http://www.geforce.com/#/News/articles/battlefield3-interview

hits the nail on the head, I posted this Crysis discussion and the Mods promptly deleted it......guess even they know

Congratulations.

http://www.geforce.com/#/News/articles/battlefield3-interview

hits the nail on the head, I posted this Crysis discussion and the Mods promptly deleted it......guess even they know
Because a Battlefield interview doesn't belong in the Crysis discussion forums, regardless of the point you're trying to put across.

On topic: Battlefield 3 is certainly looking great I'm looking forward to playing it!

As much as I like BF3 and as much as I am unhappy with the current graphics on Crysis 2. I have to come to the rescue of Crysis 2.

Engine wise CE3 is more powerful than Frostbite 2 when you consider AA and Global Illumination. Although I cant say that for deferred lighting, as destrutable enviroments being challanges to lighting and BF3 will have lots and lots of desstruction.

I have seen Ce3 tech demos with feature lot of destruction. Frostbite 2 is good with indoor lighting with destruction. But something tells me that we havent seen the best of CE3 yet.

And dont forget Crytek has Tiago Saosa, hez a badass in computer graphics and a well respected researcher. I would even go far as to say hez the John Carmack of this generation. With Dx11 and Tiago we might see some explosive stuff.

My biggest complaint with crysis 2 is that it lacks basic functions for a computer game.
Things like CUSTOMIZABLE GRAPHICS OPTIONS, that really hits the nail on the head. That and the inability to customize your game how you see fit with console commands.

But primarily, my biggest problem is graphics options. The fact that I have to use a 3rd party downloaded program to be able to run the game effectively honestly is rediculous.

Its like buying a car, then having to go buy a MPH gauge to see how fast your going.... Id be pissed if that happened...