• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

Crytek Takes Aim with Crysis 3 - The First Blockbuster Shooter of 2013

More News: PC version will be launched with directx 9.0 b. A directx 11 patch will be released after 1 year with amazing flat surface and underwater tessellation.
 
More News: PC version will launch with directx 9.0 b. A directx 11 patch will be released after 1 year with amazing flat surface and underwater tessellation.

You mad? lol.
 
You must be one of those CoD "pew pew-bam!-kabum!" lovers.
Seriuos Sam is fine but not my style, anyway; there were people who loved Crysis2
but they are never the same people that played the original Crysis concept.

Casual games are currently all over the place.

yeah you got me. I LOVE COD to bad the last CoD i bought was MW2, and then I made the transistion to Battlefield with BC2 and haven't played CoD since and have been playing Battlefield.

I don't know where you got me talking about tactically taking out enemies to call of duty loving?

cod =/= tactical.
 
Crysis 1 was all foliage and no city,
Crysis 2 was all city and no foliage and ppl hated on the graphics
Crysis 3 is a mix of city and foliage

Crytek i see how it works...
 
After the DX11 patch, I am not sure why everyone hated the graphics for C2. I didn't think to myself "wow, these are bad graphics." once when playing. I used DX11 and high res, but still.
 
Crysis 1 was all foliage and no city, (beautiful)
Crysis 2 was all city and no foliage and ppl hated on the graphics (modern warfare lovers dream but atleast the story was a continuation)
Crysis 3 is a mix of city and foliage (you play logans run with a nano suite, not to mention I watched
prophet take a lead vitamin
this game looks like a prequil to 2 and not in anyway shape or form a continuation of the story.


Crytek i see how it works...

im preparing to be disappointed. I liked 2 but i liked 1 alot more. Idealy I wanted crysis 3 to be back on the island with nomad and psycho not in some "dome" in the middle of a "city" with different "environments" in the "dome" WTF is this? If i want final fantasy ill grab my disk and play it. if I want special forces roaming around jungles killing people with a bealivable story id pick up crysis. This series is just dying imo.
 
it will be crappy graphics like older one no improves, cuz it's run on same shit the xbox 360 ans ps3
 
Do I still need to deal with the damn Aliens?
 
If they add DX11 from the start and without those fatal bugs like invisible water and super tessellated concrete barriers, I think something cool could be done, knowing that with the latest CryEngine update the objects doesn't have to be pretessellated. The gains could be used.

I noticed some DX11 features on Crysis 2, but a lot of them were hard to spot. The most notorious was the tessellation on brick walls.

I hope that as they made Crysis 1 for consoles, then they know how to make a game for consoles and then put the full experience on PC, with all the jungle and not just random New York trees of Central Park and empty maps.

Damn it, I wanna feel like Schwarzennegger in Predator. "You're one... ugly mother******!"

PS: I liked Crysis 2, but I liked more Crysis 1, it didn't have that "jail" feeling, even during the second part of the game with the aliens, that was the worst part of the game because it suddenly turned into very quick action and ending. AI and environment felt more playable with.
 
If they are making the game multi platform, the levels will be very small again, with consoles in mind. It dosent matter if they add DX11 features, consoles dont have the CPU or RAM to deal with the kind of maps Crysis 1 had. Not to mention the GPU poor capabilities...why do you think there was much less foliage and destructable stuff?
THIS GAME WILL NEVER BE AHEAD OF ITS TIME, LIKE CRYSIS 1 WAS
 
ya know personally, i feel there's no reason that graphics can't be like 10% from reality. GTX 285 could run crysis at like 30fps max, 1920x1080. So i really REALLY don't understand why graphics aren't at the level they should be. I suppose it's all consoles' fault.

Though i will say that i see everyone saying, "graphics look the same", but i'd rather hear what you'd want improved on. I mean what do feel is missing from the graphics? besides every little thing being destructable(which they should be).
 
ya know personally, i feel there's no reason that graphics can't be like 10% from reality. GTX 285 could run crysis at like 30fps max, 1920x1080. So i really REALLY don't understand why graphics aren't at the level they should be. I suppose it's all consoles' fault.

It's not the consoles fault. We are a long long away from that sort of graphics.
 
yea i suppose, i guess i don't have the "eye" to spot all the imperfections in graphics from reality. I mean yea some are obvious but i don't feel we're super far from being able to barely tell the difference. I truly believe that once the next gen consoles(1-2yr) from now will allow the graphical push all us pc users have been waiting for.
 
Pixels needed for a display to fill field of vision and be indistinguishable from the real world to the human eye (42" screen) = 86,764,216 pixels.
1920x1080p screen pixels = 2,073,600 pixels = 2.4% of the above.
2540x1600 = 4,064,000 pixels = 4.7% of where we want to be.
4096x2160 = 8,847,360 = 10.2% of the above where we want to be.
Yeah we are a ways off.
Even a 24" panel will require 25,192,366 pixels.
 
Last edited:
1st was a good game.And then they turned it into a COD with nanosuit to attract console kids.


Is not hard to get the idea but with COD fans well...
the game is great for them, in fact is tactically fun.
 
Pixels needed for a display to fill field of vision and be indistinguishable from the real world to the human eye (42" screen) = 86,764,216 pixels.
1920x1080p screen pixels = 2,073,600 pixels = 2.4% of the above.
2540x1600 = 4,064,000 pixels = 4.7% of where we want to be.
4096x2160 = 8,847,360 = 10.2% of the above where we want to be.
Yeah we are a ways off.
Even a 24" panel will require 25,192,366 pixels.

um lol i didn't really think about it that way. I was more getting at texture res, and things like that, but i suppose that screen resolution ties into that. :P
 
by the time Crysis 3 launches we'll have Radeons HD 8000 and GTX 780 or GTX 685, what NVIDIA decides to call it.

Maxwell aka GTX 700 series will be delayed just like gtx 480 and gtx 680. It'll be released in 2014 for sure like between March - April.

Chances are we'll need GTX 680 2-way SLI to play this game smooth 60 fps or above (max settings 1080p/1200p single monitor)...or maybe with a single GTX 685, GK110.
 
So we went from Futuristic Alien Weapons in Crysis 1 to Bow and Arrows in Crysis 3.

They need to stop taking from other games (COD/Skyrim) and start coming up with their own shit.

wait to see crysis 4 ;we'll have nano mace,nano club,nano spear and of course nanoshit :laugh:
 
I am going to anticipate with disappointment as Crysis 2 claimed to be a step forward, but really it seemed more like a step backwards both story wise and graphic wise. I was really hoping to play as Nomad and Psyko in Crysis 2 to go and save Prophet from the alien infested island, instead I was put into the shoes of a complete random in a linear new york city and was only given fragments of what happened to Raptor team right after being cliff hangered in Crysis 1.
 
Crysis+EA+console port = won't be purchasing.
The screenshots look nice, though.
 
A generic console port that is likely to require Origin - no thanks.
 
Doesn't look bad- its cryengine ofcourse, but then again, I'm not moved. Just like crysis 2,not interested
 
Screw EA. That is all.
 
Back
Top