The best combination of shaders and textures : Crysis

» Sat Sep 11, 2010 1:48 pm

Ive read a article lately that contained a topic about how the common gamer looks at graphics in videogames. I was suprised that in most games the textures are very low res in detail. Instead many developers like to mask the bad textures they use with the intensive use of shader- and bloom effekts.
And its really true... the textures in most FPS games are really bad ( on all platforms)
COD for example. Some textures in that game are on the same "low" level as the ones from Quake 3.I think thats why Crysis is so special. It used high res textures combined with high quality effects. Most of the textures were very detailed in the very high version.You could even see the grain on the wooden Fences when youre very close to it.

For example a Crysis texture:
http://i40.tinypic.com/3329oo2.jpg

And a cod Black ops texture ( in high res mode)
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,798497/Call-of-Duty-Black-Ops-The-Tops-and-Flops-of-the-Graphics/Practice/&menu=browser&entity_id=217981&image_id=1457169&article_id=798497&page=1&show=original

But most gamers seem not to care about high res textures anymore.
Because its mainly considered that games like Black OPs or Killzone,Halo Reach etc.
have good grfx. But the truth is.. these textures look like mud compared to Crysis.

» Sat Sep 11, 2010 9:00 am

But most gamers seem not to care about high res textures anymore.
Because its mainly considered that games like Black OPs or Killzone,Halo Reach etc.
have good grfx. But the truth is.. these textures look like mud compared to Crysis.

In 2007, Crysis (1) set a benchmark for a new era of Pc gaming. It proved, that graphics was on the move for change in the gaming world. Gamers will change, and will keep changing. The Hd era is on the Verizon.

» Sat Sep 11, 2010 2:51 pm

Nice textures alone won't make a game look the best, just as nice lighting alone won't make a game look the best. It's a combination of everything that makes a game look the best, which is why Crysis still stands out to this day as the benchmark in gaming visuals, because it does everything in real time, beautifully.

That being said, it also depends on the scene you're in. Sometimes, BlackOps can look stunning, textures included:

Attachment:

BlackOps 2010-11-09 21-26-57-54.jpg [ 408.18 KiB | Viewed 168 times ]

Attachment:

BlackOps 2010-11-09 21-56-14-08.jpg [ 363.08 KiB | Viewed 168 times ]

Elizabeth Davis: Posts: 3406; Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 10:30 am

» Sat Sep 11, 2010 10:00 am

"Nice textures alone won't make a game look the best," with that said, it'll make - more of a difference for Crysis 2 to max it out.

Yvonne: Posts: 3577; Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:05 am

» Sat Sep 11, 2010 2:44 pm

"Nice textures alone won't make a game look the best, just as nice lighting alone won't make a game look the best."

But what WILL make the game look the best is the Cryengine 3

Stephanie Kemp: Posts: 3329; Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 12:39 am

» Sat Sep 11, 2010 7:45 am

High res textures are nice but they cause a very long load time. That is why the textures in crysis 2 wont be as high res as those found in crysis. Especially consoles with their incredibly low RAM will not be able to render large levels with high resolution textures. But I think the resolution of the textures isnt what makes a game look great. Its the style of the textures themselves wich add a lot. MW2 and black ops have very good textures, maybe not high res but they look very natural. To me what makes a game look great is the lighting, for example halo 3, I still find it the best looking game because the lighting is so incredibly realistic, not in therms of ambient occlusion or something. But the color of the sun is perfect and the eye adaption when coming out of a dark cave also looks great. Also the lighting of bc2 looks similar to that of halo 3. And last but not least the framerate, every single movement in halo 3 is smooth no lag at all, no matter if you are in an intense scene or not its all smooth. Remember when pulling out your binoculars in crysis, suddenly you′ve got lag like hell. This has got all to do with those "great" textures, when zooming in on objects far away the engine has to load all those textures before it can produce the next image. This drop in framerate affects the way the game feels in a bad way.

Chantel Hopkin: Posts: 3533; Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 9:41 am

» Sat Sep 11, 2010 9:18 am

Nice textures alone won't make a game look the best, just as nice lighting alone won't make a game look the best. It's a combination of everything that makes a game look the best, which is why Crysis still stands out to this day as the benchmark in gaming visuals, because it does everything in real time, beautifully.

That being said, it also depends on the scene you're in. Sometimes, BlackOps can look stunning, textures included:

Attachment:

BlackOps 2010-11-09 21-26-57-54.jpg

Attachment:

BlackOps 2010-11-09 21-56-14-08.jpg

Were those supposed to be pretty?
Sure at first they look great but the second i saw the textures and models, i saw how unrealistic and ugly they are.
Maybe it's just me, but when i spot something, good or bad, for example the low res textures on COD, i tend to see them all the time. That happend in Crysis too, theres something about those rocks, it's just not right.

Donatus Uwasomba: Posts: 3361; Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 7:22 pm

» Sat Sep 11, 2010 2:44 pm

its just me that thinks that cod:BO multiplayer have worse graphics than the singleplayer?
and also comparing BO mp with MW2 mp to me it seams like BO looses by a lot

matt oneil: Posts: 3383; Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 12:54 am

» Sat Sep 11, 2010 11:00 am

its just me that thinks that cod:BO multiplayer have worse graphics than the singleplayer?
and also comparing BO mp with MW2 mp to me it seams like BO looses by a lot

I think i remember in a review some guy saying the graphics of blackops compare to uncharted i lmao'ed

TRIsha FEnnesse: Posts: 3369; Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 5:59 am

» Sat Sep 11, 2010 10:07 am

its just me that thinks that cod:BO multiplayer have worse graphics than the singleplayer?
and also comparing BO mp with MW2 mp to me it seams like BO looses by a lot

Yeah, BO has horrible graphics and the kicker: It runs worse than all of its predecessors, even though its the same engine with worse graphics!

Console port beta making half a billion dollars? Blasphemy!

A Dardzz: Posts: 3370; Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 6:26 pm

» Sat Sep 11, 2010 3:43 pm

Nice textures alone won't make a game look the best, just as nice lighting alone won't make a game look the best. It's a combination of everything that makes a game look the best, which is why Crysis still stands out to this day as the benchmark in gaming visuals, because it does everything in real time, beautifully.

That being said, it also depends on the scene you're in. Sometimes, BlackOps can look stunning, textures included:

Attachment:

BlackOps 2010-11-09 21-26-57-54.jpg

Attachment:

BlackOps 2010-11-09 21-56-14-08.jpg

Black Ops looks pretty poor for being a 2010 game tbh.

Are you kidding?

Black Ops is the most crappy, unworth buying piece of.... thats been made in the past FIVE years.
Horrible graphics, laggy, freezes a lot.... for me its an agitating placeholder until Crysis 2, rather then an actual game.
Treyarch = FAIL
Crytek = WINRAR.zip

Heather Dawson: Posts: 3348; Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 4:14 pm

» Sat Sep 11, 2010 6:26 am

Nice textures alone won't make a game look the best, just as nice lighting alone won't make a game look the best. It's a combination of everything that makes a game look the best, which is why Crysis still stands out to this day as the benchmark in gaming visuals, because it does everything in real time, beautifully.

That being said, it also depends on the scene you're in. Sometimes, BlackOps can look stunning, textures included:

Attachment:

BlackOps 2010-11-09 21-26-57-54.jpg

Attachment:

BlackOps 2010-11-09 21-56-14-08.jpg

Black Ops looks pretty poor for being a 2010 game tbh.

Every game (apart from metro 2033 and arguably bad company 2) released in 2010 is a load of crap compared to what we should be seeing on PC. If i can run 3dmark 11 at 30fps and see the visuals in that benchmark, we should be taking crysis as the standard of what we should be seeing graphically, not the top end.

Trey Johnson: Posts: 3295; Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 7:00 pm

» Sat Sep 11, 2010 7:16 pm

Nice textures alone won't make a game look the best, just as nice lighting alone won't make a game look the best. It's a combination of everything that makes a game look the best, which is why Crysis still stands out to this day as the benchmark in gaming visuals, because it does everything in real time, beautifully.

That being said, it also depends on the scene you're in. Sometimes, BlackOps can look stunning, textures included:

Attachment:

BlackOps 2010-11-09 21-26-57-54.jpg

Attachment:

BlackOps 2010-11-09 21-56-14-08.jpg

Black Ops looks pretty poor for being a 2010 game tbh.

Every game (apart from metro 2033 and arguably bad company 2) released in 2010 is a load of crap compared to what we should be seeing on PC. If i can run 3dmark 11 at 30fps and see the visuals in that benchmark, we should be taking crysis as the standard of what we should be seeing graphically, not the top end.

I definitely agree with this.

u gone see: Posts: 3388; Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2007 2:53 pm

» Sat Sep 11, 2010 4:09 pm

I must say that iam the kind of player that really likes to look around in games.
To see how good the textures are for example..or how detailed the objects are.
And Crysis is still the benchmark for me as an "explorer" kinda player.
The Island just keeps on breathing/ living while i just stand on a cliff and take a look around.
I go into a house and look how beautiful and full of detail the scenery was made.. it looks as someone just left this place and left everything alone. And when i get into enemy fire... the whole house and its interior gets blown away.
Its a near undiscribeable experience for me to play crysis. Thats why iam so sad that crysis 2 will leave the jungle/ island/ forest behind for a dead, cold and bombed New York scenery.

Anna Watts: Posts: 3476; Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 8:31 pm

» Sat Sep 11, 2010 5:27 pm

First of all, I do think that BO Multiplayer has worse graphics than SP or MW2.

Second of all, yes, graphics have taken a turn for the worse in many blockbuster titles,
there's so much bloom and blur you wonder if all main characters have bad vision.
I'd also like to congratulate DICE for making the most of their engine, adding every basic detail, including physics and destruction, even if it was at a most basic state.
If crytek did this with more effort, crysis 2 would easily become a five-star game.
Wait, they already did this

DAVId Bryant: Posts: 3366; Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:41 pm

Post a reply

15 posts • Page 1 of 1

Return to Crysis