meehan666 said:
Booh! said:
Garcian Smith said:
You PS3 defenders keep moving the goal-posts. It is literally impossible for any PS3 title to be technically more visually impressive than even the first Crysis. Period.
Now if you want to talk art direction, well, that's a very subjective thing and you're entitled to your own opinion. (IMO Okami on the PS2/Wii beats any game mentioned thus far for art direction). But technically speaking, Crysis (and PC Crysis 2) leave God of War 3 and its peers in the dust.
|
Aaargh, Crysis is technically impressive, but only in some areas; so it is very impressive in some aspect, but disappointing in others, thus the end result is dull. Animations are awkward, explosions and flames are not that good (flames look all the same), lights are not technically impressive either (it's just scenographic when you see the sunlight through a gazillion polygons of foliage). On the other hand, physics effects in killzone 2 are top-notch.
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTFQp625FqI&fmt=22
|
If you look at 00:48 - 00: 52 or 1:30 - 1:33 you'll know what I mean with "flames look all the same" (btw this is a mod to actually add physics to particles in crysis). Flames in Killzone 2 are a bit more animated: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9thTo7B-7U .
As for lighting, Crysis uses forward rendering for the lights and the sunlight is just directional lighting, while Killzone 2 uses deferred lighting. Deferred lighting will be the next big thing in Crysis 2: http://www.incrysis.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=27883 .
disclaimer: I am not trying to prove that the CryEngine is crap: I know that its scale is unmatched, like its resource hunger. I just want to say that it is not perfect and that is not a sin to compare it with other games.
