly true. I can't give an objective example what art is it, because isn't it something of definable at all, but I can give you the example of something it's artiscally bad, like the Da Vinci Code book. The word is full of bad art objects, you can't say bad art not exist because it's subjective, it's quite false.

 

[Kurdel]

Yet a game like deep down looks absolutely smashing on an shitty youtube stream.

Well a lot of CG cut scenes look great on youtube, that's for sure.

No, it's not exactly true. I can't give an objective example what art is it, because isn't it an object, but I can give you the example of something it's artiscally bad, like the Da Vinci Code book.

You don't know what you are talking about. Go read some definitions and come
Back when you understand the difference between objective and subjective.

 

[AppleMIX]

No, it's not exactly true. I can't give an objective example what art is it, because isn't it an object, but I can give you the example of something it's artiscally bad, like the Da Vinci Code book.

Yes, everyone universally agrees that the Da Vinci Code is in fact not art. There isn't a single person out of 7 billion people who this that it is art.

 

[omonimo]

Yes, everyone universally agrees that the Da Vinci Code is in fact not art. There isn't a single person out of 7 billion people who this that it is art.

It's what I'm trying to say. I admit I never appreciate Crysis branding, I found it quite boring, but I never claims anything about its artist level design. Until 3. I don't said there are good parts, but from the most, this game shows a lot of opinable/weird choice.

 

[Reiko]

Well a lot of CG cut scenes look great on youtube, that's for sure.

Low Res DOF

 

[omonimo]

You don't know what you are talking about. Go read some definitions and come
Back when you understand the difference between objective and subjective.

I'm not english, unfortunate choice of words, I fix it, but please don't try to give me a lesson of objective or subjective, it's not that my point.

 

[Shadow of the BEAST]

Low Res DOF

you can pick it apart like most games. But the end result looks absolutely fantastic.

 

[Kurdel]

Low Res DOF

While that does look horrible, it doesn't proove it was gameplay.

Still none of this matters. My point was when you control a videogame you can take the time to appreciate the graphics, look at textures and play with lighting effects. If this Deep Down game is real time, my point will still be valid, because like Crysis 3, next gen games will be incredibly detailed and will have to be played to be appreciated fully.

Anlyone claiming that they saw a few videos on youtube and are experts at judging a game's graphics are clearly missing the point of videogames.

 

[meta4]

If this is what next gen games are going to look like I will be severely disappointed. PS4 and 720 better have games that look much better than this.

 

[Ahmed360]

Yet a game like deep down looks absolutely smashing on an shitty youtube stream.

Exactly!!

Deep Down looked like a CGI, Capcom confirmed it was real-time engine demo.
Same goes for Agni's philosophy and Unreal 4 which both run nicely on one GTX680 only and look like CGI!

Crysis 3, even though it requires Titan to run 1080p @60fps (From benchmarks I saw it gets ~35fps on GTX680) still looks like a game, a very Pretty game, but does not feel like CGI.

Art direction maybe?

 

[Eideka]

If this is what next gen games are going to look like I will be severely disappointed. PS4 and 720 better have games that look much better than this.

Shadow Fall already does. And it won't be the only one.

Crysis 3 is not "next-gen" by standards we know. That's actually a very good thing, I've stated countless times how optimistic I was regarding next-gen graphics and so far it seems I won't be disappointed.

 

[Salacious Crumb]

If this is what next gen games are going to look like I will be severely disappointed. PS4 and 720 better have games that look much better than this.

DF's PC is a piece of crap, look at the 1080p screens someone posted above.

 

[Reiko]

Shadow Fall already does. And it won't be the only one.

Crysis 3 is not "next-gen" by standards we know. That's actually a very good thing, I've stated countless times how optimistic I was regarding next-gen graphics and so far it seems I won't be disappointed.

Currently I would put Crysis 3 character models (PC) over Shadow Fall.

Actually I was a bit more more impressed with Infamous: Second Son modeling over Shadow Fall. But it's only in alpha build anyway.

 

[childplease]

If this is what next gen games are going to look like I will be severely disappointed. PS4 and 720 better have games that look much better than this.

It won't with a low end gpu like the 7850.

 

[Chance Hale]

The quality of Digital Foundry comparisons has really gone down lately, I used to think they put a lot more effort into going into detail on the differences and technology used but this was just really incomprehensive. Hopefully we get a PC specific article like BF3 because it is that sort of difference and they just left out a lot of information with vague "next gen features!" And no discussion on the Chromatic Aberration, for better or worse? And until recently I thought they had a high end pc to use alongside their one more similar to consoles but that doesn't seem to be the case.

As for the art direction I'm really surprised with some of the comments here, especially the ones implying it might be objectively bad. Best in the series by far, with some of the levels looking like concept art brought to life. The lead up to the dam and the open area before the last mission in particular.

 

[meta4]

Shadow Fall already does. And it won't be the only one.

Crysis 3 is not "next-gen" by standards we know. That's actually a very good thing, I've stated countless times how optimistic I was regarding next-gen graphics and so far it seems I won't be disappointed.

Yeah. I really hope so. I am really hoping stuff like SF, Witcher 3,Infamous Second Son look much better than Crysis 3 at the time of their release since these games would have been designed solely from a next gen perspective. I think we will look back at Watch Dogs as a mediocre looking game in a couple of years because of this very reason ( getting ps3/360 ports )

 

[adamsapple]

If this is what next gen games are going to look like I will be severely disappointed. PS4 and 720 better have games that look much better than this.

Those are the 720p shots deliberately taken from lower specs, for a direct one to one comparison with the consoles.

They've posted some real nice 1080p shots as well later in the article.

 

[Eideka]

Currently I would put Crysis 3 character models (PC) over Shadow Fall.

I have not seen enough of Shadow Fall to dispute that, but the assets quality seems noticeably higher than in Crysis 3.
No wonder when you that Killzone SF is developped with a higher common denominator in mind, had Crysis 3 been a pure next-gen title both games could have been evenly matched.

Actually I was a bit more more impressed with Infamous: Second Son modeling over Shadow Fall. But it's only in alpha build anyway.

Oddly enough Infamous has not impressed me at all, Watch Dogs is the real highlight of the show as far as I'm concerned. Yet some people don't hesitate to classify it as a "beefed up" current-gen game.
Shows how much assessments can differ on the same material.

Yeah. I really hope so. I am really hoping stuff like SF, Witcher 3,Infamous Second Son look much better than Crysis 3 at the time of their release since these games would have been designed solely from a next gen perspective. I think we will look back at Watch Dogs as a mediocre looking game in a couple of years because of this very reason ( getting ps3/360 ports )

Of course but isn't it expected from a launch next-gen game ? They won't age well and the contrary would be worrying, don't you think ?
Yerli tried to hype Crysis 3 on PC as being reprensetative of next-gen graphics but I was doubtful when I read that (see my posts on the subject) and even though I know nothing about Shadow Fall's tech I'd wager that it's significantly more advanced than Crysis 3.

I agree with the rest of your post as well, The Witcher 3 when showcased with their next-gen renderer (the current shots are from their old one) should be considerably more sophisticated, the same can be said for many titles.

That said, Crytek deserve praise for their technical achievements on this generation of software, Crysis 3 PC will probably end up being the best looking current gen game.

Time for next-gen, NOW !!

 

[staticneuron]

I hate the idea that a game that runs like crap can look "visually stunning." People play games, not screenshots.

I hate the idea that a game is designed like crap and people can say "visually stunning". We play games not graphics.

Visually Stunning is simply a description of the graphics. Why would you find it odd for someone to use a perfectly logical word to describe an element of a game? It is not as if the word has more meaning beyond "graphics" and this is a DF article. DF only focuses on Graphics and performance.

So if you want to find a "Review" to find a description about how the game "plays" then this thread isn't for you.

 

[meta4]

I hate the idea that a game is designed like crap and people can say "visually stunning". We play games not graphics.

This is not a thread for discussing Crysis 3's gameplay merits.

 

[SneakyStephan]

If this is what next gen games are going to look like I will be severely disappointed. PS4 and 720 better have games that look much better than this.

Digital consolite appeaser foundry takes their PC screenshots at 720p and with the horrible default tunnelvision console fov... that doesn't do the graphics any favors.

I played through it with a fov of 80 and at 1200p and with the superior image quality and the wide(r) fov showing a lot more stuff on screen at once it looks quite lush.
Turning off colorgrading makes it look way better as well, as does turning off the shitty blurry fxaa.

Idk why they keep showing the fucking trainyard areas outside though, they are by far the least visually appealing parts of the game.

The art direction in the rest of the (singleplayer) game was a lot better than I expected (expected going off the shitty wonders trainyard videos and the videos of the multiplayer maps)
It's almost on par with the first game whereas crysis 2 art was a product of a monkey and his feces.


The graphics aren't the problem with this game, at least not on the technical side...
I wish modern games would pay attention to first person shooter 101: have enemies be easily identifyable and have good contrast between enemy and surroundings in function of gameplay.
Crysis 3 fails at this in several of the areas, but not as bad as crysis 2 (what a stinker that game was).

edit: anyone want to post some 1080p-1200p screenshots with 80+ fov, 80 drawnearfov (to get rid of huge weapons) , colorgrading off and no FXAA?
Post them alongside with those garbage digital foundry ones.

 

[Y2Kev]

LOL @ PS3

Also, come on, where is the Tomb Raider face off :\

edit: That shot of the PC version seems so gimped. The ones I've seen in the screenshot thread absolutely obliterate it, even accounting for the fact that DF refuses to go above 720p.