Okay here are a few of my observations. The things I've noticed stick out far too much not to be addressed and ...personally upset me. What's in the final game from this demonstration: 1. Day/Night cycle technology 2. Real time ambient maps 3. The soundtrack 4. Soft shadows 5. Paralax occlusion mapping 6. 3D ocean technology 7 Parametric skeletal animation system 8. Procedural motion warping 9. Object motion blur 10. Breakable Buildings 11. Breakable vegetation system 12. Advanced rope physics, BUT. You probably will never get to appreciate them unlike what you see at 2:23 13. "Next Gen physics system" Yes and no. I am sure it exists in the final game, but it's never used in amazing ways like this. And we never get to experience this highly impressive nuclear explosion either, which I find a huge miss out. Here's where it starts to go bad. I'll list the issues I have found: 1. Notice the lightbeams/god rays at 00:40 and the overall vegetation density. Those things are missing in the final game. The final game's jungles still look incredible, but I have never seen such a scene constructed in the final product i.e main campaign. And it's very clear to me that this was an early test map with a higher level of details isolated on a small playing field or else it would have tanked the performance of the computers back then. 2. While not demonstrated at this part. In an even earlier showcase from 2006. The demo to be exact. You could see unscripted, fully dynamic ragdoll movements when killed. It's alot more reminiscent of early old-school games than what we ended up getting. Don't believe me? Re-play the original crysis and examine the way those soldiers react to your attacks and then fall over or die. It's stiff. And it doesn't flow as smoothly or unpredictably. You'll mostly see them fall in similar poses and then remain glued to the ground right after. 3. 00:50 I am not sure what happened here. Another downgrade to make it playable? It's hard to judge the scene due to the low resolution of the recording, but the visuals such as the draw distance look strangely photorealistic. And I've never encountered another shot looking like this from any gameplay videos made with the retail version, EVER. Also I know for a fact, they removed those clouds and replaced them with textures. Watch the video by digital foundry to see what I mean. I know they had 3D cloud tech, it's missed potential and I doubt it's back in the crysis remaster. Which is inexcusable. 4. 1:11 I realize they're fixated on the ocean technology at this part. But look at the far mountain scape. That fidelity wasn't in the final game. It's close, but not quite. I think that's the only thing the remaster improved upon with the newly added "Can it run crysis?" setting in combination with ray tracing. Otherwise, still. No chance. 5. Object motion blur is there and so is depth of field. But if you observe what's happening besides them around 1:53 you'll see leaves and an unprecedented amount of particles flying around everywhere. I ALSO don't remember seeing them anywhere but here. The depth of field looks toned down significantly too imo. 6. 2:02 the way the ragdoll reacts to the explosion is odd. Like it's using the 2006 dynamic ragdolls I mentioned earlier. When did you encounter a cartwheel animation whilst playing the game? I have not once! 7. 2:28 "What you see is what you play" Yeah except, this looks downgraded tremendously from what was shown the past two and a half minutes. Looking more like the retail version now. 8. 2:48 Who has ever done that? In gameplay. How can you even test those vehicle physics? There's almost no scenario in the campaign to test it on. Multiplayer? Maybe, but I am going to need a confirmation on that in order to believe it. All in all. I've been confused with this trailer all those years ago. And I remain now. And why I am baffled whenever people say the final product looks even better. Something's off. And I can't pretend there isn't anything.
"What you see is what you play" refers to the fact that the editor view is the same as in game. Is not referred to crysis compared to this tech demo. Remember that this trailerbis not for crysis but isba tech demo for the engine which for showcase uses crysis assets.
Yes, unfortunately Crysis (even remaster) never looked as good as in early trailers. To be honest - in some parts (like dense jungle, especialy in that old video DX9 vs DX10) none of modern games came even close to look like this. 15 years passed and i'm still waiting to play this build...
@@DeBitcher you have no idea how crysis made me insane back then the lighting all of it its just wow I'm almost 22 now but I'm disappointed too that they did a downgrade
Honestly, this put the Source engine to shame! Both engines are incredible, groundbreaking, and aged very well. But this, for just a 3-4 year difference, it very impressive!
Quello che fanno da quasi due generazioni a questa parte è rilasciare nuovi motori grafici sempre più costosi, dove loro per forza di cosa ti vanno a dire"costa sempre di più fare giochi" mentre invece gli basterebbe sfruttare bene i motori grafici e stirarne di più l'arco vitale, invece fanno le cose a metà. Tra l'altro poi il costo di sviluppo viene ad incidere anche su noi perché con la scusa, alzano i prezzi dei giochi.
@@snackers7 It isn't. In terms of scale and interactivity, Crysis 1 puts Crysis 2 and partially 3 to shame, but there are some really big leaps they've made over the first game as well. Mainly the lighting, geometry, and effects. If we're talking the engine itself, then the visuals aren't the top priority. The earlier versions of CryEngine 3 are somewhat limited in scale and detail compared to CryEngine 2, but they also run *A LOT* faster, have improved tools for actually making games, and support a variety of platforms. Plus the later versions of CryEngine 3, and then later 4 and 5 got rid of some of the limitations, and the UI and tools have been improved even more. It's not as one sided as you might think at a glance.
@@okaybutwhythough7456 These reasons finally arent really important for PC gamers. So in my opinion CryEngine 2 is overall better by looking from PC gamers perspective - which is better platform in terms of graphics and physics effect and have much less limitations than consoles which limiting released Crysis on CryEngine 3 on consoles. As you can notice CryEngine 3 run faster, have improved tools and support for other platform, but for gamers, especially PC gamers this means nothing important. This is why I said CryEngine 2 looks more advanced than next CryEngine - CryEngine 3. Maybe CryEngine 5/6(I dont know what exactly version is the newest for now) is better even in other aspects but Crysis PC running on CryEngine 2 win in competition with CryEngine 3 because it is worse in terms of aspect which have meaning to gamers. Crysis introduced realistic graphics(especially on mods - which looks even more realistic) on the whole new level - Crysis 2 looks more plastic, like some movies. And the most powerful reason is the best physics in the game from these two periods finally conquering CryEngine 3, which is less advanced(which was really dissapointing for me and really, really weird - because those are the best parts of this game, this is why this game had big influence on PC games marketplace) in physics effects. Crysis is famous because of realistic graphics in this period when it released and mostly because of very sophisticated physics system.
![[E3 2006 Footage] Crysis Walkthrough](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/plRBgOzj7Mo/mqdefault.jpg)
![[UA] NAVI проти G2 Esports | Blast Premier Fall Final](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QWlIm4FGESQ/mqdefault.jpg)
this game was way ahead of it's time
I present to you 2023 we have gollum & redfall
remember playing in the demo version back in 2007, what an amazing experience it was back then!
And all of this runs on freaking Windows XP. Amazing isn't it?
Crawls *
no it doesnt. many of these features are DX10 only, and windows XP only supported DX9. You had to instal Vista to play Crysis in full glory.
Okay here are a few of my observations. The things I've noticed stick out far too much not to be addressed and ...personally upset me.
What's in the final game from this demonstration:
1. Day/Night cycle technology
2. Real time ambient maps
3. The soundtrack
4. Soft shadows
5. Paralax occlusion mapping
6. 3D ocean technology
7 Parametric skeletal animation system
8. Procedural motion warping
9. Object motion blur
10. Breakable Buildings
11. Breakable vegetation system
12. Advanced rope physics, BUT. You probably will never get to appreciate them unlike what you see at 2:23
13. "Next Gen physics system" Yes and no. I am sure it exists in the final game, but it's never used in amazing ways like this. And we never get to experience this highly impressive nuclear explosion either, which I find a huge miss out.
Here's where it starts to go bad. I'll list the issues I have found:
1. Notice the lightbeams/god rays at 00:40 and the overall vegetation density. Those things are missing in the final game. The final game's jungles still look incredible, but I have never seen such a scene constructed in the final product i.e main campaign. And it's very clear to me that this was an early test map with a higher level of details isolated on a small playing field or else it would have tanked the performance of the computers back then.
2. While not demonstrated at this part. In an even earlier showcase from 2006. The demo to be exact. You could see unscripted, fully dynamic ragdoll movements when killed. It's alot more reminiscent of early old-school games than what we ended up getting. Don't believe me? Re-play the original crysis and examine the way those soldiers react to your attacks and then fall over or die. It's stiff. And it doesn't flow as smoothly or unpredictably. You'll mostly see them fall in similar poses and then remain glued to the ground right after.
3. 00:50 I am not sure what happened here. Another downgrade to make it playable? It's hard to judge the scene due to the low resolution of the recording, but the visuals such as the draw distance look strangely photorealistic. And I've never encountered another shot looking like this from any gameplay videos made with the retail version, EVER. Also I know for a fact, they removed those clouds and replaced them with textures. Watch the video by digital foundry to see what I mean. I know they had 3D cloud tech, it's missed potential and I doubt it's back in the crysis remaster. Which is inexcusable.
4. 1:11 I realize they're fixated on the ocean technology at this part. But look at the far mountain scape. That fidelity wasn't in the final game. It's close, but not quite. I think that's the only thing the remaster improved upon with the newly added "Can it run crysis?" setting in combination with ray tracing. Otherwise, still. No chance.
5. Object motion blur is there and so is depth of field. But if you observe what's happening besides them around 1:53 you'll see leaves and an unprecedented amount of particles flying around everywhere. I ALSO don't remember seeing them anywhere but here. The depth of field looks toned down significantly too imo.
6. 2:02 the way the ragdoll reacts to the explosion is odd. Like it's using the 2006 dynamic ragdolls I mentioned earlier. When did you encounter a cartwheel animation whilst playing the game? I have not once!
7. 2:28 "What you see is what you play" Yeah except, this looks downgraded tremendously from what was shown the past two and a half minutes. Looking more like the retail version now.
8. 2:48 Who has ever done that? In gameplay. How can you even test those vehicle physics? There's almost no scenario in the campaign to test it on. Multiplayer? Maybe, but I am going to need a confirmation on that in order to believe it.
All in all. I've been confused with this trailer all those years ago. And I remain now. And why I am baffled whenever people say the final product looks even better. Something's off. And I can't pretend there isn't anything.
"What you see is what you play" refers to the fact that the editor view is the same as in game. Is not referred to crysis compared to this tech demo. Remember that this trailerbis not for crysis but isba tech demo for the engine which for showcase uses crysis assets.
Yes, unfortunately Crysis (even remaster) never looked as good as in early trailers. To be honest - in some parts (like dense jungle, especialy in that old video DX9 vs DX10) none of modern games came even close to look like this. 15 years passed and i'm still waiting to play this build...
@@DeBitcher you have no idea how crysis made me insane back then the lighting all of it its just wow I'm almost 22 now but I'm disappointed too that they did a downgrade
I remember downloading the demonstration Jungle map from 0:40 off a mod site.
Haven't played anything like it since...
Jib youcef
هم العدو فاحذرهم
2007? DAAAAMMMMN
Not work with win 10
Amd ryzen
Win 10 pl
Honestly, this put the Source engine to shame!
Both engines are incredible, groundbreaking, and aged very well.
But this, for just a 3-4 year difference, it very impressive!
Threatens ummayad
تقارب الزمن +1+2+3
الصحبة vs ADEL
قناة القران
Appache
No ma scusate.. Dove diavolo è finita ora tutta questa roba magnifica???
Non capisco cosa sia successo all industria dei videogiochi
Quello che fanno da quasi due generazioni a questa parte è rilasciare nuovi motori grafici sempre più costosi, dove loro per forza di cosa ti vanno a dire"costa sempre di più fare giochi" mentre invece gli basterebbe sfruttare bene i motori grafici e stirarne di più l'arco vitale, invece fanno le cose a metà. Tra l'altro poi il costo di sviluppo viene ad incidere anche su noi perché con la scusa, alzano i prezzi dei giochi.
Parole sante... Intanto mi rigioco Mercenari pagati per distruggere per compensare🤣
I saw the trailer, bought the game... And had to wait for 3 years in order to run it on low 😂
When I was 12 I thought this was so real. Oh my God.
Leica
اسكور
Zamanının çok ötesinde.
CryEngine 2 the best!
best age of gaming ...
2021 🤨
Сколько вырезанного потанцевала в одном видео.
Imagine se7en jiMy at lana57 dancing
Amazing.
Like always. CryEngine 2 looks more advanced than next CryEngine.
@@snackers7
It isn't. In terms of scale and interactivity, Crysis 1 puts Crysis 2 and partially 3 to shame, but there are some really big leaps they've made over the first game as well.
Mainly the lighting, geometry, and effects.
If we're talking the engine itself, then the visuals aren't the top priority. The earlier versions of CryEngine 3 are somewhat limited in scale and detail compared to CryEngine 2, but they also run *A LOT* faster, have improved tools for actually making games, and support a variety of platforms. Plus the later versions of CryEngine 3, and then later 4 and 5 got rid of some of the limitations, and the UI and tools have been improved even more.
It's not as one sided as you might think at a glance.
@@okaybutwhythough7456 These reasons finally arent really important for PC gamers. So in my opinion CryEngine 2 is overall better by looking from PC gamers perspective - which is better platform in terms of graphics and physics effect and have much less limitations than consoles which limiting released Crysis on CryEngine 3 on consoles. As you can notice CryEngine 3 run faster, have improved tools and support for other platform, but for gamers, especially PC gamers this means nothing important. This is why I said CryEngine 2 looks more advanced than next CryEngine - CryEngine 3. Maybe CryEngine 5/6(I dont know what exactly version is the newest for now) is better even in other aspects but Crysis PC running on CryEngine 2 win in competition with CryEngine 3 because it is worse in terms of aspect which have meaning to gamers. Crysis introduced realistic graphics(especially on mods - which looks even more realistic) on the whole new level - Crysis 2 looks more plastic, like some movies. And the most powerful reason is the best physics in the game from these two periods finally conquering CryEngine 3, which is less advanced(which was really dissapointing for me and really, really weird - because those are the best parts of this game, this is why this game had big influence on PC games marketplace) in physics effects. Crysis is famous because of realistic graphics in this period when it released and mostly because of very sophisticated physics system.
@@okaybutwhythough7456 Is it true that your answer was created only for underline that you dont agree with me? I dont know any other reason.
@@snackers7
Absolutely great.
I made a super long essay of a reply and UA-cam just went ahead and deleted it.
lg g7 mate 10 pro na? becki
lg g5