4K Resolutions will be available soon - UA-cam takes longer to process it. Also - want to clarify one thing I said towards the end. The Crysis Remaster DOES still have the Nanosuit comma rose menu - just not with the controller like it did in the original. Upcoming Videos: -History of Rainbow Six! Been working hard the past several weeks on this project - expect it soon :) -Serious Sam 4 comparison -Mafia Remake comparison -Final review for Marvel's Avengers -First Studio Tour to celebrate next milestone :)
@@Nick930 Good luck to your upcoming works and thanks for this great, quality comparison. If I should have to choose one now, I'd pick the original Crysis in a heartbeat. The destruction bug hurts bad and leaving out that mission where you can actually fly the VTOL? Nah.
3:09 i thought hey that doesn't look too bad crysis remastered look crisper to me then i heard now appear mostly flat? i thought i think remastered looks better then i go OH MY GOD REMASTERED IS ON THE RIGHT
They used volumetric fog, as it exist even in real nature. It wasnt possible back then as they were happy to set it with actual specs. By the way in most games this fog makes game look better in distances. In comparison to crappy far enviroment...
Yeah, but I wouldn't blame Crytek too much as there was a rumour that they lost their original pc version's source code during their company restructuring.
Yeah it really show how much for non-work they put in the remastererd tho. Tho you right i remember played this game at his first release it was insane, even the best GPU couldn't keep up on ultra settings, it was so beautiful
@@seaofrage to an extent but they could have used a fucking Nintendo ds version if that had existed and still made it look absolutely gorgeous. The pc version had exclusive graphics options not available on consoles that's the big difference That doesn't excuse bumping up the resolution, adding some rtx and calling it a day. It barely looks different otherwise
@Frax it all comes down to personal preference in the end anyway. i for one love when games get a decent equality between Gameplay and Graphical eyecandy. especially in survival games. getting a Metro Exodus kind of look with proper survival mechanics and crafting and world building makes some of my favorite games! hence why i am incredibly stoked to play S.T.A.L.K.E.R 2 when it is released!
@All_lives_matter, reject fabricated racism by govt Have the consoles run the game on the lowest settings. If your PC can only run on console quality, then set everything to low--and it should still look very good. If your PC is worse than a console, you can't play it without lag even on the lowest settings.
@All_lives_matter, reject fabricated racism by govt I fully agree, It´s even worse now with 90% of the market being 2D metroidvania, souls-like,rogue-lite indies that have to be released on switch, the current least powerfull console. Games like Crysis, Half-life 2, Doom 3, Far Cry are sadly a thing of the past.
Crysis 1 is still looking so good because artists did a great job in finding the perfectly on point colours for a photorealistic effect. in that case, no need to simulated reality with advanced lightnings. They did such a great job.
Crysis was so ahead of its time that even its own remaster, released over a decade later, is put to shame in many aspects. The real question all along should've been, "but can the future run Crysis?"
@@hihowareya4004 its a waste of money if you already have crysis. it also doesn't run as well. plus if you are using amd graphics cards it will run exceptionally terrible since the remaster uses rtx.
Crysis was way ahead of its time. I remember playing it for the first time back then, and thinking there is nothing like this in the market at the moment. I was happy that my PC could run it on medium settings. I remember shooting down a palm tree into two pieces, and taking them and placing them on the road. When the enemies arrived with thier vehicle, it capsised because of my improvided trap. My mind was blown by that.
I don't recommend you to get this remaster it's really don't worth the money Just add some graphic mod to the original Crysis and you got a better graphic already maybe even better than this remaster version
@@IamAW yeah i agreed all the way up until i heard the sound comparisons. wow those were 100x better in the remastered. and a few things like the water i thought looked better in remastered. most of the other stuff i agreed.
Sound is better & yes i do agree to a certain extent not much diffrence but if you look closely there are but i still prefer ORIGINAL this Remaster is poorly optimized...
Crysis from 07 is still one of the best looking games today. I remember it was so good, that most computers couldn't run it, and even good gaming computers had trouble running it all full resolution. It was the game to really see if you had a good gaming pc.
Many of the issues (for example the frame rate locked animations of certain objects or the fences not breaking apart properly) are due to the remaster being based on the console version of Crysis.
This game is the definition of tech dept...too much work to go back and unpack and fix badly optimised code. They need to remake this game with a new efficient engine. Or just play the original with mods and liquid nitrogen your cpu to get a decent framerate. Crytek has fallen so far
@@ryp1562 The remaster is clearly better technically, but the original game looked way more realistic. I wish the remaster would be based on the PC version (because of better physics and volumetric effects) and wouldn't have messed up the style of the game, but would have concentrated on SVOGI + Raytraced Reflections + higher resolution texture variants of the originals. (instead of changed textures, which sometimes look good, and sometimes bad)
Great video. It emphasizes how programming efficiency went down over the years. On my 2013 pc, I have to run modern games at graphics settings and resolutions that make them look way worse than any game from 2015 or earlier.
@@miyakothug3142 By newer games, which ones are you talking about? Try and play Crysis 3 and then either one of RDR2 (on PC max settings), Demon's Souls remake, Battlefield 5 (the Rotterdam map), Metro Exodus (Volga map with ray-tracing on and with max settings), or Far Cry 5 right after that. Or maybe even something like The Division 2 for a more similar setting. Do you honestly see no improvement? To me, I could easily tell that Crysis 3 isn't a new game, or at least a relatively new game that uses outdated graphics technology (e.g. Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice).
There's this awesome, subtle little thing that happens in the original game; as you fire an automatic weapon, the camera slowly zooms in until you stop firing. It is, of course, GONE in the remaster, further betraying the original game's penchant for doing neat stuff.
Both have advantages and disadvantages visually. And graphics really haven't changed a huge deal since 2007. Crysis is still one of the best looking games ever made. I think it's more of a testament to how amazing the original is, rather than a slight on the remaster. I definitely wouldn't describe it as "pathetic".
@@BrokenGodEnt Yeah but a remaster should be better in every ways not worst is some cases and better in some cases. I'll just keep my money and play the og crysis
I think consoles are to blame. They had to severely hamper Cryengine to get it working on there instead of fully exploring what it could achieve on PC.
It looks kinda abysmal compared to 2020 graphically intensive games, like DMC5 or Red Dead 2. That said, it has a cheaper price so i find it a bit forgiving. (Or maybe that's the reason) But still calling it - pushing pcs, but looking like 2015.
This side by side comparison only goes to show how amazing and truly a game-changer Crysis was back in 2007, and boy do I remember. But what I realised after watching your video too is that if I was a new young gamer and you told didn’t told me when Crysis was first released I think most would say 2012-2013. Way ahead of its time
It is a joke, this is Cryteks payback to the PC community after its massive loss from the Original, at one point being the most pirated game on the net. Crytek forever gave up on PC, after the loss, it was clear from every game they ever released afterwards including this one.
@@SteveStap1 Interesting, I didn't know this. Considering this, the remaster is good work, and PC-only PC-optimized titles are simply a thing of the past. I hope they will release the editor, this way fans can contribute to this (for pirates unfortunately free) game, and bring it to its full potential.
crysis looks more natural with it's colors, looks crisper overall crysis remastered had some reflection barells look ridiculously reflective like someone polished them
@@gianttacogod youtube algorithm. same thing happened to my channel. the system pushed the smaller channel aside and feature all the big youtubers on the main spotlight.
I just reinstalled this game and it's always a huge pleasure to play it. It's so nice and effects are truly amazing for a 13 years old game which is still hard to play in full video settings on a modern pc !
I played it for the first time this year, as my PC at the time could only manage probably around 10-15 FPS on very low and I decided that wasn't the way to experience Crysis. And boooy oh boy, was the wait worth it, and then some! I gotta say, there are few gaming experiences more satisfying than completing Crysis on the Delta difficulty (IIRC that's the hardest one) with no 'hairs and enemies speaking Korean. It really was/is a jewel and one of the biggest milestones in gaming.
Also watched DF review, from the moment Alex told that they used Console port for this upgrade, I was so pissed. Why would they do that? They made the game for PC specially and then they remaster the Console port. They tarnish the image of original Crysis which was meant to be PC exclusive.
This "remaster" could have been achieved with Reshade. In fact, I think they lost a lot of the unique realistic feel of the original. Everything looks cartoony now.
Agreed 100%. It looks more akin to Far Cry 3 now.....incredibly disappointing to say the least. I mean personally I like both the more realistic look of the original AND its possible to make it look much more colorful in tasteful way with either mods (for free) like the Blackfire mod or just by adjusting your TV's/screen's settings.....Ive done both and the game looks brilliant that way even 13 years later. There is also Enchanced mod for those who want reflections and such and the game can look even more photorealistic that way. Overall this mod is ONLY good for console gamers who only ever played 360 or PS3 versions of original Crysis.
@@Balnazzardi Blackfire mod is WAY less tasteful bro, with more (and less realistic) saturation and more bloom than the remaster while also getting that bloom less accurate due to relying on the aged lighting model of the original game, I get that people are hating on the remaster but it's like they completely forgot or unconsciously ignore all the negatives about the original and even the mod scene. Enhanced edition also comes with a lot of texture changes that are way more questionable than the remaster. I mean, Crysis still crashes for me randomly about once an hour and it's not even easy to find a copy of the original with the working 64-bit exe included and running without extra work. It's pretty much just GOG that is selling a usable and friendly copy of Crysis. Not only that, but if you put the object detail at the Crysis equivalent (Medium looks like Very High in the original) you get better performance with the remaster than the original with much higher quality textures and overall fidelity.
@@BobsRevenge Well I owned retail copy of the game and I had trouble getting it run smoothly even to this day...but then just couple days ago I bought copy from Steam and it also runs trouble free like GoG version. Gone were all the framerate issues that I experienced with the original retail version. Also I understand what you are saying with those mods which is EXACTLY why I found the best the Crysis looks for me personally is chaning my Asus screen settings from standard mode to "scenery mode"...it does much the same job like Blackfire mod, but more "tastefully" brings out the colors from the game without the overuse of bloom. And like said, since it also runs smoothly, I see no point of buying the remaster, unless I would want to play it on Xbox Series X on some later date. I also got Crysis Warhead running (more or less) smoothly after all these years by running it on Directx-9 mode rather than Directx10 and Warhead naturally looked more pretty than even original Crysis, so overall these are the kind of games that have held up incredibly well even after 13 years and I see no reason to either mod them or buying this remaster.
The way they botched the orange sunrise in the first mission and the lighting being way too dim and cloudy in the alien ship really just broke the deal for me. That and the colors being so ridiculously vibrant, it doesn't look like the Crisis I love. I'm not willing to sacrifice that for higher resolution textures which aren't even consistently higher.
@@Balnazzardi Gone were your framerate issues? I have a relatively fast computer (RTX 2070,1700x Ryzen, fast ram) and still can only get 45 fps at 4k. Blackfire overuses bloom A LOT more than the remaster, and exaggerates the over-bloomed sky in the original to the point of parody. It also ruins the color grading in the non-outdoor parts of the game. In fact, a lot of what Blackfire tries to do is done using better tech in the remaster, including the extra green in the jungle environment being propagated by global illumination instead of trying to trick the TOD settings (you can see this by looking at the green-shading on the dirt in more jungley areas, which is realistic) resulting in a more accurate look to what a real tropical island looks like in bright sunlight. The bloom effects in the remaster are in general more accurate to how real light interacts with surfaces, including compared to the original game, although it does change the look of the game and ruins some of the cinematics. You must've downloaded the 64-bit exe for Crysis on Steam and forgotten, because it still crashes on launch and doesn't include the bin64 folder after reinstalling it just now. Crysis Warhead runs more smooth than the original since they optimized the engine more for it (I get about 60 fps average), but I do still get those crashes. Warhead never had the problem of not starting up on a 64-bit OS though.
Congratulations on the nice work you've done. Content like this is very rare. You brought basically every single comparison possible, and gave details on them, in such a way that is basically impossible to say that the remastered version is not disappointing.
This remastered is a complete joke and a major letdown... No wander why the went EPIC exclusive cause they knew the reviews on STEAM would destroy this game.
@@worldsgreatestdetective926 on xbox? those are even worse if you ask me, reason why this remastered sucked is because it was a port of the the console port that was ported from the pc original LOL... JK JK
Judging on those Pictures, Crysis OG still holds up to be one of the most beautiful games ever. The landscape is fotorealistic and the lighting is near perfect.
When I heard about the remaster... I was so happy, I loved crysis back in 2007 it was just a blast even if I was playing at 15 fps... Now it's just sad... I had hoped for a full remaster like we had for some games like Spyro for instance, with gameplay and its visual identity intact but with everything redone/reworked from models to textures/shaders and so on... I don't like its cartoonish look now :/
@@SagittariusAx Honestly, I would be happy with higher-res textures, better lighting and performance fixes. The lighting is horrible in this remaster and performance is almost non-existent. A remake would be a dream come true... but if the remaster achieved only the minimum expected, I would be happy.
@@II-uj5fm Them saying "can it run crysis" is like them saying most pcs won't be able to optimize to such a "high" graphics setting such as that, such as how back in the day most pcs were incapable of doing so.
i picked up the remastered trilogy 4 years after this video was released, i think its safe to say that most of the complaints do not exist in todays version, at least imo. I felt sort of the same way as playing black mesa for the first time
If I understand this right, Crysis Remastered was developed over the Xbox 360/PS3 port of Crysis, which was a port of the game to the more console-optimized Cryengine 3 (The PC version used Cryengine 2). A lot of graphical effects were cut in order to get it to work on the 360 and PS3. Because of this, I assume that is why there is a lot of graphical effects missing and a noticeable visual downgrade overall.
Also the shadows in the remaster feature a variable penumbra. In fact too many games don't do this properly. The slight pixilating is probably an artifact of sorts.
Crysis Remaster is the 360 version a upgrade from them. Crysis pc that shoud be the minimum and then upgrade it. What we want was crysis that use modern cpus and then you can easy upgrade the settings over the orginal. But there go the cheap way, we can t use the ultra settings becouse one core is allways on 100% on the limit.
C1 has a more organic overall looks. It just works. The green-ish coloration is more realistic, dirty looking even though the technology behind it is dated.
Nick, thank you for the video, mate. Was waiting for this one after I saw your comment on DF's video. Just for kicks, can you do a comparison between this Remastered and the last Crysis ever released, Crysis 3. Fat chance. But still.
The remaster was built on legacy versions of Cryengine 3 released for Xbox 360 and PS3. That means CPU is locked to single-thread, with all the sacrifices and corner-cutting that comes with that.
Crysis OG is better because the engine was just balls to the walls. Cry Engine 2 was just 1 but with heavy optimisations to allow crysis to run on Consoles. CryTek should have just added newer API and raytracying support to their original Engine, this would have made this new remastered version actually standout.
1:56 the details of Phsyco's face were off due to the subsurface scattering shader effect which it was unknown back 2007 , they exaggerated the effect a little bit that's the problem i guess
@@hexerei02021 Yes, it does say everything because the original 07’ (non remaster) looks better than most of the games today. So if you make a statement and have nothing to back it up with, shut it.
@@Carlito_Brigante93 Most triple A games from even 2015 look a lot better. Witcher 3, Horizon Zero Dawn, Cyberpunk, Uncharted, Metro and a lot more. Original Crysis is nowhere near graphics of games coming out today.
@@hexerei02021 Bhahaha lol, no they don’t look better, they are the exact games that look like trash in comparison, with long winded boring completely dead atmosphere and awful textures/details in graphics, that looks like a smudged mess. Get your eyes checked
Considering our machines, actually can run Crysis today. I found this remaster to be a joke. I barely noticed anything different other than the nanosuit and some particle effects. The weird fence and tree bugs I noticed but your comparison made me notice even more problems. Plus indeed,the stress it gives to your pc and optimisation made me feel like I was back in 2007. Overall the only thing this remaster gave us is a chance to revive the "can it run Crysis?" Meme and not much else. Also god these gun sound effects are more of a ear rape than improvement.
One fact. Crysis was a revolutionary game, and as a historic event, one can't be repeated again. Crytek can't just overdo themselves now. They did the best they can, and the only thing remaining for them is to bring something new, without changing the old, already polished content.
I’m wondering if these issues were patched because I’m playing the remastered right now and don’t have the majority of these issues. Trees all fall normally too.
Uhm, I believe that the remaster does use ray tracing for ocean reflections. It's just that screen space reflections is layered on top. It's seemingly common practice in the early stages of this generation. Metro exodus enhanced edition does something similar. Basically you can capture screen elements that are still too demanding to ray trace. The ray tracing method on concoles doesn't use ray tracing for ocean reflections.
This is why I didn’t bother with the remastered stick to your guns and enjoy the original. These Devs really take the best parts and make them worse then take stuff no one really cared about and add heaps of detail like the barrels which look like they have been put into a bowling ball polishing machine.
I still believe it was such a waste of time remastering the game which was iconic already. Just fix the issues and get it run better on multi core, then may be introduce tessellation, raytraced reflections. Rather than making a remaster to say we are back to burn your PC to dust with poorly optimized game that you used to love. Crytek! what were you thinking? "Can it run Crysis?" No! nothing can run it if it is this poorly optimized.
They should have done a remake instead of a remaster. The game runs practically on the same outdated engine limitations the original one did (no multi-core cpu utilisation), hence why the performance is (and always will be) dogshit. I guess they didn't have the money or interest for a proper remake on the most current engine. For shame.
This happens when you create a game with love in 2007 - you create an immortal piece of art. Crysis Remastered was made as a cashgrab and its obvious, EA at its finest everybody...!
When I heard about the remaster I got excited listing the improvements in my head such using more cores to get more performance,getting rid of that loading stutter to make the game run seamlessly and running the game on a much faster engine to get doom like gameplay and what we got is another benchmark tool,thankyou crytek for getting my hopes up.ggggrrrrrhhh
"Popping" colours by ridiculous over-saturation is the most backward trend in modern game development. Skyrim SE, Hitman 2016 remastered, Crysis, Witcher 3 B&W and several others. Not every game is Mario. Nuance is a thing.
What is....oh, you mean Blood and Wine? Hmmm.....I'm not sure if I like that news. I haven't played TW3 yet**, but I remember reading that one of the expansions had some significant technical improvements, and that CDPR was going to patch them into the main game. What you said makes me wonder if the main game was patched to look like Blood and Wine? ** The Witcher: Enhanced Edition is a masterpiece and one my my top favorite games. The Witcher 2 was my biggest gaming disappointment. I'm still looking forward to trying TW3, though. I've had the box sitting on my shelf for a while now. But first I've got to read through the books again, _then_ finish my 5th playthrough of TW:EE, and _then_ my 2nd playthrough of TW2.
@@bricaaron3978 Can I ask you why The Witcher 2 was a big disappointment for you? I'm just curious as usually peoples attitudes are almost the exact opposite with Witcher being considered ok-good, Witcher 2 being good and Witcher 3 being awesome.
@@mikebenire3979 Hi, thanks for asking! I'll explain why TW2 was a disappointment, and in another post I'll offer my opinions about why some people dislike The Witcher/The Witcher: Enhanced Edition. In short, The Witcher 2 has almost nothing in common with The Witcher: Enhanced Edition. That's not an exaggeration. This is largely due to the fact that TW:EE was a PC game, whereas TW2 was designed for console hardware/controllers and the sensibilities of console gamers. 1. Loss of the real choice & consequences that altered things throughout the entire game, replaced with a few large-scale plot branchings in TW2. 2. A limited Mass Effect-style dialogue system that is much worse than TW:EE, in which the player never knows what Geralt is going to say. 3. The fun, interesting combat of TW:EE was thrown out and replaced with combat that every honest person admits is a farce. 4. The entire concept of Alchemy was downgraded--it's not fun, and far less useful. 5. Potions are basically useless. In TW:EE Geralt can drink them at any time, just like in reality. In TW2, Geralt has to somehow magically foresee what potions he's going to need to drink ahead of time. Once a fight starts--no potions. 6. The gritty, dismal Eastern European medieval atmosphere that made TW:EE so unique was tossed out in favor of a bright, colorful aesthetic. 7. The appearance of Geralt and the other characters was completely changed for no legitimate reason. 8. Loss of the fantastic, memorable music that fills TW:EE from beginning to end, and plays a crucial role in its atmosphere. I honestly didn't like or remember a single musical piece from TW2. 9. A UI that is a huge downgrade. It is designed for console controllers and is poorly designed and cumbersome to control with a mouse. 10. An *abysmal* inventory system that is a huge downgrade from the simply grid system of TW:EE. It was made to accomodate console controllers. 11. An unsatisfying upgrade system that is much less useful and interesting than that of TW:EE. 12. The Field of View is much smaller than TW:EE, and makes playing very unenjoyable for many PC players. 13. Loss of MSAA. The only way to get true AA in TW2 is FSAA, which is extremely expensive. This is because they switched to a console-friendly deferred renderer, which doesn't properly support MSAA. 14. Non-remappable keys for important functions like inventory and journal. 15. A laughably useless map. I mean literally useless. It _looks_ awesome, but can't actually be used to find one's way around, defeating the entire purpose of a map. 16. Quick Time Events. 17. But wait! There's more! I was expecting TW:EE Improved, and instead got something entirely different that was an overall downgrade. In short, the ONLY good thing about TW2 is the story, whereas the The Witcher: Enhanced Edition is the opposite--you don't have to follow the story because _playing the game_ is actually enjoyable.
@@mikebenire3979 As far as why _some_ people didn't like The Witcher (remember, it was a critically acclaimed and financially successful game), we first have to consider an unfortunate fact. The first release--The Witcher, in 2007--was not a fully polished game. It has some combat timing issues and various other problems, but arguably the biggest issue was the loading times: Every single time you entered any interior--even just a tiny shack--you had literally over a full minute load time. And you had the same load time when you exited. So I can imagine something like that being a factor in why a person put it down. So some people played The Witcher, but didn't play The Witcher: Enhanced Edition, which was a massive (free) upgrade which not only fixed the load times and other issues, but added significant upgrades & enhancements in various areas. But I'm convinced that the biggest reason why some people don't like TW/TW:EE is because they didn't understand the combat. Whenever someone says that the combat is "terrible" or "broken", it is a sure sign that he didn't actually understand it. I know this, because the same thing happened to me with Batman: Arkham Asylum & City. I wanted to like the games so much, but every time I tried I gave up, mostly because I'm not a big fan of melee combat, and I thought the combat was simple button-mashing and boring. But one day I decided to try AC one more time. This time I did some research online, and I realized that the combat wasn't button-mashing -- it was actually _timing-based_ and rather complicated if you take the time to learn it. Suddenly I was having a blast, and had the best gaming experience I had had in a while. The combat of TW:EE is _timing-based_ just like the Arkham games. You don't Click-Click-Click like Skyrim or other games--you click _once,_ and then wait for Geralt to finish his attack, and then click once more at the right time to continue chaining the attack. Just like Batman. But it is clear that many people did not understand this, and thus thought it was "broken" or "bad". I get it, I do. I understand how the combat would _seem_ bad if you just tried button-mashing, but that's not the fault of the game. Is the combat of TW:EE the best ever? No. But for a PC RPG, it's well-designed, fun, and _just works._ That is something that can _not_ be said about the combat of TW2.
seems like a lot of these studios that remaster a game, they just add modern systems and think that just makes it look better. without ever trying to make it match the original art direction or tweak it to where it actually looks good or even natural.
This is the same problem I have with MW2 remastered. the lighting may be “atmospherically” realistic, but it affects the overall cinematography of the scenes.
I thought the CoD4 and MW2 remasters were somewhat disappointing, visually, because the overall vibe was totally off. If it's midday, it should be bright outside, ESPECIALLY in a middle east town, a Favela, etc. But the sun drenched look was gone.
Having played through the “remaster” now I kind of feel scammed. It felt like the changes were minor. Not enough was done to warrant this release. At least I got it on sale for $19.99
Raytracing just makes it faster /easier on development time. It doesnt really always make it look better. Alot of recent techniques to game design revolve around making game design cheaper and faster /and are sold to the public as making the game look better .
![Dead Space [Remake] vs Original | Direct Comparison](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/X6_raZtsEbw/mqdefault.jpg)
4K Resolutions will be available soon - UA-cam takes longer to process it. Also - want to clarify one thing I said towards the end. The Crysis Remaster DOES still have the Nanosuit comma rose menu - just not with the controller like it did in the original.
Upcoming Videos:
-History of Rainbow Six! Been working hard the past several weeks on this project - expect it soon :)
-Serious Sam 4 comparison
-Mafia Remake comparison
-Final review for Marvel's Avengers
-First Studio Tour to celebrate next milestone :)
I honestly want to see a direct comparison between Black Ops 3 and Infinite Warfare🤷♂️
Uff, can't wait the Mafia comparison.
@@fergoka Same that looks like fun.
@@Nick930 Good luck to your upcoming works and thanks for this great, quality comparison. If I should have to choose one now, I'd pick the original Crysis in a heartbeat. The destruction bug hurts bad and leaving out that mission where you can actually fly the VTOL? Nah.
Nick930 can’t wait for the rainbow six video! 😃 🤓
3:09 i thought hey that doesn't look too bad crysis remastered look crisper to me
then i heard now appear mostly flat? i thought i think remastered looks better
then i go OH MY GOD REMASTERED IS ON THE RIGHT
Bro...that was the most unbelievable shot from the whole video. Borderline insane how they allowed it to be published like this.
same waha..
Same
They used volumetric fog, as it exist even in real nature. It wasnt possible back then as they were happy to set it with actual specs.
By the way in most games this fog makes game look better in distances. In comparison to crappy far enviroment...
@@davidfiser8593 Yeah, it sux I agree. 👍
No, I agree!
This mainly shows just how good the original looked, 13 yrs ago!
More like incompetent Crytek is
Yeah, but I wouldn't blame Crytek too much as there was a rumour that they lost their original pc version's source code during their company restructuring.
and imagine on what hardware it ran ... todays games optimization is completly pathetic compared to original crysis
Yeah it really show how much for non-work they put in the remastererd tho.
Tho you right i remember played this game at his first release it was insane, even the best GPU couldn't keep up on ultra settings, it was so beautiful
Like Bioshock
Crysis: The only game that looks better in the early era of photorealistic games than it does in 2020.
Crytek still can't beat Crysis 1 all these years later, nor even improve upon it in the remastered version. Absolutely pathetic.
This is because they used the xbox 360 version for the remaster. Not the original pc version.
@@seaofrage to an extent but they could have used a fucking Nintendo ds version if that had existed and still made it look absolutely gorgeous. The pc version had exclusive graphics options not available on consoles that's the big difference
That doesn't excuse bumping up the resolution, adding some rtx and calling it a day. It barely looks different otherwise
Downgraded
Crysis has never looked good. Even in 4k it has aliasing. Compare that to far cry games that are smooth and perform better
2007: my pc can't run Crysis
2020: my pc can only run Crysis
2007: Cant play Crysis smooth.
2020: Cant play Crysis smooth.
Nah
@Frax it all comes down to personal preference in the end anyway. i for one love when games get a decent equality between Gameplay and Graphical eyecandy. especially in survival games. getting a Metro Exodus kind of look with proper survival mechanics and crafting and world building makes some of my favorite games! hence why i am incredibly stoked to play S.T.A.L.K.E.R 2 when it is released!
@All_lives_matter, reject fabricated racism by govt Have the consoles run the game on the lowest settings. If your PC can only run on console quality, then set everything to low--and it should still look very good. If your PC is worse than a console, you can't play it without lag even on the lowest settings.
@All_lives_matter, reject fabricated racism by govt I fully agree, It´s even worse now with 90% of the market being 2D metroidvania, souls-like,rogue-lite indies that have to be released on switch, the current least powerfull console. Games like Crysis, Half-life 2, Doom 3, Far Cry are sadly a thing of the past.
Crysis 1 is still looking so good because artists did a great job in finding the perfectly on point colours for a photorealistic effect. in that case, no need to simulated reality with advanced lightnings. They did such a great job.
Crysis is so hard to run that UA-cam only offers it in 360p
360p? i got 144p
You guys even got the video to load?
what video..?
only the true gamers could upload it in 480p 😂
9:54 damn the North Korean technology knows no bound, that guy went straight through the rock!
Platform 9¾
@@Renghub ur a blizzard Harry
at 10:07 you can see him come back out of the rock haha
@@ramasubbusrinivasan2872 i'm a w0t?
It's possibly an lod object with no collision. that's why he no clipped smoothly.
This game looks so good it doesn't even need a remaster. I cant believe this game is 13 years old.
Ikr? Did this game really need a remaster in the first place?
@@EliasYFGM nah, prolly just EA running out of ideas...
@President Joe Biden EA is the publisher
14 years old now
@President Joe Biden ea the company dude
Crysis was so ahead of its time that even its own remaster, released over a decade later, is put to shame in many aspects.
The real question all along should've been, "but can the future run Crysis?"
It really was the most advance game
The same can be said for gta 3. Even so, the remaster still looks better than the original. Y’all must be blind, or either in denial.
complete money waste... to buy new one
@@hihowareya4004 its a waste of money if you already have crysis. it also doesn't run as well. plus if you are using amd graphics cards it will run exceptionally terrible since the remaster uses rtx.
Crysis was way ahead of its time. I remember playing it for the first time back then, and thinking there is nothing like this in the market at the moment. I was happy that my PC could run it on medium settings. I remember shooting down a palm tree into two pieces, and taking them and placing them on the road. When the enemies arrived with thier vehicle, it capsised because of my improvided trap. My mind was blown by that.
damn, thats sad, i was excited to get this remastered version but now...
I don't recommend you to get this remaster it's really don't worth the money
Just add some graphic mod to the original Crysis and you got a better graphic already maybe even better than this remaster version
@@thewolf6943 No remaster is worth the money, lol. They're fucking texture packs, you can download that for free for most games.
@@IamAW yeah i agreed all the way up until i heard the sound comparisons. wow those were 100x better in the remastered. and a few things like the water i thought looked better in remastered. most of the other stuff i agreed.
@@EmpireHitSquad just gotta had a sound mod my friend, but I think this remaster is still better than that "remaster" we had for mafia II
Lmao im pirating it rn its only 18gb i download games on steamunlocked no viruses if you dont trust me well yiur on your own
what would be hilarious is someone modding in more environmental details like the remaster more trees increase draw distance and crush the remaster
@@BobsRevenge ah yes, flood the streets, oversaturate everything, exaggerate on the bloom and you got yourself a graphics mod
@@ABC-in2le Don't forget setting the depth of field to start a few yards out from the player!
@@BobsRevenge yards? i think you mean nanometers
Why are you commenting so much
@@shane4429 disappointment with a passion
did anyone notice that dude clipping through that rock on the beach when he was showcasing the shotgun?
I noticed it too and decided to keep it - because this kind of nonsense seems to happen a lot
Lol I have see now after your comment .. hilarious xD
9:53
For who want a quick jump in to it
@@pennaverdeful thank you, what a comedy lol
Dude, I just to saw it.. Oh boy /facepalm.. I insist, this remaster is a sham.. Nobody asked for it!
*It doesn't look better, it just looks different.*
*you dont need to bold it*
*yes its bad but somebody gave it to me for free so I’m not complaining*
Sound is better & yes i do agree to a certain extent not much diffrence but if you look closely there are but i still prefer ORIGINAL this Remaster is poorly optimized...
@@Chuked it's looking like reverse
Remastered looking like original
And original looking like remastered
Due to graphics quality
@@thegameking3931 i got it cause some person gifted to me for free and I didn’t really like the game anyways so yeah
Crysis from 07 is still one of the best looking games today. I remember it was so good, that most computers couldn't run it, and even good gaming computers had trouble running it all full resolution. It was the game to really see if you had a good gaming pc.
This is the most generic comment you could gave possibly made. Are you an early AI?
Many of the issues (for example the frame rate locked animations of certain objects or the fences not breaking apart properly) are due to the remaster being based on the console version of Crysis.
Can someone explain to me why they have remastered the console version?
@@thetrouserpress4494is probably was simpler than getting very old code updated
@@thetrouserpress4494 It was on a newer engine and probably easier to work with
They took from an already inferior version. Why though?
This game is the definition of tech dept...too much work to go back and unpack and fix badly optimised code. They need to remake this game with a new efficient engine. Or just play the original with mods and liquid nitrogen your cpu to get a decent framerate. Crytek has fallen so far
That akward moment when original Crysis looks better than remastered 😳😳
Dude most of us oldies still remember. This just makes me cry.
@Danny Williams yes, it needed. But properly done. The original Crysis is a technical mess, and it deserves to be played with good performance.
Yep, I was much more impressed with how well the *original* Crysis aged than with its own remaster.
It really doesn’t look better than remastered. Let’s be honest.
@@ryp1562 The remaster is clearly better technically, but the original game looked way more realistic. I wish the remaster would be based on the PC version (because of better physics and volumetric effects) and wouldn't have messed up the style of the game, but would have concentrated on SVOGI + Raytraced Reflections + higher resolution texture variants of the originals. (instead of changed textures, which sometimes look good, and sometimes bad)
Great video. It emphasizes how programming efficiency went down over the years. On my 2013 pc, I have to run modern games at graphics settings and resolutions that make them look way worse than any game from 2015 or earlier.
The OG Crysis had that natural battleground tropical setting, whereas the remaster looks like you’re in on a vacation
2007 Crysis it's so powerful even the remastered version still can't make a more decent graphics
Because it is only remastered, not REMAKE
@@Mychannelbandung serius amat ngab idup lo
@James Sunderland consoles are great too, Fxck off with the PC elitist bullshxt
9:54 Crysis Remastred contains ghosts that pass through the rock.
What
@@wunpis9541 You can see again in 10:07
And again in 10:42
Nice
Don't judge him guys, not every1 can afford a house. So what if he is living in a rock
the fact that crysis 3 looks better than the "remaster" is kinda sad.
I mean, even until now crysis 3 is still up there compared to the other new high graphics games
@@lend5201 Not really though. The character models are even better than in most games releasing today, but everything else looks outdated.
@@maxkho00 nah I'm currently playing it with 4k res on pc and it does still looks good as the newer games, not just the in game models
@@miyakothug3142 By newer games, which ones are you talking about? Try and play Crysis 3 and then either one of RDR2 (on PC max settings), Demon's Souls remake, Battlefield 5 (the Rotterdam map), Metro Exodus (Volga map with ray-tracing on and with max settings), or Far Cry 5 right after that. Or maybe even something like The Division 2 for a more similar setting. Do you honestly see no improvement? To me, I could easily tell that Crysis 3 isn't a new game, or at least a relatively new game that uses outdated graphics technology (e.g. Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice).
@@maxkho00 finally someone who isn't an ipocrite... thank you
The original still stands out after all that time. Incredible.
There's this awesome, subtle little thing that happens in the original game; as you fire an automatic weapon, the camera slowly zooms in until you stop firing. It is, of course, GONE in the remaster, further betraying the original game's penchant for doing neat stuff.
Pathetic that a game from 2007 looks superior compared to the 2020 remaster. It’s been 13 years.
Both have advantages and disadvantages visually. And graphics really haven't changed a huge deal since 2007. Crysis is still one of the best looking games ever made. I think it's more of a testament to how amazing the original is, rather than a slight on the remaster. I definitely wouldn't describe it as "pathetic".
@@BrokenGodEnt cringe.
@@BrokenGodEnt Yeah but a remaster should be better in every ways not worst is some cases and better in some cases. I'll just keep my money and play the og crysis
I think consoles are to blame. They had to severely hamper Cryengine to get it working on there instead of fully exploring what it could achieve on PC.
@@Wabajak13 No, consoles are not to blame. The devs are to blame. They used the 360 port of Crysis to make this abomination not the pc version.
Crysis: the game that still looks so good that it's impossible to remaster.
Not impossible at all to remaster... it just could've been much better..
It really doesnt look that good anymore
I'm still playing it ❤️🔥
You're kind of overreacting, it's doesn't even look that great compared to some AAA games these days
It looks kinda abysmal compared to 2020 graphically intensive games, like DMC5 or Red Dead 2.
That said, it has a cheaper price so i find it a bit forgiving. (Or maybe that's the reason)
But still calling it - pushing pcs, but looking like 2015.
"Look how they massacred my boy"
Look how they remassacred my boy
This side by side comparison only goes to show how amazing and truly a game-changer Crysis was back in 2007, and boy do I remember. But what I realised after watching your video too is that if I was a new young gamer and you told didn’t told me when Crysis was first released I think most would say 2012-2013. Way ahead of its time
More than that, Crysis needs 4GB of VRAM for everything running on very high settings, took almost a decade for this.
that sound of the new Sniper Rifle reverb is awesome :D
For a remaster this seems like kind of a joke. Thank you so much for this content.
Not a very funny joke either
I agree, fans are able to make better mods than this...
@@ImKent this is a joke
It is a joke, this is Cryteks payback to the PC community after its massive loss from the Original, at one point being the most pirated game on the net. Crytek forever gave up on PC, after the loss, it was clear from every game they ever released afterwards including this one.
@@SteveStap1 Interesting, I didn't know this. Considering this, the remaster is good work, and PC-only PC-optimized titles are simply a thing of the past. I hope they will release the editor, this way fans can contribute to this (for pirates unfortunately free) game, and bring it to its full potential.
Crysis 2007: BALLS OF STEEL GRAPHICS AND SOUND
Crysis remastered: BALLS CUT OFF
HAHAH :D
crysis
looks more natural with it's colors, looks crisper overall
crysis remastered had some reflection barells look ridiculously reflective like someone polished them
Looking at your view count and sub count, I think you are sub botting. How are you verified?
Victor Anglin yeah but UA-cam has to check the channel
Victor Anglin I checked his popular videos. He has a few popular videos which is fair. Still his recent Channel views seems to be dipping
@@gianttacogod youtube algorithm. same thing happened to my channel. the system pushed the smaller channel aside and feature all the big youtubers on the main spotlight.
Pharmit24 ahh so that’s why all his views are dipping despite his sub count? If so I understand. UA-cam algorithm is very weird.
I just reinstalled this game and it's always a huge pleasure to play it. It's so nice and effects are truly amazing for a 13 years old game which is still hard to play in full video settings on a modern pc !
I played it for the first time this year, as my PC at the time could only manage probably around 10-15 FPS on very low and I decided that wasn't the way to experience Crysis. And boooy oh boy, was the wait worth it, and then some! I gotta say, there are few gaming experiences more satisfying than completing Crysis on the Delta difficulty (IIRC that's the hardest one) with no 'hairs and enemies speaking Korean. It really was/is a jewel and one of the biggest milestones in gaming.
Honestly all they had to do is release a big official patch for original to run on modern systems without tweaks.
The original with mods absolutely destroys this so called remaster, it didn’t even fix the cpu core issues of the original release.
Blackfire Mod. End of discussion
Extreme emersion mod. Remember that one? Still got them all on a drive somewhere.
Also watched DF review, from the moment Alex told that they used Console port for this upgrade, I was so pissed. Why would they do that? They made the game for PC specially and then they remaster the Console port. They tarnish the image of original Crysis which was meant to be PC exclusive.
Like when 343 remastered halo ce and used gearbox port instead of the original game wich looks better
They used the console port most likely because it runs on cryengine 3 instead of cryengine 2
@@Gost343 ironically that game was also done by Saber Interactive
This "remaster" could have been achieved with Reshade. In fact, I think they lost a lot of the unique realistic feel of the original. Everything looks cartoony now.
Agreed 100%. It looks more akin to Far Cry 3 now.....incredibly disappointing to say the least.
I mean personally I like both the more realistic look of the original AND its possible to make it look much more colorful in tasteful way with either mods (for free) like the Blackfire mod or just by adjusting your TV's/screen's settings.....Ive done both and the game looks brilliant that way even 13 years later. There is also Enchanced mod for those who want reflections and such and the game can look even more photorealistic that way.
Overall this mod is ONLY good for console gamers who only ever played 360 or PS3 versions of original Crysis.
@@Balnazzardi Blackfire mod is WAY less tasteful bro, with more (and less realistic) saturation and more bloom than the remaster while also getting that bloom less accurate due to relying on the aged lighting model of the original game, I get that people are hating on the remaster but it's like they completely forgot or unconsciously ignore all the negatives about the original and even the mod scene. Enhanced edition also comes with a lot of texture changes that are way more questionable than the remaster. I mean, Crysis still crashes for me randomly about once an hour and it's not even easy to find a copy of the original with the working 64-bit exe included and running without extra work. It's pretty much just GOG that is selling a usable and friendly copy of Crysis. Not only that, but if you put the object detail at the Crysis equivalent (Medium looks like Very High in the original) you get better performance with the remaster than the original with much higher quality textures and overall fidelity.
@@BobsRevenge Well I owned retail copy of the game and I had trouble getting it run smoothly even to this day...but then just couple days ago I bought copy from Steam and it also runs trouble free like GoG version. Gone were all the framerate issues that I experienced with the original retail version.
Also I understand what you are saying with those mods which is EXACTLY why I found the best the Crysis looks for me personally is chaning my Asus screen settings from standard mode to "scenery mode"...it does much the same job like Blackfire mod, but more "tastefully" brings out the colors from the game without the overuse of bloom. And like said, since it also runs smoothly, I see no point of buying the remaster, unless I would want to play it on Xbox Series X on some later date.
I also got Crysis Warhead running (more or less) smoothly after all these years by running it on Directx-9 mode rather than Directx10 and Warhead naturally looked more pretty than even original Crysis, so overall these are the kind of games that have held up incredibly well even after 13 years and I see no reason to either mod them or buying this remaster.
The way they botched the orange sunrise in the first mission and the lighting being way too dim and cloudy in the alien ship really just broke the deal for me. That and the colors being so ridiculously vibrant, it doesn't look like the Crisis I love. I'm not willing to sacrifice that for higher resolution textures which aren't even consistently higher.
@@Balnazzardi Gone were your framerate issues? I have a relatively fast computer (RTX 2070,1700x Ryzen, fast ram) and still can only get 45 fps at 4k. Blackfire overuses bloom A LOT more than the remaster, and exaggerates the over-bloomed sky in the original to the point of parody. It also ruins the color grading in the non-outdoor parts of the game. In fact, a lot of what Blackfire tries to do is done using better tech in the remaster, including the extra green in the jungle environment being propagated by global illumination instead of trying to trick the TOD settings (you can see this by looking at the green-shading on the dirt in more jungley areas, which is realistic) resulting in a more accurate look to what a real tropical island looks like in bright sunlight. The bloom effects in the remaster are in general more accurate to how real light interacts with surfaces, including compared to the original game, although it does change the look of the game and ruins some of the cinematics.
You must've downloaded the 64-bit exe for Crysis on Steam and forgotten, because it still crashes on launch and doesn't include the bin64 folder after reinstalling it just now. Crysis Warhead runs more smooth than the original since they optimized the engine more for it (I get about 60 fps average), but I do still get those crashes. Warhead never had the problem of not starting up on a 64-bit OS though.
Now we need to wait *Crysis Remastered Remake*
Is it worth buying it’s on special for ps4 rn ?🤔
@@kevin.a7089 I directly jumped to play Crysis 3 today without playing the previous versions and it looks cool for now
can’t wait for crysis remastered remake game of the year edition
Can’t believe how much of a work they put in the crysis at that time absolutely crazy
The style of the original wasn’t fully recaptured here, I don’t feel like
The remastered looks worse, WTF.
@Anatol my dad also called it closer to far cry lmao
@Anatol Exactly it looks like a far cry remaster not crysis.
Congratulations on the nice work you've done. Content like this is very rare. You brought basically every single comparison possible, and gave details on them, in such a way that is basically impossible to say that the remastered version is not disappointing.
This remastered is a complete joke and a major letdown...
No wander why the went EPIC exclusive cause they knew the reviews on STEAM would destroy this game.
The 3 original are all on Xbox pass, I'm just gunna play those instead.
@@worldsgreatestdetective926 on xbox? those are even worse if you ask me, reason why this remastered sucked is because it was a port of the the console port that was ported from the pc original LOL... JK JK
@@worldsgreatestdetective926 i think its EA play
Yeah on pc gamepass the original is included through ea play.
holy crap they didnt ? THIS IS MESSED UP . i loved cryteck for repsecting PC gaming but going epic exclusive is just the wost thing you can do .
Judging on those Pictures, Crysis OG still holds up to be one of the most beautiful games ever. The landscape is fotorealistic and the lighting is near perfect.
1:11 Why the remaster version appears so stuttery?
The optimization isn't too great.
Makes you appreciate the genius that is the original even more.
this is the first game I asked for a refund.
I'm so sad about this remaster.
Sorry, my friend! :(
When I heard about the remaster... I was so happy, I loved crysis back in 2007 it was just a blast even if I was playing at 15 fps...
Now it's just sad...
I had hoped for a full remaster like we had for some games like Spyro for instance, with gameplay and its visual identity intact but with everything redone/reworked from models to textures/shaders and so on... I don't like its cartoonish look now :/
@@SagittariusAx Honestly, I would be happy with higher-res textures, better lighting and performance fixes.
The lighting is horrible in this remaster and performance is almost non-existent.
A remake would be a dream come true... but if the remaster achieved only the minimum expected, I would be happy.
Hey at least its bit as bad as the Assasins Creed III remaster
9:56 dude walks right thru a boulder. Disappointing remaster for sure. I bought Crysis back in 2007 and would rather just play that version again.
9:56 Is it me or the enemy npc just go through a ROCK!?
Subscribed! I am convinced by your reviews of comparison and thank you
This is a result of an extremely lazy effort that has put into remastering a title.
and the devs are just proud of their poor optimization calling a graphics settings "Can it run Crysis?"
John Marshall How is that them being proud of it? I agree this is lazy but that was a joke when the original came out.
@@II-uj5fm
Them saying "can it run crysis" is like them saying most pcs won't be able to optimize to such a "high" graphics setting such as that, such as how back in the day most pcs were incapable of doing so.
@@II-uj5fm
So yes they're overly proud of themselves thinking it's so advance most pcs won't run it :)
@@KingSolidTails Same mentality backfired 7 years later. Cryengine fall behind in comparison to Unreal/Unity (Scalability wise).
7:44 Water effects were one of the most powerful aspects of original Crysis. It's unbelievably they made it much worse after 13 years.
bro they need money...do you know the crytek company's stroy?
When the "remaster" looks 10x times worse than its 13 year old predecessor. What a joke!
16x times worse, like Todd Howard would say ☺️
"16 times less details, 4 times downgraded realism"
It's literally unbelievable. WTF Crytek
i picked up the remastered trilogy 4 years after this video was released, i think its safe to say that most of the complaints do not exist in todays version, at least imo. I felt sort of the same way as playing black mesa for the first time
If I understand this right, Crysis Remastered was developed over the Xbox 360/PS3 port of Crysis, which was a port of the game to the more console-optimized Cryengine 3 (The PC version used Cryengine 2). A lot of graphical effects were cut in order to get it to work on the 360 and PS3. Because of this, I assume that is why there is a lot of graphical effects missing and a noticeable visual downgrade overall.
13:11 There's an option for toggle nanosuit. It's in your settings. Just enable classic nanosuit.
0:30 You can actually see that Crysis: Remastered named the "Ultra" Settings into "Can it run Crysis?" Settings.
Yea the remaster is a joke
@@laos85 yeah...sadly
ROFL !!!!!!!! =)))))))
My main issue with this Remaster is the art style. Lighting, colours. The artists behind this didn't get the Crysis ambiance.
The same problem that plagued Crysis 2 and 3.. it's oversaturated with glossy objects...... consoles....
@@crysed7897 No need for artistic integrity or good lighting and textures - just slap shaders and bloom on *everything* . Bam done, give me money.
im just now realizing how ahead of its time the original Crysis actually was and it blows my mind
Also the shadows in the remaster feature a variable penumbra. In fact too many games don't do this properly. The slight pixilating is probably an artifact of sorts.
Crysis Remaster is the 360 version a upgrade from them.
Crysis pc that shoud be the minimum and then upgrade it.
What we want was crysis that use modern cpus and then you can easy upgrade
the settings over the orginal.
But there go the cheap way, we can t use the ultra settings becouse one core is allways on 100%
on the limit.
I forgot this even released. I thought it was releasing this Friday.
No one even cares now, even the crysis fanboys because half of them think it looks so bad that this is still in development
I'm guessing the HD version is taking a while to upload
11:30 the rocky debris don't even create splashes in the water when they fall, compared to the original.
C1 has a more organic overall looks. It just works. The green-ish coloration is more realistic, dirty looking even though the technology behind it is dated.
Nick, thank you for the video, mate.
Was waiting for this one after I saw your comment on DF's video.
Just for kicks, can you do a comparison between this Remastered and the last Crysis ever released, Crysis 3.
Fat chance. But still.
Man the gun sound in crisis remastered sounds like they went through a opera session
Explain to me how a 2007 looks significantly better than 2020.. and its a "Remaster". Make it make sense please
You can't, they REALLY fucked this up.
The remaster was built on legacy versions of Cryengine 3 released for Xbox 360 and PS3. That means CPU is locked to single-thread, with all the sacrifices and corner-cutting that comes with that.
@@Circuitssmith So... Why they used that version instead of the PC version?
@@skolotaj
I'm guessing it was easier and they just went "ah screw the PC users."
@@Circuitssmith Really disappointing
Crysis OG is better because the engine was just balls to the walls. Cry Engine 2 was just 1 but with heavy optimisations to allow crysis to run on Consoles. CryTek should have just added newer API and raytracying support to their original Engine, this would have made this new remastered version actually standout.
1:56 the details of Phsyco's face were off due to the subsurface scattering shader effect which it was unknown back 2007 , they exaggerated the effect a little bit that's the problem i guess
Everybody gangsta till the original is the real remaster
What I’ve learned: the more wet you make a texture, the more money and good reviews you tubers will give
Yea lmao...
9:56 the guy just walked inside the rock on the left
10:08 he walks out of the rock
10:42 he walks out again
He's just vibing leave him alone.
A 2007 game that looks better than any game today, says a lot.
No, it doesn't say anything because it isn't true.
@@hexerei02021 Yes, it does say everything because the original 07’ (non remaster) looks better than most of the games today. So if you make a statement and have nothing to back it up with, shut it.
@@Carlito_Brigante93 Most triple A games from even 2015 look a lot better. Witcher 3, Horizon Zero Dawn, Cyberpunk, Uncharted, Metro and a lot more. Original Crysis is nowhere near graphics of games coming out today.
@@hexerei02021 Bhahaha lol, no they don’t look better, they are the exact games that look like trash in comparison, with long winded boring completely dead atmosphere and awful textures/details in graphics, that looks like a smudged mess. Get your eyes checked
@@Carlito_Brigante93 Ok, bro, you are blinded by nostalgia. No sense arguing with you.
Considering our machines, actually can run Crysis today. I found this remaster to be a joke. I barely noticed anything different other than the nanosuit and some particle effects. The weird fence and tree bugs I noticed but your comparison made me notice even more problems. Plus indeed,the stress it gives to your pc and optimisation made me feel like I was back in 2007. Overall the only thing this remaster gave us is a chance to revive the "can it run Crysis?" Meme and not much else. Also god these gun sound effects are more of a ear rape than improvement.
If they made a "SIKE " setting, that let you run the game with all of the potential of CryEngine 5.3, o boi the game could looks so awesome
@@AZRAELLABS And PC go boom :D
One fact. Crysis was a revolutionary game, and as a historic event, one can't be repeated again. Crytek can't just overdo themselves now. They did the best they can, and the only thing remaining for them is to bring something new, without changing the old, already polished content.
remastered version made by saber interactive, not by crytek
I dont know why today's game has less overhaul physics and environmental details as compared to previous gen like comparing Farcry 2 with Farcry 5
They should remaster far cry 2 with 5’s graphics and make it a great game
Crysis was so good back in the day that even the remaster can't run Crysis.
I’m wondering if these issues were patched because I’m playing the remastered right now and don’t have the majority of these issues. Trees all fall normally too.
Uhm, I believe that the remaster does use ray tracing for ocean reflections. It's just that screen space reflections is layered on top. It's seemingly common practice in the early stages of this generation. Metro exodus enhanced edition does something similar. Basically you can capture screen elements that are still too demanding to ray trace.
The ray tracing method on concoles doesn't use ray tracing for ocean reflections.
This is why I didn’t bother with the remastered stick to your guns and enjoy the original. These Devs really take the best parts and make them worse then take stuff no one really cared about and add heaps of detail like the barrels which look like they have been put into a bowling ball polishing machine.
THEY COULD HAVE MADE IT UP TO 3 COME ON BRUH THEY FUCKED THIS UP BAD BUT COULD HAVE MADE IT GREAT
I actually got scared for a sec when he said that he's gonna crank up the settings of crysis to the max...
So basically don't buy Crysis Remastered play the original
(Just like Skyrim Remastered only the water looks better than the original)
At around 10:20 I see that after more than a decade, they kept the weird clipping when grabbing the magazine for the SCAR.
Did the updates fix it?
Can Crysis Remastered run Crysis? Turns out, no.
This is sad tbh. More so because the setting "Can it run Crysis" now sounds like such an arrogant bs.
Lmao any call of duty from the last 5 years looks better than this
@@gamingnoah9807 no it doesn't but I get your point
@@parthmehra8630 ok, last 4 years
@@gamingnoah9807 nah
@@Maximus20778 look at infinite warfare compared to this infinite warfare is infinitely better
I still believe it was such a waste of time remastering the game which was iconic already. Just fix the issues and get it run better on multi core, then may be introduce tessellation, raytraced reflections. Rather than making a remaster to say we are back to burn your PC to dust with poorly optimized game that you used to love. Crytek! what were you thinking? "Can it run Crysis?" No! nothing can run it if it is this poorly optimized.
They should have done a remake instead of a remaster.
The game runs practically on the same outdated engine limitations the original one did (no multi-core cpu utilisation), hence why the performance is (and always will be) dogshit.
I guess they didn't have the money or interest for a proper remake on the most current engine. For shame.
This happens when you create a game with love in 2007 - you create an immortal piece of art. Crysis Remastered was made as a cashgrab and its obvious, EA at its finest everybody...!
9:53 "Don't mind me, I'll just phase into this rock" - KPA dude on the beach
When I heard about the remaster I got excited listing the improvements in my head such using more cores to get more performance,getting rid of that loading stutter to make the game run seamlessly and running the game on a much faster engine to get doom like gameplay and what we got is another benchmark tool,thankyou crytek for getting my hopes up.ggggrrrrrhhh
"Popping" colours by ridiculous over-saturation is the most backward trend in modern game development. Skyrim SE, Hitman 2016 remastered, Crysis, Witcher 3 B&W and several others. Not every game is Mario. Nuance is a thing.
What is....oh, you mean Blood and Wine? Hmmm.....I'm not sure if I like that news. I haven't played TW3 yet**, but I remember reading that one of the expansions had some significant technical improvements, and that CDPR was going to patch them into the main game. What you said makes me wonder if the main game was patched to look like Blood and Wine?
** The Witcher: Enhanced Edition is a masterpiece and one my my top favorite games. The Witcher 2 was my biggest gaming disappointment. I'm still looking forward to trying TW3, though. I've had the box sitting on my shelf for a while now. But first I've got to read through the books again, _then_ finish my 5th playthrough of TW:EE, and _then_ my 2nd playthrough of TW2.
@@bricaaron3978 Can I ask you why The Witcher 2 was a big disappointment for you?
I'm just curious as usually peoples attitudes are almost the exact opposite with Witcher being considered ok-good, Witcher 2 being good and Witcher 3 being awesome.
@@mikebenire3979 Hi, thanks for asking! I'll explain why TW2 was a disappointment, and in another post I'll offer my opinions about why some people dislike The Witcher/The Witcher: Enhanced Edition.
In short, The Witcher 2 has almost nothing in common with The Witcher: Enhanced Edition. That's not an exaggeration. This is largely due to the fact that TW:EE was a PC game, whereas TW2 was designed for console hardware/controllers and the sensibilities of console gamers.
1. Loss of the real choice & consequences that altered things throughout the entire game, replaced with a few large-scale plot branchings in TW2.
2. A limited Mass Effect-style dialogue system that is much worse than TW:EE, in which the player never knows what Geralt is going to say.
3. The fun, interesting combat of TW:EE was thrown out and replaced with combat that every honest person admits is a farce.
4. The entire concept of Alchemy was downgraded--it's not fun, and far less useful.
5. Potions are basically useless. In TW:EE Geralt can drink them at any time, just like in reality. In TW2, Geralt has to somehow magically foresee what potions he's going to need to drink ahead of time. Once a fight starts--no potions.
6. The gritty, dismal Eastern European medieval atmosphere that made TW:EE so unique was tossed out in favor of a bright, colorful aesthetic.
7. The appearance of Geralt and the other characters was completely changed for no legitimate reason.
8. Loss of the fantastic, memorable music that fills TW:EE from beginning to end, and plays a crucial role in its atmosphere. I honestly didn't like or remember a single musical piece from TW2.
9. A UI that is a huge downgrade. It is designed for console controllers and is poorly designed and cumbersome to control with a mouse.
10. An *abysmal* inventory system that is a huge downgrade from the simply grid system of TW:EE. It was made to accomodate console controllers.
11. An unsatisfying upgrade system that is much less useful and interesting than that of TW:EE.
12. The Field of View is much smaller than TW:EE, and makes playing very unenjoyable for many PC players.
13. Loss of MSAA. The only way to get true AA in TW2 is FSAA, which is extremely expensive. This is because they switched to a console-friendly deferred renderer, which doesn't properly support MSAA.
14. Non-remappable keys for important functions like inventory and journal.
15. A laughably useless map. I mean literally useless. It _looks_ awesome, but can't actually be used to find one's way around, defeating the entire purpose of a map.
16. Quick Time Events.
17. But wait! There's more!
I was expecting TW:EE Improved, and instead got something entirely different that was an overall downgrade. In short, the ONLY good thing about TW2 is the story, whereas the The Witcher: Enhanced Edition is the opposite--you don't have to follow the story because _playing the game_ is actually enjoyable.
@@mikebenire3979 As far as why _some_ people didn't like The Witcher (remember, it was a critically acclaimed and financially successful game), we first have to consider an unfortunate fact.
The first release--The Witcher, in 2007--was not a fully polished game. It has some combat timing issues and various other problems, but arguably the biggest issue was the loading times: Every single time you entered any interior--even just a tiny shack--you had literally over a full minute load time. And you had the same load time when you exited. So I can imagine something like that being a factor in why a person put it down.
So some people played The Witcher, but didn't play The Witcher: Enhanced Edition, which was a massive (free) upgrade which not only fixed the load times and other issues, but added significant upgrades & enhancements in various areas.
But I'm convinced that the biggest reason why some people don't like TW/TW:EE is because they didn't understand the combat. Whenever someone says that the combat is "terrible" or "broken", it is a sure sign that he didn't actually understand it.
I know this, because the same thing happened to me with Batman: Arkham Asylum & City. I wanted to like the games so much, but every time I tried I gave up, mostly because I'm not a big fan of melee combat, and I thought the combat was simple button-mashing and boring.
But one day I decided to try AC one more time. This time I did some research online, and I realized that the combat wasn't button-mashing -- it was actually _timing-based_ and rather complicated if you take the time to learn it. Suddenly I was having a blast, and had the best gaming experience I had had in a while.
The combat of TW:EE is _timing-based_ just like the Arkham games. You don't Click-Click-Click like Skyrim or other games--you click _once,_ and then wait for Geralt to finish his attack, and then click once more at the right time to continue chaining the attack. Just like Batman.
But it is clear that many people did not understand this, and thus thought it was "broken" or "bad". I get it, I do. I understand how the combat would _seem_ bad if you just tried button-mashing, but that's not the fault of the game.
Is the combat of TW:EE the best ever? No. But for a PC RPG, it's well-designed, fun, and _just works._ That is something that can _not_ be said about the combat of TW2.
There is no better example than Halo CE Anniversary.
Crysis has been remastered by the modding community. It is the only true ' Remaster ', this is just a quick cash grab. The original is much better.
Am I the only one who thinks that the old games look good enough as they are and don’t really need remasters but new instalments instead?
seems like a lot of these studios that remaster a game, they just add modern systems and think that just makes it look better. without ever trying to make it match the original art direction or tweak it to where it actually looks good or even natural.
This is the same problem I have with MW2 remastered. the lighting may be “atmospherically” realistic, but it affects the overall cinematography of the scenes.
I thought the CoD4 and MW2 remasters were somewhat disappointing, visually, because the overall vibe was totally off. If it's midday, it should be bright outside, ESPECIALLY in a middle east town, a Favela, etc. But the sun drenched look was gone.
honestly, when I saw the remastered I thought I was looking at the original one
Having played through the “remaster” now I kind of feel scammed. It felt like the changes were minor. Not enough was done to warrant this release. At least I got it on sale for $19.99
Recently replayed the original trilogy. I was thinking of buying a remaster. Thank you, you saved me money and nerves!
Raytracing just makes it faster /easier on development time. It doesnt really always make it look better. Alot of recent techniques to game design revolve around making game design cheaper and faster /and are sold to the public as making the game look better .