Ok now your all probally thinkin "why is this guy talkin about Crysis 3 when Crysis 2 hasnt even been released yet?" This is why; Crysis 1 was a game to show off Cryengine 2 and it did a wonderful job of that. it had the best graphics of any game and it still has the best graphics of any game. Then a while after Crysis 2 was announced, it turned out that Crytek's main focus this time was to make a game that everyone could play which had a good storyline,multipalyer,singleplayer,and gameplay mechanics and would make consumers happy and Crytek happy from the $$ they are gunna make from it. Now dont get me wrong Crysis 2 is gunnna be AMAZING! But what im getting at is Crysis 2 graphics arent as powerful as Crysis 1. So if Crytek decides to make Crysis 3 do you want it to be like Crysis 2 where they focus on storyline and gameplay and stuff like other video games do; or would you like it to be like Crysis 1 where they intend to show off their new engine (Most likely Cryengine 4).

stupid post,no pc footage
and its freakin crytek,really think they gona build a whole new engine to just have lesser graphics

Cevet Yerli did mention that the visual gap between Cryengine 3 and 4 will be massive. Wheres Cryengine 3 was all about refining the engine Cryengine 4 will focus on raw power like Cryengine 2 did, but without requiring a NASA super computer.

I really hope CryEngine 4 uses voxel octrees as the foundation.

I did not know there is a CE4 now?

I did not know there is a CE4 now?

It's in the pre-development stages, don't expect it for a few years.

Cevet Yerli did mention that the visual gap between Cryengine 3 and 4 will be massive. Wheres Cryengine 3 was all about refining the engine Cryengine 4 will focus on raw power like Cryengine 2 did, but without requiring a NASA super computer.

I already cant wait

How about a mixture of both? ^-^

I hope that CryEngine 3 takes the best advantage possible out of DX11, and I'm guessing that the CryEngine 4 will be out for DX12? Who knows. I just hope it can really pump out some raw power and keep a managable framerate like 30fps on the top video cards (GTX 880? hehe) when Crysis 3 is released.

Cryengine 3 is more powerful and more efficient than Cryengine 2. I don't know what you're talking about.

But what im getting at is Crysis 2 graphics arent as powerful as Crysis 1. This is the basis for your entire argument but it's flawed by the fact that there has not been any media released so far that features the full power of CryENGINE3.

There was a bit of confusion over the source of the latest screenshots released. Which platform did they came from? PC?

I think they were a mix. There was one 360 and the others were PC. But honestly, the PC version hasn’t been shown off yet at all. They were rendered out of PC but at console settings. The PC settings aren’t being disclosed at all right now. We haven’t made any screenshots yet that show the PC settings.
http://www.next-gen.biz/features/crysis-2-interview?page=0%2C0

Sad truth is by the time CE4 comes out, our best computer to date will be but fossils, sad, but true, as has happened to me.....

:(

By the time the next cryEngine is out, so will be the next generation of consoles. So yeah, you can expect a massive improvement in quality. And contrary to what adam said, cryEngine 3 was actually made to work on consoles... and so will the next. Difference is, there will be new consoles by then.

But what im getting at is Crysis 2 graphics arent as powerful as Crysis 1. This is the basis for your entire argument but it's flawed by the fact that there has not been any media released so far that features the full power of CryENGINE3.

There was a bit of confusion over the source of the latest screenshots released. Which platform did they came from? PC?

I think they were a mix. There was one 360 and the others were PC. But honestly, the PC version hasn’t been shown off yet at all. They were rendered out of PC but at console settings. The PC settings aren’t being disclosed at all right now. We haven’t made any screenshots yet that show the PC settings.
http://www.next-gen.biz/features/crysis-2-interview?page=0%2C0

Then show us one PC screenshot please (with pc settings) ok?

They can't. They're busy spending microsoft's money on cookies and whores. Few days left until the demo, have some patience. Just keep ur expectations low, so that u won't be disappointed when u see the game looking just as the leak (minus the bugs ofc)

Just the question. Do you want Crysis 3 to have even better graphics, my answer is no.

Some time ago I was all about great graphics, that’s also how I came to Crysis 1 but there is one big problem with this.
You need a very powerful PC. Now I could buy a new one when Crysis 3 welcomes us but not everybody will do so, this means a smaller community and I want to see a lager community. Another thing I’m seeing (not Crysis specific but just games in general) is that they pay a lot of attention to graphics but the story gets boring and single-player games are way to short.

What I love about Crysis 1 is that is feels (movement, view) like it should. Clean and simple. Whereas those other shooters (The new Wolfenstein, COD, MOH) all have this not so good feel. But lets be honest, the story form Crysis 1 was oke but not very complex, it was not very long and playing it on delta was kinda easy. Big plus was that the open environment makes it fun to play it over and over again. Compare it to the story and length of Tomb Raider or any game that has been produced before +-2003.

Besides better graphics also results in a more crowded environment and that’s something not everybody likes even if it's maybe more realistic. A good example of the game that fall in this trap was UT but also for a shooter as Crysis this is something to look at. Tactical games should have a lot of stuff like trees and chairs and so on while other shooters should not.

Personally I hope for a long life for Crysis 2 with some expansions in stead of a Crysis 3.

If there will be a Crysis 3 I hope it will keep the same graphics and so allowing more players to play. The only requirement that should go up is the hd-space. What I’ve seen from Crysis 2 already looks amazing, and I haven't seen any DirectX 11 stuff, just some youtube vids. There is no need for better graphics if you ask me. When real-time ray-tracing will be possible then you should again look for better graphics. Now make a game that is fun to play and has a lot to offer. Singel-player and multiplayer.

Didn't read all ur message, so sry for that. I have just 1 thing to tell u: NOBODY forces u to play the game on the maximum possible settings.
Would u die if u were to play the game on the quality of the leak? It's more then fine. But having the option of even better graphics for the future, when u might have a better pc, or for now for who ever has a good pc, it's even better.

Just the question. Do you want Crysis 3 to have even better graphics, my answer is no.

Some time ago I was all about great graphics, that’s also how I came to Crysis 1 but there is one big problem with this.
You need a very powerful PC. Now I could buy a new one when Crysis 3 welcomes us but not everybody will do so, this means a smaller community and I want to see a lager community. Another thing I’m seeing (not Crysis specific but just games in general) is that they pay a lot of attention to graphics but the story gets boring and single-player games are way to short.

What I love about Crysis 1 is that is feels (movement, view) like it should. Clean and simple. Whereas those other shooters (The new Wolfenstein, COD, MOH) all have this not so good feel. But lets be honest, the story form Crysis 1 was oke but not very complex, it was not very long and playing it on delta was kinda easy. Big plus was that the open environment makes it fun to play it over and over again. Compare it to the story and length of Tomb Raider or any game that has been produced before +-2003.

Besides better graphics also results in a more crowded environment and that’s something not everybody likes even if it's maybe more realistic. A good example of the game that fall in this trap was UT but also for a shooter as Crysis this is something to look at. Tactical games should have a lot of stuff like trees and chairs and so on while other shooters should not.

Personally I hope for a long life for Crysis 2 with some expansions in stead of a Crysis 3.

If there will be a Crysis 3 I hope it will keep the same graphics and so allowing more players to play. The only requirement that should go up is the hd-space. What I’ve seen from Crysis 2 already looks amazing, and I haven't seen any DirectX 11 stuff, just some youtube vids. There is no need for better graphics if you ask me. When real-time ray-tracing will be possible then you should again look for better graphics. Now make a game that is fun to play and has a lot to offer. Singel-player and multiplayer.

There's a simple answer to your graphics problem. Go to medium/high settings, not ultra high. It'll still look perfectly fine

No that will not always work, especially not online when you want very high fps and a very big community.

If a new Crysis would have even better graphics then the lowest settings still will require higher specs then what is required for Crysis 2 with low settings. Don't forget that the mainstream uses PC's that how low-end GPU's.

And that is just one of the reasons. Better graphics also mean a lot of time go's into creating that while I personal would rather see that time go into bigger maps or a longer multiplayer and that sort of things. That is, until new graphical advantages really have something new to offer. That’s why I referred to ray-traycing. Looking back in the pas few years the only real new thing is physics.

if you cry that crysis's graphics are too much for your pc then you are selfish. I'd much rather a company attmpet to push the limits of current technology and sacrifice whatever is necessary to do so. Even if i can't play the game max for two years i dont care...because if someone doesn't do it what will i be playing instead? Cod 12? bioshock 5? Devil may cry 7?

You want community? You want super sahweeeeet maps with crap graphics and lackluster gameplay? Go play one of the vanilla games that are so super popular.

i believe crysi 2 and 3 for that matter will have the best graphics to date on top of all of these features.

No that will not always work, especially not online when you want very high fps and a very big community.

If a new Crysis would have even better graphics then the lowest settings still will require higher specs then what is required for Crysis 2 with low settings. Don't forget that the mainstream uses PC's that how low-end GPU's.

And that is just one of the reasons. Better graphics also mean a lot of time go's into creating that while I personal would rather see that time go into bigger maps or a longer multiplayer and that sort of things. That is, until new graphical advantages really have something new to offer. That’s why I referred to ray-traycing. Looking back in the pas few years the only real new thing is physics.

Its called evolution/progression dumbass. With your **** logic, a game like half life 2 would have the same engine as hl1. DERP GREAT IDEA BOSS.

If your not going to upgrade a pc every few years, then dont expect to play on maximum. Look at cry1, nobody could play on very high with 60fps when it came out. But now you can. Was that wrong of them? No, because most could play at high. Theres nothing wrong with coming out with a new engine/game that requires more power to max.

Yes gameplay blah blah blah is important and the #1 factor of a game's awesomeness, however, keeping gameplay/features consistent, would you be against better graphics? Of course you wouldnt, that would be simply illogical to turn down additional options/features just because you may or may not be able to use them.

Shut up please.

@ pears

My PC will run it since a new one is coming specially for Crysis 2 but realistic looking it is a problem. If I ask fends to buy Crysis 2 the most hearth argument is that they don't feel like upgrading there PC.

"You want community? You want super sahweeeeet maps with crap graphics and lackluster gameplay?"
Yes I want community, yes I want super sahweeeet maps. Crap graphics..? I was saying that Crysis 3 may have the same graphics as Crysis 2 so that means you consider the Crysis 2 graphics crappy? Well then we disagree on that part. And I haven't even see any DirecX 11 High Crysis 2 graphics.

lackluster gameplay.. depends on the shooter. A game like UT should indeed be lackluster while a tactical shooter should not. But then again, you think Crysis 2 is to lackluster, I don't? I just say, don't create a game only for the graphics but create it for the game and when new advantages have really something new to offer use is but don't make it hard on yourself by always wanting to have the best-looking game out there. That was fine but I would not mind if Crytek would take a graphical break with the next game (or first create some expansions).

@ pears

My PC will run it since a new one is coming specially for Crysis 2 but realistic looking it is a problem. If I ask fends to buy Crysis 2 the most hearth argument is that they don't feel like upgrading there PC.

"You want community? You want super sahweeeeet maps with crap graphics and lackluster gameplay?"
Yes I want community, yes I want super sahweeeet maps. Crap graphics..? I was saying that Crysis 3 may have the same graphics as Crysis 2 so that means you consider the Crysis 2 graphics crappy? Well then we disagree on that part. And I haven't even see any DirecX 11 High Crysis 2 graphics.

lackluster gameplay.. depends on the shooter. A game like UT should indeed be lackluster while a tactical shooter should not. But then again, you think Crysis 2 is to lackluster, I don't? I just say, don't create a game only for the graphics but create it for the game and when new advantages have really something new to offer use is but don't make it hard on yourself by always wanting to have the best-looking game out there. That was fine but I would not mind if Crytek would take a graphical break with the next game (or first create some expansions).

They already took a graphical break with crysis 2 dude. Its BARELY better than crysis 1. So i dont know why you keep saying 'crytek should do...' when they are doing it now.

It will take 3-5 years to see crysis 3. The average upgrade time for PCs is about 3-5 years. If you dont upgrade within those timeframes, then do you really expect to play new games?

Crysis 2 looks pretty nice so far, but keep in mind its a lot different than crysis 1, where in cry1 a lot of power was used due to the view distance of the jungle, whereas crysis 2 has a lot smaller area in which is being rendered. Therefore, crysis 2 can focus on using cpu/gpu power on other things. The excuse of 'omg why did crytek release such an awesome game that nobody can run!' does not apply to crysis 2. So if your friends cant run it at all, they should be upgrading, not complaining. A 1.5K investment every 5 years is not too much to ask if you are getting a large amount of enjoyment and use out of your PC.

The point is, even great looking games (crysis 2) become outdated. When the hl2/source engine came out, it was all the craze. But now, its looking a bit outdated with what it can do. As great as the graphics are in crysis, its not perfect. As photorealistic as it may look, its not. There is still a ways to go. Computers these days can run crysis 1/2 on highest settings and resolutions no problem. Do you think crytek wants to release crysis 3 with an old engine that in 5 years time will likely be below average or average in terms of visual quality? Of course they dont, they pride themselves on pushing boundaries in terms of graphics. All video game developers who build their own engines do it with the future in mind. It takes a lot of time, and when its done, you cant have it looking like a pile of crap compared to your competitors.

Also, if you want an expansive multiplayer experience with community etc, you should be hoping for mod tools/sandbox editor. That is what makes or breaks games in the long term.

@ zergrush

I started with saying that I didn’t see Crysis 2 yet so I can't say they did or did not take a break now. Seems like I’m the only one here who has not yet seen Crysis 2 in full glory. I also started with telling that I was all about graphics and I so ended up with Crysis but I just want to be realistic. Am I the only person hearing people complain about games becoming less fun because it seems graphics are the only important factor anymore?

Just for the record. I have it about games in general. If I didn’t like Crysis I would not be here or have per-orderd it. I just don't want Crysis to fall in the same trap as most game-companies did.

@ zergrush

I started with saying that I didn’t see Crysis 2 yet so I can't say they did or did not take a break now. Seems like I’m the only one here who has not yet seen Crysis 2 in full glory. I also started with telling that I was all about graphics and I so ended up with Crysis but I just want to be realistic. Am I the only person hearing people complain about games becoming less fun because it seems graphics are the only important factor anymore?

Just for the record. I have it about games in general. If I didn’t like Crysis I would not be here or have per-orderd it. I just don't want Crysis to fall in the same trap as most game-companies did.

I have no downloaded the leaked copy or anything, but have looked at a few videos just to look at the quality of the visuals. I am still waiting on getting the PC demo (which i hope has every setting avaliable to us) to judge the graphics, but i would say they are par with crysis 1 thusfar.

I agree many games these days are about graphics and not about gameplay. But i dont think thats the case with crytek games. While the gameplay may not be what most/some want in crysis 2, i dont think they are sacrificing gameplay for graphics, but rather taking the gameplay in a new direction (which may or may not be a bad thing, who knows).

I hope crysis doesnt fall into the same trap too. But if they do fall into a trap it will be the catering to the 'popular' console gameplay and not releasing sandbox editor to PCs. Those are the factors that will decide the success of crysis 2 imo.

As far as i can tell for me i am in Computer gaming since 1990, and so there is maybe some other viewpoint:
My opinion once also was gfx is not as important as gameplay, story etc.
But now in retrospection: Yeah gfx do mater they have the same importance like all the others.
I nowadays wont play Starcraft Broodwar anymore, cuz it gives me eye-cancer.
And also if you think: GFX now is enough! I will say: No!
There is so many still to do.
The most realism till now is achieved with lookalike effects - even in cryengine 3, for example the bitmaps for light at windows:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhZG7SjX1Lg here u will see that the look of the light from the main-window at the floor or wall dosent match with the windows silhouette.
Not that i will complain. But that is just to show that there is so many more to do if we want real looking worlds. And that we need so much more CPU/GPU power therefor. I am sick of ugly pc-generated-hands grabbing things - a real hand deforms!
Then there is physics.
So as conclusion: I want to say:
We need way more CPU/GPU power. And i am really happy over every engine thats not afraid to demand more. Cuz we dont are far enough to stop development! We shall not be satisfied with what we got!