DSOGaming writes: "Normally, we’d include these screenshots in our weekly CryEngine 3 gallery but they’re so hot that we felt the need to share them with you as soon as possible. A lot of gamers think that CryEngine 3 is inferior to CryEngine 2 (because Crysis 1 looks better than Crysis 2), however CryEngine 3 can achieve CG quality graphics as can be seen by the works of modder Puppy and 3D artist Mark Ranson. We really hope that next-generation games will look this good and if you thought that Project CARS' car models looked phenomenal, wait until you see the one created by Ranson. Enjoy!"
40°
30°
20°
70°
Ad 
20°
10°
30°
20°
20°
40°
I think even GT5 on PS3 has more realistic lighting this.
It lacked self-shadows (see rear spoiler and side mirrors) and the tail lights look hideous.
Come on Cry Engine 3, I hope you can do better than that.
BUT I really liked the water and dirt particles on it. Looked pretty awesome.
Exhibit A (CE3 - PC):
http://www.dsogaming.com/wp...
Exhibit B (GT5 - PS3):
http://i48.tinypic.com/2m4a...
Both real-time.
But seriously.
When will people learn that the engine doesn't make 3d models through magic? Anyone can take a fairly recent engine, put some high res models in it, and run it "real time" on Jesus Christ's $10,000 supercomputer, like all of the "next gen" engine demonstrations we've been seeing lately.
Real impressiveness comes from an engine's ability to be efficient.
Can we make headlines like this illegal or punishable by a kick to the nuts for spreading misinformation and further fueling petty fanboy wars and what not? please?!
What? The whole point of this is that it isn't pre-rendered. If it was, it would just be 'cgi'. And I'm not sure what sort of disability would be required to render screenshots without anti-aliasing if it wasn't in game (I don't understand it even in in-game), but they shouldn't be working with the hardware if they don't know to turn on AA while rendering.
Also it's CryEngine, why wouldn't it be real time?
When they build a fun game to PLAY around those graphics, then i will take them seriously.
After 30 minutes the graphics are just there and dont stand out anymore while playing, about 3 hours into Crysis 2 i thought i was going to die of boredom.
At the very least outsource your gameplay so we can actually enjoy the surroundings!
Crytek has the engine but the lack talent when it comes to making a game.
MS should just buy them out.
I have all 3 platforms, so no fanboyism here, but MS don't know how to run their studios.
RARE being a prime example.
Add in super high visuals, gadgets for "reality" maybe rooms to get full fledged experience. And all of it works like the old arcades. Put in 50 cents, then 50 cents when you die etc :P
Want to play super high end games? Well spend thousands on a computer, or come on down to the arcade :D
(I miss arcades, only reason I'm saying this)
Shades of killzone 2 shown on E3 2005, remember how Sony said it was realtime and only to admit a year later it was Pre rendered hahahaha lol.
look, i like games like GT but if PD had this and did it on PC, it would hands down BEAT ANY GT GAME! In terms of graphics. Please, let us not get stupid and say subjective things about a technical fact.
"oh i will believe" blah, blah, blah! It will be a beast engine next gen, when next gen systems can actually even run it. I would like to see the first Crysis made (ported) on PS4 and 720!
(and yes I'm very much aware Crysis 1 was ported to PS3 and 360 through Live and PSN).....theres a reason why it was disregarded. lol. What Crysis was on PC is something a lot of gamers need to play. Clearly if you played the port....you didn't play Crysis, but another game with the same name.
http://www.gtplanet.net/for...
GT5 PS3 still looks better. But they ARE getting close.... All this in-game pics!!
If Polyphony Digital made a Gran Turismo with Crytek's CryEngine 3 on PC, it would BE THE BEST LOOKING RACER! Best in terms of tech being way better on PC. I'm a huge GT fan and i'll tell you that, if a team made a racing game on PC using this engine...it would look better then GT5 by default. Period.
Oh does a Nissan 350Z look better on a system running 256vram or 2gig GPU? I mean really people? A finished game looks better then this mod. (well you don't say!) With something like a racing game, you don't get close. You have an engine thats better and hardware to run it....you win. (i say this of course in terms of graphics ONLY) PD is amazing with what they do with how little they have to do it with. Their hands down the best team in all gaming when it comes to racing games. A person can get a GT game and pretty much never play another racer and be fine with that, that can't be said about most games. Even that being said, i just can't ignore the actual fact that better hardware will always equal a better looking game. (in terms of realism) when your trying to render something from a real life object, there is not subjectivity to it. More polygons make it look more real.....period. So one can't just say "well that apple looks better with less polygons" cause that technically means, its rendered actually less real.
Not many, when they can get a cheaper one with similar, but less stellar results.
Check out this GT5 model:
http://i.imgur.com/pIcnO.jp...
Also rain does not effect the car in GT5 like it's being shown in these photos.
The jaggies and angular shapes in the cryengine model don't help.
PGR4 had some waterdrops though. The CryEngine3 Nissan looks meh, really. Frog is nice, but unless these are put in motion it really doesn't matter. I think I've seen better looking cars on that ICE mod (GTAIV).