Check out a graphics comparison between minimum and maximum settings for Crysis 3 (PC)
I can not see any difference !
I can and any one who plays on PC can. Have both console and PC and trust me you will learn more about graphics if you mess with PC.. but even so you should be able to see something bro.
I know, PC for years is ahead compared to this generation consoles, its obviously . But in those images i can not see any huge or tangible difference between Min and Max Settings . I think this is good news for those who have no high-end PCs :) .
Well that would be terrible news for the graphics business then, wouldnt it? If it looks the same i guess people should just stop upgrading. See how long AMD and Nvidia last then
Funny thing about that while your pc game has better graphics (which is nice) the gameplay was exactly the same as consoles. Nothing better no improvement in AI or physics. So with all that shine you still get the same game. Now if a pc game that is also on consoles would be better in more areas then just graphics maybe I would build a gaming pc again.
I can't tell which is which, because when you click "Maximale Details" the max detail image is missing the rings on the pipe that the "Minimale Details" image has. The rest looks about the same quality, but the pics are only 666px × 375px, so it's not much to go on.
Sure, totally ignore mods, dedicated servers, and the fact that a gaming PC can do much more than just play games/watch movies.
" PC can do much more than just play games/watch movies " Dude, having a PC isn't like being part of an elite club. EVERYONE, including console gamers, have a computer and use it to do other things aside from gaming and watching movies. So whether people decide to play game on it or not, is their choice. You're acting as if people have to make a choice between buying a console or buying a PC. Things aren't always black or white lol
@NathanExplosion So by your logic if anyone had 400 euro they can buy both ?! console and good PC wow thats great... Of course you must make a choice if you have no options -_- not everyone is made of money or should i say "Things aren't always black or white lol" I would love to have both but i had to make a choice... yeah it was PC. Same goes with the ones that made a choice to get console. But i understand what you wanted to say non the less.
@aLiEnViSiToR, Considering N4G is on the internet i'd assume most people here have a PC, or they wouldn't be here.
You don't buy a new PC for every console you buy. Don't be foolish. Also you missed the point of my previous comment.
@Highlife Battlefield 3 with 128/256 players on armored kill maps with 7 cap points says hi! Even on metro, 128 waaaaaayyy more immersive than 24. So dont say its same game as on consoles.
This is about Crysis 3 not Battlefield 3. We all know how good Bf3 is though.
Erm mag on ps3 had 256 players so get your facts right before you make comments like that.
@orb And mag was also a flop. It wasn't very good
Single player is the same. All you are doing is upping the player cap. in multiplayer. But like I said AI and physics all the same. You have all this extra power and yet all you get is a visual upgrade. Guess that will change for pc when you get ports of the next gen consoles. I would be all for pc gaming (cheaper games) but to many console exclusives and not much difference between pc and console titles.
there is... the plane in the right side
1. I can see the difference some minor some major 2. But remember CryEngine 3 is such a CONSOLE Engine that it really doesn't make use of all the great PC features until Crytek goes back in and adds stuff to it! Will have to wait for a high texture pak to really push Crysis 3 PC. CryEngine 2 OMG that Engine was SO PC and it still looks better than CryEngine 3
Holy shit the amount of ignorance. Go look at any recent Cryengine 3 real-time walkthough and tell me thats being 'CONSOLE'
you're mad because you can't justify your $2000 rig.
Lower textures on low. Poor shadows. View distance is also low. Better AA on Max. I think you can also notice the low AF on the low settings screenshot. All of these can be deduced from the screenshots. The rest of the effects such as particles, AO, etc will be more apparent during gameplay.
higher resolution shadows, higher resolution textures and tessellation on the rubble on the left hand corner were the most noticeable to me.
Open up the "Full HD Slider" at the bottom of the picture and it's easy to see there isn't much difference. It's just a beta though right?
HD has shadows. Biggest difference I see.
Minimum settings look very good. The main difference I noticed was the trees, the texture seems richer more vibrant on max, compared to the minimum which looked good, but not half as good as the max (the trees). Overall there isn't much difference, which I guess is good.
I can see the differnce move the slider in middle. But oddly i find the debris to fron left more better on minimum then maximum however draw distance much better and foliage, shadows lighting ect. The power of DX11 on both are awsome
yeah that's pretty weird regarding the ground.
I know PC is much more powerful than console but god..im loosing hope next gen graphics are not gonna be the major leap between PS2 to PS3 was. A high end PC is what? 10x-30x more powerful than console, even at that much the graphics are not reaching near Avatar. Not even remotely close. I guess we gotta wait till PS4/XBOX 4000 to get video games to look near avatar(possibly). Even the AI is pretty dumb. I can only think of three major improvement from current gen.... 1080p, 60fps and physics.
there's quite a lot of room in the middle between avatar and current consoles.
People aren't maxing out PC potential. THey say they are but theyre just being amateurs. The next PS and Xbox when maxed out will bring a new dawn of graphics. Right now PS3 and 360 are holding PC's back , as all PC's are getting is 1080p 60FPS xbox 360 graphics. Honestly there will be a leap and the next Xbox and PS will lead the way , and the PC's will get slightly upgraded versions of Xbox 720 / ps3 games. Even when people Max the Wiiu out you will see lighting and Textures that are uncommon today.
Hella disagrees but I think your right. PC seems to have been getting kind of screwed on the multiplatform games. With the new consoles the developers will have a higher floor from which to build their engines and I thik that will translate into better looking games than what we're seeing now. Frankly, I'm not impressed by what I've seen graphically form Crysis 3 yet. @Norrison: I'll check em out. Thanks. EDIT: Strike my last comment about not being impressed! Holy shit. The realism is making my eyes bleed!
It's an mp beta, it won't look as good as the SP, have you seen the crysis 3 7 wonders trailers? Also stop with that dumb console gamer idea that games will look like avatar when avatar was rendered by super computers.
The thing is, once the next-gen consoles are released, the graphics levels will shoot up rapidly, on both PC and the new consoles. This is because most AAA games are made for multiple platforms, so if a developer used all the raw power of a high end gaming rig, then they won't be able to port it to the consoles. Next gen consoles are said to have specs similar to a high end gaming laptop. But when games do get developed for them, the games will look better than games running on high end gaming desktops now. But the PC versions of those games, will look better than their console counterparts, thanks to the high scalability of the platform. Exclusives may at first look better than the multiplatform games (PC inclusive), but overtime, PC will once again reign in terms of performance.
Ill just try it myself, why look at still images?
It is still early to tell though lets be honest - the real difference between, hell, high and Ultra on the original Crysis was apparent from a mile away. This... just isn't there. Yet. Or maybe it won't live up to that standard, I don't really know until the game is out. Don't get me wrong - the game does look great, though the graphical improvement from Crysis 2 - Crysis 3 just doesn't seem THAT substantial in the first place.
Here we go agn
PC rapes consoles this gen and next in terms of power.O by the way thats a fact.
I'd prefer if my PC didn't rape my console. That'd be a liability issue for me with all the lawsuit claims and the questioning.
Ok just got the PC beta. I'm @ 1920x1080. i5 2500k 6870 8gb ram Maxed I get 35fps. with x2aa. Medium I get 45-50fps, same setup. I tried knocking down rez, does not do much tbh. I think there is more problems for processor, rather then gpu. Either way, it's better then crisis 2 mp. Actually abit of fun to be had. Graphics are better then crysis2 even in this mp imo. Still beta, so i'm guessing fps, will get better anyway. ----- Regarding BF3, it is stunning in places and awful in others. When you get onto the hills, the tree's are lol 2d and not even stuck in the ground. Crysis water moves way to fast from bullets and people jumping in.
Hmm, thanks for dropping that information. Its very helpful. Im curious if its CPU limated or if its due to your ATI setup. Crytek is known to be a bit on Nvidias side, and a CPU bottleneck at your specs would be quite frightening in my opinion.
Even if PCs rape consoles hardware wise, which is true, of course, I'd still take the next PS console over a hightech PC anytime. It's just personal preference. Sure you can't have mods and all those cool features but shit...you get astounding games.
I'm not at all impressed with Crysis 3 graphics, it just looks like a high-res version of current gen games.
there isnt much of a difference that makes it worth while really.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.