January 11, 2013 at 12:12 AM

I think you lost your credibility with that comment when you twice iterated that Crysis 1 is a 7 year old game, as well as saying it doesn’t have the best graphics by a long shot.Do you know what “optimizing” means? In rendering, it usually refers to either changing code to allow the most efficient processing possible, or actually removing and moving actual game assets. In this case they did both. Does Crysis Warhead look that much worse than Crysis 1? No, and yet the requirements are lower. Sure they changed some things, but the game isn’t that far off from the original, and some things were actually improved. They are doing the same thing again, except have been given a larger amount of time to do it, and have a lower hardware spec to hit. The game will be downgraded overall in several areas, but that is the norm for any console game. To say it will look just okay is an insult.You can’t seem to grasp this concept. If you take a game with very high quality assets and shrink it, you will get a much better product than with a game with medium-quality assets created for consoles alone. If you go the very high quality route, you just have to downscale until you are able to just fit under the absolute maximum. While for a game created for consoles, the developers have to eyeball it and can often end up with lower-quality assets than what they could have fit.That is the principle behind it and just because Crysis 1 was created a couple years ago, doesn’t mean they can’t somehow optimize it effectively. Show me a game on consoles that looks as good as this with such large environments as well. The only contender would be Battlefield 3, but a jungle setting will look better than an urban setting any day.VN:F [1.9.15_1155](from 2 votes)

accutane classic car insurance

Display Messages: Threaded     Flat
0 Replies