Far Cry 2 vs Crysis(Visualy)

[jedi940]

Most of this is subjective. Since one game is jungle and one is desert, it makes it more difficult. What I looked at were the things that are in both games. Facial expressions, mouth movement with talking etc. Another thing I like to look at is grip. How characters pick up and handle objects (are they actually holding it or does it look like it would fall right out of their hands). Grass detail and movement.

As far as these things go, I think Crysis has better character animation in the face and the detail level is much better. As far as grip, I think Far Cry 2 looks better. Characters seem to have a much better handle on their guns and papers (although there is still some to be desired). Grass and foilage looked better in crysis. I think there was better independent movement there however, I was impressed with the way trees in Far Cry 2 swayed with the wind. I thought that movement was excellent if you looked at the tree on the whole.

 

[stemnin]

If Crysis were a 10. i'd give FC2 a 9.5+. It looks great, I just don't like the look of the water, and everything feels too brown (not enought colors).

 

[speedbird]

I do like the fact that in Far Cry 2 the frame rate is more steady than in Crysis. I found that in Crysis FPS would be really good, then turn into a slide show especially on the ship at the end.

 

[dagger]

I do like the fact that in Far Cry 2 the frame rate is more steady than in Crysis. I found that in Crysis FPS would be really good, then turn into a slide show especially on the ship at the end.

That's because of the intensive effects (ice, particles, etc). Far Cry 2 is a console port, with far inferior graphics, so it's natural for mediocre systems to run it better. By that logic, you can say the original Half Life is better because it runs the best. 😛

 

[deadone08]

Farcry 2 looks excelent but visualy it is just a little behind crysis.

Having that said farcry 2 runs much better even tho it's a huge world compared to crysis with it's smaller levels.

Aside of that fc2 beats the crap out of crysis. Shows you once again that gameplay>graphics.

 

[dagger]

Farcry 2 looks excelent but visualy it is just a little behind crysis.

Having that said farcry 2 runs much better even tho it's a huge world compared to crysis with it's smaller levels.

Aside of that fc2 beats the crap out of crysis. Shows you once again that gameplay>graphics.

Far Cry 2 would be better named as Far Drive.
Not to mention you can't see where people are shooting from. It's just tedious and frustrating, compared to the fast paced action of Crysis Warhead.

 

[speedbird]

That's because of the intensive effects (ice, particles, etc). Far Cry 2 is a console port, with far inferior graphics

I wasn't disputing the fact of Crysis having better visuals, but it was a badly optimized game.I thought Crysis and Crysis Warhead were awesome games BTW. Far Cry 2 cannot compete with Crysis Visually, but I must say it still looks very good considering it was primarily designed with Console hardware in mind.

 

[brendano257]

Personally I've liked FC2 a lot more than Crysis, it may have less color, but it's the African Jungle vs. a lush tropical island, there's a difference you know. Far Cry 2 should be compared to Crysis, not Warhead, because Warhead was when they realized you can't run Crysis at res. higher than 1280X1024 on high w/o a card above an 8800GT, or dual cards. Far Cry 2 is Ubisoft's first try, and Crysis was the first try for Crytek.

I like FC2 a lot more for the open world, and all the environment and it's realism obviously blows away nano suit land. Also when you look at characters keep in mind that Crysis was Window's crown achievement to flaunt with DX10 so they probably had an influence on the making of it, people being something everyone can relate to would make them a prime example of DX10 graphics.

 

[Guest]

I just finished playing FC2 and Warhead. Yes, we're talking about two very different games. But Crysis/Crysis Warhead were a far more enjoyable experience. Far more; full stop.

Visually, Crysis and Warhead generally outperforms Far Cry 2, but Far Cry 2 is very very very beautiful game anyway; and some bit downright beat Crysis. Both were run on ultra high/very high on my PC.

What spoilt FC2 for me was the wasted time fighting your way to objectives, only to find on the way back, all the men you'd killed were replaced in under 10 minutes with new ones. Then there was the time wasted getting those damn diamonds. The other thing I hated about Far Cry 2 is you couldn't kill anything without raising some form of alarm. Employing your brain didn't help in Far Cry 2, but in Crysis 1 and a little in 2 you were rewarded. Plus, after Crysis, nothing beats the nano suit.

 

[tmeacham]

The other thing I hated about Far Cry 2 is you couldn't kill anything without raising some form of alarm. Employing your brain didn't help in Far Cry 2, but in Crysis 1 and a little in 2 you were rewarded.

Not true. I will frequently take out entire camps with the silenced pistol and machete. What draws attention and alerts are engine noise (i.e. getting too close to the camp with your car), gun noise, being seen or heard, and your victims yelling out. It's challenging but that's what makes it fun.

Or you can strap explosives to your car and send it careening into the center of camp before blowing it up. Either way...

 

[dagger]

Crysis isn't Crytek's first, that would be the original Far Cry. Far Cry 2 was sold out to Ubisoft to be developed later on. That's the reason a lot of people are disappointed by Far Cry 2. They were led to believe that the sequel would live up to the reputation of the original. 😛

Even though the original Far Cry's graphics are clearly outdated, colors are especially bright. Original Far Cry's fans would find the monotone drabness of its sequel unacceptable.

 

[darthvaderkenneth]

u shouldn't compare far cry 2 to crysis since its a sandbox game. If crysis was 50km square large u wouldn't even be able to run it at medium settings and far cry 2 is the best looking sand box game anyway compared to gta 4/ assassins creed etc

 

[M3d]

"far cry 2 is the best looking sand box game anyway compared to gta 4/ assassins creed etc "


Share PC game video links for GTA4 please.

 

[mihirkula]

a lot of people are disappointed by Far Cry 2. They were led to believe that the sequel would live up to the reputation of the original. 😛

Even though the original Far Cry's graphics are clearly outdated, colors are especially bright. Original Far Cry's fans would find the monotone drabness of its sequel unacceptable.

Don't you think doing something different was the whole point of FC2 ... what's the point of having the same bright colors on a tropical island ... if they'd done that, people would moan 'oh its just more of the same'.

 

[anartik]

I'm a little annoyed I bought the hype or that it got high ratings a lot of places. I am playing Farcry 2 on a fast machine at 1920 maxed out and no AA (tried 8x but to slow). All I can say is the game SUCKS and what a waste of $50. The graphics detail is horrible (washed out, bland and void of detail, especially in vegetation) and the gameplay is just as bad. Once you have played past the intro phase you have pretty much played the whole game. Kinda lame just running around the same sandbox map, collecting diamonds to buy weapons, and running up against the same in jeep enemies and guard posts over and over. My first thought was WTF is this... the original Farcry and Crysis are FAR better in graphics and gameplay.

It's got a few nice effects like the grassfires and yeah it's optimized... for the lowest possible denominator. The answer to the typical "will my machine play it" question is yes. Even if you still have the same lame computer from when the original Farcry came out you will be good to go.

Don't waste your money!... Its such a sham that you cannot return software or this game would be back to the store for a crap refund. Ubisoft pulled a fast one here and FC2 was not written by Crytek and does not use the Crytek engine but played on the reputation of the first. I didn't know this was a console port and maybe that explains why the graphics quality is so bad at 1920x1200 on a 26" Samsung. Can't imagine how bad it must look at higher res on a larger monitor.

 

[speedbird]

I wasn't sure what to make of Far Cry 2 when I first started playing, I did feel disappointed. The Game begins very slow, but having played Far Cry 2 for many hours now, the action has increased and initial feelings of disappointment have now disappeared. I think Comparisons with Crysis were inevitable, But Farcry 2 offers a completely different experience to Crysis. Far Cry 2 is a sandbox game and I really like the idea of doing missions when I want to. Crysis was awesome IMO, but it was a linear game covered up with open environments. Far Cry 2 is a true open environment game, so I applaud Ubisoft.

Like I have already said Far Cry 2 doesn't compete with Crysis visually, but Ubisoft have done a good Job visually. The Shadows look realistic and the lighting effects look pretty decent. The characters do seem to lack detail however and the blood effects look a bit crap.

Far Cry 2 is good game, just not outstanding

 

[baracubra]

Crysis's graphics for me beat FC2's hands-down!
Somehow when I play Crysis, I feel bewildered and amazed at the great shadows and colours, not to mention the extreme 3D models.

I don't get the same feeling in FC2...sure it looks good but somehow its lacking, and that put me off at first. Then came the respawning checkpoints and I didn't get past 11% of Act 1 without feeling utterly dissapointed and bored.

Crysis rulz, FC2 drools *wow that was bad* :S

 

[badaxe2]

I prefer the environments of Far Cry 2 more, and overall I think the game is more graphically consistent. I've run into a lot of PS2 quality textures in Crysis and Warhead, albeit only on DirectX 9's high settings, but from what I've read DX 10 only improves noticeably with regards to lighting and shaders. Crysis still blows everything else away at its best, especially particle effects/explosions, but I'd rather take Fary Cry 2 only requiring about half the system to actually play it at its best.

 

[dagger]

I prefer the environments of Far Cry 2 more, and overall I think the game is more graphically consistent. I've run into a lot of PS2 quality textures in Crysis and Warhead, albeit only on DirectX 9's high settings, but from what I've read DX 10 only improves noticeably with regards to lighting and shaders. Crysis still blows everything else away at its best, especially particle effects/explosions, but I'd rather take Fary Cry 2 only requiring about half the system to actually play it at its best.

With some drivers, if you changed graphics settings in-game for Crysis Warhead, you have to save and reload. Otherwise texture don't repopulate correctly, aside from shader problems. If you see bad textures until moving in close, that's what happened. The "PS2 quality textures" is due to driver glitch.

 

[High]

agreeing with every word 3ball said

 

[badaxe2]

With some drivers, if you changed graphics settings in-game for Crysis Warhead, you have to save and reload. Otherwise texture don't repopulate correctly, aside from shader problems. If you see bad textures until moving in close, that's what happened. The "PS2 quality textures" is due to driver glitch.

It's the same for both games. No matter how many times I've reloaded the game completely. I've also used both an Nvidia card and later an ATI, even reformatted my system before changing over. Man made structures in particular like railings, and general indoor environments/objects are an obvious mix of hi and low res textures in Crysis and Warhead. For its time Far Cry 1 had better overall textures than Crysis. Pretty much everything on screen was hi res.

 

[djcoolmasterx]

@badaxe2

Try r_TexturesStreaming 0

 

[badaxe2]

@badaxe2

Try r_TexturesStreaming 0

I'm playing Crysis with the CCC mod now so will apply that after a fresh install. Thanks.

 

[BlakHart]

Far Cry 2 does not compare to crysis visually... But I think it comes second. I play both Very high settings and they both look amazing IMO. Nothing will compare to crysis for a few years though... No way.

 

[Z02X]

I agree Crysis and warhead may look beater but FarCry is defiantly up their with them.

I'm a poor guy .. i played both FC2 and Crysis Warhead on 1280 res recently (both maxed out) ... and I can tell ya i didn't find Crysis THAT much more visually stunning than FC2 ...agreed that Crysis looked better, but not THAT much better.

Saying that Warhead 'completely blows FC2 out of the water and that Warhead is MILES AHEAD of FC2 is absurd. Yes Warhead looks better, but FC2 isn't exactly a piece of cr@p to look at