I always thought Crysis 2 looked fabulous and was really pushing ahead of its time, that the remaster doesn't look much different (and perhaps not as good in some areas) is a real testament to this.
The High Res Pack really made the difference. Modders made far better "versions" of this game than the actual company did on their remakes.. over 10 years later. Depressing if you ask me and sad to know, we could have much better lookin games today. But at least we got Horizon Zero Dawn ^^
It's lightning that made huge difference... Crysis used complex reflection which was heavy on cpu and mostly single core performance oriented upto crysis 3... The reflection used on remaster is very similar to Ray tracing and problem is, ray tracing is not shiny... 2:03 best example... For original they have used independent reflection on car but on remaster it's one reflection acting for all area from one certain point and since the area is closed, it doesn't reflect like original.. While remaster lighting and shadows is very close to real, we have come to conclusion that shiny and reflection means better graphics.. 😂 Look at the car headlight reflection of remastered which looks real unlike original where they have attached reflection independently to car... In real life cars are nit that shiny..
Crysis 2 Remastered just came out 2021 but yet does not compare to COD MW 2019🏡HOME INVASION🔫CALL OF DUTY MW💣RECORDED IN🎥8K📹FOR EXTRA DETAIL 4K+HDR📼🔍(GAME CHANGER SETTINGS)🏠 ruclips.net/video/z0xgT4dclxc/видео.html
This is like the perfect case of realism vs art design. We only thought Crysis was realistic compared to its contemporaries. It was a curated hyper reality
Because people don't even understand what "hyperrealism" is. Most gamers doesn't know what a PBR material is, not even Ray tracing: - What is RT for you little gamer monkey? - RT makes games realistic. - Ok but, do you know how it works? - Ye, makes gaem realistic.
Crysis 1 has realistic art style, sequels do not. The only game that did what Crysis 1 did with visuals since its release is Kingdom Come Deliverance. I haven't played any other games that did that visual style as well as those two games, even Crysis 1 Remastered fucked it up.
i can see this are all console gamers which discovered the crysis franchise with crysis 2, the first crysis and warhead were the real art style direction, these last games are just as bland as the last crysis remastered
Just the opposite to the first one, Crysis Remastered became brighter with the remaster, the original was more, "color accurate", Ray tracing is always overused in reflections. You go out of your home, no matter the weather, cars NEVER looks like mirrors, just like DXR is used.
Согласен, у оригинала общее освещение не до жало, в ремастере свет более реалистичней и мягкий, но в каких то моментах он не нужен. Радует хоть что трассировку добавили)
I would say, that remastered version looks more realistic, cose cars and other things or stuff that staying outside in rain, fire, dirt and smoke, everything won't be so shining after couple day's already.
I guess we are in the Age of Remastering games instead of developing new ones... Grand Theft Auto Trilogy and now this. Anything new actually coming out? And Battlefield and COD don't count those all still feel the same.
@@Xardas_99 Real life doesn't look so dull and muted. Original had it's own issues with that shit poop colored filter and bloomy look all console games used to have (and let's face it, Crysis 2 was a console game) but definitely looks more vibrant than the remaster.
To me I don't see major differences, in some cases I prefer the original HOWEVER when you consider the performance huge gap, the original comes on top by a mile
agree with this, the requirements are going up and up and we're getting very little visual increase. same with ray tracing imo, huge cost at minimal visual increase
C2 Remastered still fails to impress compared to OG . They wanted to bring down the OG contrast but messed things up in the process. Now you have a complete blank looking game as you're showing it, even if some textures are improved. We should wait for modders to remaster the game themselves.
No, it doesnt. Remaster looks better in every possible way, however it seems some of you guys prefer JJAbrams color grading and flat (unrealistic) lighting. Do you even know what GI does and why original game has blue color cast everywhere?
@@ok-70707 I've made a typing mistake (I'm typing on my phone). Original game looks much worse because it has: -Prebaked (flat and unrealistic) lighting. Indirect shadows are missing in remaster, and without dynamic GI there's blue (cold) color cast everywhere. -Unrealistic color grading (blown out highlights, black crush, oversaturated colors). -Original game has no RT reflections (only low resolution cubemaps that shines even in the shade or even in pitch black room). RT alone makes a huge difference in this game, because most textures reflects light. -low resolution textures (512x512 vs 7680x4320!!). Orignal game use sharpening on many textures, but true high resolution texture (true fine details) is always better. From technical point of view remaster eats orignal game for breakfast and no wonder MUCH MORE realistic graphics requires more hardware resources.
@@PabloB888 nothing worth upgrading to from original crysis 2. Let’s be honest crysis remastered trilogy is for console gamers who never could experience any crysis in the way PC players could.
Nothing wrong with the old graphics really. Maybe slightly over saturated. They tidied things up and changes a few things. The lightning. I like how the sun shines on the ground in the old version better.
Will say for the original, the reflections on that taxi at the end are quite impressive!, I played it back on PS3 over 10 years ago. I remember the game being awesome graphically and the way it handled through the whole experience! I'll admit I think both versions of the game still look great even in today's modern graphics, the remaster looks better in some ways and the original had nuance things in it like the complex shadows on that taxi, but then for example the fire in the remaster looks more believable 😁 They're both pretty stellar :)
They did the remaster from the old console version , not the PC version thats why it looks so bad , its crazy how they thought doing thats based on a version lower in graphics than the original pc version .
Remastered version looks much better. The original one has too many post-process effects like bloom, contrast etc. It reminds me of countless "ultra-realistic graphic mods" that makes everything more colorful and contrasted but destroys realism. I always preferred more grounded look than cheap effects so for me remastered version wins easily.
There is no "mexico" filter. The colors are more natural. And the 2010's move is the transformers blue tint (like the original had), and with over the top bloom.
What a joke of a remaster! There are hardly any differences. Yes, there are some things that stick out: better shadows in one place, better reflections in another, and a more accurate sky color. But the performance penalty (and the necessity of an entirely separate purchase) to get what is effectively a modest revision of the same thing we had 10 years ago is unjustified and ridiculous.
@Tractor Cannon the reason objects look less shiny is because of the realistic lighting but with dlss it is more shiny Alot of textures in c2 og are muddy And the charachters look better to while not distorting their faces
Also, they removed multiplayer, the fun factor of the three games literally deleted, that's also a bad change even if they shut down crysis 2's servers before remastered, i hope they don't so this for Crysis 3
I do think the remaster looks more realistic, and I prefer it due to the lighting and colours, the original was so dark and unnatural looking in areas to me. Textures across the board are better on the remaster, they are some of the best textures around, as for the rest of the game, for the most part it doesn't look 10 years better
The chopper at 1:21 really tells the story, They put a higher resolution texture but without intent. All the textures are too pristine with 0 desregard for the art style.
The remaster has realistic colors and better quality textures. It's also running on a modern version of the game engine that is designed for modern hardware.
Yeah, running at half the FPS while looking slightly better. Truly designed for modern hardware. Especially for selling it.
2 года назад+2
@@Broformist, sadly photo realistic graphics require much more processing power, one of the simplest example is a different reflections alghorithms, you can use aproximated effect using for example screen space reflections (cheap, but not work for all cases and produces visible artifacts) or ray traced reflections (expensive, but looks correct in any case) - probably most user will not bother artifacts during dynamic game play but it will complain for frame rate drops when more accurate solution is used...
@@domingorodriguez3077 Yep, like what is the point of "realistic lights eflections\shadows" in a completely unrealistic looking world. Reminds me of Q2 rtx, where everything looks off and does not fit game design.
So even when looking at this short video its clear that the remaster is technically superior. The global illumination and light bounce is more realistic thanks to SVOGI and the textures are superior. I think what's happening is some people like the color and contrast of the original better. But thats more of a matter of art style. The remaster contains superior graphics.
@@pointlessangle2149 Art style is subjective so you can't say one is objectively superior to another. However, if you like the art style of the original then that's fine. I'm not saying you can't. What I'm saying is the graphics of the remaster are superior. Better textures superior, more advanced lighting and ray tracing. I'm countering the claim people are making which is "the original has better graphics". It doesn't.
@@pointlessangle2149 completely disagree, I'd take hyper-realism over art style any day unless the game has a very unique art style like zelda botw or borderlands
You're blind. The lighting is far more realistic in the original, and has more detailed textures. The remaster just simplified things and added sharpening.
The real question should be "is it close enough to what the developers intended?" . If they intended the game to look realistic, remaster wins. If they intended to have a specific art style that is not meant to look real, original wins
How can you be that stupid? Those guys in comments don't shit about graphics, i get it. But when digital foundry literally puts improvements to your face, and you still can't see it... I've got bad news for you
Agreed... Maldo Mods and others did bring crysis 2 to the next level... this remaster changes the color tone and even the effects are weaker (less reflections and the fire looks crap), in my end it shows an inferior version of Crysis 2 (even the blood is strange)... They need to change or add the option to color mapping (Original or Remastered).
@1:02 On the right, it looks like it’s 5:00PM and the sun is clearly to the right. On the left picture it looks like the sun is sitting right in front of the truck. That’s the difference “Global Illumination” and Ray Tracing makes.
The original smoke and fire effects look better as well as the lighting the added raytracing makes no actual tangible improvements that I can spot other than destroying frame rates hardpass ill keep my original copy of Crysis 2 & 3 on origin and Crysis 1 and warhead on steam my take the original dev team which has long departed from working on this title would have done a way better job and possibly made the remasters a must have but alas!
The biggest problem is the remaster's incandescent sun... Yellow sunlight does not equal yellow landscape and sepia vision. Sunlight isn't like a lightbulb that only outputs one single color temperature, it's like 6 temperatures all at once that barely influences or tints the objects it hits. The best balance between remastering and preserving crysis's drive for realism would've probably been to just improve the assets but not touch the sky properties.. it's too yellow now
long story short: Money! as someone who played them all when they came out: this is just blatant moneymaking! these games where the gems of an era & there was no need atall for this, only "i want money", thats all🙄
remastered looks much better. stop giving free passes to glowy lighting due to culling limitations in old games. shiny and bright doesn't mean good. that car looks like a cubemap reflection from nfs hot pursuit 2 from 2002 svogi and rt reflections on the other hand look brilliant on the remaster. also spotted some biased in this comparision, as the massive texture and geometry changes were almost hidden by showing the only objects that weren't changed
В свое время после патча на DX10, второй Крайзиз был самой графонистой игрой на свете. Но комон, рей трейсинг дает правильное освещение, то что в оригинале все в глюре это красиво, но бестолково. Говорить что рей трейсинг не красив, это как ругаться в пасмурную погоду на сбой в матрице и отсутствие теней на улице. Первый Крайзиз еще нагляднее показывает, на сколько рей трейсинг делает освещение правильным и живым, а не то что в оригинале отражается все от всего словно вы светите на этот куст десятью лампами под разными углами
Not sure which one looks better, varies per location and stuff. But one thing is clear: lighting in the original oneis way better. Crysis was always a dream for kids like me to play on pc.. what a legendary game.
Been playing Crysis 2 again (normal version) and I don't really know why they bothered doing a remaster, the game looks amazing and always will. The design and graphics of the game is pretty timeless. It really holds up well.
Many areas where the original looks better, either sharper details, brighter stylized lighting, and overall less dull and desaturation. The new version may be technically 'more real'.. but I'd take the original, especially with the 120 frames vs. the under 60 hit you'll take with ray tracing at 1:22 in the video.
This game is super weird. It's in a transitory place where the game world still feels a bit barren, and most objects look oversized and a bit simplistic, while at the same time looking pretty good. It's hard to describe, but it's like you're in a model, a mockup of the real world, instead of the actual real world. it's very uncanny, is what i'm saying. i played it again in 2020 and i felt that all the way through.
I'm currently playing the original it and it feels exactly like what you are saying. It feels like it's a tech demo and a full game, Iike it feels old but yet new. It feels like I'm playing in my PS3 again
katılıyorum. Hele ki bukadar rakibi olmasına rağmen oyun piyasasında bulunmayan milletimizden birileirnin çıkıp biranda ea gamesle anlaşıp pazarlayarak piyasaya en yüksekten giriş yapmamız ve serii bitince çıkıp gitmemiz çok ilginç... İlk oyundan itibaren olaylar günümüze yakın tarihten başlıyordu... Kesinlikle bir tuhaflık var.
Its texture setting that create stutters.. Looks like High and very high texture setting eats more than 6 GB VRAM... I ran this game without stutter at 1440p DLSS quality and with texture in Medium and rest all settings very high and RTX setting -Performance. The game was rock solid.. I have RTX 2060 OC
In my opinion the remaster it's much more beautiful and natural for the eyes. That metallic taxi don't fit in the dark environment. They also fixed the withe borders (you can see on the trees) and dark textures
I also dont understand the hate. Ignoring the better textures, geometry and lighting of the remaster, the original looks like an 8yo maxed out every slider in windows movie maker.
@@faisal-nl2vf Have you actually played the remaster? The performance is great. In this video, the game is running at 4K with ray tracing turned all the way up. And DLSS turned off. Of course it's demanding.
Crysis 2 had a plastic like looking texture and material quality was not visible very slightly only on PC version. In xbox 360 and PS3 everything had a plastic like look to it.
It's simple cause they took from the Xbox 360 source code just like the crysis remastered one not the original pc code for remastering that's why it looks and performs worse you can check the crysis 2 intro from other channels when they're comparing base xbox/ps4 to pc when it was released ages ago check the nanosuit pattern it was gray and muddy in Xbox 360 just like the crysis remastered 2 unlike the original pc one when's it was darker and has photorealistic lighting and that's why I prefer crysis 2 & 3 original with tons of mod only crysis remastered are added to my library cheers hope this helps 👍🥂😉
There is no "xbox 360" source code for Crysis 2. Cryengine 3 is a multiplatform engine, meaning the game is developed simultaneously for every platform, until they split to accommodate each platform for hardware differences, and those differences are smaller textures, tuned down effects, or disabling some effects, but technologically they are all pretty much the same. C2R has everything that C2 on pc had with a DX11 patch and more. SVOGI isnt free, the lighting is far far more superior and accurate than their single LPV bounce, theres pretty much no light bleed through objects or around corners. Theres no more baked lights, light probes, and negative light probes, SVOGI is entirely responsible for lighting for every part of the level, giving it a far more realistic look. Ray tracing obviously isnt cheap. Theres a lot of 8k textures, hell, the new bus texture is almost as big as every texture in the original game (1.3gb of bus 8k textures, the original game file a total of 2.8gb). Theres a lot of 3D scanned models, the the most common used textures have been swapped for their higher res counterparts. Instead of using heavily contrasted textures, they let the materials do the lighting work, making the surrounding area and objects feel more lifelike cuz they reflect and react to light in a more realistic way. Every gun model and characters have been updated, animations have been unlocked. Everything apart from AI has been touched for Crysis 2. I dont know how can anyone with a straight face say that C2R looks worse than the original, they arent even in the same league.
@@DivvayKhatri somewhat better lighting in few cases? lol In literally every part of the game. Not even in the same ballpark. You maybe ought to play c2 and then c2r to see how big of a difference SVOGI alone makes.
@@Rajta_ yes! SVOGI is a game changer. Fully dynamic global illumination! Im no expert but damn i havent seen any other GI technique perform it better than cryengine's SVOGI.
@@branchprediction9923 There are better GI solutions out there, Metro Exodus' is more accurate, cuz SVOGI voxelizes the environment, but then again SVOGI is less expensive than Metro's GI. And they are both a form of ray traced GI solution, you also get ray traced shadows with SVOGI as well.
its because they sacrificed artistic style for realism. Honestly a testament to how good the visuals in crysis 2 were when the only thing they could do to make it look more realistic is to sacrifice parts that made it look good. Crysis literally looks better than real life lol
Running the highest quality ray traced reflections at native 4K with no DLSS is insanity. There's a reason DLSS was invented -- because RT is very expensive. You've got two options. Run at a lower resolution, or turn down RT quality.
I didnt notice the stutter in any Crysis game other than Crysis 3, and that was only after I upgraded my system and got an RTX 3070, where before I had a GTX 970. The biggest disappointment in Crysis 2 remastered was the oil slick rainbow effect on the puddle by the ammo shed next to the fountain on the last level ( where you smash the 3 pipes before jumping down the long tunnel ) that looked realistic in the original, but just looked flat in the remastered game. Crysys 2 and 3 Remastered both crashed at one point in the game, which never happened on the original games.
It's normal that will looks different, before, the rays and lights were an way to transfer feelings planned by the game artists and, now, the luminosity and their respective fonts interact with the scenario of more realistic and calculated forms because the graphics cards does the work based on optical physics rules
As someone who doesn't have a PC, the main perk of the Remastered editions os the games is the 60fps that we didn't get with the originals (unless you had a PC).
Lol the remastered version of this game is far superior to the original. As a long time fan I was blown away with the ray tracing and color this time around. Not sure if your PC has something wrong with it maybe
People are mixing up art preference with realism. The light propagation is far superior in the remaster. People just like the saturated colors of the original.
@@QuanLovesGaming It's probably youtube's compression's fault, you need to look at them side by side at the highest settings in order to see the difference clearly, the remastered also looks more realistic when it comes to colors, the original has pretty saturated colors, the infamous 30 fps weapon reloading animation has also been upgraded
@@Yas_Sin you shouldn't need to really look at them side by side with highest settings to tell a difference. It's a fucking remaster. The difference should be very clear.
I'm liking the PBR, rendering, but they should have definitely pulled some tonemapping trickery on top of that to make it pop. Plus there's an odd sloppy handiwork on display with some bad new models and materials that could have been better chosen.
I honestly think the original looks for the most part better, and it runs 2 times faster.... The remaster seems like "redone" not improved... not greatly anyway...
@@20puskinas1992 I have played it recently yeah, In some areas the original still looks better. I just think they could have done a lot more with Unreal.
The ray tracing is very slight in this game it more on reflection on windows less noticeably any where else's even though there there on the guns. I would like to see better higher textures even better foliage but they went with ray tracing . I do like that they added in a fov slider and got rid of the over saturated bloom and colour and even added in better AA settings but all of this comes at a very big cost of frame rate and it really need a 3000 card to run it maxed out with dlss on as well but it needed better textures still in this remastered version. what makes me mad is i cant even use dlss on this in quality mode as for some reason it don't work on my ultra wide monitor at 3400x1440p and i have to use balanced mode and using dlss on a resolution on 3400x1440p isn't really going to give me a better quality image over native and as the frame rate is so demanding i cant even use dynamic super resolution either so i refunded the game due to not able to use dlss in quality mode and not able to use dynamic super resolution for a better quality picture like i can with a lot of other games i play on without the use of ray tracing.
But they are using 8k textures (the bus texture alone is like 1.3gb, while the original game texture file was 2.3gb in total). Not on everything, but they had an algorithm to determine whats the most common texture, and they went through the list, and replaced the most common textures with their respective higher res replacements. SVOGI is pretty much ray traced GI, and shadows, and added ray traced reflections on top. They also worked a lot on models, to accommodate them with the use of SVOGI. And literally any surface that has a hint of specularity is ray traced. Im not sure how thats "very slight", theres a lot of specular materials everywhere. DLSS quality is currently bugged, in every game, all 3 games have a weird bug with ultrawide resolutions, which will hopefully be fixed soon.
@@Rajta_ once it's fix i will go back and buy it as for textures in crysis 2 they could of done better. The maldohd 4.0 mod had better foliage and leaves. Yes the remastered is good but i thought it could of been a bit better as some textures as they still looks bad it just needs a little bit more work to it that's all
@@bioshock6935 foliage has also been changed, they no longer have a heavily contrasted texture, but rather a material and better shading that behaves more realistically in terms of lighting. All mahalo did was boost the contrast even more to fake out the detail in the leaves, and he made them "wet" to simulate specularity, but they just look weird. In fact thats what he did the most, contrasting textures is an old technique to "increase" the level of detail of textures, because our eyes perceive it as higher detail when you make a heavy contrast. The textures that haven't been touched are the ones that we see rarely. Unless you go looking for them, you won't notice them during gameplay.
@@Rajta_ well all i can say is the foliage still looks bad specially the ivy bushes and looks better from the modded maldo version ruclips.net/video/e_zWhT4PN1A/видео.html&ab_channel=Yellowswift3 skip to (18.43)
@@bioshock6935 foliage is difficult for compression, there's too many leaves and blades of grass. Compression algorithms used for yt videos, streams, etc. cant deal with that many instances and you end up having poor quality on video. Blasting foliage with a lot of contrast helps the algorithm differentiate between a lot of instances.
it seems as a poor HDR tone mapping, SDR sets whitepoint at the peak luminance of the display while HDR sets it at 200 nits, so thats why it looks washed out
its genuinely insane to me how many games seem to have screwed up HDR tone mapping. like all the work of the artists is ultimately shown in a lackluster context on most people's displays because the HDR workflow nowadays is less easy to translate compared to when there was no tonemap transformation to show it on the screen
Original is better for me wtf!!! The game was created these days. The picture is worse than the old game. I really don't understand. Developers make the game look bad.
I appreciate that the remaster removes some of the bloom and blur of the original version, but the brown-grey colour tone it adds is rather awful (and no, not in any way realistic).
It depends on what destroyed it. In remastered smoke is coming from inside so I assume damage is internal and the APC is abandoned by troops. In original it looks like it took a severe hit.
So basically everyone is mad because they want the heavy filters back. For that jj abrams style. All that bloom in the original. Sometimes people don't know what they want.
It's called artistic changes. They got rid of the super contrasty textures that they had to use to add more detail at the time, which now there isn't a need for. They also lowered the heavy contrast of the overall image and toned down the orange-blue pallets so it looked more natural and not like a late 2000s Michael Bay movie. And finally they adjusted the material properties, so the cars don't look like they're glowing even though they're in shadow. And that's not including the upgrades to fidelity of each aspect and new tech from later versions of the engine. People love to only look at the overall image and judge from there.
Может из-за того что его на Switch ещё запульнули, хотел сказать я, но оптимизацию тоже похерили, так что видимо проблема в кривых руках, и тупом желании навариться на волне ремастеров.
Remaster looks much more realistic. Orignal game has: -Prebaked (flat and unrealistic) lighting. Indirect shadows are missing in remaster, and without dynamic GI there's blue (cold) color cast everywhere. -Unrealistic color grading (blown out highlights, black crush, oversaturated colors). -Original game has no RT reflections (only low resolution cubemaps that shines even in the shade or even in pitch black room). RT alone makes a huge difference in this game, because most textures reflects light. -low resolution (512x512 vs 7680x4320!!). Orignal game use sharpening on many textures, but true high resolution texture (true fine details) is always better. From technical point of view remaster eats orignal game for breakfast, but I guess some people prefer flat and unrealistic lighting and JJAbrams (overblown and cold) color grading.
I think people just liked the flashy art direction. A less realistic game can be prettier than an unrealistic game. I think a lot of people are gonna prefer the og systems which were sort of hand crafted for the game
Well thts more tht he used max settings on raytracing. Its a pretty big performance impact. Turn it off and u get similar if not better fps. Plus the cube map quality of regular reflections is better than the original.
Remastered has better color grading than original, it looks much more realistic I think crysis 2 and 3 remasters are nice atleast for consoles whose performance was worst in 7th gen console Crysis 1 on the other hand was disgrace, a few touchups here and there and looked little bit better than 7th gen counterparts, but performance is still horrible as it was back then, at least 2 and 3 remasters sorted that thing
I always thought Crysis 2 looked fabulous and was really pushing ahead of its time, that the remaster doesn't look much different (and perhaps not as good in some areas) is a real testament to this.
The High Res Pack really made the difference. Modders made far better "versions" of this game than the actual company did on their remakes.. over 10 years later. Depressing if you ask me and sad to know, we could have much better lookin games today. But at least we got Horizon Zero Dawn ^^
It's lightning that made huge difference... Crysis used complex reflection which was heavy on cpu and mostly single core performance oriented upto crysis 3...
The reflection used on remaster is very similar to Ray tracing and problem is, ray tracing is not shiny...
2:03 best example... For original they have used independent reflection on car but on remaster it's one reflection acting for all area from one certain point and since the area is closed, it doesn't reflect like original.. While remaster lighting and shadows is very close to real, we have come to conclusion that shiny and reflection means better graphics.. 😂
Look at the car headlight reflection of remastered which looks real unlike original where they have attached reflection independently to car... In real life cars are nit that shiny..
Original Crysis looks like the remastered version of the Remastered!!!
Hahahahaha - Funny, and true!
The original crisis seems to have Ray Trasín
Crysis 2 Remastered just came out 2021 but yet does not compare to COD MW 2019🏡HOME INVASION🔫CALL OF DUTY MW💣RECORDED IN🎥8K📹FOR EXTRA DETAIL 4K+HDR📼🔍(GAME CHANGER SETTINGS)🏠 ruclips.net/video/z0xgT4dclxc/видео.html
You lost me at remastered
true! original is better
This is like the perfect case of realism vs art design. We only thought Crysis was realistic compared to its contemporaries. It was a curated hyper reality
x)
Because people don't even understand what "hyperrealism" is. Most gamers doesn't know what a PBR material is, not even Ray tracing:
- What is RT for you little gamer monkey?
- RT makes games realistic.
- Ok but, do you know how it works?
- Ye, makes gaem realistic.
@@osvaldoprado9906 damn your parents really hate you huh
Crysis 1 has realistic art style, sequels do not. The only game that did what Crysis 1 did with visuals since its release is Kingdom Come Deliverance. I haven't played any other games that did that visual style as well as those two games, even Crysis 1 Remastered fucked it up.
i can see this are all console gamers which discovered the crysis franchise with crysis 2, the first crysis and warhead were the real art style direction, these last games are just as bland as the last crysis remastered
The remaster seems to be more... realistic so to speak, the original was so much brighter and saturated considering the setting.
yes
I mean, that's expected of a remaster. I'm glad it worked out well
Just the opposite to the first one, Crysis Remastered became brighter with the remaster, the original was more, "color accurate", Ray tracing is always overused in reflections. You go out of your home, no matter the weather, cars NEVER looks like mirrors, just like DXR is used.
Согласен, у оригинала общее освещение не до жало, в ремастере свет более реалистичней и мягкий, но в каких то моментах он не нужен. Радует хоть что трассировку добавили)
I don't know what you're smoking. The remaster is trash. You're probably a troll anyway
I would say, that remastered version looks more realistic, cose cars and other things or stuff that staying outside in rain, fire, dirt and smoke, everything won't be so shining after couple day's already.
This ☝
yess
++
Especially with all that bloom. xD
i agree, i actually think it’s better tbh, don’t know what everyone is talking about lol
I've always wondered this
I guess we are in the Age of Remastering games instead of developing new ones... Grand Theft Auto Trilogy and now this. Anything new actually coming out? And Battlefield and COD don't count those all still feel the same.
This is what happens when people get restricted in what they're allowed to create, you can thank "modern audiences." For that one
Death stranding be like allow me to introduce
Yes gaming gets worse by time imo
guys do you play anything else than mainstream games? try more indie games
@@DeadpoolPlayz i can only find cod like indie game.
While the remastered does look better in some cases, I actually prefer the style in the original.
What a remaster
Hard agree.
Looks alot more realistic
Remaster did one thing really well. 60 fps animations for weapons.
@@Xardas_99 Real life doesn't look so dull and muted.
Original had it's own issues with that shit poop colored filter and bloomy look all console games used to have (and let's face it, Crysis 2 was a console game) but definitely looks more vibrant than the remaster.
Are you sure they’re the right way round?
I think the ray tracing is actually making the game look more dull. I guess sometimes realistic doesn't always equal better.
bingo
100% agreed. Ray tracing on its own isn’t better by nature than good art.
I mean raytracing what sunlight the shit that never enters a gamers house at night Lmao.
@@abudorayakobu lol so true
Crysis Dev. : "This Game is Too Heavy, We need to Remastered it !!"
.
2021 : "Finally !!!'
To me I don't see major differences, in some cases I prefer the original HOWEVER when you consider the performance huge gap, the original comes on top by a mile
agree with this, the requirements are going up and up and we're getting very little visual increase. same with ray tracing imo, huge cost at minimal visual increase
@@domingorodriguez3077Where's a good place to go to find last gen graphics cards? Thanks.
@@danieldavis8607 probably used on ebay or amazon
C2 Remastered still fails to impress compared to OG . They wanted to bring down the OG contrast but messed things up in the process. Now you have a complete blank looking game as you're showing it, even if some textures are improved.
We should wait for modders to remaster the game themselves.
When original looks better than remaster lmao
@@ok-70707 omg
Same case for NFS Hot Pursuit
No, it doesnt. Remaster looks better in every possible way, however it seems some of you guys prefer JJAbrams color grading and flat (unrealistic) lighting. Do you even know what GI does and why original game has blue color cast everywhere?
@@ok-70707 I've made a typing mistake (I'm typing on my phone). Original game looks much worse because it has:
-Prebaked (flat and unrealistic) lighting. Indirect shadows are missing in remaster, and without dynamic GI there's blue (cold) color cast everywhere.
-Unrealistic color grading (blown out highlights, black crush, oversaturated colors).
-Original game has no RT reflections (only low resolution cubemaps that shines even in the shade or even in pitch black room). RT alone makes a huge difference in this game, because most textures reflects light.
-low resolution textures (512x512 vs 7680x4320!!). Orignal game use sharpening on many textures, but true high resolution texture (true fine details) is always better.
From technical point of view remaster eats orignal game for breakfast and no wonder MUCH MORE realistic graphics requires more hardware resources.
@@PabloB888 nothing worth upgrading to from original crysis 2. Let’s be honest crysis remastered trilogy is for console gamers who never could experience any crysis in the way PC players could.
Original is better. 😁
of course !!!🤣
no
50 на 50, где-то и у ремастера есть преимущества
Nothing wrong with the old graphics really. Maybe slightly over saturated. They tidied things up and changes a few things. The lightning. I like how the sun shines on the ground in the old version better.
Will say for the original, the reflections on that taxi at the end are quite impressive!, I played it back on PS3 over 10 years ago.
I remember the game being awesome graphically and the way it handled through the whole experience!
I'll admit I think both versions of the game still look great even in today's modern graphics, the remaster looks better in some ways and the original had nuance things in it like the complex shadows on that taxi, but then for example the fire in the remaster looks more believable 😁
They're both pretty stellar :)
ORIGINAL looks like the E3 trailer; REMASTERED looks like what they actually released
They did the remaster from the old console version , not the PC version thats why it looks so bad , its crazy how they thought doing thats based on a version lower in graphics than the original pc version .
1:01 Even shiney metal is now brown.
Remastered version looks much better. The original one has too many post-process effects like bloom, contrast etc. It reminds me of countless "ultra-realistic graphic mods" that makes everything more colorful and contrasted but destroys realism. I always preferred more grounded look than cheap effects so for me remastered version wins easily.
Lmao they did the 2010's move by applying mexico filter.
There is no "mexico" filter. The colors are more natural. And the 2010's move is the transformers blue tint (like the original had), and with over the top bloom.
What a joke of a remaster! There are hardly any differences. Yes, there are some things that stick out: better shadows in one place, better reflections in another, and a more accurate sky color. But the performance penalty (and the necessity of an entirely separate purchase) to get what is effectively a modest revision of the same thing we had 10 years ago is unjustified and ridiculous.
Also, performance dropped by half.
Look at df videos the remaster is way better the og is muddy with low textures and messed up faces
@Tractor Cannon why
@Tractor Cannon the reason objects look less shiny is because of the realistic lighting but with dlss it is more shiny
Alot of textures in c2 og are muddy
And the charachters look better to while not distorting their faces
Also, they removed multiplayer, the fun factor of the three games literally deleted, that's also a bad change even if they shut down crysis 2's servers before remastered, i hope they don't so this for Crysis 3
The remaster doesn't look better (or worse), it just look different for the sake of it
Still better than GTA Trilogy the Defective edition.
I do think the remaster looks more realistic, and I prefer it due to the lighting and colours, the original was so dark and unnatural looking in areas to me. Textures across the board are better on the remaster, they are some of the best textures around, as for the rest of the game, for the most part it doesn't look 10 years better
Crysis 2 was ahead of it's time.
the whole series was,trust me,1,2 and 3 left a lot of people speachless...and they still do
@@brosqi13 no they didnt becoz most people were not able to play it with max graphics.2013 was the year i played them in max settings.
It looked worse than Crysis 1 it was behind its own time.
The chopper at 1:21 really tells the story,
They put a higher resolution texture but without intent.
All the textures are too pristine with 0 desregard for the art style.
The remaster has realistic colors and better quality textures. It's also running on a modern version of the game engine that is designed for modern hardware.
Yeah, running at half the FPS while looking slightly better. Truly designed for modern hardware. Especially for selling it.
@@Broformist, sadly photo realistic graphics require much more processing power, one of the simplest example is a different reflections alghorithms, you can use aproximated effect using for example screen space reflections (cheap, but not work for all cases and produces visible artifacts) or ray traced reflections (expensive, but looks correct in any case) - probably most user will not bother artifacts during dynamic game play but it will complain for frame rate drops when more accurate solution is used...
@ meh. a 2% visual increase at 50% more performance cost. pass.
@@domingorodriguez3077 Yep, like what is the point of "realistic lights
eflections\shadows" in a completely unrealistic looking world. Reminds me of Q2 rtx, where everything looks off and does not fit game design.
Original v/s remastered is like photophop v/s paint
So even when looking at this short video its clear that the remaster is technically superior. The global illumination and light bounce is more realistic thanks to SVOGI and the textures are superior. I think what's happening is some people like the color and contrast of the original better. But thats more of a matter of art style. The remaster contains superior graphics.
@@pointlessangle2149 Art style is subjective so you can't say one is objectively superior to another. However, if you like the art style of the original then that's fine. I'm not saying you can't. What I'm saying is the graphics of the remaster are superior. Better textures superior, more advanced lighting and ray tracing. I'm countering the claim people are making which is "the original has better graphics". It doesn't.
@@pointlessangle2149 completely disagree, I'd take hyper-realism over art style any day unless the game has a very unique art style like zelda botw or borderlands
You're blind. The lighting is far more realistic in the original, and has more detailed textures. The remaster just simplified things and added sharpening.
The real question should be "is it close enough to what the developers intended?" . If they intended the game to look realistic, remaster wins. If they intended to have a specific art style that is not meant to look real, original wins
I see a big difference, in the FPS.
there are shots i prefer in the remaster but then some other shots that i heavily prefer in the original
Worst part is, it reduces the framerate by more than ＨＡＬＦ
When i watched Digital Foundry praising this remaster, i got mad...
How can you be that stupid? Those guys in comments don't shit about graphics, i get it. But when digital foundry literally puts improvements to your face, and you still can't see it... I've got bad news for you
The same people that speak of image quality and prise blur whenever they can... Sure.
Agreed... Maldo Mods and others did bring crysis 2 to the next level... this remaster changes the color tone and even the effects are weaker (less reflections and the fire looks crap), in my end it shows an inferior version of Crysis 2 (even the blood is strange)... They need to change or add the option to color mapping (Original or Remastered).
I'd rather play the original for fps
@1:02 On the right, it looks like it’s 5:00PM and the sun is clearly to the right. On the left picture it looks like the sun is sitting right in front of the truck.
That’s the difference “Global Illumination” and Ray Tracing makes.
Apart from shadows the remaster is actually kind of worse as the orange filter they apply makes the game dimmer and blurrier!
The orange was in the og did you mix them up
The original smoke and fire effects look better as well as the lighting the added raytracing makes no actual tangible improvements that I can spot other than destroying frame rates hardpass ill keep my original copy of Crysis 2 & 3 on origin and Crysis 1 and warhead on steam my take the original dev team which has long departed from working on this title would have done a way better job and possibly made the remasters a must have but alas!
The biggest problem is the remaster's incandescent sun...
Yellow sunlight does not equal yellow landscape and sepia vision. Sunlight isn't like a lightbulb that only outputs one single color temperature, it's like 6 temperatures all at once that barely influences or tints the objects it hits.
The best balance between remastering and preserving crysis's drive for realism would've probably been to just improve the assets but not touch the sky properties.. it's too yellow now
Look like they just put a film grain on the remaster
wowh i prefer the original, this remaster was boring, It wasn't bad!! It got worse.
It´s true.
Na its way better in the remaster this guy is using blackfire and calling it the og clickbait sells i guess
long story short: Money!
as someone who played them all when they came out: this is just blatant moneymaking! these games where the gems of an era & there was no need atall for this, only "i want money", thats all🙄
Оригинал приятнее смотреть, нет мыла такого)
remastered looks much better. stop giving free passes to glowy lighting due to culling limitations in old games. shiny and bright doesn't mean good. that car looks like a cubemap reflection from nfs hot pursuit 2 from 2002
svogi and rt reflections on the other hand look brilliant on the remaster. also spotted some biased in this comparision, as the massive texture and geometry changes were almost hidden by showing the only objects that weren't changed
so they completely remove the floor and it looks remaster
Wow original was WAY better
В свое время после патча на DX10, второй Крайзиз был самой графонистой игрой на свете. Но комон, рей трейсинг дает правильное освещение, то что в оригинале все в глюре это красиво, но бестолково. Говорить что рей трейсинг не красив, это как ругаться в пасмурную погоду на сбой в матрице и отсутствие теней на улице. Первый Крайзиз еще нагляднее показывает, на сколько рей трейсинг делает освещение правильным и живым, а не то что в оригинале отражается все от всего словно вы светите на этот куст десятью лампами под разными углами
Not sure which one looks better, varies per location and stuff. But one thing is clear: lighting in the original oneis way better. Crysis was always a dream for kids like me to play on pc.. what a legendary game.
Been playing Crysis 2 again (normal version) and I don't really know why they bothered doing a remaster, the game looks amazing and always will. The design and graphics of the game is pretty timeless. It really holds up well.
Water and fire had a massive improvement, but everything else looks way worst.
SImple answer:
MONEY!
They changed the colors of light, wow. Take my money.
Many areas where the original looks better, either sharper details, brighter stylized lighting, and overall less dull and desaturation. The new version may be technically 'more real'.. but I'd take the original, especially with the 120 frames vs. the under 60 hit you'll take with ray tracing at 1:22 in the video.
If I’ve learned anything from Breaking Bad, the Remastered takes place in Mexico
This game is super weird. It's in a transitory place where the game world still feels a bit barren, and most objects look oversized and a bit simplistic, while at the same time looking pretty good. It's hard to describe, but it's like you're in a model, a mockup of the real world, instead of the actual real world.
it's very uncanny, is what i'm saying. i played it again in 2020 and i felt that all the way through.
I'm currently playing the original it and it feels exactly like what you are saying. It feels like it's a tech demo and a full game, Iike it feels old but yet new.
It feels like I'm playing in my PS3 again
katılıyorum. Hele ki bukadar rakibi olmasına rağmen oyun piyasasında bulunmayan milletimizden birileirnin çıkıp biranda ea gamesle anlaşıp pazarlayarak piyasaya en yüksekten giriş yapmamız ve serii bitince çıkıp gitmemiz çok ilginç... İlk oyundan itibaren olaylar günümüze yakın tarihten başlıyordu... Kesinlikle bir tuhaflık var.
I think you've described it well, you're very spot on.
Scaling is way off. It reminds me of Halo a lot
I have both and on my setup, the Remastered looks more natural. It’s up to preference, but the remaster stutters like crazy.
x)
Its texture setting that create stutters.. Looks like High and very high texture setting eats more than 6 GB VRAM... I ran this game without stutter at 1440p DLSS quality and with texture in Medium and rest all settings very high and RTX setting -Performance. The game was rock solid.. I have RTX 2060 OC
In my opinion the remaster it's much more beautiful and natural for the eyes. That metallic taxi don't fit in the dark environment. They also fixed the withe borders (you can see on the trees) and dark textures
I also dont understand the hate. Ignoring the better textures, geometry and lighting of the remaster, the original looks like an 8yo maxed out every slider in windows movie maker.
@@vanMrMann Have you seen the FPS? Definitely not worth it for such minor tweaks
@@faisal-nl2vf get your eyes checked if that’s minor
Look at everything else in that scene with the Taxi, Remaster looks worse.
@@faisal-nl2vf Have you actually played the remaster? The performance is great. In this video, the game is running at 4K with ray tracing turned all the way up. And DLSS turned off. Of course it's demanding.
Crysis 2 had a plastic like looking texture and material quality was not visible very slightly only on PC version. In xbox 360 and PS3 everything had a plastic like look to it.
in the remaster the added ray tracing, fixed the lighting, better nanosuit design, better texture, but a big hit on fps
And also, giant file size.
It's simple cause they took from the Xbox 360 source code just like the crysis remastered one not the original pc code for remastering that's why it looks and performs worse you can check the crysis 2 intro from other channels when they're comparing base xbox/ps4 to pc when it was released ages ago check the nanosuit pattern it was gray and muddy in Xbox 360 just like the crysis remastered 2 unlike the original pc one when's it was darker and has photorealistic lighting and that's why I prefer crysis 2 & 3 original with tons of mod only crysis remastered are added to my library cheers hope this helps 👍🥂😉
There is no "xbox 360" source code for Crysis 2. Cryengine 3 is a multiplatform engine, meaning the game is developed simultaneously for every platform, until they split to accommodate each platform for hardware differences, and those differences are smaller textures, tuned down effects, or disabling some effects, but technologically they are all pretty much the same. C2R has everything that C2 on pc had with a DX11 patch and more. SVOGI isnt free, the lighting is far far more superior and accurate than their single LPV bounce, theres pretty much no light bleed through objects or around corners. Theres no more baked lights, light probes, and negative light probes, SVOGI is entirely responsible for lighting for every part of the level, giving it a far more realistic look. Ray tracing obviously isnt cheap. Theres a lot of 8k textures, hell, the new bus texture is almost as big as every texture in the original game (1.3gb of bus 8k textures, the original game file a total of 2.8gb). Theres a lot of 3D scanned models, the the most common used textures have been swapped for their higher res counterparts. Instead of using heavily contrasted textures, they let the materials do the lighting work, making the surrounding area and objects feel more lifelike cuz they reflect and react to light in a more realistic way. Every gun model and characters have been updated, animations have been unlocked. Everything apart from AI has been touched for Crysis 2. I dont know how can anyone with a straight face say that C2R looks worse than the original, they arent even in the same league.
@@Rajta_ and yet all of that combined only comes down to better textures and somewhat better lighting in a few cases LMAO
@@DivvayKhatri somewhat better lighting in few cases? lol In literally every part of the game. Not even in the same ballpark. You maybe ought to play c2 and then c2r to see how big of a difference SVOGI alone makes.
@@Rajta_ yes! SVOGI is a game changer. Fully dynamic global illumination! Im no expert but damn i havent seen any other GI technique perform it better than cryengine's SVOGI.
@@branchprediction9923 There are better GI solutions out there, Metro Exodus' is more accurate, cuz SVOGI voxelizes the environment, but then again SVOGI is less expensive than Metro's GI. And they are both a form of ray traced GI solution, you also get ray traced shadows with SVOGI as well.
Some of these scenes literally made Original Crysis 2 like Unreal engine 5 its actually crazy
They only reduced contrast. Horrible.
КОгда ремастер хуже оригинала
its because they sacrificed artistic style for realism. Honestly a testament to how good the visuals in crysis 2 were when the only thing they could do to make it look more realistic is to sacrifice parts that made it look good. Crysis literally looks better than real life lol
I thought the HDR on this game looked so bad I switched it off to reveal the original game at 1080p looks great like that
Running the highest quality ray traced reflections at native 4K with no DLSS is insanity. There's a reason DLSS was invented -- because RT is very expensive. You've got two options. Run at a lower resolution, or turn down RT quality.
RT is power scam , nothing more ... and xxx poeple belivie lies about it ...
I dunno but i had stutter in all the original games and the remaster ones not anymore.
I didnt notice the stutter in any Crysis game other than Crysis 3, and that was only after I upgraded my system and got an RTX 3070, where before I had a GTX 970.
The biggest disappointment in Crysis 2 remastered was the oil slick rainbow effect on the puddle by the ammo shed next to the fountain on the last level ( where you smash the 3 pipes before jumping down the long tunnel ) that looked realistic in the original, but just looked flat in the remastered game.
Crysys 2 and 3 Remastered both crashed at one point in the game, which never happened on the original games.
It's normal that will looks different, before, the rays and lights were an way to transfer feelings planned by the game artists and, now, the luminosity and their respective fonts interact with the scenario of more realistic and calculated forms because the graphics cards does the work based on optical physics rules
Crytek drops the ball. What are they? Sonic Team with Sonic Adventure DX?
As someone who doesn't have a PC, the main perk of the Remastered editions os the games is the 60fps that we didn't get with the originals (unless you had a PC).
I got smooth frame rates once I got my new GPU. After that the game ran smooth
Lol the remastered version of this game is far superior to the original. As a long time fan I was blown away with the ray tracing and color this time around. Not sure if your PC has something wrong with it maybe
People are mixing up art preference with realism. The light propagation is far superior in the remaster. People just like the saturated colors of the original.
@@storm12weather This is a video game people. Not a basket of fruit. Wake the f*ck up.
No one wants to talk bout the background music… dawg been straight vibing
Considerable improvements to textures, lighting, and particle effects, especially with that fire/smoke scene, i'd say they did a pretty good job
The fire and smoke is the only thing I thought improved.
@@QuanLovesGaming It's probably youtube's compression's fault, you need to look at them side by side at the highest settings in order to see the difference clearly, the remastered also looks more realistic when it comes to colors, the original has pretty saturated colors, the infamous 30 fps weapon reloading animation has also been upgraded
@@Yas_Sin you shouldn't need to really look at them side by side with highest settings to tell a difference. It's a fucking remaster. The difference should be very clear.
@@eliasroflchopper3006 Well, it might be clear to you and me, but not to all people
2:02
I'm liking the PBR, rendering, but they should have definitely pulled some tonemapping trickery on top of that to make it pop. Plus there's an odd sloppy handiwork on display with some bad new models and materials that could have been better chosen.
I honestly think the original looks for the most part better, and it runs 2 times faster.... The remaster seems like "redone" not improved... not greatly anyway...
You played it? RUclips dont show all the fidelity you can see on game.
Dont be a sheep.
Its much improved version.
Check other comparisons.
@@20puskinas1992 I have played it recently yeah, In some areas the original still looks better. I just think they could have done a lot more with Unreal.
The ray tracing is very slight in this game it more on reflection on windows less noticeably any where else's even though there there on the guns. I would like to see better higher textures even better foliage but they went with ray tracing . I do like that they added in a fov slider and got rid of the over saturated bloom and colour and even added in better AA settings but all of this comes at a very big cost of frame rate and it really need a 3000 card to run it maxed out with dlss on as well but it needed better textures still in this remastered version. what makes me mad is i cant even use dlss on this in quality mode as for some reason it don't work on my ultra wide monitor at 3400x1440p and i have to use balanced mode and using dlss on a resolution on 3400x1440p isn't really going to give me a better quality image over native and as the frame rate is so demanding i cant even use dynamic super resolution either so i refunded the game due to not able to use dlss in quality mode and not able to use dynamic super resolution for a better quality picture like i can with a lot of other games i play on without the use of ray tracing.
But they are using 8k textures (the bus texture alone is like 1.3gb, while the original game texture file was 2.3gb in total). Not on everything, but they had an algorithm to determine whats the most common texture, and they went through the list, and replaced the most common textures with their respective higher res replacements. SVOGI is pretty much ray traced GI, and shadows, and added ray traced reflections on top. They also worked a lot on models, to accommodate them with the use of SVOGI. And literally any surface that has a hint of specularity is ray traced. Im not sure how thats "very slight", theres a lot of specular materials everywhere.
DLSS quality is currently bugged, in every game, all 3 games have a weird bug with ultrawide resolutions, which will hopefully be fixed soon.
@@Rajta_ once it's fix i will go back and buy it as for textures in crysis 2 they could of done better. The maldohd 4.0 mod had better foliage and leaves. Yes the remastered is good but i thought it could of been a bit better as some textures as they still looks bad it just needs a little bit more work to it that's all
@@bioshock6935 foliage has also been changed, they no longer have a heavily contrasted texture, but rather a material and better shading that behaves more realistically in terms of lighting. All mahalo did was boost the contrast even more to fake out the detail in the leaves, and he made them "wet" to simulate specularity, but they just look weird. In fact thats what he did the most, contrasting textures is an old technique to "increase" the level of detail of textures, because our eyes perceive it as higher detail when you make a heavy contrast. The textures that haven't been touched are the ones that we see rarely. Unless you go looking for them, you won't notice them during gameplay.
@@Rajta_ well all i can say is the foliage still looks bad specially the ivy bushes and looks better from the modded maldo version ruclips.net/video/e_zWhT4PN1A/видео.html&ab_channel=Yellowswift3 skip to (18.43)
@@bioshock6935 foliage is difficult for compression, there's too many leaves and blades of grass. Compression algorithms used for yt videos, streams, etc. cant deal with that many instances and you end up having poor quality on video. Blasting foliage with a lot of contrast helps the algorithm differentiate between a lot of instances.
The first person pistol is totally dead and painted off in 'Remastered' lol
it seems as a poor HDR tone mapping, SDR sets whitepoint at the peak luminance of the display while HDR sets it at 200 nits, so thats why it looks washed out
its genuinely insane to me how many games seem to have screwed up HDR tone mapping. like all the work of the artists is ultimately shown in a lackluster context on most people's displays because the HDR workflow nowadays is less easy to translate compared to when there was no tonemap transformation to show it on the screen
Original is better for me wtf!!!
The game was created these days. The picture is worse than the old game. I really don't understand. Developers make the game look bad.
And I bet the original game is 8 gigs while remastered is 75
I appreciate that the remaster removes some of the bloom and blur of the original version, but the brown-grey colour tone it adds is rather awful (and no, not in any way realistic).
Realism is much more important for a fast-paced first-person shooter about an alien invasion than frames per second.
it's hard to tell which is original and which is remastered
realism vs art design
"Colors not shiny anymore, game bad."
-some dude, 2021
Original > Remastered.
WTF? Less quality by less FPS!!! 😂😂😂🖒. Original is a little better in light's. My opinion.
Lol the remastered version is far better and I have both
1:59 ,the destroyed apc looks worse (looks like it was less destroyed but covered by a thick layer of dust)
It depends on what destroyed it. In remastered smoke is coming from inside so I assume damage is internal and the APC is abandoned by troops. In original it looks like it took a severe hit.
So basically everyone is mad because they want the heavy filters back. For that jj abrams style. All that bloom in the original. Sometimes people don't know what they want.
There is ppl tht prefer cinematic style or more realistic style and its almost always the original tht ppl pick. Really goes for any game tbh.
The original is more saturated, like a Michael Bay movie (and that general blockbusters feeling that i miss with the Remastered).
It's called artistic changes. They got rid of the super contrasty textures that they had to use to add more detail at the time, which now there isn't a need for. They also lowered the heavy contrast of the overall image and toned down the orange-blue pallets so it looked more natural and not like a late 2000s Michael Bay movie. And finally they adjusted the material properties, so the cars don't look like they're glowing even though they're in shadow. And that's not including the upgrades to fidelity of each aspect and new tech from later versions of the engine.
People love to only look at the overall image and judge from there.
Может из-за того что его на Switch ещё запульнули, хотел сказать я, но оптимизацию тоже похерили, так что видимо проблема в кривых руках, и тупом желании навариться на волне ремастеров.
Remaster looks much more realistic. Orignal game has:
-Prebaked (flat and unrealistic) lighting. Indirect shadows are missing in remaster, and without dynamic GI there's blue (cold) color cast everywhere.
-Unrealistic color grading (blown out highlights, black crush, oversaturated colors).
-Original game has no RT reflections (only low resolution cubemaps that shines even in the shade or even in pitch black room). RT alone makes a huge difference in this game, because most textures reflects light.
-low resolution (512x512 vs 7680x4320!!). Orignal game use sharpening on many textures, but true high resolution texture (true fine details) is always better.
From technical point of view remaster eats orignal game for breakfast, but I guess some people prefer flat and unrealistic lighting and JJAbrams (overblown and cold) color grading.
My hardware hot lel
I think people just liked the flashy art direction. A less realistic game can be prettier than an unrealistic game. I think a lot of people are gonna prefer the og systems which were sort of hand crafted for the game
Ray tracing make it more realistic, but realistic doesn't mean it more beautiful
It looks different but not better and the fps hit is gigantic. I'd stick with the original.
Well thts more tht he used max settings on raytracing. Its a pretty big performance impact.
Turn it off and u get similar if not better fps. Plus the cube map quality of regular reflections is better than the original.
original might look pleasing to eyes but remastered looks more close to natural.....atleast to me
I agree. But Id prefer higher FPS.
Remastered has better color grading than original, it looks much more realistic
I think crysis 2 and 3 remasters are nice atleast for consoles whose performance was worst in 7th gen console
Crysis 1 on the other hand was disgrace, a few touchups here and there and looked little bit better than 7th gen counterparts, but performance is still horrible as it was back then, at least 2 and 3 remasters sorted that thing