Graphics Crown still Crysis ?

[ultima]

Staude said:

CGI-Quality said:

Staude said:

The only thing that makes crysis "so special" are the combined visual output along with the physics engine.

The individual visual aspects can, and has been taken over.

The cry engine was made particularly for forrests and island terrain. If you look at the original cry-engine 3, you'll see city terrain that looks nowhere near as good as killzone 2s.

Now all 3 games stream data, crysis from your harddrive, killzone 2 and uncharted 2 from the disc.

Uncharted 2 has far far better animations. It has the best animations ever created by any game. It's incredible. Uncharted 1 has better animations than crysis. Both also has better lipsyncing.

Furthermore, uncharted models have greater polygon detail. IE they have more polygons, and from the looks of it, heavily optimised work.

Now crysis on the other hand uses primarily low polygon char models with normal maps. Normal map giving the details. Like a unreal engine 3 game, but at a bigger resolution.

It's said that crysis uses up to 60k in their char models, however, i've come to learn that it's more like 5k for the normal char model, and 60k for the models used in the intro.

Killzone 2, has better particle effects in my opinion, based on the fact that i've played through, crysis, crysis warhead and killzone 2. That's my call. It becomes especially aparent in the last level. The vista is some of the most incredible in particle effects i've seen in a video game.

Killzone 2 also has smoother animations by the way...

 

also both uncharted, uncharted 2..... and heck killzone 2 has far superior AI to crysis. The AI is pretty dumb in that game.

That's besides the point though. If you read through my post again and try to lecture me CGI, i'll have to facepalm you !

Sorry but I have some knowledge in this field that you may not.

 

The combined visual aspect and especially physics, Crysis wins by a long shot. But it's still been beaten in individual aspects.

Well, you aren't proving this factually to me. Even if you * facepalm * me, I'm not convinced. I've played and beaten EVERY game in this discussion. Yes, Killzone 2 and Uncharted 1 & 2 have aspects that exceed Crysis, in fact I never argued that. But from a FULL technical standpoint, which btw I have plenty of knowledge in that field, I don't have a degree for nothing, Crysis wins this out. As I said, Crysis is open-ended, UNLIKE the console games mentioned in this discussion. Also, look at the entire spectrum, there are more polygons EVERYWHERE in that world than any of the PS3 games mentioned here.

Put it this way, like you, I'm arguing based on my knowledge of the specs that went into each project, and what each display on screen, and although Killzone 2 and Uncharteds 1 & 2 have aspects that are greater, Crysis is the more technically advanced game. Since neither one of us have EVERY bit of info on these games though, we're arguing opinions for the most part, though both sides contain some facts.

I'm not trying to get you mad or act ugly towards you, but I think you need to learn how to debate without letting personal crudentials and condescending rhetoric enter the debate, it makes the argument look weaker than it very well may be.

The only one condecending here is you based on your prior post. You keep telling me i'm letting personal opinion get in the way while it is something that I have infact not done. Not only that, I used to be a pc gamer first and foremost. 

In the future, I also would strongly suggest you actually read what i'm writing as I never debated that any of the games from a full technical standpoint were above crysis. If you had cared to read my posts you would find that I've only debated that certain aspects of the games were above crysis. So what's your problem ?

And crysis is not really open ended. Don't judge a bear by it's covers.

I'm sorry, but what makes you say that Uncharted has better character models than Crysis if it isn't personal bias. I love Uncharted, but it doesn't have better looking character models; simple as that. Bump mapping can make a model seem a little more detailed than it actually is, but it cannot, for example make a character's head perfectly smooth.

And CE2 wasn't made specifically for rendering forests. Just because you haven't seen a decent shot of a different setting doesn't mean the engine is not capable of it. Crytek is good at making realistic looking forests (Far Cry, for example), that's why they stuck with the setting. A forest with a lot of vegetation is quite possible the most difficult thing to realistically render. If an engine can render a forest as good as CE2, you can bet it can render anything else at least as good if not better (provided it's in the right hands).

Also, AI is not a part of graphics, so it's irrelevant.

In short, Crysis has been beaten by some games in certain areas, but those areas weren't its focusing points to begin with. Oh, and it's highly unlikely that a console game will release this gen with a lightning engine to could even touch Crysis with a 4-foot stick.