COD4 V Crysis

[Inazuma]

I can't believehow good COD looks!

I have to disagree!

On a more serious note...

COD4 gives you 100FPS and looks like 8/10

Crysis gives you 20FPS and looks like a 9/10

COD4 wins hands down even though both games are complete rubbish in multiplayer...

I already accused someone else of doing this a couple days ago, but I will have to accuse you too - STOP SMOKING THAT WEED MAN!
Even on Gamer settings (which my 8800GTX and Q6600 handles well at 30FPS 1680x1050), if you were to compare Crysis to COD4, Crysis would be 10/10 and COD4 would be 4/10. If you take Crysis out of equation though, the graphics bar falls right down but COD4 still becomes 7/10 at most.

In fact, try playing Crysis on Mainstream settings where you will get 60FPS and it will still look better than COD4.


And remember, Crysis doesn't require you to mess with configs - it was your own choice to do so. I ran Crysis perfectly fine (30FPS) with some settings on Medium and most on High; the game still looked miles better than anything else out there. For Warhead, all I did was pop everything to Gamer, and post processing to Enthusiast (for the sun ray effects) and it ran great.

 

[willhub]

I must have been the only one then who thinks COD4 does not look all that impressive.

 

[Darkwave]

I must have been the only one then who thinks COD4 does not look all that impressive.

I think COD4's visuals are not great in the technical aspect but superb in the environmental aspect.

COD4's visuals set a definite tone and mood for me, I really love them a lot, but from a technical and eye candy point of view they've got ansolutely nothing on Crysis. That's just my 2c anyway.

 

[Mattus]

It's not just about pretty graphics; it's an intelligent and immersive shooter.

I wouldn't go that far The aspects which relate to the engine are pretty intelligent/immersive - the ability to free roam, destructible environments, physics, etc. But the storyline is dire and you feel nothing for the characters, which in my mind disqualifies it from being intelligent. Half-Life 2 and Bioshock are intelligent shooters. Crysis is a lot of fun but it's not intelligent.

 

[Inazuma]

Did anyone notice that the aliens seem to have something against black people too? Two are killed and the 3rd is driven insane!

 

[HangTime]

These guys here got 8800's and that is the reason they dont understand. Once they get a 4870 or better graphics card in the future they will understand what we do.

I dunno; I've got a GTX280 and the game still doesn't look as amazing as I'd hoped when I've turned the settings down enough to get a semi-decent framerate. Sure, it looks great and probably better than CoD4, but certainly not as breathtaking as I thought it would.

I think the real issue is that it doesn't scale well enough when you turn down the settings. Medium DX9 doesn't run much better than High DX10 for me, the framerate still tails off down into the high-20s in places.

 

[Warbie]

I'm on a 4850 and still can't see the fuss. Frame rates aren't great- ~30 fps - but there's pop up, the distance looks blurry, and in heavy action the frame rate drops into the 20's, which looks absolutely awful on any setting/resolution. By dropping resolution and settings to medium the frame rate is much improved (still not great), but now the game doesn't look particularly impressive at all.

 

[Strife212]

I think COD4's visuals are not great in the technical aspect but superb in the environmental aspect.

COD4's visuals set a definite tone and mood for me, I really love them a lot, but from a technical and eye candy point of view they've got ansolutely nothing on Crysis. That's just my 2c anyway.

I think this is spot on

 

[TNA]

I dunno; I've got a GTX280 and the game still doesn't look as amazing as I'd hoped when I've turned the settings down enough to get a semi-decent framerate. Sure, it looks great and probably better than CoD4, but certainly not as breathtaking as I thought it would.

I think the real issue is that it doesn't scale well enough when you turn down the settings. Medium DX9 doesn't run much better than High DX10 for me, the framerate still tails off down into the high-20s in places.

I play everything on enthusiast (Very High). Make sure you turn off v-sync as it runs much smoother and you still don't get tearing anyways. Then make sure your on dx9 mode.

But then again if you think high 20's is not good in this game, then your never going to be happy mate. I say forget about the frames. I don't get slow downs until the game drops to under 20, more so even under 15. The game runs great for me between 20-30 frames. No slowdowns what so ever.

Your card should run the game better then mine, as its more optimized for it. So not sure why it is not.

 

[Warbie]

Panning just doesn't look smooth at 20-30 fps - you certainly aren't as accurate. Even playing at 45 fps limits your accuracy and affects gameplay. I know this isn't as important in single player (in multiplayer such a low frame rate is a serious disadvantage), but I hate the feeling of lag when aiming and a background that jerks. This is nothing new - it was the same with Quake years back and every fps since.

 

[willhub]

I play everything on enthusiast (Very High). Make sure you turn off v-sync as it runs much smoother and you still don't get tearing anyways. Then make sure your on dx9 mode.

But then again if you think high 20's is not good in this game, then your never going to be happy mate. I say forget about the frames. I don't get slow downs until the game drops to under 20, more so even under 15. The game runs great for me between 20-30 frames. No slowdowns what so ever.

Your card should run the game better then mine, as its more optimized for it. So not sure why it is not.

20-30 fps is not very smooth in warhead IMO and I am happy playing plenty of other games.

 

[HangTime]

Yeah I really don't buy into this "30fps in Crysis is silky smooth" malarkey. It isn't, at least not to me.

I think some people get the illusion of smoothness because the framerate is at least fairly consistent, it's not fluctuating wildly from 90fps down to 30fps for no apparent reason. If you are only getting say 38-45fps running about the level, then a drop to 30fps doesn't seem that bad in comparison. Judged on merit though, compared to the smoothness of other games, it's pretty nasty.

If I cruise along in a buggy straight into an enemy camp and start letting them have it with the MG to kick off a massive fight, it's well jerky. There's also some locations where you're only getting 30fps outside of a fight, which doesn't feel right if you swing the mouse round quickly.

 

[Gashman]

Yeah I really don't buy into this "30fps in Crysis is silky smooth" malarkey. It isn't, at least not to me.

I think some people get the illusion of smoothness because the framerate is at least fairly consistent, it's not fluctuating wildly from 90fps down to 30fps for no apparent reason. If you are only getting say 38-45fps running about the level, then a drop to 30fps doesn't seem that bad in comparison. Judged on merit though, compared to the smoothness of other games, it's pretty nasty.

If I cruise along in a buggy straight into an enemy camp and start letting them have it with the MG to kick off a massive fight, it's well jerky. There's also some locations where you're only getting 30fps outside of a fight, which doesn't feel right if you swing the mouse round quickly.

nope, 30FPS for me is totally smooth, it perfectly playable throughout the entire game at that framerate, whether it be the ice parts shooting everything to hell with gauss rifle and grenading stuff or sneaking about through foliage. running in DX10 with streaming disabled/superfetch disabled no problems

 

[Warbie]

It's subjective. 30 fps isn't smooth to me (playing rtcw/et for years with a frame rate that never went below 85 probably didn't help). I know ppl who are happy with ~20!

 

[KNiVES]

I like consistent 30fps, this comes from many years of playing on consoles. Obviously 60fps > 30fps, but I will be happy with 30 at least.

 

[Billzz]

Sorry to dig this thread up again buy i've just seen the original post and had to add my 2 penneth ... I recently played through both COD4 and Crysis/Crysis Warhead. Sorry OP you need glasses if you think COD4 looks better. Even the weapons feel much better in Crysis - COD4 felt a bit 'light' by comparison. The best aspect of the gameplay in Crysis is you're given a general directive, its up to you how you get there/complete the mission. In COD4, you may as well be sitting on invisible railway track. No comparison.

I really hope Crysis gets the 2 follow ups to the story and it keeps away from consoles. It sums up what I love about PC gaming.

 

[Gashman]

sorry but how is it subjective, its either smooth or its not, sure people might settle for unsmooth gameplay, but you DO NOT need anything over 30FPS in crysis, its pointless and theres no noticable difference, however its the only game i have played that is like that, COD4 with 30FPS is unplayable, UT3 with anywhere even close to that is unplayable, HL2 at 30FPS feels crap, its just crysis as far as im aware. had warhead running close to 60FPS in DX9 with some stuff turned down and 30FPS in DX10 with custom config. and there is no difference as far as i can tell except the latter looks better

 

[willhub]

sorry but how is it subjective, its either smooth or its not, sure people might settle for unsmooth gameplay, but you DO NOT need anything over 30FPS in crysis, its pointless and theres no noticable difference, however its the only game i have played that is like that, COD4 with 30FPS is unplayable, UT3 with anywhere even close to that is unplayable, HL2 at 30FPS feels crap, its just crysis as far as im aware. had warhead running close to 60FPS in DX9 with some stuff turned down and 30FPS in DX10 with custom config. and there is no difference as far as i can tell except the latter looks better

Crysis at 30fps, Crysis at 60fps, the difference IS noticeable, but it is playable at 30fps.