I said the engine can do scenes that look almost as good... not that MW2 looks just as good... sure the lighting effects aren't as advanced and it doesn't use displacement maps - but with the right art direction/level design its quite capable of scenes that are very close - while running at probably 4x the framerate.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
*** New crysis 2 screenshots ***
- Thread starter chaparral
- Start date
I said the engine can do scenes that look almost as good... not that MW2 looks just as good... sure the lighting effects aren't as advanced and it doesn't use displacement maps - but with the right art direction/level design its quite capable of scenes that are very close - while running at probably 4x the framerate.
That first pic looks rubbish - The draw distance is very short and the skybox is incredibly obvious.
Draw distance isn't actually as short as your assuming - theres a valley, then a ridge, then a massive lake beyond that before the sky box... tho I agree the skybox is fairly obvious.
I don't think those screenshots look as good as what can be done with cryengine2+ but they are the closest thing I can find to demonstrating the engine capabilities.
I don't think those screenshots look as good as what can be done with cryengine2+ but they are the closest thing I can find to demonstrating the engine capabilities.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 1,840
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 May 2006
- Posts
- 5,786
Only FPS that comes close to Crysis in terms of scene complexity is Stalker Clear Sky imo. Graphics aren't as realistic but the level of detail is amazing.
well that vids crap, i turned off after 1 min, stuttering all over the place, it was, and thats with him moving round as slow as he could to try to let his pc catch up, and the excuse of it being due to fraps capturing, lol if he wanted to show it in a decent way why didnt he use something else.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 May 2006
- Posts
- 5,786
Not sure we're playing the same game. Not the most realistic graphics (probably due to it's artistic direction), but it sure as hell doesn't look crap:
Plus this isn't even maxed out.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 May 2006
- Posts
- 5,786
Think so, it's pretty much the DX9 renderer maxed out. In DX10 you can make it look even better.
meh - aside from some of the trees which do look nice - most of the foliage looks rubbish and doesn't blend with the scene well... lots of harsh transitions between materials resulting in noticeable lines, very varied texture quality from quite good to quite poor. In some places you can see different objects that cast shadows at incorrect directions for the same light source.
Don't get me wrong - for instance the car in the one from last screenshot looks fantastic and some of the ground textures are great... but theres always enough bad stuff in each scene to make it look quite ropey at anything but a distance.
Don't get me wrong - for instance the car in the one from last screenshot looks fantastic and some of the ground textures are great... but theres always enough bad stuff in each scene to make it look quite ropey at anything but a distance.
Agree 100%, what's always bothered me about Stalker is the inconsistency of the visuals. You feel like you're playing with a state of the art engine one moment and a Quake3 engine the next. The barrel rings look like octagons but you can see the pores on someone's face.
Lol nutcase.
old engines are not optimised to run better, they are just old. crysis runs amazing when you think of the scale and how far ahead it is.