@DarthRamms: It has better resolutions, textures, effects, lighting, draw distance etc, But the same object geometry, animations, and character models as the PS3/360 version. That video was posted to prove that it is still the same game at it's core, and is not fully next gen. Do you disgree?
Not all the object geometry is the same.
Tessellation on the PC version does change some of the object detail.
nope, no tessellated vegetation either. dont be fooled by that crysis tech marketing video. most of that shit isnt even in the game. its just examples of what the engine can do. that shit isnt in crysis 3 because crytek knows tessellation is garbage on current hardware. until micropolygones are feasible it always will be.
@DarthRamms: It has better resolutions, textures, effects, lighting, draw distance etc, But the same object geometry, animations, and character models as the PS3/360 version. That video was posted to prove that it is still the same game at it's core, and is not fully next gen. Do you disgree?
Not all the object geometry is the same.
Tessellation on the PC version does change some of the object detail.
Yep I know. But only a few trees and rocks here and there. To call it next gen on the basis of it having lighting effects, water effects and tessellation is stupid. It's the same game as the 360/PS3 version with those things added on. The Character models, vehicles, guns, pickups, random objects in the game world are the same. Am I speaking absolute gobbldy goop here? Is it that hard to get what i'm saying? Fucks sake!
Well when you have both versions of the game in motion you will see that the PC version is a large leap.
Of course it's not as huge of a leap compared to if Crysis 3 was developed only for next gen and PC but there is a large leap.
Keep in mind the console version of Crysis 3 have large drops in fps down to around 15 fps.
30 is probly a generous number. these people are clueless. ive already linked twice to a comparison showing how useless the tessellation in this game actually is and they just keep chirping on and on about it.
watching the video do you view it as a generational leap? its a simple yes or no question.
Having actually played the PC and PS3 versions of Crysis 3, yes, it absolutely is a generational leap. If you downgraded ISS to run on PS3 it would have the same look at a glance too, but it would still lack the detail and effects that make it truly shine on the PS4.
crysis 3 uses basically the same lighting on consoles and pc excluding the single bounce GI, which honestly doesnt do much of anything. the only legitimate differences come down to resolution, textures, lod, and some more instanced grass/shrubs. those are the factors contributing to the improved look on the pc version. everything else you would be hard pressed to notice on or off.
watching the video do you view it as a generational leap? its a simple yes or no question.
Having actually played the PC and PS3 versions of Crysis 3, yes, it absolutely is a generational leap. If you downgraded ISS to run on PS3 it would have the same look at a glance too, but it would still lack the detail and effects that make it truly shine on the PS4.
But that's just the point. If you stripped down Infamous SS like Crysis 3 did for Consoles, you would still have a higher mesh than any game on PS3 because the base mesh is next gen in ISS, Crysis 3 isn't. It would have PS3 level textures, lighting, draw distance, and resolution, but it would still have PS4 character models, animations, object geometry because those things can't be toggled on and off on a PC game. They are fundamental to the game. That's what makes it a true next gen game.
It's also obvious that PS3 or 360 can't produce enough polygons to produce the meshes in Second son. The same can't be said for crysis 3. So strange MS fanboys always used to shit on PS3 exclusives for being too linear and now a linear game is their vanguard.
That is false when Crytek and Digital foundry have stated it is beyond the console version in every aspect
Digital Foundry
"And with all its graphical settings pushed to the max, Crysis 3 on PC effectively offers a "next-gen now" experience - a preview of the level of technical prowess we should expect in the years to come from the new wave of consoles, but an experience that can be appreciated now by those willing to invest in top-end PC components."
"Overall, there's no question that the PC game offers up the definitive visual experience and it clearly gives us a glimpse at the kind of rendering quality we expect to be seeing in titles running on the next generation of consoles with regards to level of detail on offer and the advanced nature of the effects work."
"Where Crysis 3 really shines is on the PC, in which we are presented with a huge leap in graphical quality that gives us a tantalising glimpse of visual accomplishment on next-gen hardware."
I said this earlier. Crysis 3 displays many effects that you will see in future next gen games, so in that respect, it's ahead of it's time. But the geometry is the same apart from a few tessellated objects here and there, and tessellation is just an overlay on the original PS3/360 mesh, the final result is good, but it's yet another addon which further prooves that Crysis 3 is not a fully next gen game. It gives you glimpses of some next gen effects, but on top of a last gen game.
I can't lie...I just went through and watched the videos for Crysis 3 and Infamous and I am really impressed by both games. Even so much I think I'm going to purchase Crysis 3.
are you really this stupid? you dont know the difference between instancing and tessellation? also provide evidence of what? i dont get the relation of the bolded quote to the question.
watching the video do you view it as a generational leap? its a simple yes or no question.
Having actually played the PC and PS3 versions of Crysis 3, yes, it absolutely is a generational leap. If you downgraded ISS to run on PS3 it would have the same look at a glance too, but it would still lack the detail and effects that make it truly shine on the PS4.
But that's just the point. If you stripped down Infamous SS like Crysis 3 did for Consoles, you would still have a higher mesh than any game on PS3 because the base mesh is next gen in ISS, Crysis 3 isn't. It would have PS3 level textures, lighting, draw distance, and resolution, but it would still have PS4 character models, animations, object geometry because those things can't be toggled on and off on a PC game. They are fundamental to the game. That's what makes it a true next gen game.
Bullshit. This idea you have that there are fundamental differences that equate to "next gen" and other differences that don't equate to "next gen" is just a bunch of nonsense. All of the graphical elements that add up to create a game's visuals are what make a game next gen.
You act like polygon count is what makes a game truly next gen, when in reality polygon count is one area where we see a huge amount of diminishing returns. You can double or triple polygon count, but it won't result in anything close to a two or three times better-looking game.
In any case, object geometry could simply be further reduced for the PS3 version of ISS and it wouldn't result in a vastly different looking game.
And the quality of a character model is dependent on a whole hell of a lot more than just poly count. It also depends on how those polygons are used, the textures, maps and shaders that make the skin and detail of the face look more believable.
As far as animations, you have to be kidding me. There is absolutely nothing amazing or revolutionary about the animations in Second Son. Last gen Assassin's Creed games, for example, had more realistic animations than ISS.
That is false when Crytek and Digital foundry have stated it is beyond the console version in every aspect
Digital Foundry
"And with all its graphical settings pushed to the max, Crysis 3 on PC effectively offers a "next-gen now" experience - a preview of the level of technical prowess we should expect in the years to come from the new wave of consoles, but an experience that can be appreciated now by those willing to invest in top-end PC components."
"Overall, there's no question that the PC game offers up the definitive visual experience and it clearly gives us a glimpse at the kind of rendering quality we expect to be seeing in titles running on the next generation of consoles with regards to level of detail on offer and the advanced nature of the effects work."
"Where Crysis 3 really shines is on the PC, in which we are presented with a huge leap in graphical quality that gives us a tantalising glimpse of visual accomplishment on next-gen hardware."
I said this earlier. Crysis 3 displays many effects that you will see in future next gen games, so in that respect, it's ahead of it's time. But the geometry is the same apart from a few tessellated objects here and there, and tessellation is just an overlay on the original PS3/360 mesh, the final result is good, but it's yet another addon which further prooves that Crysis 3 is not a fully next gen game. It gives you glimpses of some next gen effects, but on top of a last gen game.
Care to prove that
Why are you here? To ask as many people as possible for evidence of their claims? So you can feel you have contributed to the discussion without any real argument? Cevat Yerli has never stated in those words about geometry difference. But what he has said (after the buzz around the game died down btw).
"The consoles are eight year old devices. Of course, in one way or another, they will limit you. It’s impossible not to limited by a limited console. By definition it’s the case. So if it were PC only, could we have done more things? Certainly, yes."
Now you tell me what that compromise was. It's certainly not textures, lighting, foliage and DX11 effects because they kill the console version. It's polygon count. It's the first thing you see when comparing them side by side. You can clearly see it's the same gun models and character models. Geometry is the same. These are the compromises you will always get if you design a game with 8 year old hardware in mind.
It's a matter of common sense.
So let's see the psycho model for the console version and how much they are the same pc version
watching the video do you view it as a generational leap? its a simple yes or no question.
Having actually played the PC and PS3 versions of Crysis 3, yes, it absolutely is a generational leap. If you downgraded ISS to run on PS3 it would have the same look at a glance too, but it would still lack the detail and effects that make it truly shine on the PS4.
But that's just the point. If you stripped down Infamous SS like Crysis 3 did for Consoles, you would still have a higher mesh than any game on PS3 because the base mesh is next gen in ISS, Crysis 3 isn't. It would have PS3 level textures, lighting, draw distance, and resolution, but it would still have PS4 character models, animations, object geometry because those things can't be toggled on and off on a PC game. They are fundamental to the game. That's what makes it a true next gen game.
Bullshit. This idea you have that there are fundamental differences that equate to "next gen" and other differences that don't equate to "next gen" is just a bunch of nonsense. All of the graphical elements that add up to create a game's visuals are what make a game next gen.
You act like polygon count is what makes a game truly next gen, when in reality polygon count is one area where we see a huge amount of diminishing returns. You can double or triple polygon count, but it won't result in anything close to a two or three times better-looking game.
In any case, object geometry could simply be further reduced for the PS3 version of ISS and it wouldn't result in a vastly different looking game.
And the quality of a character model is dependent on a whole hell of a lot more than just poly count. It also depends on how those polygons are used, the textures, maps and shaders that make the skin and detail of the face look more believable.
As far as animations, you have to be kidding me. There is absolutely nothing amazing or revolutionary about the animations in Second Son. Last gen Assassin's Creed games, for example, had more realistic animations than ISS.
You're on a mission. A road to nowhere. Is Infamous Second Son a next gen open world super hero beat em up game? Yes. Is Crysis 3 a next gen FPS? No.
Just read this post I did okay. It will explain my point. But please read it carefully and don't argue anything before you read it please.
"If you compare Prototype PC max to Crysis 3 max, which is part of the same generation, What looks better and IS better graphically? Crysis 3. By far. Now as for the 8th generation, ISS falls into the same category as prototype, except it's in the launch time frame so there is room for improvement over the years. Prototype was never the best looking game of it's generation, neither was the spider-man games, or the Hulk sandbox games etc. Infamous SS will most likely suffer the same fate as those games in this generation. Comparing it to Crysis 3 on PC is kind of silly really, as they are totally different games. If you use prototype 2 on PC, as a guide, then compare that to the absolute best of it's generation (Crysis 3), then you have an Idea of what a next gen FPS will look like later on in the consoles life if compared to Infamous SS (which is afterall, a launch, next gen super hero sand box). My point is that it doesn't have to compete with Crysis 3 PC, Spider-Man 3 on PS3/360 never competed with Half-life, which has better character models and textures than SM3, but on a smaller scale. The same goes for Infamous SS compared to Crysis 3 PC.
The next Crysis installment is said to be created for the PS4 in mind and not last gen, so the difference between Crysis 3 PC, and Crysis 4 PC will be huge by a technical standpoint, even if the texture resolution and lighting isn't much different. I keep using this word lol. But the 'FUNDAMENTAL' assets on both the PC and PS4 will be much better than Crysis 3 PC. We will be seeing in game animations that beat out Killzone Shadowfall's character animations, every object lying around will have several times the geometry mesh as Crysis 3, and probably even newer tech from Crytek that we have yet to witness.
As for Crysis 1, It's still my favorite game on PC. I have countless nuke mods and particle mods that rival Infamous SS, but then Crysis isn't a last gen game. It, as you said, brought the SLI 8800 GTX to its knees, but for completely different reasons to Crysis 3. With C3 it's all the DX11 lighting and tessellation and next gen effects that gives the performance hits. With Crysis 1, it was the sheer amount of assets on screen, such as polygons etc that beats out even the mighty Crysis 3 in many respects. It was the sheer scale. It is by far the best Crysis game for me, I really love it. On top of that, Cryengine 2 allows so much bullshit that it's untrue. All you said is true man , I do the same shit with it. But Infamous SS doesn't compete as it's a totally different game with different focus points to Crysis games. Comparing it to GTA IV is silly because, again, it has different focus points like car physics among others. That's why it's best to compare it to other games like it such as the first 2 Infamous games, Prototype games, Spider-Man games, and Hulk games etc. Then you see the improvement over generations.
To clarify.
Spider-Man 2 PS2
Spider-Man 3 PS3
Now I know the PS2 and 3 difference seemed greater because of the law of diminishing returns as you say also. But my point is that Halo 2 PC beats Spider-Man 3 in many aspects despite being last gen, Just like Crysis 3 does to Infamous. But that doesn't mean it's even comparable at all. By the end of this gen, Infamous will be dated if anything, as will Crysis 3 etc. The next Infamous game will most likely look better than Second Son, but it will fall short when compared to linear games like the next Crysis or Uncharted, just like Infamous 2 looks nowhere near as good as The Last Of Us."
lolol so next gen game doesn't look good compared to a last gen game
not sure how you can say that almost looks the same
i never said the pc version of crysis 3 doesnt look better than the console version. im saying its a glorified uprezzed ps360 port and not anything close to a generational improvement.
not sure how you can say that almost looks the same
i never said the pc version of crysis 3 doesnt look better than the console version. im saying its a glorified uprezzed ps360 port and not anything close to a generational improvement.
A rock that uses all of 10 polygons. That's the next gen experience folks.
Give me a break. Infamous Second Son is even blockier in the way it models objects.
First of all, you act like geometry is what defines "next gen" and I already showed why that is an absurd attitude to have. I also showed that Crysis 3 does have provably more geometry in the PC version than the console versions anyway.
All it comes down to is this: Crysis 3 is a graphically superior game compared to Infamous Second Son. All this talk of "true next gen" is bogus and doesn't change that fact.
A rock that uses all of 10 polygons. That's the next gen experience folks.
Give me a break. Infamous Second Son is even blockier in the way it models objects.
First of all, you act like geometry is what defines "next gen" and I already showed why that is an absurd attitude to have. I also showed that Crysis 3 does have provably more geometry in the PC version than the console versions anyway.
All it comes down to is this: Crysis 3 is a graphically superior game compared to Infamous Second Son. All this talk of "true next gen" is bogus and doesn't change that fact.
So what defines next gen? What is fundamental is geometry isn't?
more advanced lighting, particle effects, physics, cleaner AA, and higher resolution all come into play too.
Log in to comment