By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - The First in-game shots of Crysis 2 are no where near KZ2

SmoothCriminal said:

I will admit that I am slightly biased (I hate Sony with a burning passion from deep within my very soul, but I digress), but I will give credit where credit is due. Uncharted 2 looks amazing (though there are some "meh" textures from time to time) and God of War 3 looks great as well. I just feel that everyone is oblivious to the fact that it looks good from a technical standpoint, but as far as design goes, it's nothing to write home about. 

I should also mention that the Source engine is still the best engine ever, and Cryengine 3 will do little to change that.

I think this is further proof that your likes and dislikes of games/developers/companies are heavlly colouring your judgment about tech and engines :) HL and HL2 are in my personal top 5 games list, but I would describe Source today as adequate and very cleverly put together rather than anything else. Let's not forget that it was born at a time when it had to scale back down to DirectX 7 and no multithreading.



"All you need in life is ignorance and confidence; then success is sure." - Mark Twain

"..." - Gordon Freeman

Around the Network

What makes Killzone 2 look so good is the smoothing effect. There's very little aliasing to be seen, whereas in Crysis 2 shots its very jaggy. However, environments in Crysis look amazing, and it's meant to be seen in motion anyway.

Crysis 2 will look better in the end, but it is much newer after all. Killzone 3 will crush it, I'm sure.



I cant imagine playing a FPS on a console. I'm sure I told urll about the Gears Of War story?
So I'll be grabbing the PC version of Crysis, thank you!



There is no Knowledge that is not Power

If crisis 2 looks that bad I will eat a whole freakin cow in front of an Indian guru.




WereKitten said:
SmoothCriminal said:

I will admit that I am slightly biased (I hate Sony with a burning passion from deep within my very soul, but I digress), but I will give credit where credit is due. Uncharted 2 looks amazing (though there are some "meh" textures from time to time) and God of War 3 looks great as well. I just feel that everyone is oblivious to the fact that it looks good from a technical standpoint, but as far as design goes, it's nothing to write home about. 

I should also mention that the Source engine is still the best engine ever, and Cryengine 3 will do little to change that.

I think this is further proof that your likes and dislikes of games/developers/companies are heavlly colouring your judgment about tech and engines :) HL and HL2 are in my personal top 5 games list, but I would describe Source today as adequate and very cleverly put together rather than anything else. Let's not forget that it was born at a time when it had to scale back down to DirectX 7 and no multithreading.

I'm not simply referring to graphics, but stability, audio quality, and ease of use.

 

The Source engine can make average graphics, but nothing special (the flame/explosion and water effects are still top-notch though).

I've never had any Source game crash, give me any bugs, refuse to run, or have random frame drops.

The surround-sound quality in Source is unmatched. 

It's is extremely easy to mod for.

 

I didn't say it was the best looking engine, I said that it was the best engine. Also, I'd put the Quake 1 engine in second place.



Around the Network
SmoothCriminal said:
WereKitten said:
SmoothCriminal said:

I will admit that I am slightly biased (I hate Sony with a burning passion from deep within my very soul, but I digress), but I will give credit where credit is due. Uncharted 2 looks amazing (though there are some "meh" textures from time to time) and God of War 3 looks great as well. I just feel that everyone is oblivious to the fact that it looks good from a technical standpoint, but as far as design goes, it's nothing to write home about. 

I should also mention that the Source engine is still the best engine ever, and Cryengine 3 will do little to change that.

I think this is further proof that your likes and dislikes of games/developers/companies are heavlly colouring your judgment about tech and engines :) HL and HL2 are in my personal top 5 games list, but I would describe Source today as adequate and very cleverly put together rather than anything else. Let's not forget that it was born at a time when it had to scale back down to DirectX 7 and no multithreading.

I'm not simply referring to graphics, but stability, audio quality, and ease of use.

 

The Source engine can make average graphics, but nothing special (the flame/explosion and water effects are still top-notch though).

I've never had any Source game crash, give me any bugs, refuse to run, or have random frame drops.

The surround-sound quality in Source is unmatched. 

It's is extremely easy to mod for.

 

I didn't say it was the best looking engine, I said that it was the best engine. Also, I'd put the Quake 1 engine in second place.

I don't know about the water. In a small body of water like a pool or something it's not bad as the distortion and relfections look great. However, it just looks too static in the larger bodies of water like a river or the sea. Speaking of static, there's also the water splash effects which could use an overhaul.

The sound is quite nice though. The ambience of City-17 while you're running through it is just awesome.