Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Crysis vs Battlefield 3? (graphics)

Last response: in Video Games
Share
November 8, 2011 12:42:49 AM

After playing Battlefield 3 on max settings for the past couple of days, I went back to Crysis (max settings) just to compare.

Crysis is still King.

When will this 4 year old game be beat?

Good Lord...
November 8, 2011 2:45:56 AM

PCgamer81 said:
After playing Battlefield 3 on max settings for the past couple of days, I went back to Crysis (max settings) just to compare.

Crysis is still King.

When will this 4 year old game be beat?

Good Lord...



I think both engines are capable of beating it, and I think that Crysis 2 with the MaLDoHD mod (along with the DX11/texture pack) DOES beat Crysis.

I'm still utterly amazed at how good Crysis looks, especially modded to the extent that it now is.....a stroll through some of the custom maps like Hunter's Life, Jungle Rumble, and Before Apophys gives you an idea at just how amazing this game was for something released in 2007. And it STILL looks better than 99% of what's being released today - - years later. I think Crysis was the epitome of the "clean" style of PC graphics.




That said, I think CryEngine3 does a better job at reflective surfaces - especially glass. I think the lighting is also more natural, and it seems like other things like depth-of-field, and especially how things appear at long draw distance look better in CryEngine3.


Battlefield 3 is littered with low-poly, terrible looking models and a lot of awful textures. I really like the dramatic lighting, though.....some of the scenes are downright beautiful. I would like to see what this game would look like with some real attention to detail, because I think it could look fantastic. Its just a shame this game is really just about the MP. I love the MP - it's a lot of fun, but the SP campaign is where they should have really shown off their tech, and they completely dropped the ball.
m
0
l
November 8, 2011 3:04:47 AM

Stringjam said:
I think both engines are capable of beating it, and I think that Crysis 2 with the MaLDoHD mod (along with the DX11/texture pack) DOES beat Crysis.

I'm still utterly amazed at how good Crysis looks, especially modded to the extent that it now is.....a stroll through some of the custom maps like Hunter's Life, Jungle Rumble, and Before Apophys gives you an idea at just how amazing this game was for something released in 2007. And it STILL looks better than 99% of what's being released today - - years later. I think Crysis was the epitome of the "clean" style of PC graphics.

http://earthmachine.home.mchsi.com/apop1.jpg


That said, I think CryEngine3 does a better job at reflective surfaces - especially glass. I think the lighting is also more natural, and it seems like other things like depth-of-field, and especially how things appear at long draw distance look better in CryEngine3.


Battlefield 3 is littered with low-poly, terrible looking models and a lot of awful textures. I really like the dramatic lighting, though.....some of the scenes are downright beautiful. I would like to see what this game would look like with some real attention to detail, because I think it could look fantastic. Its just a shame this game is really just about the MP. I love the MP - it's a lot of fun, but the SP campaign is where they should have really shown off their tech, and they completely dropped the ball.


I have yet to play the multiplayer. I got it sunday morning and I wanted to play through it on hard before going to MP and screwing my stats up too badly before I even learn to play the game. I have a bad habit of wanting to complete games on the hardest difficulty before really sinking my teeth into the multiplayer - I do not like being fragged. Alas, I know that no amount of time practicing will keep me alive in B3 - some of those guys are just insanely good.

With that said, I am a little disappointed with the single player, but overall I kind of like the way it is playing out. While not as good as BBC2 single player, I think it's a little more story driven, but that's just an opinion that I'm sure not many would agree with.

Yes, Crysis is amazing. I never had the chance to play Crysis 2 since the DX11 patches and what-not, I had it on my old PC a while back and maxed it with a 5770(DX9). Needless to say, I was hoping for a system crusher so I would have a reason to go shopping - I didn't get it. It wasn't until the Battlefield 3 release date drew nigh that I felt an upgrade was mandatory - hence my current setup.

I will also say this: If any game really gives Crysis a run for it's money, in my opinion that game would have to be Metro 2033. I play that daily - and have for a very long time. It is my second favorite game (Behind Half-Life 2, of course) of all time. I think the textures in Metro 2033 beat Crysis. As well as the facial models. But in terms of overall scope and in-your-face, awesome shading; and just overall WOW, Crysis is still king, IMO.
m
0
l
Related resources
November 8, 2011 5:58:50 AM

The rocks are horrible in crysis, the rocks are great in BF3. The sandbags are 50/50 in BF3, they are 100% amazing in crysis. All in all the lighting in BF3 if much better than crysis. But if crysis had BF3 lighting and rocks it would easily be the better looking game.

I think overall, BF3 looks better than crysis also more taxing on the system than crysis. Crysis was an amazing game, I think the last of its kind sadly.
m
0
l
November 8, 2011 7:09:58 AM

nocturnal7x said:
The rocks are horrible in crysis, the rocks are great in BF3. The sandbags are 50/50 in BF3, they are 100% amazing in crysis. All in all the lighting in BF3 if much better than crysis. But if crysis had BF3 lighting and rocks it would easily be the better looking game.

I think overall, BF3 looks better than crysis also more taxing on the system than crysis. Crysis was an amazing game, I think the last of its kind sadly.

Your opinion is fair enough.
m
0
l
November 8, 2011 8:09:59 AM

The explosions are something that I really liked in BF3 and Crysis 2. In Crysis, it wasn't too pretty.
m
0
l
November 8, 2011 10:55:16 AM

Gman450 said:
The explosions are something that I really liked in BF3 and Crysis 2. In Crysis, it wasn't too pretty.



.....until you download Xigmatec's particle mod......then there is NO game that compares. ;) 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhIaylrOEiM&feature=play...!


Not to mention CryEngine2 seems to have better physics than either of the new engines........look at the vehicle explosion at 2:05 - - at what point do you ever see anything like that in Crysis2 or BF3? ;) 
m
0
l
November 8, 2011 12:25:44 PM

I've only been playing Battlefield 3 multiplayer, and I must say that BF3 is the first game, since I saw Crysis for the first time, that has literally made my jaw drop :o 

The sunshaft effects, the DX11 tesselation-effects that eliminates objects from "popping up", the smoke, ligthing effects, physics engine, shadows, ragdoll effects, water reflections etc. are mindblowingly beautiful imo.

Yes, there are some low polygon objects which really hurt the overall look - but my god it's a sexy engine :love: 

m
0
l
November 8, 2011 12:43:51 PM

Stringjam said:
.....until you download Xigmatec's particle mod......then there is NO game that compares. ;) 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhIaylrOEiM&feature=play...!


Not to mention CryEngine2 seems to have better physics than either of the new engines........look at the vehicle explosion at 2:05 - - at what point do you ever see anything like that in Crysis2 or BF3? ;) 

I was referring to the un-modded one, and yeah, that does look really good! :) 
m
0
l
!