Jump to content

Crysis 3 still looks better than most games


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Jon2B said:

And still pushes my GPU to max in certain areas....at 1080p60 :holeup:

 

Remij can you run this at 4k60?

It drops in a few areas, but it's mostly 60-70.  If I turn down the AA, then yea it's possible.

 

I told motherfuckers that C3 was still better looking than most current gen games, I think it was an argument referring to competing with Sony exclusives... but yes, I stand by it.  

 

Crytek is/was one of the most capable studios graphically.  Sucks they decided to start focusing on consoles.. they could have raised the bar even further if they had stayed focused on only PC :shrug: 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Remij_ said:

It drops in a few areas, but it's mostly 60-70.  If I turn down the AA, then yea it's possible.

 

I told motherfuckers that C3 was still better looking than most current gen games, I think it was an argument referring to competing with Sony exclusives... but yes, I stand by it.  

 

Crytek is/was one of the most capable studios graphically.  Sucks they decided to start focusing on consoles.. they could have raised the bar even further if they had stayed focused on only PC :shrug: 

No, Nobody cares about PussC gaming :kaz: 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Remij_ said:

It drops in a few areas, but it's mostly 60-70.  If I turn down the AA, then yea it's possible.

 

I told motherfuckers that C3 was still better looking than most current gen games, I think it was an argument referring to competing with Sony exclusives... but yes, I stand by it.  

 

Crytek is/was one of the most capable studios graphically.  Sucks they decided to start focusing on consoles.. they could have raised the bar even further if they had stayed focused on only PC :shrug: 

What about Hunt: Showdown? That game looks ridiculous. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bhytre said:

Flourished on PC with nerdmits who couldn't even run their first Crysis game properly for years :hest: 

This is so true though lol, it was like three hardware generations before the game could be maxed out and even then 60 FPS was a hard reach. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Remij_ said:

It drops in a few areas, but it's mostly 60-70.  If I turn down the AA, then yea it's possible.

 

I told motherfuckers that C3 was still better looking than most current gen games, I think it was an argument referring to competing with Sony exclusives... but yes, I stand by it.  

 

Crytek is/was one of the most capable studios graphically.  Sucks they decided to start focusing on consoles.. they could have raised the bar even further if they had stayed focused on only PC :shrug: 

To get 60fps on my 1060 I had like medium settings I just tried it at ultra settings and was shocked to how good it looked. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, bhytre said:

Flourished on PC with nerdmits who couldn't even run their first Crysis game properly for years :hest: 

 

7 minutes ago, DynamiteCop! said:

This is so true though lol, it was like three hardware generations before the game could be maxed out and even then 60 FPS was a hard reach. 

I never understood the viewpoint of criticizing a game for raising the bar looking towards the future by offering the option to push fidelity and effects farther than the current hardware can support.  It's an argument by idiots who think that if a PC game isn't "maxed" that it's somehow a negative against the platform... despite the fact that would be still far and away the best looking/playing version.  All PC games should be developed with visual effects and options that far exceed what the current hardware is capable of.  Push LODs as far as possible, have incredibly detailed textures for everything.. have effects at really high sample rates.  

 

The technology will catch up... and the game will remain relevant and modern for longer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Remij_ said:

 

I never understood the viewpoint of criticizing a game for raising the bar looking towards the future by offering the option to push fidelity and effects farther than the current hardware can support.  It's an argument by idiots who think that if a PC game isn't "maxed" that it's somehow a negative against the platform... despite the fact that would be still far and away the best looking/playing version.  All PC games should be developed with visual effects and options that far exceed what the current hardware is capable of.  Push LODs as far as possible, have incredibly detailed textures for everything.. have effects at really high sample rates.  

 

The technology will catch up... and the game will remain relevant and modern for longer.

I'm criticizing the game because it's become clear that as hardware came out and time passed it wasn't just this ultra hard game to render, the engine is just very bloated in demands or lacking deep optimization. There's game engines which look nigh identical or better even yet churn out triple to quadruple the performance, it's just not a very good engine. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DynamiteCop! said:

I'm criticizing the game because it's become clear that as hardware came out and time passed it wasn't just this ultra hard game to render, the engine is just very bloated in demands or lacking deep optimization. There's game engines which look nigh identical or better even yet churn out triple to quadruple the performance, it's just not a very good engine. 

Which game are you talking about?  C3 or C1?  Because there was no game out at the time that was even close to C1, and with regards to C3... we're still comparing games to it 6 years later...

 

The CryEngine was fine.  It's an old engine that you're comparing against new engines.   There's no game that looks better and runs at triple or quadruple the performance. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Remij_ said:

Which game are you talking about?  C3 or C1?  Because there was no game out at the time that was even close to C1, and with regards to C3... we're still comparing games to it 6 years later...

 

The CryEngine was fine.  It's an old engine that you're comparing against new engines.   There's no game that looks better and runs at triple or quadruple the performance. 

CryEngine basically in general.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Crysis has also the best story and level design. The mission midway through the game where you enter the alien structure that's built into the mountain. 

 

The whole level plays in zero gravity and you see the "real" aliens for the first time. Floating tentacle shits. god damn that level owns hard. It feels like you are somewhere else, discovering an alien civilization. 

 

:bow: 

 

I didn't even bother with 3 after crysis 2. console garbage and story was fucked :camby:

Edited by kaz
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, kaz said:

Crysis has also the best story and level design. The mission midway through the game where you enter the alien structure that's built into the mountain. 

 

The whole level plays in zero gravity and you see the "real" aliens for the first time. Floating tentacle shits. god damn that level owns hard. It feels like you are somewhere else, discovering an alien civilization. 

 

:bow: 

 

I didn't even bother with 3 after crysis 2. console garbage and story was fucked :camby:

That was the worst level ever 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...