Crysis vs Just Cause 2 Graphics

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 4:09 am

I feel that Crysis does have slightly better lighting and foilage than Just Cause 2, but Just Cause 2 has 10x better distant landscapes.

Check out this screen I took today and look at the mountains and city in the background:
http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/542900342959635338/5945EAE8FBF7785BD71F16C4992E93ADCCD50A22/



Just Cause 2 is 100 sq miles of open world.
Crysis is also open world, but not nearly as big.


In Just Cause 2, you can fly across the island going 250 mph in a jet, parachute out, and grapple on to a moving car. With no pop-in.
The screenshot I posted above was taken from a moving jet.


And then we have the fact of how well they run.
I can barely get medium-high settings on Crysis, but I can run Just Cause 2 maxed out 50fps, 1080p.

The Avalanche engine is very well optimized, and even on console it looks good. The Crytek engine is full of dirty code, and it can't run on consoles.
I hate it when people say "Crysis looks so good, thats why it can't be on consoles herp derp." If the engine was optimized better, it could run on Xbox 360 locked at 30fps just fine. (With reduced textures and shaders)


Crysis does not deserve all the hype it gets, and Just Cause 2 was an amazing game that never got any recognition, but achieved far more than Crysis did from a technical standpoint.


Can you do this in Crysis?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFpXNdQN16o
User avatar
Mr. Ray
 
Posts: 3459
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 8:08 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:06 am

I've got Just Cause 2 for my PS3. It's a beautiful game, but I can't comment on Crysis, much, as my PC can only play the game on low settings and that certainly doesn't compare to the PS3 version of Just Cause 2.
User avatar
Bee Baby
 
Posts: 3450
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 4:47 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 1:46 pm

Just Cause 2 was a gorgeous, vibrant game; but in terms of photorealistic-ness it has nothing on Crysis. Yes, it's infinitely better optimized, and yes, IMO it was funner. http://www.thebuzzmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/crysis-2-ultra-quality-screenshot-realistic-forest-soldier.jpg
User avatar
Leilene Nessel
 
Posts: 3428
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 2:11 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 4:55 am

As someone who played Crysis on the highest of settings, nope, that picture is not on par with Crysis in terms of photorealisticness. However, it still looks damn good.
User avatar
Sabrina Steige
 
Posts: 3396
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 9:51 pm

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:53 am

Just Cause 2 has better world design. Crysis 2 has undoubtedly better graphics.
User avatar
Rachel Cafferty
 
Posts: 3442
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 1:48 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 2:22 pm

Just Cause 2 was a gorgeous, vibrant game; but in terms of photorealistic-ness it has nothing on Crysis. Yes, it's infinitely better optimized, and yes, IMO it was funner. http://www.thebuzzmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/crysis-2-ultra-quality-screenshot-realistic-forest-soldier.jpg

Your link is broken, it links to a picture of a real jungle.
User avatar
Jack Moves
 
Posts: 3367
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 7:51 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:27 am

Just Cause 2 was a gorgeous, vibrant game; but in terms of photorealistic-ness it has nothing on Crysis. Yes, it's infinitely better optimized, and yes, IMO it was funner. http://www.thebuzzmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/crysis-2-ultra-quality-screenshot-realistic-forest-soldier.jpg


Your link is broken, it links to a picture of a real jungle.


Yea, pretty much this. I love Just Cause 2. It's kinda like a really pretty physics sandbox to me. I get to drive jets at 250mph then jump out, grapple onto a car then drive that car down a mountain. But Crysis looks a LOT better.
User avatar
Lexy Dick
 
Posts: 3459
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 12:15 pm

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 12:37 pm

I see your Just Cause 2 realism and raise you http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8I9Pd-5F8s#t=1m33s.
User avatar
Andrea P
 
Posts: 3400
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 7:45 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 6:32 am

http://www.thebuzzmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/crysis-2-ultra-quality-screenshot-realistic-forest-soldier.jpg

That says it all, really. While Just Cause 2 has an impressive draw distance and a very crisp visual style, Crysis has a hundred times more detail in its sharper textures and environmental effects. Crysis is also a generation older than Just Cause 2 - a lot can happen in 3 years in videogame development - so it's a bit like saying the P-51 was an overhyped plane because the MiG-15 is faster. Might as well compare chalk and cheese.

The important thing to note is that neither game was inherently better for having such impressive visuals. Sure, there was a certain novelty in climbing enormous mountains and basejumping off in Just Cause 2, or admiring the sunsets along a beach (for about 5 seconds before the pull of mayhem draws you back into another car/plane/boat/parachute chase) but the gameplay elements were so basic and repetitive, I never got anywhere with the plot before I was completely bored. For all that 100 sq-mi of open space, there really isn't anything to do once you get there except blow it all up.
User avatar
saharen beauty
 
Posts: 3456
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 12:54 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:47 am

I see your Just Cause 2 realism and raise you http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8I9Pd-5F8s#t=1m33s.


Hey, no mods allowed.

Vanilla GTA:IV absolutely svcks.
And modded Crysis is just....wow.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PivoSi2VvqA
User avatar
Emilie Joseph
 
Posts: 3387
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 6:28 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:15 am

I have to agree with some others. Just Cause 2 is a really fun game, but Crysis definitely trumps it graphically. I also enjoyed Crysis and Warhead more as shooters, while I enjoyed JC2 more as a sandbox. :shrug:
User avatar
danni Marchant
 
Posts: 3420
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 2:32 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:44 am

Hey, no mods allowed.

Vanilla GTA:IV absolutely svcks.
And modded Crysis is just....wow.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PivoSi2VvqA

What kind of computer do you need to run that?
User avatar
yermom
 
Posts: 3323
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 12:56 pm

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 3:56 am

Just Cause 2 was a gorgeous, vibrant game; but in terms of photorealistic-ness it has nothing on Crysis. Yes, it's infinitely better optimized, and yes, IMO it was funner. http://www.thebuzzmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/crysis-2-ultra-quality-screenshot-realistic-forest-soldier.jpg

Actually, I don't think Crysis looks that good. :shrug:
User avatar
Nikki Hype
 
Posts: 3429
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 12:38 pm

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 3:38 am

I see your Just Cause 2 realism and raise you http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8I9Pd-5F8s#t=1m33s.

Wow, that really is incredible. I can only imagine the graphics in 10 years
User avatar
Ashley Clifft
 
Posts: 3468
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:56 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 4:32 am

http://www.thebuzzmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/crysis-2-ultra-quality-screenshot-realistic-forest-soldier.jpg


And screenshots like that are why i keep saying that the best possible graphics are soon reached. 10 years from now games will look like that, but with better framerate :hehe: I mean, how and why would you improve on that?
User avatar
Anna Kyselova
 
Posts: 3431
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 9:42 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 4:21 pm

And screenshots like that are why i keep saying that the best possible graphics are soon reached. 10 years from now games will look like that, but with better framerate :hehe: I mean, how and why would you improve on that?

4D.

Also sensors that attach to your head that make your brain think that what's happening in the game is actually happening to you in real life i.e. when you're getting shot, you actually feel pain.
User avatar
GEo LIme
 
Posts: 3304
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 7:18 pm

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 7:55 am

4D.

Also sensors that attach to your head that make your brain think that what's happening in the game is actually happening to you in real life i.e. when you're getting shot, you actually feel pain.


That doesn't sound particularly fun.
User avatar
Sarah Evason
 
Posts: 3507
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2006 10:47 pm

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 4:07 pm

And screenshots like that are why i keep saying that the best possible graphics are soon reached. 10 years from now games will look like that, but with better framerate :hehe: I mean, how and why would you improve on that?

That screenshot doesn't look anywhere near photorealistic. It's stylized realism.
User avatar
Courtney Foren
 
Posts: 3418
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 6:49 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:26 am

And screenshots like that are why i keep saying that the best possible graphics are soon reached. 10 years from now games will look like that, but with better framerate :hehe: I mean, how and why would you improve on that?

I think the immediate future for game graphics lies in stuff like procedural animation: deformable terrain and characters, limbs flying off with semi-realistic damage without being tightly scripted into canned animations, better fluid effects, more motion-capture performances, and greater blending of multiple lightsources on textured surfaces.

Basically http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSXyztq_0uM :D

Also sensors that attach to your head that make your brain think that what's happening in the game is actually happening to you in real life i.e. when you're getting shot, you actually feel pain.

I think that would be a terrible feature for a game, even for an ultra-hardcoe shooter like ArmA. Not only would it get old quickly (I'd probably just turn it off) it would be jarring as hell.
User avatar
Alex [AK]
 
Posts: 3436
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2007 10:01 pm

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 2:25 pm

I think that would be a terrible feature for a game, even for an ultra-hardcoe shooter like ArmA. Not only would it get old quickly (I'd probably just turn it off) it would be jarring as hell.

It would probably be banned too.
User avatar
Dan Wright
 
Posts: 3308
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 8:40 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 7:03 pm

FreakLore does not care, FreakLore says aesthetics> graphics.
User avatar
Jade Muggeridge
 
Posts: 3439
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 6:51 pm

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 4:59 pm

FreakLore does not care, FreakLore says aesthetics> graphics.


Yeah, when we're talking about overall gaming, the aesthetics and how they complement the game play and feel for the game is what's really important. If I were making a game I would want it to be remembered for the story and it's unique feel, not that it was technologically or graphically superior.

Anyway, Crysis for the win.
User avatar
Ria dell
 
Posts: 3430
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 4:03 pm

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 7:26 am

Yeah, when we're talking about overall gaming, the aesthetics and how they complement the game play and feel for the game is what's really important. If I were making a game I would want it to be remembered for the story and it's unique feel, not that it was technologically or graphically superior.

Anyway, Crysis for the win.

I definitely agree. That said, I still enjoyed Crysis and Warhead as a shooter more than Just Cause 2, although JC2 is a really fun game. I actually enjoyed Crysis and Warhead more than Crysis 2.
User avatar
Nymph
 
Posts: 3487
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 1:17 pm

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 3:27 am

4D.

Also sensors that attach to your head that make your brain think that what's happening in the game is actually happening to you in real life i.e. when you're getting shot, you actually feel pain.


And you actually die. For real. From a video game.
User avatar
Jade Barnes-Mackey
 
Posts: 3418
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 7:29 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 12:58 pm

It would probably be banned too.

True. And the Germans would have to settle for a version that replaced pain with chastising verbal rebukes. :P
User avatar
Eve Booker
 
Posts: 3300
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:53 pm

Next

Return to Othor Games