*Confirmed* Original Crysis Bound for *PS360

1:05 ontop of cliffs yes. If most of the outer region playarea is like that they will save tons of rendering becouse in Crysis PC even offline playarea vegetation was same as ingame area. Actually to such degree it was a WTF question when playing with maps in editor.

 

Yes it's really a direct feed screenshot of the x360 version. While that particular screenshot looks very good, there are others that are less flattering.

 

Thank you very much.
It really looks impressive in some screenshots,I must buy this game, fast.

 

That shot looks great but on PC I recall that particular scene being a "holy F*ck!!" moment (it's just before the cut scene on the first level). The POM in that particular scene is even better in the PC version. At least if my memory serves me correctly.

 

Interesting, the gap is much bigger than I orginally thought. Still, it's a very impressive job they've done with the console version. Certainly better than most of us expected would be possible.

I'm curious to hear console gamers impressions of the gameplay who are playing for the first time. Good game or glorified tech demo?

 

This is months after Crytek's very first 360 release (and a budget port at that). Imagine if they were as experienced as Bungie, or Epic, or even just on their second generation of 360 games.

For the next gen of consoles Crytek will be onboard from day one, and they'll really be able to challenge the top dogs. This bodes well for console development, PC development, and basically multiplatform games in general.

 

I'm curious how Ryse will look like.

 

To me, Crysis on 360 is more impressive than what Bungie or Epic ever done on that console. They have privilege of developing solely for one consoles so it can look better, run better and be more polished, but in the end they only look more polished, not better certainly. Very interested in Ryse, they have some serious programmers it seems.

 

Look at the overcontrasted lighting, the blurry textures and the low quality foliage. This is almost certainly a console shot.

 

So I finally bought the 360 version.

The textures really aren't that bad. It's no worse than Medium and the terrain textures all seem to be around the same level as High/Very High. Some of the new rock textures are even higher res than the original.

Overall, I'm pretty impressed. It's similar to Medium settings in regards to object quality/draw distance but with HDR, SSAO, colourgrading, sunshafts, OBM, high quality shaders, better textures, etc. It looks and runs better than Crysis does on my ATI Mobility 5650 (Medium settings + HDR and colourgrading). The best thing for me, though, is that they've kept the sandbox gameplay intact. I didn't think they'd manage to fit the huge levels, but even with that, the loading times are actually far shorter than they are on my PC.

On the other hand, the vegetation cutbacks can be very severe. It makes the game look more sterile than the original. This probably sounds stupid but there might be even less than Far Cry.

Almost hard to believe that it once looked like this:

 

Yeah it does. Maybe I'm wrong.. wouldn't be the first time

 

some PS3 screens

http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/7132/avermediacenter20111005.jpg
http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/7132/avermediacenter20111005.jpg
http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/7132/avermediacenter20111005.jpg
http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/7132/avermediacenter20111005.jpg
http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/7132/avermediacenter20111005.jpg
http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/7132/avermediacenter20111005.jpg

source : http://forums.gametrailers.com/thread/--it-only-does-screenshots-gif/1221872?page=27

 

I've only played in about 15 minute sessions a few times so not far in, but so far the actual game is surprisingly good.

I beat it on PC but I dont remember specific battles much anyway. On controller (I'm not much for PC controls) I feel like the game is finally opening up to be that sandbox everybody always talks about it being in a way the PC version never did for me. It feels like you really use your suit powers to be a badass and wreak carnage. It feel great to walk into an enemy camp cloaked with a shotgun, decloak and wipe out 3 guys from inside the camp.

Game is old school hard too. Which I really like. 2-3 enemies can actually kill you dead if you're not careful. A lot about the game kind of feels old school but in a good way. The checkpoints seems spaced fairly far apart for nowdays as well adding to the pleasant difficulty.

One thing I noticed is armor mode does not seem nearly as effective as in Crysis 2. Seems like a good burst or two can knock it all the way down.

Overall it looks great too. It has a different look than the PC versions too, very bright/bloomy. It definitely is not up to PC high settings but looks great in it's own right which for me always helps a game be more enjoyable. So far I give the nod to Crysis 2 for having better visuals but it's very high end.

Oh but apparently the achievements are borked? Boo Crytek, real reputation for bugs over there at this point...I only have one achievement, I'm not sure if it added to my gamerscore, but the game itself shows 0/1000 points...

 

Grabbed the PS3 version last night but I have yet to give it a go. I've got a number of games in a holding pattern on my HD now (From Dust, Dead Nation DLC), and I've only just started Rage. But in a strange way I am looking forward to getting stuck in, I kind of fell out with the PC version!!

 

No , they work just fine now .. there was a broblem at the beginning but they solved it .

 

Moi?

 

???? How could you think CE2 was optimized? It's been proven the engine is way too draw call heavy, amongst other things...

 

Maybe because it's still one of the best looking games you can play today on PC, and performs not too badly against recent shooters on todays hardware? Obviously it has the drawbacks of being largely DX9 technology, and the first to implement a bunch of techniques that have enjoyed years of improvement and optimisation.

Take a fresh look and compare the visuals, interactivity, scope and performance to todays games on todays hardware. It wouldn't look out of place being released today, never mind 4 years ago. Obviously benefitting from 4 years of extra time optimising. Personally I'm glad to have played it back in 2007.

 

I for one was quite impressed by the game in DX9, all high settings at 720p, on an Asus G52 gaming laptop with Vista 64, 2.2 GHz Core 2 Duo, 4 GB DDR2-800, and Geforce 9800M 512 MB (underclocked desktop G94/9600 GT) and still got about 25-30 FPS average. I think by PC standards, it was pretty decently optimized, still looked better than anything else on any platform (and this was early 2009 when I had first had the laptop). What is funny is that Call of Duty 4 wasn't too FPS keen on that hardware unless I OC'd the hell out of the CPU even at 720p. I think the CoD engine since 4 (and coincidentally all others after) are clock speed dependent, not architecture dependent. NOW THAT is bad optimization. When all the 3.0 GHz Athlons I've owned on different OSs, have had no problem running CoD4 60 FPS flat out and on weaker GPUs, and a Core 2 Duo has an issue, it makes me go hmmm That Core 2 Duo in my laptop ran Crysis better than those Athlons did, even in WinXP.

 

Becouse it pulled far more at better framerates than pretty much any other PC game engine. Goes to say other devs had even shittier optimisations. My wallet is closed.