Cryengine 3 vs Cryengine 2

By Zott820
1270265980|%c|agohover

Will we ever get sick of Crysis? Yes eventually, but until that time comes I implore you to check out the video above. It has a decent analysis of what we as gamers should expect out of the upcoming Cryengine 3. If you don’t know, Cryengine 2 is the engine that runs Crysis, while Crysis Warhead had a slightly updated version, which we’ll call Cryengine 2.5. If I recall correctly, Farcry used Cryengine 1, but that’s getting off topic. Cryengine 3 then is the next iteration of this hardware eating beast.

As you may be aware, Cryengine 3 and consequently Crysis 2, are going to be compatible with home consoles. But you didn’t really think that those consoles would be able to run a game, that kills even some modern gaming computers, at anything less than 480p and keep up the graphical fidelity uncut did you? Yes? Pleeease. Therefore, as the clip shows there are some concessions to be made. Some are minor, I don’t mind the antialiasing, or lack of, while some are more major, empty hills in the distance, what is this; Flight Simulator? I also like some of the details that the video brings to our attention that I wasn’t even aware of to a large extent. I knew that Crysis had wind, but I didn’t know that weapon fire created “wind” in the sense that it displaces trees around gunshots, even if only by a little. Now that’s attention to detail that I like.

It is my home that Crytek will fix a couple of these issues present, largely the shadow refresh rate on the trees, but the others would be good too. Regardless, I appreciate all optimizations that Crytech is doing when porting the game to Consoles. I was underwhelmed with how Crysis Warhead was supposed to run better. I hope that these optimizations up the frame rate but do not take a hit to Crysis 2 on the PC version’s prowess to glorious detail. I expect that to be a benchmark for graphics for years to come.