A litlle of both,bad and good

Attachments:

File comment: Tweaked cfg and the trees look better crysis2 2011-04-12 03-48-40-68.jpg [ 160.59 KiB | Viewed 71 times ]

File comment: WTF?? crysis2 2011-04-12 03-44-22-06.jpg [ 129.46 KiB | Viewed 71 times ]

Basically, Crysis 2 uses many cheating techniques. Its lazy. Especially that texture with all the fallen bricks. Its completely flat, and reminded me of that texture from Doom 2 with all the grey, screaming faces.

Thing is, if this were a Source game, no one would care about the detail. Thing is, Crytek made a massive deal about what Cryengine 3 can do, and that Crysis 2 would show it off in a practical game environment. Crysis 2 failed to deliver on the massive promise given by Crytek, and falls quite a way short.

If you promise the world, then you'd better deliver, and they didn't. Valve haven't made a big deal over Source since 2004. After that its just been incremental, thus they delivered each time, 2005 with the introduction of HDR, 2007 with the open environments and cinematic physics and 2008 with the AI Director.

A litlle of both,bad and good
Achieved with CryEngine3
enjoy dude =D

I hope Crytek takes a great look at this thread and realizes that there promise on better looking graphics than Crysis was complete BS.

heres why none of that is there- they intend to use tessalation to take its place...rather than the illusion of such bumps, there will simply be bumps...

My theory at least