Thread: CRYSIS reviews up on Gamespot and IGN

HDR HDR HDR HDR HDR.
Valve's been obsessed with updating their engine with better graphics... since better graphics have been available.

HDR is used in more things, than just Half Life.

Did Valve go all out like crytek did?

Motion blurs, excessive multiprocessor use, particle effects, complex algorithms for crazy shaders (such as phongs and rim lighting), depth of field, color modifying... there's so many more things Valve has been creaming themselves over with in the past few years... they have probably and equal amount of "OMG LOOK AT THIS EFFECT" tech demo releases as crytek does.

All of which, has been done before.

And? That doesn't remove the fact that they've been slobbering all over them releasing these effects... if anything it makes crytek more admirable for doing new effects I've yet to see.
Crytek's done things that should've been done years ago.
This is a retarded argument.

Ok, even with all of these effects, a Middle of the road pc can easilly run these games maxed.

Every game is made to make money, unless it's freeware. Game companies are for-profit entities. They all have the same goal, they just have different strategies for achieving it.

Originally Posted by ComradeJim270

Every game is made to make money, unless it's freeware. Game companies are for-profit entities. They all have the same goal, they just have different strategies for achieving it.

I can agree with that.

I'm not going to argue that they did a better job optimizing the source engine for lower grade PC's... But with the Crytek engine is completely different from Valve's, you can't optimize everything... they weren't set out to make the "best looking game but still can run on low grade PCs" type of engine... The Crytek engine is miles ahead of Source... Hows this a bad thing again?

Originally Posted by Mr.Jello

this a bad thing again?

That's not a bad thing, but that doesn't make it better than the source engine, which is optimized for current day pc's