I have recently been seeing comments or reviews saying how bad the graphics of the Crysis 2 demo are. I really don't see what they mean. The graphics may not be as good as Crysis was, but they're still pretty good. What are your opinions about them?

Pretty freakin' awesome if you ask me. I like that they went for a more "cartoony" look (for lack of a better word) a la Warhead. I love the new NanoSuit designs, the aliens, and technically speaking, it looks top-notch. Definitely going to be one of the best-looking games across all platforms.

I think that's a load of crap. Obviously, compared to PC games it doesn't look nearly as good, but we're talking about 6 years old hardware here.

PC is superior obviously and I'm more of a PC gamer so I really don't have anything to compare console Crysis with.

It looks better than 8-bit Mario. But I'm not impressed.

honestly the only thing i didnt like about the graphics is that they didnt look that smooth sometimes, and any pc with a decent engine can fix that

I think that's a load of crap. Obviously, compared to PC games it doesn't look nearly as good, but we're talking about 6 years old hardware here.
Which is why I have such high hopes for Crysis 2 on my 5770.

If you look at the technical aspect of what this engine is doing, it's really quite impressive. Global Illumination, Ambient Occlusion, Object Motion-Blur, High-Quality Bloom, Soft Shadows, Light Propogation Volumes. No, the lighting may not look as good as some Unreal Engine 3 maps, but you have to consider those are all Non-Realtime time lighting calculations. They all took 5-10 mins on a quad-core PC to calculate, and its just throwing all of the shading info into a big file. Cryengine 3 is Strictly real-time. Now if the last few sentences I said made no sense, here's what you need to know: Unlike other Engines which are non real time, Cryengine 3 gives the you the ability to have Dynamic Time-Of-Day maps, and allows for dynamic environments that can be destroyed and changed in-game. Also, when a developer makes a map on Non-Realtime solution Vs Cryengine 2/3, you have re-calculate the lighting any time ANYTHING about the map has changed, so it can be pretty time-consuming.

ask yourself what games look better than Crysis running on the consoles at this point? remember that the graphics are limited to the consoles, not the engine.

ask yourself what games look better than Crysis running on the consoles at this point? remember that the graphics are limited to the consoles, not the engine.
That is false, actually. CryEngine 3 is highly scalable so the graphics are representative of the given hardware, not the weakest platform.

I was expecting the graphics to be slightly better than the current lineup of games available on console or at least on par with them but that doesn't seem to be the case. They're almost there but not quite. Bullet Storm looks better, unfortunately.

I was expecting the graphics to be slightly better than the current lineup of games available on console or at least on par with them but that doesn't seem to be the case. They're almost there but not quite. Bullet Storm looks better, unfortunately.

And this is based on what, exactly?

I was expecting the graphics to be slightly better than the current lineup of games available on console or at least on par with them but that doesn't seem to be the case. They're almost there but not quite. Bullet Storm looks better, unfortunately.

And this is based on what, exactly?
I find that Crysis 2 has some of the most amazing lighting I have ever seen in a video game, and this is just my opinion based from playing the demo. The graphics still do need some work. The pop-in is atrocious and look at the player's glove in the beta compared to this screenshot from the single player.



It's amazing attention little details like this that set apart from all other games. I'm just curious if Crysis 2 will look as good as this screenshot below in the single player on the Xbox 360.


What do you all think?

t he lighting actually look pretty bad compared to metro 2033 which had BEASTIN LIGHTING!

and im not trolling!

sorry the pics are huge

I can agree on the glove and the hand textures. That's something that's very close to the screen, this absolutely needs hi-res textures. Yet, the glove in the MP looks downright crap. As for lighting, well... We will have to wait and see, really. I doubt they put much effort into the demo to begin with. I think this was basically EA's saying. Realistically, you can't expect the game to have a finished game's level of polish, 2 months before release.

CryEngine 3 is capable of superior graphics even on the consoles. I've seen games that look sometimes BETTER than Crysis 2 on PS3, like Killzone 2. Not comparing gameplay or the games, but the graphics in KZ2 are better than Crysis' graphics, IMO. Bash and hate all you want, but KZ2 showed us that consoles (or the PS3 at least) can handle high-end graphics with oomph, and considering this is Crytek, with the CryEngine 3, we should get stellar graphics surpassing other games.

Hopefully Crytek will make the console versions the milestone for consoles that Crysis was for PC.

The graphics on console are very impressive, both visually and technically. Crytek have done an excellent job on optimising their engine from only being able to play decently on high end rigs to playing decently on 5-6 year old hardware (360, Ps3) while still keeping visuals at a good standard.

Its obvious the people saying the graphics on console are bad don't know the technicacal side of graphics, or are just not looking propery.

Or are saying 'bad compared to...' statements. But that's not so much bad as worse.