[kagemaru]

Originally Posted by RenegadeRocks

I am interested in what optimisations have they got for the consoles? Have they got the GI to work on consoles? What about the IQ this time around? How will these super dense looking environments look on the ps360?

According to the producer, they can't do anything more with these consoles.

[Rangers]

Originally Posted by L. Scofield

Not quite. Two considerations: it's using the high-end spectrum of UE3 (DX11 level) and is not bounded to the limitations of this gen. They can go all-out whereas Crytek is still held back by consoles

Well C3 looks at least as impressive as 1313 to me.

Crytek said something about (and we know they talk a lot) having the console engine work done allowed them to focus more on improving the PC visuals this time as compared to Crysis 2. Makes sense.

I'm kind of sad/disbelieving this is really Crytek's last triple A packaged title as they claim. Can it really be true? Makes the game a little bittersweet.

[Acert93]

Originally Posted by Rangers

Star Wars 1313 is based on UE3. So that makes it very this gen.

So Bioshock was an Xbox1-gen game because it used UE2.x

I don't think engine "number" dictates the model quality, art quality, shader complexity, rendering features, physics features, etc. The question is a) was SW1313 targeting next gen visual targets and b) was it designed to degrade gracefully to current gen platforms.

a) seems an obvious yes; if b) is yes then it can be compared to Crysis 3; if no then you are discussing totally different software parameters.

[/quote]UE4 simply wasnt impressive. Despite being non gameplay as well.[/QUOTE]

If UE4 allows developers to get a robust rendering material based material pipeline with a unified realtime lighting and shadowing with all those GI effects right out of the box to allow artists to plunk in assets right away and designers to, in engine, do the tweaking they mention, then it is quite impressive!

A good art pipeline and design development is going to produce better visuals next gen than pure render technology. That is true this generation already based on a lot of comments.

Originally Posted by ultragpu

Honestly not impressed very much especially when I seen what they have done with UE4, Agni's Philosophy and Star Wars 1313. I wonder if they would show the new dx11 features before release.

What hardware was the current Crysis 3 demo running on?

And what hardware were the gameplay footage of UE4 ... opps, none as it wasn't gameplay. What hardware was the gameplay footage of AP running on ... opps, none as it wasn't gameplay. What hardware was the SW1313 gameplay shown on? See comments above.

If we are comparing engine tech shouldn't we be comparing Crysis engine stuff and not nearly 20minutes of gameplay of real-game assets? World of difference.

[RenegadeRocks]

Originally Posted by nightshade

I don't remember Crysis being advertised as a stealth game.
You are given option and there's no one stopping you from cloaking through the whole game taking out each enemy one by one, but that isn't something that would look good in the videos...so instead what they choose was an action oriented stealth route, like a predator where you hit and vanish.

Really, they say it twice in this very video !

They specifically mentioned that its a stealth option, yet what they showed was just cloak-kill one guy ! Stealth should mean no one notices that you are in and out. The video was stupid in that regard. I , too, mentioned that on the youtube comment section. In fact Crysis 2 can be played as a stealth game , its just that this dev video they advertised a stealth option and then went guns blazing !

Originally Posted by nightshade

Cause it's a good video, I didn't posted it and exclaimed upon it for the graphics..it was the overall presentation aspect with the music, environment and the level design fitting the gameplay. PC or console it doesn't matter.

Yes, its a good video and I am not saying why are you going ga ga over it. Everyone seems to be loving the presentation and we have no idea how it would like on the consoles right now. As for the level design, even Crysis and Crysis 2 had this kindof freedom in most levels, so nothing new there.

Originally Posted by nightshade

The GI on PC isn't anywhere that nice in the first place it's very minor and only for the sun, doesn't works indoors where GI is most apparent. Battlefield 3 is far superior in that aspect and it has GI on consoles too.

Crysis 2 is the only game doing real-time GI on any platform, including PC. and it looks stellar. One of the reasons the game looks so good on the PC. Yes, its only for the sunlight but it makes a difference. I hope they have got it working on the consoles this time around. Crysis 2 was just their first game on consoles ever.

BF3 has baked GI which accommodates for destructibility too and it is the same on the consoles. What Frostbite 2 does is a combo of realtime calculation on prebaked GI. Their solution is better cos it works on present hardware easily, unlike Crytek which advertised it everywhere only to remove it from the console versions.

I guess, Crytek was expecting the next-gen too soon.

[ultragpu]

Originally Posted by Acert93

What hardware was the current Crysis 3 demo running on?

And what hardware were the gameplay footage of UE4 ... opps, none as it wasn't gameplay. What hardware was the gameplay footage of AP running on ... opps, none as it wasn't gameplay. What hardware was the SW1313 gameplay shown on? See comments above.

If we are comparing engine tech shouldn't we be comparing Crysis engine stuff and not nearly 20minutes of gameplay of real-game assets? World of difference.

AFAIK they were all demoed on a single 680gtx and that's the reason why I think despite running on the same hardware, C3 wasn't nearly as impressive as the rest. Also using Gears3 vs UE3's initial demo, it's probably not that farfetched to say the actual games using UE4 or Agni would look mostly the same as the engine demo, maybe even better throughout the life time. We're not talking about Nvidia New Dawn demo which it takes sli 670gtx to reach 30fps+, UE4 and Agni are actually quite representative to the upcoming nextgen games according to the devs themselves.

[Billy Idol]

Originally Posted by ultragpu

AFAIK they were all demoed on a single 680gtx and that's the reason why I think despite running on the same hardware, C2 wasn't nearly as impressive as the rest. Also using Gears3 vs UE3's initial demo, it's probably not that farfetched to say the actual games using UE4 or Agni would look mostly the same as the engine demo, maybe even better throughout the life time. We're not talking about Nvidia New Dawn demo which it takes sli 670gtx to reach 30fps+, UE4 and Agni are actually quite representative to the upcoming nextgen games according to the devs themselves.

But I think you really cannot compare those two. C3 is an actual game, showing actual gameplay of a game shipping in near future. The gameplay sequence showed a rather big area with lots of paths and ways of playing through the section and interaction, whereas the demos are just demos, nothing more.

Furthermore, C3 is a multiplatform release, as pointed out by L.Scofield, console definitively hold back the whole graphic fidelity...

I would be happy, if next gen graphics have anything to do with C3 on ultra settings at 1080p60Hz with proper AA

[nightshade]

Originally Posted by RenegadeRocks

BF3 has baked GI which accommodates for destructibility too and it is the same on the consoles. What Frostbite 2 does is a combo of realtime calculation on prebaked GI. Their solution is better cos it works on present hardware easily, unlike Crytek which advertised it everywhere only to remove it from the console versions.

I guess, Crytek was expecting the next-gen too soon.

You see this is what I don't understand if it's baked GI BUT can accommodate to changing light conditions (due to destruction or flashing/changing lights) then what's the advantage of going realtime in the first place? The only advantage real time GI has over baked is that it's not static and it doesn't takes time to generate unlike baked GI ala Uncharted or lightmass in UE3 (Where it's so easily obvious that it's baked whenever something changes).

[RenegadeRocks]

Realtime GI is the holy grail of lighting !Being a CG lighting artist for 10 years, I have been dreaming of it ever since Stalker tried it in Shadow of Chernobyl . In Crysis 2 on PC, if I pick up objects throw, them around, the GI works on the fly on every frame. A car explodes and the light around it changes. Jave been tweaking settings for the GI , increasing and decreasing it, checking colour bleeds and messing around in it.
Static solutions are static solutions, GI is calculated once and baked into light maps. Its like running around in a photograph.Dynamic objects are anyways removed from these calculations as they know player might move these around.
BF3 GI doesn't do much , except for accomodating destruction. And since the destruction is canned, it simply means they have different set of light maps for broken and vanilla objects, thats all. And it doesn't accomodate for flashing or moving lights in any case. As for Spherical Harmonics, KZ also uses it for characters. But , as close as they may come in creating an illusion of real light, nothing can beat a light calculated every frame !

Anyways, I wasn't making a case for realtime GI. Crytek has it implemented, we just have to wait for new hardware, I guess.

[L. Scofield]

The problems with CryEngine 3's realtime GI implementation are that it is calculated only for the sunlight, it's very low frequency and there's no secondary occlusion support (it was shown in one of their tech videos but it's not part of the game nor are the glossy reflections AFAIK). Thankfully the HDR lightprobes pickup the slack. Just place one in the environment, press a button and you get instant image-based lighting

[assurdum]

Originally Posted by kagemaru

According to the producer, they can't do anything more with these consoles.

I hope it means this time they have learned to use the whole ram for the graphic in the ps3 version.... Because a single pool not sound exactly like a maximization to me imho....

[L. Scofield]

Crysis 3 - CryEngine 3 Tech Trailer


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWvgETOo5ek&hd=1

Who knows how much of that will be present in the console version (tessellation being the obvious NO), but damn, it looks amazing.

[Rangers]

I wouldn't expect the current gen console version to look much different than Crysis 2...considering the huge framerate problems it had, any optimization would seemingly go there first.

Now if you're referring to next gen version...

[nightshade]

Wow !!

[RenegadeRocks]

Originally Posted by L. Scofield

Crysis 3 - CryEngine 3 Tech Trailer


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWvgETOo5ek&hd=1

Who knows how much of that will be present in the console version (tessellation being the obvious NO), but damn, it looks amazing.

Who needs the render button anymore !!! I had to rub my eyes on the water caustics !!!

I think I can hear my PC croaking already !

[ultragpu]

Something about the environment looked too blurry compared to the bullshots they have released, maybe too much fog or strong LOD? But the toad, the toad looked insanely real.

[milk]

Now they better have a shitload of toads in this game!

[CNCAddict]

description of what you see in the trailer
http://www.cgrecord.net/2012/08/crye...h-trailer.html

[DieH@rd]

PADM is extremely impressive, hopefully it will not be taxing on the hardware.

[CNCAddict]

Hmm, I wonder what is 3rd generation about the GI solution? Anybody have an idea?

[RenegadeRocks]

Its still single bounce thats for sure. I didn't get the 3rd gen comment either. Crysis2 and now Crysis 3, they can call it 2nd gen if they want !

[Ike Turner]

Originally Posted by RenegadeRocks

Its still single bounce thats for sure. I didn't get the 3rd gen comment either. Crysis2 and now Crysis 3, they can call it 2nd gen if they want !

The new addition is Glossy Reflections which couldn't be enabled before.

[Ruskie]

Huh...where did they get these screens? (and no, they aren't from E3 or interactive trailer).

http://www.xboxygen.com/Medias/Image...images-in-game

[Rangers]

Dunno but, Crysis 3 worst looking game of the gen already confirmed. Crysis 2 all over again.

Is that supposed to be Xbox version?

[Ruskie]

Thats a joke, right? I mean, you can't possibly determine visuals by screencaps from low res video.
I dunno...Its played with controller.

[Rangers]

Originally Posted by Ruskie

Thats a joke, right? I mean, you can't possibly determine visuals by screencaps from low res video.
I dunno...Its played with controller.

Yeh, a joke. Partly from people doing that about Crysis 2.

That SuperDae twerp has been making noises on his twitter about having Crysis 3, maybe it really is out there though. Or like, a level of it more likely.