Graphics Comparison - Crysis 3
Crysis 3 is now available globally!Posted Feb 21, 2013 | 1:30 | 10,562 Views
Using some good old stealth in conjunction with the Bow makes killing easy in the destroyed streets of New York.Posted Feb 19, 2013 | 2:30 | 2,522 Views
After a quick energy surge Prophet looks around the city as he approaches a watch tower.Posted Feb 19, 2013 | 2:30 | 928 Views
Prophet tries out his new toy on some Cell soldiers in the rain.Posted Feb 19, 2013 | 2:30 | 191 Views
After letting a little skirmish play out between Ceph and Cell soldiers, Prophet takes out what’s left behind.Posted Feb 19, 2013 | 2:30 | 158 Views
- Feb 19, 2013
Want to see which version of Crysis 3 has the best rain drops? We do a graphics comparison video with PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 and PC versions of the game!
I didn't see any differences that would affect game play, unless the frame rate was affected. Sure, there's more rain and explosion effects on a PC, but does that affect game play much? No.
Admittedly, Crysis 2 looked amazing on my new PC with everything set to Extreme and at HD resolution. I had earlier played on less than top settings and at 1024*768. Even so, the game as such played as well and was as enjoyable on either machine.
Shouldn't you compare the graphics with the same price point PC?
My grandmother knows that a Ferrari can run faster, but it won't get you to your destination earlier...
only on alienware u can enjoy this game and all others fps on high, and thats why pc is on the top. Who can tell me now what are we expecting in the future with quantum computers, are we gonna have VR eyesight and lots of accesories...i will look like a freak old man playing those games ....cheers
It's funny isn't it - I'd say I'm not interested in this comparison thing but I'm here commenting aren't I! All I'm going to say on this is when we get a game do we sit down and play it and enjoy it or do we have images of other versions laying about so we can constantly compare and worry that distant tree on the horizon wasn't in our version or a particular plume of smoke isn't present.
Comparing is fun (like a game of spot the difference) but I don't think console gamers are particularly upset by seeing better graphics on PC; everyone knows graphics can be better on PC depending on how much money you can afford to pour into it. Usually the ones that appear to get upset are the ones who have already got the top, high end spec PCs worrying that the console gamers won't get 'PC-envy' if they don't have their faces rubbed in it properly! I just find it funny that's all.
@spacemanjam The PC is at a low resolution and is not even turned up to very high. I for example play at 3 times the resolution of 720. Just saying.
I'm running a gtx460 with a q6600 @1920x1200 and it looks fantastic and runs smooth with the default settings. Very happy with the quality. So now I really don't have to upgrade to a 560!
LOL Dudes!!! You call that a comparison ? What happened to the Very High graphics setting on PC why show it on just High ?! If you want to show the PC's true graphics Quality turn it to Very High! And use atleast 2 Gtx680 or 3 in SLI with atleast 2xMGPU-MsAA (multi GPU AA) Why ? Wore you afraid you would shame the console graphics too much and overshadow by too far the Xbox 360 and the PS3 ? Show the people out there what Crysis 3's 3D graphic power and detail is all about and better Yet go for a Quad SLI with 4 Nvida GTX-TITAN on 2560x1440 resolution!!! And cranck up the MsAA all the way to 8x-MsAA and make the console fanboys cry! (If i upset any console owners i will say a sory in advance but this is the real truth of what Crysis 3 capable of!)
For people witch are curious about Nvidia GTX-TITAN look here ... http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/introducing-the-geforce-gtx-titan
You will be plesantly impresed :) but also shocked by it's price but ofcourse excelence costs big bucks and it don't get more excelent than this :)
@wizzman2332 You are a crazy person. I run the game in 2560x1440 with 2 GTX 670s in SLI. You dont need half the hardware you are talking about. AA is not needed at 2560x1440 so you dont need high levels of that, though I do use FXAA. Really though it comes down to how many of us have 2.5k monitors, and the answer is relatively few when up against 1080p. While I do agree they should of at least shown it in 1080, not many people are playing at very high. Just saying.
@failboater @wizzman2332 Well that might be right but can you blame a persont for beeing pasionate about something ? And why turn up AA to max at 1440p ? Just because you can and will make your game look better crisper and show the world you can run it like that also the game indeed looks better if you know what details to look at in the textures and the heat will be lower cause the video load is shared almost equaly between all the cards also the textures will be rendered better because the graphics card is runing at optimal temperatures. And also the Bits will sum up and make a better quality of the image ever wondered how an image will look like at 386x4 Bits? Well I do. And that's not all the reaction speed of your character will be increased because it will move exactly like you imagine because you have high Fps I know the human eyes don't destinguish over 60 fps but you feel it in the reaction times of your character. And if you can have blazing fast reaction speeds low temprature and mirror like image quality why not ? :D To be honest i am probably going a little over the edge I also have 3 Gtx680 in SLI. :))
@wizzman2332 @failboater I water cool so heat is never an issue. I'm not quite sure what you are talking about in the rest of your reply but the average gamer can not play at very high and even less can play in 2560x1440. Its insane to ask these people to make a article that would appeal to only 5% or less of their readership.
The problems with these videos is TV & Console setting needing to be set correctly i.e. I can get games to look just as clean as the PC version via my PS3/360 but not of course not when it comes to rendering and frame rates etc.
RGB needs to be set to Full on PS3
Expanded needs be to set on 360
720p video output
TV setting Dynamic does work if used right
Better draw distance on the 360, but not by much. You can see it when Psycho opens the shutters that overlooks NY. The closest building is blurred in the PS version. I think the flat looking effect produced by the 360 is simply, a more aggressive diffuse lighting effect...e.g. HDR/ Bloom etc. You can tell because when there's a bright scene, like NY, it looks more ethereal/ dream-like and bathed in light, to the point of looking like a mist/ fog...a bit too much for my taste. If you don't like it, you can simply pop into the options or your monitor settings and turn the gamma down, or pop into the game and turn the brightness down and it will look identical to the PS3 footage. It's funny...I watch all these side-by-side comparisons and everytime, it's the 360 that is the darker looking one and all the PS3 fanboy's say, "I like the PS3's more washed out one more, the 360 is too dark..." Then F**** with the brightness settings! Don't nitpick on your personal taste for contrast/ brightness. On my monitor, which is an MLG monitor, it doesn't look at all like these footage. It looks sharper and the blacks look blacker on the 360 version of this game. Maybe this is because it's set to scenic mode, which, sharpens everything and in the game, I have the brightness set as 35%, rather than the default 45%.
its like pc are high graphics ,ps3 medium hd graphics, and xbox360 lowest graphics. and i finally see a fps game where the character you control actually is in the conversation
@mrloco123 No, it is not at all that way. While the 360 has now, an aging/ old GPU, the GPU is capable of some high level of programmability, even, the modern day tessellation. It also has onboard embedded Ram, which, clearly was not even used for this game, otherwise it would look smoother and sharper, like Halo 4. The function of this RAM is to serve as, essentially, "free anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering." The GPU itself, sports a modern day unified shader system, something that was new back then. The first GPU to have that on PC didn't release until about a year after the 360. Am i 360 biased? No, I just know hardware from having games since 1995, on my own built PC's. Moreover, this Hollywood GPU is capable of emulating 48 pixel pipelines, which means beautiful shaders.
On the other hand, the PS3's Nvidia 7800 is just that. A 7800. Nothing more, nothing less...maybe a faster default clock, that's it...it is identically the same all the way down to the inability of pulling off anti-aliasing and HDR simultaneously. The Nvidia 6000/ 7000 series was Nvidia's nightmare. You wanted to be the person who owned the AMD 2900Xt at that time. I recall all the disgruntled PC players that had one of these cards that couldn't run Oblivion with HDR and AA together, without some driver tricks. Not only that, the RSX GPU in the PS3 has only 8 pixel pipelines. This is why games generally looked more washed out than the 360's. Thankfully, the PS3's CPU pulls the weight where the GPU fails, in most applications these days...using tricks to implement AA and HDR simultaneously, for instance. Also, the PS3 is a burden to develop for, the 360 is bread and butter, using the same XNA dev kits as for PC, and developers can get the most out of the console. Sony had took a different route with the PS4 (something Microsoft did years ago with the 360) and asked developers, "what would be the best architecture for you to work with?"
Today, in order to avoid graphics battles, developers have now began developing games closely together. With some occasional exceptions. You'll hear how they say, "we intentionally made the games look as identical as possible..." but, due, to different hardware, there will be slight differences these days, but namely in brightness/ sharpeness.
@666NightsInHell You got that right! Even biger then what they showed in this vid because they didn't even cranck up the pc graphics to very high! Wana know why ? becouse Crytech finally lisend to PC enthusiasts and gave us a game we can strugle again to run :) Just like with Crysis 1 back in end of 2007.
@666NightsInHell you have fun with wasd
@Joshua_CF @666NightsInHell Don't forget the spacebar that's my favorite thing to mash. Well besides mashing r2 or rt... yeah great times on console and I love the fact that you can support two monitors on the ps3/xbox 360... I mean console is the best, but I think I'm going to keep mashing the spacebar because I hate it when I can't mash something and keep using the old "wasd" just because I'm not good enough for consoles in me opinion and hopefully I will never be. BTW console is the best I'll prove it. Console cost $200-$300 somewhere in that range and a VGA display card (Graphics card) cost in the range of $50-$1,000. So since the console in all cost 3x, 4x, even 5x less than one part of a pc this makes the console better... right? I will have fun with "wasd" and the f-ing spacebar. Mash away mother f-er mash the f-away.
@666NightsInHell It's THAN not THEN as in PC's can have more than double the ram of a console (just an example) the use of then would be as follows: I'm eating cereal , I've just finished but I'm still hungry so I had better have some more then....
It's absolutely astounding the amount of people on the interwebz that seem to confuse then and than - obviously if English is not your first language then its completely understandable, but if you are English you are behaving like a chav please stop it.
@666NightsInHell I used to be a PC gamer, I played Crysis 1 and 2 max on PC and I've also played Crysis 2 on X360, the thing is whilst you may see a huge difference in comparison screenshots, it makes absolutely no difference at all when you're in a frantic firefight with the ceph or cell, unless you have to play at 60fps or have a mouse and keyboard, Its a matter of opinion.
@666NightsInHell not all people have the money to be spending hundreds of dollars in a pc or upgrading their pc in which console are a good economic choice that has good graphics
So why are you comparing PC (High), instead of PC (ultra)?
I've been getting the impression for a little while now that Gamespot doesn't have a single super high end PC. I mean even if the general public can't afford a $5,000 PC just to see Crysis 3 at its best, doesn't mean GS can't afford it.
@Stabba_The_Kutt Hate to break it to you but I recently built a computer that runs crysis 3 on ultra for $1200.
Why does gamespot keep using lousy compressed 720p video to try to compare console graphics (which are 720p) to PC graphics (which are potentially over twice that high res at 1080p)?
These videos are so freaking pointless. They don't show anything.
@The_Beanster download it and play it in window media player.
@The_Beanster You stole the keystrokes from my fingers. (the words out of my mouth?)
@The_Beansterwell console vs pc war gives them something to talk about :))......Feedbackula shit or whatever....... PC has the best graphics and consoles have a bigger market.