Crysis 3 whats the graphical difference?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by SystemsGO (1071 posts) -

I don't have time to play the beta, I may download it tonight and give it at least a try. I also don't have the specs to max it apparently. Anyhow, with that being said I've viwed the new videos that have surfaced on Youtube in full 1080p quality, and see no real different that I can tell between the visuals of Crysis 2 and Crysis 3. What makes this one any different, what additional graphical fidelity are we supposed to be looking at that wasn't already present in Crysis 2? 

Are we really just getting an unopotmized game to satisfy our desire to have a game that we can't max, because it's so glorious visually? Anyway.. Not trying to be rude, but if someone can point out obvious differences to me, that would be wonderful. :D 

 

Edit: Still doesn't look as good as modded Crysis 1. :D

#2 Posted by faizan_faizan (7846 posts) -

It's beautiful, It DOES compete with Real Lifesis's vegetation (Crysis Mod)
And if you compare Ultra Crysis 3 to Ultra Crysis 2 even with the DX11 Patch it looks like a PS2 game infront of it.
Pics i0SKFpignuclq.pngiHH9xhK3bXCTr.png 

#3 Posted by bonafidetk (3820 posts) -
Some of the stuff they've done in Crysis 3 makes Crysis 1 look like a PS1 game.
#4 Posted by the_bi99man (11047 posts) -

From what I've seen in the dozens of screenshots people have been posting in the screenshot thread, from the beta, it looks incredible, and much, much better than Crysis 2. At this point, I think it really does look better than I've seen Crysis 1 looking, except for the color palette, but that's just because I like the green island setting more.

#5 Posted by Barujin (308 posts) -

Depth of Field and YouTube both lower the apparent visual quality that you're seeing.

#6 Posted by ferret-gamer (17310 posts) -

The texture work is leagues better than Crysis 2.

 

Improved vegetation interaction, allowing for larger amounts of interactive vegitaion, with better simulation (Look at entire fields of interactive tall grass in single player videos)

 Much improved water ineractions, reflections, and real time caustic refraction.

 

Improved displacement mapping, PADM, optimized tessellation.

 

Improved AO quality and optimized.

 

Got rid of crappy blurry Anti aliasing solution for multiple better options.

 

Improved skin and sub surface scattering shaders

 

Got rid of stretched bloom in exchagne actual lens flare

 

True Area lighting, and pneumbra shadows on all shadow casing lights instead of just sun

 

Particles and fog recieve shadows. Significantly improved and optimized from Crysis 2's utterly horrible implementation.

 

There is more stuff, but that is all i remember off the top of my head

#7 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23455 posts) -
it looks okay for how it runs. however there is so much input lag, that it's unplayable it keeps capping to 60fps and 120fps and vsync is disabled for all apps in the nvidia control panel, and I saw no such option in game.
#8 Posted by ferret-gamer (17310 posts) -
[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"]it looks okay for how it runs. however there is so much input lag, that it's unplayable it keeps capping to 60fps and 120fps and vsync is disabled for all apps in the nvidia control panel, and I saw no such option in game.

V-sync for the game is in the same menu as the resolution.
#9 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38214 posts) -

it looks okay for how it runs. however there is so much input lag, that it's unplayable it keeps capping to 60fps and 120fps and vsync is disabled for all apps in the nvidia control panel, and I saw no such option in game.JigglyWiggly_

Vsync is where the resolution is. But the game has mouse acceleration enabled and you can't turn it off. It was the same for crysis 2 and it makes them terribly inconsistent to play online. That and the fvcking dreadful hit detection. It's fun to d!ck around in though and grief people :P

Also here are some real purty shots of the game that show a huge difference

ivP8iEPuHWeDq.pngisjloEwua4tXt.pngiu1d13T68gR11.jpgib0txJKS1EYro5.jpginLPx9tmYABgI.jpg

Look in any one of those screenshots and look how dense it is, how cluttered with minute detail it is. I think it's incredible and furthermore even on the lowest settings it still looks great. I think SP will blow our socks off

#10 Posted by mhofever (3952 posts) -

The most beautiful Crysis to date. It's a DX11 only game so if you have a DX10, you might wanna consider upgrading if you want to play Crysis 3.

#11 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38214 posts) -

 

Edit: Still doesn't look as good as modded Crysis 1. :D

SystemsGO

Honestly? Yes it does. It looks much better. Crysis 1 is inconsistent. Once you get indoors in that game it all falls apart

#12 Posted by FaustArp (1038 posts) -

I'm waiting for the SP but I'm drooling at those screenshots...

#13 Posted by NoodleFighter (6982 posts) -

My difference is that even at low settings the PC version still looks easily better than the console versions

#14 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38214 posts) -

My difference is that even at low settings the PC version still looks easily better than the console versions

NoodleFighter

I couldn't care less about that, what I do care about is that even on low the game still looks fantastic

#15 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23455 posts) -

[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"]it looks okay for how it runs. however there is so much input lag, that it's unplayable it keeps capping to 60fps and 120fps and vsync is disabled for all apps in the nvidia control panel, and I saw no such option in game.seanmcloughlin

Vsync is where the resolution is. But the game has mouse acceleration enabled and you can't turn it off. It was the same for crysis 2 and it makes them terribly inconsistent to play online. That and the fvcking dreadful hit detection. It's fun to d!ck around in though and grief people :P

Also here are some real purty shots of the game that show a huge difference

ivP8iEPuHWeDq.pngisjloEwua4tXt.pngiu1d13T68gR11.jpgib0txJKS1EYro5.jpginLPx9tmYABgI.jpg

Look in any one of those screenshots and look how dense it is, how cluttered with minute detail it is. I think it's incredible and furthermore even on the lowest settings it still looks great. I think SP will blow our socks off

I guess I'll try again and look, but I already uninstalled it. Does the game cap you to 60fps and 120fps randomly though(vsync off)? Also another problem I forgot to mention is how the game has no mouse settings. I have my g9x at 1800dpi. I wanted 28cm/360 If I put the slider at 5/100 in crysis 3, it's approx 10-15cm/360 and if I put it at 0, it's around 50cm/360 (only increments of 5) what a joke
#16 Posted by Baranga (14217 posts) -

Get used to the chromatic aberration implemented in Crysis 3, next-gen's gonna be all about stuff like that.

I hate this trend of treating the player PoV as a movie camera. At least Crytek's artists don't go full retard when emulating optical defects, like DICE and others do.

#17 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38214 posts) -

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"]it looks okay for how it runs. however there is so much input lag, that it's unplayable it keeps capping to 60fps and 120fps and vsync is disabled for all apps in the nvidia control panel, and I saw no such option in game.JigglyWiggly_

Vsync is where the resolution is. But the game has mouse acceleration enabled and you can't turn it off. It was the same for crysis 2 and it makes them terribly inconsistent to play online. That and the fvcking dreadful hit detection. It's fun to d!ck around in though and grief people :P

Also here are some real purty shots of the game that show a huge difference

 

Look in any one of those screenshots and look how dense it is, how cluttered with minute detail it is. I think it's incredible and furthermore even on the lowest settings it still looks great. I think SP will blow our socks off

I guess I'll try again and look, but I already uninstalled it. Does the game cap you to 60fps and 120fps randomly though(vsync off)? Also another problem I forgot to mention is how the game has no mouse settings. I have my g9x at 1800dpi. I wanted 28cm/360 If I put the slider at 5/100 in crysis 3, it's approx 10-15cm/360 and if I put it at 0, it's around 50cm/360 (only increments of 5) what a joke

Yeah I was watching levelcaps impressions of it on youtube and he said too about the sensitivity drastically changing because it's in increments of 5. It's really hard adjust and it seems like hip aiming and down the sights are different to each other too. It's really poor form.

And I haven't noticed the frame capping TBH. 

#18 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38214 posts) -

Get used to the chromatic aberration implemented in Crysis 3, next-gen's gonna be all about stuff like that.

I hate this trend of treating the player PoV as a movie camera. At least Crytek's artists don't go full retard when emulating optical defects, like DICE and others do.

Baranga

Crytek said in their recent demonstration that they went for a movie camera look because that's what gamers seem to gravitate towards visually these days. That and doing normal realistic lighting is boring. Normal light is boring anyway, when you look outside it's just there. Going movie style enables a lot more artistic flair (for lack of a better term). I like it when it's done right, BF3 didn't do it right. Crysis 3 is doing it right. 

#19 Posted by ferret-gamer (17310 posts) -

[QUOTE="Baranga"]

Get used to the chromatic aberration implemented in Crysis 3, next-gen's gonna be all about stuff like that.

I hate this trend of treating the player PoV as a movie camera. At least Crytek's artists don't go full retard when emulating optical defects, like DICE and others do.

seanmcloughlin

Crytek said in their recent demonstration that they went for a movie camera look because that's what gamers seem to gravitate towards visually these days. That and doing normal realistic lighting is boring. Normal light is boring anyway, when you look outside it's just there. Going movie style enables a lot more artistic flair (for lack of a better term). I like it when it's done right, BF3 didn't do it right. Crysis 3 is doing it right. 

Yeah the flares aren't very in your face with C3, and you have an option to turn them off anyways.
#20 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38214 posts) -

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

[QUOTE="Baranga"]

Get used to the chromatic aberration implemented in Crysis 3, next-gen's gonna be all about stuff like that.

I hate this trend of treating the player PoV as a movie camera. At least Crytek's artists don't go full retard when emulating optical defects, like DICE and others do.

ferret-gamer

Crytek said in their recent demonstration that they went for a movie camera look because that's what gamers seem to gravitate towards visually these days. That and doing normal realistic lighting is boring. Normal light is boring anyway, when you look outside it's just there. Going movie style enables a lot more artistic flair (for lack of a better term). I like it when it's done right, BF3 didn't do it right. Crysis 3 is doing it right. 

Yeah the flares aren't very in your face with C3, and you have an option to turn them off anyways.

Yup. In BF3 when I saw them I was like "WTF is that supposed to be" they even had like hexagonal flares on caspian border exactly like a lens and it didn't feel right at all. It was way over powering. Crysis 3 has nicer ones, when I see them I actualy stop and stare sometimes. They add something good in my opinion. 

#21 Posted by Baranga (14217 posts) -

Look at the shadows in the last pic ITT, you really think someone actually WANTS a blurry red outline there?

If anything, people dislike blurriness. The more you emulate the stereotypical movie camera look, the more blur you get. Look how 1313 hides lack of detail under a thick layer of vaseline, blur, fixed bokeh and chromatic aberrations. I suppose it's impressive these things can be done accurately in real time, but I'll take more detail over that.

You can make the argument that certain genres naturally lend themselves to such techniques, but in a first person game it's awful. Especially when the nanosuit is supposed to give you improved vision, there's no way its lenses would have defects:P

#22 Posted by SystemsGO (1071 posts) -

It does look good, but from those cluster of screenshots, it looks awfuly cartoonish in comparison to the orinigals play at realism. I'm gonna give it a download and hopefulyl play it a little when I get home from school tomorrow.. But from one of those screenshots I definitely got a semi-borderlands feel.

#23 Posted by slipknot0129 (5485 posts) -

Crysis 3 looks a leap ahead of how good Crysis 2 looked. 

#24 Posted by Advid-Gamer (4632 posts) -

I wouldnt say leaps.

#25 Posted by faizan_faizan (7846 posts) -

I wouldnt say leaps.

Advid-Gamer
If compared to Crysis 2 then yes, Because Crysis 2 was missing a hell lot of destruction and physics from the first, Though i don't know about destruction but i do know well that the game has a lot of physics.
#26 Posted by Cranler (8704 posts) -
[QUOTE="Advid-Gamer"]

I wouldnt say leaps.

faizan_faizan
If compared to Crysis 2 then yes, Because Crysis 2 was missing a hell lot of destruction and physics from the first, Though i don't know about destruction but i do know well that the game has a lot of physics.

Quake 3 to Doom 3 or Far Cry to Crysis is what I call a leap. This is a step. I havent played much with the physics in the beta but I did try shooting some buckets and nothing happened. Maybe physics are limited to sp.
#27 Posted by Toxic-Seahorse (4117 posts) -

It does look good, but from those cluster of screenshots, it looks awfuly cartoonish in comparison to the orinigals play at realism. I'm gonna give it a download and hopefulyl play it a little when I get home from school tomorrow.. But from one of those screenshots I definitely got a semi-borderlands feel.

SystemsGO
Not even close.
#28 Posted by Elann2008 (32953 posts) -

Look at the shadows in the last pic ITT, you really think someone actually WANTS a blurry red outline there?

If anything, people dislike blurriness. The more you emulate the stereotypical movie camera look, the more blur you get. Look how 1313 hides lack of detail under a thick layer of vaseline, blur, fixed bokeh and chromatic aberrations. I suppose it's impressive these things can be done accurately in real time, but I'll take more detail over that.

You can make the argument that certain genres naturally lend themselves to such techniques, but in a first person game it's awful. Especially when the nanosuit is supposed to give you improved vision, there's no way its lenses would have defects:P

Baranga
I know exactly what you're talking about. I'm not a fan of those either.
#29 Posted by faizan_faizan (7846 posts) -
[QUOTE="faizan_faizan"][QUOTE="Advid-Gamer"]

I wouldnt say leaps.

Cranler
If compared to Crysis 2 then yes, Because Crysis 2 was missing a hell lot of destruction and physics from the first, Though i don't know about destruction but i do know well that the game has a lot of physics.

Quake 3 to Doom 3 or Far Cry to Crysis is what I call a leap. This is a step. I havent played much with the physics in the beta but I did try shooting some buckets and nothing happened. Maybe physics are limited to sp.

Might be, But the vegetation is working pretty well.
#30 Posted by klusps (10381 posts) -

The MP's graphics look great but I have a feeling the SP's graphic would look way better.

#31 Posted by GameFan1983 (2116 posts) -

I don't have time to play the beta, I may download it tonight and give it at least a try. I also don't have the specs to max it apparently. Anyhow, with that being said I've viwed the new videos that have surfaced on Youtube in full 1080p quality, and see no real different that I can tell between the visuals of Crysis 2 and Crysis 3. What makes this one any different, what additional graphical fidelity are we supposed to be looking at that wasn't already present in Crysis 2? 

Are we really just getting an unopotmized game to satisfy our desire to have a game that we can't max, because it's so glorious visually? Anyway.. Not trying to be rude, but if someone can point out obvious differences to me, that would be wonderful. :D 

 

Edit: Still doesn't look as good as modded Crysis 1. :D

SystemsGO

So, a low end pc user, never played crysis3 beta, come straight up with a mind blowing clueless conclusion like this... you got love it. 

I don't know what planet you are on my friend, but here on earth, your crysis1's supersampling bullshots + photoshopped shaprness can't even hold a candle to crysis2's lowest possible setting = truth  

/thread

 

 

 

#32 Posted by mitu123 (153911 posts) -

The MP's graphics look great but I have a feeling the SP's graphic would look way better.

klusps

Of course, it's going to blow away the MP's graphics by a huge amount.

#33 Posted by faizan_faizan (7846 posts) -

[QUOTE="klusps"]

The MP's graphics look great but I have a feeling the SP's graphic would look way better.

mitu123

Of course, it's going to blow away the MP's graphics by a huge amount.

I just saw some Low Settings gameplay, I simply cannot believe my eyes, It still looks beautiful.
#34 Posted by Renevent42 (5126 posts) -

Just tried the beta last night...on a technical level the game is a marvel. Like most are saying, there is so much detail packed into every inch of the game. The effects are fantastic too.

With that said, on all very high @ 1080P the game runs at like ~20 FPS...looks like my computer finally met it's match and maybe it's time for an upgrade :P

Q6600@3.0GHZ

4GB Ram

570GTX

I tell you what though, that Q6600 really lasted much longer than I had hoped.  Intel's processors these days are great values!

#35 Posted by jun_aka_pekto (15909 posts) -

Just to compare and as a refresher, here are some C2 DX11 or Maldo 4.0 images of the green stuff. I can't remember which one.....

crysis22012112400515180.jpg

#36 Posted by Author_Jerry (564 posts) -

Look at the shadows in the last pic ITT, you really think someone actually WANTS a blurry red outline there?

If anything, people dislike blurriness. The more you emulate the stereotypical movie camera look, the more blur you get. Look how 1313 hides lack of detail under a thick layer of vaseline, blur, fixed bokeh and chromatic aberrations. I suppose it's impressive these things can be done accurately in real time, but I'll take more detail over that.

You can make the argument that certain genres naturally lend themselves to such techniques, but in a first person game it's awful. Especially when the nanosuit is supposed to give you improved vision, there's no way its lenses would have defects:P

Baranga
Baranga, Baldur from Crytek UK has assembled a list of CVar commands you can input while in game, with one CVar allowing you to disable chromatic aberrations: r_ChromaticAberration = 0.0 Nota bene: I have not tested this CVar myself, so I have no idea if it'll cause any problems while in game. Use at your own risk. Read Baldur's full forum post for more information.
#37 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38214 posts) -

Just to compare and as a refresher, here are some C2 DX11 or Maldo 4.0 images of the green stuff. I can't remember which one.....

 

 

 

This is the only one I'm certain is Maldo 4.0

 

jun_aka_pekto

Does indeed look good, but look at beta multiplayer unmodded Crysis 3 unleashed

The uploader went a bit overboard with swwetFX though to change the colours in the Museum map

8V5W6Lv.jpgzEwFcxl.jpgXPo7un9.jpgcs1pdIq.jpgfQCdw4Z.jpgn7arIvH.jpg

#38 Posted by jun_aka_pekto (15909 posts) -

fQCdw4Z.jpgn7arIvH.jpg

seanmcloughlin

Looks great. Hopefully, the SP maps will look even better. Also, although I'm getting too far ahead of myself, I'm thinking of what improvements Maldo may make on this new game.

#39 Posted by KHAndAnime (13388 posts) -

Screenshots aside, Crysis 3 is likely something you'll need to actually play before you can really judge its graphics.

As for the multiplayer beta, it just doesn't look that good to me ingame. It's got a weird art style to it all. Even maxed, few of the game's assets actually look high quality - and occasionally they don't work with each other very well. For a game that actually does a good job of pushing my GTX 670, I'd expect something that looks a lot better really.  Compared to Crysis 2, this iteration looks heavier on the post processing and looks kind of muddy.

#40 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38214 posts) -

Screenshots aside, Crysis 3 is likely something you'll need to actually play before you can really judge its graphics.

As for the multiplayer beta, it just doesn't look that good to me ingame. It's got a weird art style to it all. Even maxed, few of the game's assets actually look high quality - and occasionally they don't work with each other very well. For a game that actually does a good job of pushing my GTX 670, I'd expect something that looks a lot better really.  Compared to Crysis 2, this iteration looks heavier on the post processing and looks kind of muddy.

KHAndAnime

I thought Crysis 2 looked far muddier. It had a weird blurry filter over everything when in Dx11 mode. 

I don't think the MP beta this time is pushing things as much as it is unoptimised yet. It's not in it's most efficient form yet and drivers aren't finalised. Wait for single player and a few driver updates and I think it will not only look incredible but also perform well too. But I can understand people's reactions to the beta being a bit underwhelming

#41 Posted by NoAssKicker47 (2843 posts) -

I wonder how SP will run on my rig.

#42 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38214 posts) -

I wonder how SP will run on my rig.

NoAssKicker47

You should manage high pretty well I imagine. Your CPU is fine for it anyway. But Crytek recommended a 690 to run the game at its best :?

#43 Posted by Phelaidar (1290 posts) -

Screenshots aside, Crysis 3 is likely something you'll need to actually play before you can really judge its graphics.

As for the multiplayer beta, it just doesn't look that good to me ingame. It's got a weird art style to it all. Even maxed, few of the game's assets actually look high quality - and occasionally they don't work with each other very well. For a game that actually does a good job of pushing my GTX 670, I'd expect something that looks a lot better really.  Compared to Crysis 2, this iteration looks heavier on the post processing and looks kind of muddy.

KHAndAnime
That's my maind problem with what Crytek has done to the Crysis franchise... The tech is amazing but there seems to be a lack of creativity and things don't look organic (everything feels fake, as it the maps were movie sets and not a part of the city)
#44 Posted by NoAssKicker47 (2843 posts) -

[QUOTE="NoAssKicker47"]

I wonder how SP will run on my rig.

seanmcloughlin

You should manage high pretty well I imagine. Your CPU is fine for it anyway. But Crytek recommended a 690 to run the game at its best :?

Alright... Gonna be the first time my GPU won't be able to cut max settings... Except for Metro, but that was just an unoptimized mess - the game didn't look THAT good. This game, however, looks stunning.
#45 Posted by Author_Jerry (564 posts) -
[QUOTE="KHAndAnime"]

Screenshots aside, Crysis 3 is likely something you'll need to actually play before you can really judge its graphics.

As for the multiplayer beta, it just doesn't look that good to me ingame. It's got a weird art style to it all. Even maxed, few of the game's assets actually look high quality - and occasionally they don't work with each other very well. For a game that actually does a good job of pushing my GTX 670, I'd expect something that looks a lot better really.  Compared to Crysis 2, this iteration looks heavier on the post processing and looks kind of muddy.

Phelaidar
That's my maind problem with what Crytek has done to the Crysis franchise... The tech is amazing but there seems to be a lack of creativity and things don't look organic (everything feels fake, as it the maps were movie sets and not a part of the city)

This has been my problem with Crytek games since Crysis: Crytek is technically proficient at producing marvelous graphics, but they lack artistic talent. It's more pronounced in Crysis 2. There's nothing visually interesting about the graphics in either Crysis or Crysis 2 because there's no artistic vision that ties everything into a cohesive whole. Instead, you get a lot of copy and pasted elements slapped together into a chaotic battlefield, with little resembling what was once an inhabited world. It's pretty to look at but not beautiful.
#46 Posted by Elann2008 (32953 posts) -
I tried it on high and I don't see a difference! I get a little more frames per second too. For some reason, in High, the graphics looks sharper. Perhaps, Very High has all those "effects" included, and High doesn't have them as much? Will test some more. I'm getting about 45-50fps since I tweaked my settings. The MP is addicting.
#47 Posted by Elann2008 (32953 posts) -
[QUOTE="Phelaidar"][QUOTE="KHAndAnime"]

Screenshots aside, Crysis 3 is likely something you'll need to actually play before you can really judge its graphics.

As for the multiplayer beta, it just doesn't look that good to me ingame. It's got a weird art style to it all. Even maxed, few of the game's assets actually look high quality - and occasionally they don't work with each other very well. For a game that actually does a good job of pushing my GTX 670, I'd expect something that looks a lot better really.  Compared to Crysis 2, this iteration looks heavier on the post processing and looks kind of muddy.

Author_Jerry
That's my maind problem with what Crytek has done to the Crysis franchise... The tech is amazing but there seems to be a lack of creativity and things don't look organic (everything feels fake, as it the maps were movie sets and not a part of the city)

This has been my problem with Crytek games since Crysis: Crytek is technically proficient at producing marvelous graphics, but they lack artistic talent. It's more pronounced in Crysis 2. There's nothing visual interesting about the graphics in either Crysis or Crysis 2 because there's no artistic vision that ties everything into a cohesive whole. Instead, you get a lot of copy and pasted elements slapped together into a chaotic battlefield, with little resembling what was once an inhabited world. It's pretty to look at but not beautiful.

Yeah, I definitely agree with you guys. I've said this myself before and after Crysis 2's release. Crysis 3 is definitely going back to being more 'organic' though. Crysis 2 vanila was muddy.
#48 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38214 posts) -

I tried it on high and I don't see a difference! I get a little more frames per second too. For some reason, in High, the graphics looks sharper. Perhaps, Very High has all those "effects" included, and High doesn't have them as much? Will test some more. I'm getting about 45-50fps since I tweaked my settings. The MP is addicting.Elann2008

There's also a tweak to remove mouse acceleration that makes it sooooo much easier to kill people

#49 Posted by Elann2008 (32953 posts) -

[QUOTE="Elann2008"]I tried it on high and I don't see a difference! I get a little more frames per second too. For some reason, in High, the graphics looks sharper. Perhaps, Very High has all those "effects" included, and High doesn't have them as much? Will test some more. I'm getting about 45-50fps since I tweaked my settings. The MP is addicting.seanmcloughlin

There's also a tweak to remove mouse acceleration that makes it sooooo much easier to kill people

Mark's Mouse acceleration? I'm going to try it out now.
#50 Posted by R4gn4r0k (16294 posts) -

[QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]

Just to compare and as a refresher, here are some C2 DX11 or Maldo 4.0 images of the green stuff. I can't remember which one.....

This is the only one I'm certain is Maldo 4.0

seanmcloughlin

Does indeed look good, but look at beta multiplayer unmodded Crysis 3 unleashed

The uploader went a bit overboard with swwetFX though to change the colours in the Museum map

n7arIvH.jpg

I'm currently really amazed by playing Crysis 2 with the MaldoHD mod. A lot of the times I can't properly play because I have to stop and look around at all the beauty in that game. :P

Looks like Crysis 3 will look even better than that and set a new standard for FPS graphics. One that I hope, but doubt, next gen consoles will beat or at least rival them.