I just made that, because I was tired of those comparisons, where they take the worst things from C2 vs. the best things from C1, wich aren't even close to equal!

Enjoy, and comment!

PS: My personal thoughts are in the video description!

EDIT:
For you "In C2 nothing can be destroyed!!!1!!!one" - idiots:

Incredibly biased.

I didn't say "Crysis 2/ Crysis 1 has Ultra graphix + maximum performance ftw!!!". What I wanted to say, is that Crytek didn't only "dump down" the graphics to let the consoles hold it. They also improved things. At the overall quality, both are equal, with both having negatives and positives, but of course, when I want to get slammed by the graphics-bat, I'll play Crysis 1.

Incredibly biased.

No, it's not at all. It shows very well what Crysis 2 exceeds in or is the same as Crysis 1. The description even points out certain things Crysis 1 is better at (like textures for example) and explains what is the same in Crysis 2 and has an explanation for why something in Crysis 2 is better than in Crysis 1.

This is a good comparison, hope this thread doesnt die

Would be nice, if someone could tell me how to embed this...

Good comparison.
But IMO, the only thing C2 does better than C1 is explosion particles. It looks like fireworks show, clearly much better than C1.
But C1 is better in everything else: textures, AI, physics, level designs ...

I wanted to make a video just like this but you beat me to it XD

Incredibly biased.

No, it's not at all. It shows very well what Crysis 2 exceeds in or is the same as Crysis 1. The description even points out certain things Crysis 1 is better at (like textures for example) and explains what is the same in Crysis 2 and has an explanation for why something in Crysis 2 is better than in Crysis 1.

If you cant see why its biased you need some lessons on language.

Incredibly biased.

No, it's not at all. It shows very well what Crysis 2 exceeds in or is the same as Crysis 1. The description even points out certain things Crysis 1 is better at (like textures for example) and explains what is the same in Crysis 2 and has an explanation for why something in Crysis 2 is better than in Crysis 1.

If you cant see why its biased you need some lessons on language.
Instead of giving such Smart-Ass comments you should give reasonable answers.

Why do you think it's biased.

Good comparison.
But IMO, the only thing C2 does better than C1 is explosion particles. It looks like fireworks show, clearly much better than C1.
But C1 is better in everything else: textures, AI, physics, level designs ...
Nah... The Level Design of Crysis 1 was repetetive. Many houses, plants and Props are Reused very often. Maybe Crysis 2 DOS that, too, but it's less obvious. But when it comes to Placement etc. They are equal.

Why do you think it's biased.

Because it doesn't favor C1, I'm guessing. Yawn.

By the way, I'm seeing a lot of things here that the console versions of C2 don't do, if it's any consolation to the PC gamers that feel like the engine's been neutered to run on consoles. You're clearly still getting the superior-looking game and I'm pretty danged jealous right now.

Crytek had 2 choices for consoles .

Give C2 the freedom of C1 , but make it look like Half-life 1 .
Give C2 the graphics of C1 , but make it more linear then a straight line .

sadly , PC had to follow .

Good comparison.
But IMO, the only thing C2 does better than C1 is explosion particles. It looks like fireworks show, clearly much better than C1.
But C1 is better in everything else: textures, AI, physics, level designs ...
Nah... The Level Design of Crysis 1 was repetetive. Many houses, plants and Props are Reused very often. Maybe Crysis 2 DOS that, too, but it's less obvious. But when it comes to Placement etc. They are equal.

I mean the levels of C1 were much bigger than C2's.

If by bigger you mean a bigger surrounding area full of the same old trees, then yeah, you could say that. The essential parts to C1's level design were incredibly tiny when you actually think about it.

IMO, crysis have the story on an island, where its surrounded by trees and plants and mountains. you can CLEARLY seen more repeated textures. on crysis 2, there are buildings that looks different from each other, the contain of items are also more. what do you see alot in C1? plants, trees, house, anything that can repeat on an island. C2 have more items from cars to building to rubbles and others things that a city would included. in summary, C1 may have better texture, but in small amount since an island doesnt have much to put in. C2 may have lower texture but have more contains. C2 you can actually use items ingame like printer and monitor even its just on and off. C1 doesnt have something like that. both game have flaw and good, just because C2 is not released in dx11 and its buggy doesnt mean you can biased it to the worse game. look at the game in more variety, not just graphics and AI.

Would be nice, if someone could tell me how to embed this...

Click the youtube button when you get to the edit screen. Then, in between the two bracketed parts, past the part of the link that comes AFTER the v=

for your video, that would be this portion of the link:

0AzUCbRCvB8&feature=youtube_gdata

I have noticed Crysis 2 has better lighting, which goes a long way in making C2 look more realistic than C1. Also, the character models in Crysis 2 are more realistic looking than in Crysis 1. Just look at a marine in the first game. They look a bit cartoonish in comparison to the marines in Crysis 2.

Everytime I hear people say that they think Crysis 1 looks more realistic than Crysis 2, all they can point to is that textures in Crysis 2 are a lower resolution. And sadly, these are the people who "can't see the forest for the trees" as the saying goes. They are so obsessed with picking apart tiny little details that they don't see the bigger picture, and the bigger picture is gorgeous.

You know I haven't played the original crysis, but from watching all the gameplay videos It doesn't seem nearly as interesting as the Crysis 2. I'd rather be in a city with my printers and computer screens, then the desolate island paradise with shanty houses and outhouses.

I'm beginning to tire of all the "Crysis 1 has better graphics because the texture resolution and polygon count is higher" argument.

Does anyone remember when Normal Mapping came out? I think that was one of the staples of FEAR back in the day. It allowed for detailed objects using less polygons. The result? Something could be rendered with less polygons and still look great, which helped performance IMMENSELY.

Maybe Crytek stepped back and thought "Hmmm, instead of using the brutal method of making everyone's PC render insanely high-res textures and piling on a ridiculous polygon count, maybe we can scale it back and use a few tricks that will only have a MINOR effect on the graphical quality as a whole, but ensure Crysis 2 runs beautifully on a wider range of systems."

And, even with that scaling back, the game still looks pretty damn good. Show me a game that is currently out (minus C1) that significantly tops C2 graphically.

You want to know where most of this hate is honestly coming from? Expectations. People expected another game that won't be playable on mainstream systems until years later just so they can justify their quad SLI setup. Because of this, they aren't taking things at face value. Maybe Crytek wasn't going for bleeding edge tech, but pushing the limits of scalability. That's an impressive feat in and of itself.

All in all, I'm tired of people saying this game looks bad. Compare it to a plethora of other PC titles and you'll quickly see that they only took a baby step back from C1 for the sake of scalability. That also means, if C1 is clearly still the best looking game to date, and C2 isn't far off, doesn't that mean that C2 is still graphically superior to everything but its big brother?

cry1 wins of course.

A brilliant comparison. I like how the fanboys are screaming bias because they can blatantly see that in most aspects C2 does it better.

Why do you think it's biased.

Because it doesn't favor C1, I'm guessing. Yawn.

The video does favor Crysis 1 though. Learn to read?

From the starters comparison-
4/9 points for Crysis
2/9 points are a tie <- This includes destructibles which the OP thinks are the same in both games lmao
3/9 points for Crysis 2

Crysis 1 is the better looking game and only console players or people with extremely low end computers will claim otherwise.

Why is it biased? Every time Crysis 1 wins a point, in the OPs opinion, it follows on with "WELL CRYIS 2 BLABLA NOT SO BAD EITHER"

Oh and destructibles are a draw? Dont make me laugh. That alone wrecks any credibility the OP has. I would be surprised if hes even played Crysis after claiming that.

Then there is the part where he thinks Crysis 2 water > Crysis 1 water... hilarity ensues.

And whoever posted that Crysis 2 has better lighting, you need to grow some eyeballs and learn to use them because Crysis 1 DESTROYS Crysis 2 for lighting. Crysis 2 doesnt even have a day/night cycle.

Water, lighting and destructibles are three fields where Crysis 1 has the biggest edge over Crysis 2 and yet you blind douches are here saying Crysis 2 bests in all of them? LOL.

But anyways.. if you add any grfxmods to Crysis 1.. Crysis 2 looses big time.. and according to all the time between the two games Crysis 1 is still better in a few technical aspects. So point goes for a 4 year old game holding up to a 2011 released game.

Destructible is a draw, because there are for example more stone and concrete things you can break in Crysis 2. For Example the Central station Level, or Terminal. After about 2 minutes the pinger destroyed almost everything. Of course, C1 has more trees, wooden houses, other things out of woods, wooden people to be breakable, but that's it! But it surely scores with the amount of destructibles.

About the water, it looks nicer in Crysis 1, but is more dynamic in Crysis 2. That's what I wrote.

Lightning... Look, when we see the foliage reacting to the lightning in C1, and then in C2, the lightning in C2 surely looks better. Then Crysis 2 has lense flares and other nice lightning effects wich just looks good. The only thing are the sunshafts. There has C1 a better quality.

Oh, and btw. Crysis 2 has a goddamn day/night circle. Not a full, but Crysis 1 hadn't one either! First Level (both games) you start in the early morning. You go a bit, enter an area (in C1, where the trees are on that small hill, and in C2, when you entered the decon area, and opened the gate) it is around midday. In the second chapter of C2, there is one time of day change either.

I was never to show off that Crysis 2 looks better (hell no, just read and understand me!), but to show, that Crysis 2 doesn't only has "dumped down" graphics.

But anyways.. if you add any grfxmods to Crysis 1.. Crysis 2 looses big time.. and according to all the time between the two games Crysis 1 is still better in a few technical aspects. So point goes for a 4 year old game holding up to a 2011 released game.
Yes, and if we could mod C2, it would be looking better then any high quality mod from C1, but appearently we can't. We have to wait 'til sommer.

At least play Crysis before you even start a comparison on destructibles. Crysis 2 has only scripted events and decals.

Crysis 2 doesnt have a day night cycle, the time of day is completely static. If you stand around in Crysis the sun moves in the sky, shadows react accordingly and eventually day becomes night. Do you honestly think having some levels set at day and some at night is a day night cycle? Hilarious.

All you are doing with this thread is making yourself look stupid.