Support NeoGAF

[Chance Hale]

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.

The screenshot is at lower settings and 720P to compare to the console versions more readily. I don't have a direct comparison but it looks much better in-game if you're using AA(am using TXAA here which blurs to some degree, can look sharper).

It's a lot of the mid/late game areas which are the most memorable so it's a shame to some degree that the trainyard keeps getting so much viewage.

And I still think people who honestly think Crysis 3 is going to be surpassed early on by the bulk of next-gen games are going to be in for a surprise. It's the first game I've ever played where every texture seemed to be of high quality while still processing a pretty stunning and consistent art direction. A lot of the eurogamer screenshots are giving poor impressions of how good the game actually looks. Not to mention they don't talk about any of the more impressive features of the engine like wind affecting grass and particles. Shadow Fall's direct feed looked nice but I don't think the texture quality was higher as a whole, although the HD footage is so short it's hard to compare.

 

[meta4]

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.


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.

I think Watch Dog's animation of the lead character is what is more impressive than the actual visual quality which seems to be just a decent visual jump over what is there currently.
I mean take a look at the opening of this ps4 gameplay vid - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGdVdi49V9Y

Check out the opening shots of the water and the buildings etc.. Not like a massive jump from open world games that we are seeing currently. I bet watch dogs will not be considered visually impressive even two years from now and hopefully is not an indication of next gen capabilities.

The screenshot is at lower settings and 720P to compare to the console versions more readily. I don't have a direct comparison but it looks much better in-game if you're using AA(am using TXAA here which blurs to some degree, can look sharper). It's a lot of the mid/late game areas which are the most memorable so it's a shame to some degree that the trainyard keeps getting so much viewage.

And I still think people who honestly think Crysis 3 is going to be surpassed early on by the bulk of next-gen games are going to be in for a surprise. It's the first game I've ever played where every texture seemed to be of high quality while still processing a pretty stunning and consistent art direction. A lot of the eurogamer screenshots are giving poor impressions of how good the game actually looks. Not to mention they don't talk about any of the more impressive features of the engine like wind affecting grass and particles. Shadow Fall's direct feed looked nice but I don't think the texture quality was higher as a whole, although the HD footage is so short it's hard to compare.

Thanks! That looks much better. I still am holding out hope that launch games on PS4 and 720 will look better. Fingers crossed.

 

[Shadow of the BEAST]

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?

deep down has cgi like qualities. A true next gen leap.

crysis 3 does not.

 

[Eideka]

And I still think people who honestly think Crysis 3 is going to be surpassed early on by the bulk of next-gen games are going to be in for a surprise. It's the first game I've ever played where every texture seemed to be of high quality while still processing a pretty stunning and consistent art direction. A lot of the eurogamer screenshots are giving poor impressions of how good the game actually looks. Not to mention they don't talk about any of the more impressive features of the engine like wind affecting grass and particles. Shadow Fall's direct feed looked nice but I don't think the texture quality was higher as a whole, although the HD footage is so short it's hard to compare.

At the risk of repeating myself, I find this hard to believe that Crysis 3 will hold a candle to 1st party launch games. I used to consider it at least as impressive as Watch Dogs but the recent PS Meeting footage has changed my mind, from this moment on I no longer thought that Crysis 3 deserved the next-gen monicker.

We already know that at least one game will look quite a bit better : Killzone Shadow Fall and games suspected to follow suit include : Watch Dogs, Infamous Second Son.

Make no mistake, those games are not a generation ahead of Crysis 3 on very high settings but the gap is enough for me to disagree with you. I really don't think Crysis 3 is playing in the same league as those games.

I think Watch Dog's animation of the lead character is what is more impressive than the actual visual quality which seems to be just a decent visual jump over what is there currently.
I mean take a look at the opening of this ps4 gameplay vid - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGdVdi49V9Y
Check out the opening shots of the water and the buildings etc.. Not like a massive jump from open world games that we are seeing currently. I bet watch dogs will not be considered visually impressive even two years from now and hopefully is not an indication of next gen capabilities.

I beg to differ.
While it's true that the animations are very impressive the level of detail and the lighting are way above what is seen in open-world games today. The first few seconds of the recent footage show impressive water rendering as well, I'm just stunned by the E3 2012 gameplay and how detailed Pearce is, the skin shader is what stands out the most, I have trouble claiming this is not a next-gen leap, it really is to me.
It saddens me that the PC setup powering both demos has not been revealed. Gamespot think it's a single GTX680 but nothing official on the matter.

Thanks! That looks much better. I still am holding out hope that launch games on PS4 and 720 will look better. Fingers crossed.

This is absolutely guaranteed; and much sooner than you might think. Look at what Guerilla Games can do on a devkit with only 1.5gb of VRAM....

 

[Waaghals]

Crytek making a game that barely runs on two of the platforms is inexcusable. That being said, only really working on pc makes the game a de facto pc exclusive. That means that the gameplay becomes boring and the art bad.

It's like a law of nature!

Some of the charcter models don't look right I admit, but apart from that the game looks stunning.

I feel it looks a bit like a more detailed The Last of Us, and everybody is all over that....

 

[Backfoggen]

I think Crysis 3 will be the minimum of what we can expect graphically next-gen. Definitely good looking but far from being really impressive. Launch games will be in the same ballpark and then improve from there on.

 

[angular graphics]

Crytek making a game that barely runs on two of the platforms is inexcusable. That being said, only really working on pc makes the game a de facto pc exclusive. That means that the gameplay becomes boring and the art bad.

wut

 

[KKRT00]

deep down has cgi like qualities. A true next gen leap.

crysis 3 does not.

Which is funny, because Deep Down demo does only fluid dynamic particles better than Crysis 3.
You can compare Deep Down to this Crysis 3 footage if You want http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWvgETOo5ek

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.

If You put city landscape as asset quality as art design, i can agree, but if think on foot segment had higher quality assets than i disagree completely.

--
BTW i really have to make that 1080p video from Medium Setting of different parts of Crysis 3 finally ;p


--
And about art discussion, i think KyleN's shots speak for themselves

 

[jett]

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

Those pictures are also from DF(with setting maxxed out according to them). Assets and graphical quality(IQ aside) don't really change from one video card to another.

 

[TGO]

for 7/8 year old hardware thats good minus the missing smoke effects, but I ain't seeing what so special about the PC version & after watching the gamersyde vid I'm kinda put off, theres something bitty about it, textures are obviously superior but they lower res then the rest of the output which looks overly sharp, Clare looks freakish & the old dude got some dodgy eyes lol
Psycho fine thou

 

[fizzelopeguss]

It's so obvious to spot the people that haven't played this on even a mid tier rig.

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.

Stellar as in this is the best looking game on the market currently, by a considerable fucking margin.

 

[Agent Ironside]

I think Crysis 3 will be the minimum of what we can expect graphically next-gen. Definitely good looking but far from being really impressive. Launch games will be in the same ballpark and then improve from there on.

I've always thought of Crysis 3 as an introduction to the next generation. But it just doesn't have the strength to keep up with Killzone Shadow Fall and it's geometry and particle effects, smoke, etc. And that's a launch game.

Crysis 3 is no doubt the best looking current gen game we've seen.

 

[Waaghals]

wut

Just so we are sure that we are nt misunderstanding each other: I frequently see that pc exlusives with great visuals get criticised by console only gamers using nebulous terms like bad art design, only a tech demo or "angular graphics".

The more subjective the terms, the better. My point is that crysis 3 play pretty well and gives the player many options in how to solve a situation. We all know that this is not a given these days. The setting inside the dome is pretty creative, and large part of the enviroment looks like something naughty dog could have made. (Though I still believe that ND are better at that).

My point being: these games are subject to criticism the would apply to every other high profile game. Yet still they are singled out.

 

[Portugeezer]

Instead we see general frame-rates hovering between the 24-28FPS mark on the 360 across a general run of play, with the PS3 version regularly falling behind when confronted with longer draw distances and a more taxing variety of shader effects and lighting.

Fucking joke.

 

[KKRT00]

h Killzone Shadow Fall and it's geometry and particle effects, smoke, etc.

Really? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdoRGaW-u9s
Its much better in that department. All particles and smoke have physics and are affected by explosion force and wind from other sources.

 

[Chance Hale]

for 7/8 year old hardware thats good minus the missing smoke effects, but I ain't seeing what so special about the PC version & after watching the gamersyde vid I'm kinda put off, theres something bitty about it, textures are obviously superior but they lower res then the rest of the output which looks overly sharp, Clare looks freakish & the old dude got some dodgy eyes lol
Psycho fine thou

Well, once again the shot you linked is 720P and with little to no AA. The big differences are the lighting which is often completely different than the console versions. There are many added light sources, which cast dynamic shadows, and so on and so forth. Plus the wind affects how grass and objects in the environment move. As someone who has played through the entirety of the game, it can really be something stunning and at the very least is far beyond any other game I've played in that regard. The eurogamer screenshots are really doing it a disservice. Not sure what the gamerryde video consists of.

And I'm unclear on what you mean by bitty but the comment about them looking like a lower res in comparison to the rest of the picture could have to do with the resolution. I've linked a few mediocre shots I took but check out some of the stuff in the high res thread to see why it is so special(although they're downsampling)

Really? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdoRGaW-u9s
Its much better in that department. All particles and smoke have physics and are affected by explosion force and wind from other sources.

Different language made me nostalgic for playing Crysis 1 and having the Korean soldiers actually speak Korean. Had to learn what meant what

 

[Raide]

Will wait for the 720/PS4 Super HD Remix Alpha Edition. Or maybe not since Crysis does not interest me that much. Would rather see Crytek try something new and fresh with their own engine.

 

[Reiko]

Instead we see general frame-rates hovering between the 24-28FPS mark on the 360 across a general run of play, with the PS3 version regularly falling behind when confronted with longer draw distances and a more taxing variety of shader effects and lighting.

Fucking joke.

2005 hardware trying to push 2013 tech...

 

[iceatcs]

Really? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdoRGaW-u9s
Its much better in that department. All particles and smoke have physics and are affected by explosion force and wind from other sources.

One of worst looking particles I even see. 2D smokes lookalike, weak flame, too slow and few flying particles. I think it is just bad area. I have seen better explosion from Crysis.

 

[Xun]

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

Whilst you may consider the 7850 a low end GPU, it is more than enough for a generational leap over what we've seen capable on it so far.

Once next-gen engines come out that "low end" GPU will better anything you've currently seen on a high end card.

 

[KKRT00]

One of worst looking particles I even see. 2D smokes lookalike, weak flame, very very slow flying particles. I think it is just bad area. I have seen better explosion from Crysis.

Its in slow motion ... and dont know how volumetric smoke that its shadowed by environment and itself looks 2D to You, but ok.

 

[angular graphics]

Just so we are sure that we are nt misunderstanding each other: I frequently see that pc exlusives with great visuals get criticised by console only gamers using nebulous terms like bad art design, only a tech demo or "angular graphics".

The more subjective the terms, the better. My point is that crysis 3 play pretty well and gives the player many options in how to solve a situation. We all know that this is not a given these days. The setting inside the dome is pretty creative, and large part of the enviroment looks like something naughty dog could have made. (Though I still believe that ND are better at that).

My point being: these games are subject to criticism the would apply to every other high profile game. Yet still they are singled out.

Oh, ok.

 

[Y2Kev]

2005 hardware trying to push 2013 tech...

Yeah, but a lot of the hullaballoo this time around was that the game wasn't going to run like a dog like Crysis 2. It still runs like a dog.

 

[Biggzy]

2005 hardware trying to push 2013 tech...

It's like getting blood out of a stone.

 

[omonimo]

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.

What's wrong to ps3 version compared to 360? :\ Yes, framerate is worse in the massive transparancies scenes, but isn't it normal? :\

 

[Portugeezer]

One of worst looking particles I even see. 2D smokes lookalike, weak flame, too slow and few flying particles. I think it is just bad area. I have seen better explosion from Crysis.

It's not low end. Unless he's an elitist that is, everything but the best becomes low end.

 

[Y2Kev]

What's wrong to ps3 version compared to 360? :\ Yes, framerate is worse in the massive transparancies scenes, but isn't it normal? :\

I don't think, throughout the entire demo, it touches 30 fps. Except for one time when it hits 32fps when he is looking at a wall.

 

[omonimo]

I don't think, throughout the entire demo, it touches 30 fps. Except for one time when it hits 32fps when he is looking at a wall.

What you don't think. I haven't understood.

 

[TGO]

Well, once again the shot you linked is 720P and with little to no AA. The big differences are the lighting which is often completely different than the console versions. There are many added light sources, which cast dynamic shadows, and so on and so forth. Plus the wind affects how grass and objects in the environment move. As someone who has played through the entirety of the game, it can really be something stunning and at the very least is far beyond any other game I've played in that regard. The eurogamer screenshots are really doing it a disservice. Not sure what the gamerryde video consists of.

And I'm unclear on what you mean by bitty but the comment about them looking like a lower res in comparison to the rest of the picture could have to do with the resolution. I've linked a few mediocre shots I took but check out some of the stuff in the high res thread to see why it is so special(although they're downsampling)

Eurogamer screenshots are a load of shit regardless the game lol
gamersyde has gameplay & cutscreens all recorded at a stupid bit rate( I'm sure I saw it hit 40mbps) I got the full effect rest assured, but it was what I was expecting, its probably because I been hearing people go on about it in the next gen threads and its heighten my expectations, but I've come away thinking psycho is good but the rest looks not as good, if those 1080p shots are yours they look great, it what I expected C3 to look like, but I am referring to the gamersyde videos the bittiness( did I spell that right?)
and it is a resolution problem, I see the same effect when viewing really high resolution photos @ full scale if you know what I'm on about, could just be gamersydes settings.

 

[Reiko]

Yeah, but a lot of the hullaballoo this time around was that the game wasn't going to run like a dog like Crysis 2. It still runs like a dog.

True. CryEngine3 has been disappointing performance wise on consoles.

 

[adamsapple]

What's wrong to ps3 version compared to 360? :\ Yes, framerate is worse in the massive transparancies scenes, but isn't it normal? :\

you missed out the part where it's also running at a lower resolution.

Yeah, but a lot of the hullaballoo this time around was that the game wasn't going to run like a dog like Crysis 2. It still runs like a dog.

Remember Yerli said that there's not a single percent of the console's power left after this game, you think he was right ?

 

[omonimo]

you missed out the part where it's also running at a lower resolution.

1024x720p has the same difference to 1152x720p from native 720p, it's not that great. However it's barely notable, I think it's more important this. This game is like the hell for the ps3 hardware, I don't think is that terrible compared to 360. Of course, performance wise it's another matter. But I imagine Crytek is so obsessed to the tech achievement to ignore some smart trick.

Remember Yerli said that there's not a single percent of the console's power left after this game, you think he was right ?

From what I know, Crysis 2 at least, use only vram for the graphic in the ps3 hardware (the same crytek claims that, because was impossible to do otherwise for this kind of engine), I don't know the last version. From what I remember, basically, they have ported to pc from 360 then to ps3, like iD. To me sound like a porting (at least on ps3), no? But I could wrong. The true multiplat engine with lead ps3 hardware, it's frostbite 2 from what I have understood if I'm not wrong & some other exception (Mercury Steam etc etc) but most of developers are not that precise when they are talking of 'dedicate development' because not means that much for me, if you ported to 360, it's a porting whatever you call it. Most of the times they porting to 360, even the lately, it's the way more practice & affordable.

 

[JaseC]

Remember Yerli said that there's not a single percent of the console's power left after this game, you think he was right ?

Sure, but that doesn't mean the game couldn't have been further optimised. 100% utilisation with bad code is still 100% utilisation, after all.

 

[Eideka]

Whilst you may consider the 7850 a low end GPU, it is more than enough for a generational leap over what we've seen capable on it so far.

Once next-gen engines come out that "low end" GPU will better anything you've currently seen on a high end card.

By the time this happens, higher hardware on PC will be available. And this will show in multiplatform games.

 

[LiquidMetal14]

I do think Crysis 3 is an impressive game visually but I also am not a fan of throwing in a bunch of fancy effects just to say they did it. I feel like this game doesn't really need every thing it uses to make the world look stunning. Much like motion blur is a preference for me and I actually turn it down in most games. Same thing for depth of field.

That being said, I do think the engine needs a little more optimizations. The performance in the first level due to the ropes is pretty unacceptable.

 

[Haunted]

It's a testament to Crysis 3's enormous advantage that it looks so much better than the console versions even with the terribly gimped DF screenshots. Next thing you know they take their screens at low PC settings to show off "an even playing field" or some shit. :lol

In any case, performance is the real killer here. Looks like Crytek got that 60 million budget from EA and made two shit versions of their PC game with it.


PC version is the best looking game I've ever played, no doubts about that.

 

[vio]

Really? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdoRGaW-u9s
Its much better in that department. All particles and smoke have physics and are affected by explosion force and wind from other sources.

Only thing i am impressed with that explosion, is how long the smoke stays around.

 

[SneakyStephan]

The game doesn't screenshot well either tbh
Just replayed a bit that I thought looked nice and took some screenshots but a screenshot doesn't show how dynamic it all looks (lighting,shadows, effects) so it's not half as impressive than it looks while playing.

Also the last gen environments (buildings and props still look like they belong in ps3 game, which they do...) really don't do it any favors.

Crysis 4 or whatever game comes first that isn't designed to work on ps360 should look a lot better.

edit: seems abload took a shit on them with compression when it converted the bmp's to PNG, cba reuploading

 

[shinnn]

it's a shame DF didn't take a shot of the close up of that old man's face from that gamersyde video, that looked REALLY impressive.

yeap

 

[BigTnaples]

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.

Eh I disagree. With some games like Halo, I think this is great design.


With other games, like Crysis, Arma, Ghost Recon, Battlefield, CoD, etc. (or any game where camp or foliage comes into play) the enemies should NOT be easily identifiable or have contrast with surroundings.

 

[I NEED SCISSORS]

Those console shots are just sad.

And to think people said we didn't need a new gen, and people still say they can't see much of a difference in next-gen.

 

[CadetMahoney]

Come on, where is the Tomb Raider face off :\

I'm waiting for this too.

 

[theignoramus]

C3 getting knocked for "bad art"...that argument sounds suspiciously like the arguments I was reading here circa 2007/08 when C1 was just too "sterile" and "boring"...tho it was obvious then the people that talked that mess had no idea about the last third of the game.

game looks phenomenal on my rig

 

[TheFLYINGManga_Ka]

Tomb Raider is next, I hope.

 

[les papillons sexuels]

the question about art isn't whether or not it's good, its whether or not it's conducive to the game, and I'm arguing it's not.

 

[theignoramus]

the question about art isn't whether or not it's good, its whether or not it's conducive to the game, and I'm arguing it's not.

what does this even mean, "conducive to the game"? whatever your explanation is, I bet it had zero impact on my appreciation for the graphics....

 

[sleepykyo]

Tomb Raider is next, I hope.

Would the hair even show up in the comparison? I thought it was both DX11 and AMD Gpu exclusive?

 

[Eideka]

Would the hair even show up in the comparison? I thought it was both DX11 and AMD Gpu exclusive?

It's not AMD exclusive, available on any DX11 card. And it's a certainty that Eurogamer will talk about TressFx, it deserves to be underlined because it looks so fucking good, even moreso in motion I assume.

 

[sleepykyo]

It's not AMD exclusive, available on any DX11 card. And it's a certainty that Eurogamer will talk about TressFx, it deserves to be underlined because it looks so fucking good, even moreso in motion I assume.

Whoops. I thought it was going to be like Nvidia and Batman AA considering how AMD seems to be heavily involved in the advertising.

 

[Truespeed]

Form before function and graphics before performance. It's the Crytek design philosophy.