• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

2012 High-Res PC Screenshot Thread of Don't Use Imgur

Dewoh

Neo Member
JC2 is stunning.

Which is why FC3 is disappointing. At least so far. My copy unlocks tomorrow, so I'll see for myself soon.
 

Hzoltan69

Member
So your point is that Crysis (@max) looks better (/equal) than Far Cry 3 (@max meaning dx11) while it has about the same performance problems.
You do realize that this is 5 years after crysis has come out and we still have not surpased it in a open world setting?

This is why people are "underwhelmed".

Because Locations in Crysis (1) are so big that there is not much difference in how those graphics have to be streamed id say.

While I don't think that is entirely true, the step up in graphics should definitely be more significant.

It saddens me greatly how much the whole industry has been hurt (technology-wise) by the current console generation staying on way longer than it should have.
 

JAY the BIRD

Neo Member
JC2 is stunning.

Which is why FC3 is disappointing. At least so far. My copy unlocks tomorrow, so I'll see for myself soon.

I think graphically speaking, FC3 looks pretty damn good.

It's just something about the color palette. After playing Absolution, which has some of the best post processing work this side of Witcher 2, the colors in FC3 just look... down right cartoonist.

I know everyone hates on the whole next gen brown, and granted FC2 was a little TOO brown, I still think a middle ground could be found and enjoyed.

Contribution:
ibzJ3LXl9dvNol.jpg
 

Corky

Nine out of ten orphans can't tell the difference.
I'll wait for DX11 FC3 shots before making any judgements.

Something tells me given the vast sprawling open world nature of the game the dx11 effects won't make a huge difference, visually that is. Also whoever said FC3 looks like FC2 without that brownfilter I'll be inclined to agree with. Oh well I'll get to judge for myself in 12h.
 

Corky

Nine out of ten orphans can't tell the difference.
I'm sorry but the game doesn't look that hot. It's like Crysis 1 on Medium / Low settings.

Low would be a stretch but I think crysis 1 on medium and up would rival fc3 ( from what I've seen ) everything else equal ( aa, resolution, etc )
 

FACE

Banned
Based on some of the draw distance and effects I've seen, that's not even too far off. Remember, you can set everything individually so a mix of Low / Medium.

It's definitely not a game that a GTX 680 should be having problems maxing out.
 

Alexios

Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
FC3 looks great, way more polished/consistent/less janky than vanilla Crysis imo.

Clearly a little bit stylized rather than attempting photorealism of course.
 

Alexios

Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
Crysis 1 was janky?
Well, I consider things like the super close range pop in jank (not that I could run the game on max settings well, but I did test it to see how it looks, and it didn't fix that). I'd rather turn detail objects off than have them pop in 10ft ahead to make pretty screenshots. Suit controls and what not could have been smoother too, C2 took it to the right direction in some ways (wrong in others). It's way inconsistent in texture and object quality at times. AI and physics weirdness. Flying frogs. Not great loading points. There were probably more messy things about it that I don't remember by now either.

I think you have no idea what are you saying.
I think you have no idea what you are saying.
Crysis 1 is the closest to photorealism as you can get since 2007.
I dunno about that, I didn't dispute that and I couldn't care less about that.
 

RedSwirl

Junior Member
Considering Far Cry 3 is a port of a console game, I'd say it looks pretty damn impressive.

- Enters High-Res PC screenshot thread.
- Argument about Mass Effect "shoot bang" and corridors.

Like I said in the other thread, it's a running joke.

Because the game still calls itself an RPG, and was still made by an RPG developer. I dunno, I just think BioWare should do what they're good at.
 
TO ANYONE WITH FARCRY 3!

Would you be so kind as to post a comparison of the game with ambient occlusion on and off? It seems like the effect is really exaggerated and I would love to see what this game looks like with it turned off. Much appreciated ;)
 

iNvid02

Member
TO ANYONE WITH FARCRY 3!

Would you be so kind as to post a comparison of the game with ambient occlusion on and off? It seems like the effect is really exaggerated and I would love to see what this game looks like with it turned off. Much appreciated ;)

i think kylen already did - see the game's pc performance thread
 

Nekrono

Member
To the people thinking Far Cry 3 looks like Crysis 1 on low/medium... let me remind you how the game actually looks:

Medium:

i6hIqUkyJYR85.jpg


Low:

iXP8uKJ4xLOXx.jpg


Bonus shot with HP's Ultra High Quality Custom Config V1.3

Mind you those are downsampled from 1440p, without downsampling they look worse.

I'm not trying to pick on anyone but to say FC3 looks like Crysis on low or even medium is indeed a bit of an exaggeration and this is coming from someone who absolutely loves Crysis 1 to death.

Far Cry 3 looks pretty good, at least downsampled. Sure it may not be as impressive as some other games but at least it seems to have a very clean look to it(judging from KyleN shots) and the game actually looks interesting.
 

Sethos

Banned
Add some DoF, some grass shadows and hey presto, that medium shot is FC3. Basically just the shader.

It's quite funny actually.
 
Add some DoF, some grass shadows and hey presto, that medium shot is FC3. Basically just the shader.

It's quite funny actually.
I think you're insane.

The aliasing in Crysis medium is awful, the lighting is completely flat, the grass itself looks completely inferior even beyond the grass shadows (notice how they're all sticking out at random directions), no AO whatsoever, everything at medium-distance out is a blurry mess... it's not even a fair comparison. Even the ultra-high shot only looks comparable, I wouldn't ever say it looks 'better' (again, dat grass).
 

Sethos

Banned
I think you're insane.

The aliasing in Crysis medium is awful, the lighting is completely flat, the grass itself looks completely inferior even beyond the grass shadows (notice how they're all sticking out at random directions), no AO whatsoever, everything at medium-distance out is a blurry mess... it's not even a fair comparison. Even the ultra-high shot only looks comparable, I wouldn't ever say it looks 'better' (again, dat grass).

I think you are the last person in the world to start lecturing me on IQ.

But people really don't have an imagnation whatsoever apparently. If you can't look at the two images, of a game released in 2012 and one in 2007, where the 2007 shares lots of identical traits on its medium settings with the 2012 game maxed out. Yes, it's a half-way joke but that's still on MEDIUM. There's a few more steps upwards.

No they aren't twin identical, like comparisons people do all the time but they are in the same courthyard and you'd have to want to defend a game pretty badly if you can't look at the comparison and go "Ha, okay sure, with some effects here and there they do look kinda similar".
 
Sorry, not seeing it.

They look pretty damn similar in setting, for sure. That goes without saying. But Crysis Medium makes so many compromises I feel like it's disingenuous to suggest FC3 looks like it plus a few bells and whistles.

Okay, to make the Crysis shot look like FC3, you would need to add:
- Better grass
- Better LOD quality at distances greater than 0
- Harsher lighting / better tone-mapping
- HBAO
- Custom MSAA (it works on the trees!)
- A more saturated color palette

And THEN they would look identical. But that is a pretty big list.
 
Top Bottom