Crysis 3 vs Cyberpunk 2077

[sL3nd3rmAnn]

Many have praised Cyberpunk 2077 for the great graphics.
Someone told me in another thread: "And I'm sorry man, but stating that C3 is the better looking game is just ridiculous. My rig's far from the best rn, so while of course it can smoothly run C3 on Ultra, to have reasonably fluid gameplay in Cyberpunk I'm playing it on Medium. And still, it's clearly the better looking game. Facial models and expressions, textures, lighting - they're simply better."

I just played again Crysis 3 this week. I can fairly say on my 50" 4k TV or 30" 1080p TV Crysis 3 definitely looks better. Image is not blurred but crisp, detailed.
Rain and water are among the most realistic I have ever seen in a game(the water looks and behaves close to reality).

Cyberpunk 2077 looks blurred, grainy(SSR), textures are not that detailed or not loaded properly(on walls, cars, people); LOD distance is ugly.
TAA sucks compared with MSAA from Crysis 3. Rain and water are inferior(the water has basically no effect and physics, underwater feels like being on land with sky above, at a distance the water looks grainy) compared with Crysis 3.
Lighting is better (but that somewhat that got downgraded too with patches).
I compared rasterization look only.

Cyberpunk 2077(patch 1.22):

\

Crysis 3:

Q: What do you think? Is Cyberpunk 2077 that much better? If yes why?
Q: Why does it looks from pics for rasterization look that Crysis 3 is graphically better overall or at least that Cyberpunk 2077 is definitely not superior?

 

[LeKill3rFou]

Nothing to say, except that it looks really fair considering the screenhots chosen for Cyberpunk.
You can take those ones, it could be better no ?
First and last post for me

Edit for not add a new post : most of the time it's much more beautiful than that on my XBSX, so if it's a PC even in "medium"... like said Panam, I have doubt...

 

[AikoHayashi]

 

[HasoLtd]

Very fair comparisons (sarcasm), but other than that, are the settings even the same on both games?

 

[AikoHayashi]

Post automatically merged: Jun 9, 2021

I currently play on a pc with Intel i7 8 GEN processor and Nvidia GeForce 1060. And before patch 1.2 the graphics looked even better. Whan we see in CP are not even next gen graphics.

 

[DC9V]

Q: What do you think? Is Cyberpunk 2077 that much better? If yes why?

There's no way this is going to be a discussion. The screenshots you have chosen for Cyberpunk are intentional trash, and you didn't provide information about your setup and in-game settings.

 

[Guest 3847602]

Very fair comparisons (sarcasm), but other than that, are the settings even the same on both games?

Cyberpunk is 110% not maxed out, here's how the scene witch Jackie should look:

Look at the level of detail of his forearm and cans.

 

[Wenceslaus]

Cyberpunk 2077 looks a lot better.
As pointed out, the chosen screenshot are not exactly balanced.
And yes, in open world you will have better and worse places. I could probably pick few even worse.
And yes, grainy SSR is annoying, TAA makign it blurred (and is unfortunately standart theses days).

But the Crysis screenshots with the super strong AO, overshadowing, Lens Flares and Dirt are also not perfect.
And the amount of geometry is (on average) just on another level. The RT lighting is really breathtaking (TM) but even without it could be beautiful and some scenes are lit in such perfect way... Crysis does not have that as far as I know.

All in all I prefer Cyberpunk even though I do not turn my nose over Crysis, just CP77 is newer and it is showing.

Screenshots:
If I remember corectly I had custom options not maxed out (priorities after Digital Foundry) with RT, DLSS-performance at 4K (scaled down before posting).
RTX 2070, Ryzen 3700x

Spoiler

Notice this geometry—the engine part is super detailed and well lit. Event the pavements kerb is naturally rounded without sharp edges (notice pavement on the Crysis screenshot)

I mean... look at the reflections.

Not mention some characters. I put also a wooden wall there as example of textures and grass for example of shading of problematic parts.

 

[sL3nd3rmAnn]

There's no way this is going to be a discussion. The screenshots you have chosen for Cyberpunk are intentional trash, and you didn't provide information about your setup and in-game settings.

Speculation. I did not intentionally try to make it look bad. LOL.
I have forgotten to mention the settings.
Settings are as follows:
All Shadows and volumetrics(in Cyberpunk) are in both games on low.
Anti aliasing: MSAA is 2x in Crysis 3. Cyberpunk 2077 has forced TAA.
Rest of Settings are on HIGH in both games.

You can clearly see the low textures or not loading textures, grainy surfaces:
You cannot intentionally not load texture.

The water above and below looking awful, not realistically at all(no effect or physics) its also not my fault.

Look at the image above. It looks like looking at the sky. That's underwater.

And now look how it look in Crysis 3 underwater:

Clearly its better and tons more realistic.
Clear water in Crysis 3 has less visibility at a distance then the polluted water in Cyberpunk 2077. Let that sink in.

Post automatically merged: Jun 9, 2021

Cyberpunk 2077 looks a lot better.
As pointed out, the chosen screenshot are not exactly balanced.
And yes, in open world you will have better and worse places. I could probably pick few even worse.
And yes, grainy SSR is annoying, TAA makign it blurred (and is unfortunately standart theses days).

But the Crysis screenshots with the super strong AO, overshadowing, Lens Flares and Dirt are also not perfect.
And the amount of geometry is (on average) just on another level. The RT lighting is really breathtaking (TM) but even without it could be beautiful and some scenes are lit in such perfect way... Crysis does not have that as far as I know.

All in all i prefer Cyberpunk even though I do not turn my nose over Crysis, just CP77 is newer and it is showing.

Screenshots:
If I remember corectly I had custom options not maxed out (priorities after Digital Foundry) with RT, DLSS-performance at 4K (scaled down before posting).
RTX 2070, Ryzen 3700x

Spoiler

Notice this geometry—the engine part is super detailed and well lit. Event the pavements kerb is naturally rounded without sharp edges (notice pavement on the Crysis screenshot)
View attachment 11223731
I mean... look at the reflections.
View attachment 11223737
Not mention some characters. I put also a wooden wall there as example of textures and grass for example of shading of problematic parts.
View attachment 11223734View attachment 11223740

I specifically said no RT. Just rasterization.

Post automatically merged: Jun 9, 2021

Cyberpunk is 110% not maxed out, here's how the scene witch Jackie should look:

View attachment 11223725

Look at the level of detail of his forearm and cans.

I did not said maxed out. Crysis 3 its not maxed out either.

You can clearly see the low textures or not loading textures, grainy surfaces:

The water above and below looking awful, not realistically at all(no effect or physics) its also not my fault.

Look at the image above. It looks like looking at the sky. That's underwater.

And now look how it look in Crysis 3 underwater:

Clearly its better and tons more realistic.
Clear water in Crysis 3 has less visibility at a distance then the polluted water in Cyberpunk 2077. Let that sink in.

 

[Wenceslaus]

I specifically said no RT. Just rasterization.

I know. I just don't see why that should be a rule for others.

Anyway, I think that there was only one RT reflection screenshot in my post and the rest still apply.
CP2077 geometry and lighting still makes it look superrior.

Speculation. I did not intentionally try to make it look bad. LOL.

I find quite hard to belive this.
You spend most of the time here on forum supporting any criticism. Seems odd coinsidence it just happens you pick bad looking screenshots.
Especially after your reaction to all the fedback here gets restricted to few points about no RT and streaming problem.

And yes, streaming is a problems sometimes, especially in open world games. SSD helps a bit.
Not mine major experience with CP2077 though. The SSR and Eye Adoption would be much greater issue to me.

 

[Guest 3847602]

I did not said maxed out. Crysis 3 its not maxed out either.

Then I fail to see the point of this thread. When you're making face-to-face comparison between two games, you normally compare how they look when maxed out. OK, maybe you can leave out ray tracing, because that one does seem like unfair advantage.
Textures of those cans next to Jacke loaded just fine in the screenshot I posted. And I have to ask: are you sure you set textures to "high" in the main menu. Because you can't see that setting anymore after the save game is loaded.
And yeah, underwater in CP2077 looks bad everywhere but in Laguna Bend. Probably because that's the only place you're required to visit.

 

[sL3nd3rmAnn]

I know. I just don't see why that should be a rule for others.

Anyway, I think that there was only one RT reflection screenshot in my post and the rest still apply.
CP2077 geometry and lighting still makes it look superrior.


I find quite hard to belive this.
You spend most of the time here on forum supporting any criticism. Seems odd coinsidence it just happens you pick bad looking screenshots.
Especially after your reaction to all the fedback here gets restricted to few points about no RT and streaming problem.

And yes, streaming is a problems sometimes, especially in open world games. SSD helps a bit.
Not mine major experience with CP2077 though. The SSR and Eye Adoption would be much greater issue to me.

So your saying Cyberpunk 2077 a 2020 game needs ray tracing to look better then an 2013 game.
You can clearly see the low textures or not loading textures, grainy surfaces:
You cannot intentionally not load texture.

The water above and below looking awful, not realistically at all(no effect or physics) its also not my fault.

Look at the image above. It looks like looking at the sky. That's underwater.

And now look how it look in Crysis 3 underwater:

Clearly its better and tons more realistic.
Clear water in Crysis 3 has less visibility at a distance then the polluted water in Cyberpunk 2077. Let that sink in.

Also i already admit lighting is better in Cyberpunk 2077. The rest is not.
Also it could be said the same about people defending the game. Trying it to make it better.
Lets not go Ad hominem route, please.

Post automatically merged: Jun 9, 2021

Then I fail to see the point of this thread. When you're making face-to-face comparison between two games, you normally compare how they look when maxed out. OK, maybe you can leave out ray tracing, because that one does seem like unfair advantage.
Textures of those cans next to Jacke loaded just fine in the screenshot I posted. And I have to ask: are you sure you set textures to "high" in the main menu. Because you can't see that setting anymore after the save game is loaded.

I made the thread as a response to: "And I'm sorry man, but stating that C3 is the better looking game is just ridiculous. My rig's far from the best rn, so while of course it can smoothly run C3 on Ultra, to have reasonably fluid gameplay in Cyberpunk I'm playing it on Medium. And still, it's clearly the better looking game. Facial models and expressions, textures, lighting - they're simply better.""

I felt was an not accurate after playing again Crysis 3(the game simple looks better). I though instead of speaking of topic in other threads to start a new thread.

I could not compare max out for it was a slideshow and could not do it.
Its irrelevant for crysis was the same low shadows, 1080p, AA enabled and rest high(except volumetric in cyberpunk).
Rasterization vs rasterization seemed fair.

 

[DC9V]

Speculation. I did not intentionally try to make it look bad. LOL.
I have forgotten to mention the settings.
Settings are as follows:
All Shadows and volumetrics(in Cyberpunk) are in both games on low.
Anti aliasing: MSAA is 2x in Crysis 3. Cyberpunk 2077 has forced TAA.
Rest of Settings are on HIGH in both games. You cannot intentionally not load textures.

It's not speculation when you refuse to provide information that is needed for a fair comparison. And it is possible to slow down textures intentionally e.g. by using a damaged GPU. What's your CPU, GPU, which resolution, etc.? We need more information for such a comparison and it's not the first time that I tell you.

 

[Pufty]

The 'fairness' of the comparison is a small thread to pick up on when only dense city areas have what you'd consider comparable. Maybe judge by the frequency of how often you get too see screenshot-worthy scenery. I don't know how this goes in Crysis, but in Cyberpunk, if you detour from the main story areas, take an odd turn in an alley, drive off the desert road a bit... Just a bit, you get a lot of slapped together areas. The models aren't bad (They are fantastic, just hampered and blurred into the ground for performance), the way they're tossed in is, which shows how rushed some of it was. JUST from the static world itself... Not including mechanics.

I don't feel like attacking or defending this game, I just don't feel like I want to thank this game for it's existence. It was something I wanted to experience for sure, it just underwhelmed in a way where I wonder if I was better off with just a grand illusion.

 

[Wenceslaus]

Lets not go Ad hominem route, please.

Not ad hominem, I do not think you did it with evil intention, we are all biased. But fair point, that might be unproductive argument.

So your saying Cyberpunk 2077 a 2020 game needs ray tracing to look better then an 2013 game.

No I do not say that, the CP77 lighting looks better to Crysis overdone AO, not mention the geometry details.

But the argument seems quite silly. It is like saying "What new games need new technologies to look better?" Well... yes, generally.

About ten years before Crysis 3 there was a game, half life 2. it has real time accurate water relection. Crysis has not.
Sometimes, you can nitpicking and show what has been done better in differen older game, differen genre... but that does not mean HL2 is the best looking game ever.

 

[LeKill3rFou]

I said it would be my last post, but at the risk of sounding like a gonk, I'll post anyway

Look at the image above. It looks like looking at the sky. That's underwater.
And now look how it look in Crysis 3 underwater:

You're absolutely right to focus on graphics quality underwater, because honestly over all the gaming time I spent on Cyberpunk, I must have been underwater a good 80% of the time. It's easy, I still thought I was in Subnautica... I even looked for where my Seaglide was hiding in my inventory...

 

[sL3nd3rmAnn]

Not ad hominem, I do not think you did it with evil intention, we are all biased. But fair point, that might be unproductive argument.




No i do not say that, the CP77 lighting loks better to Crysis overdone AO not mention the geometry details.

But the argument seems quite silly. It is like saying "What new games need new technologies to look better?" Well... yes, generaly.

About ten years before Crysis 3 there was a game, half life 2. it has real time accurate water relection. Crysis has not.
Sometimes, you can nitpicking and show what has been done better in differen older game, differen genre... but that does not mean HL2 is the best looking game ever.

I already admit lighting is better. Why keep mention that?
We are comparing water Crysis 3 vs Cyberpunk 2077. Not Half Life. Talking about other game is irrelevant.

Q: Which of the water(both underneath and above) looks better, in Crysis 3 or Cyberpunk 2077?

Ignoring the textures not loading, graininess, blurred TAA which does not exist in Crysis 3.

Post automatically merged: Jun 9, 2021

I said it would be my last post, but at the risk of sounding like a gonk, I'll post anyway

You're absolutely right to focus on graphics quality underwater, because honestly over all the gaming time I spent on Cyberpunk, I must have been underwater a good 80% of the time. It's easy, I still thought I was in Subnautica... I even looked for where my Seaglide was hiding in my inventory...

You don't spend time under water in crysis 3 either.
What's that have to do with anything?

Post automatically merged: Jun 9, 2021

It's not speculation when you refuse to provide information that is needed for a fair comparison. And it is possible to slow down textures intentionally e.g. by using a damaged GPU. What speculation would actually look like, is if I told you to sell your OLED TV in order to buy a new PC with a decent GPU, and the reason for that is that l don't know more about your setup.

What's your GPU, CPU, which resolution, etc.? Your information in its current state:
"I was in the room (WHICH ONE?) with four people (WHEN?) and one of us (WHO?) shat on the table (WHY?)."

We need more information for such a comparison and it's not the first time that I tell you.

I said i forgot. There was no intention to omit settings.
The TV its not OLED.

My pc is
Ryzen 1700 8 core 16 thread CPU.
Asus b350 prime plus MOBO latest bios.
Corsair 16 GB 3200 Mhz RAM.
XFX 580 4GB GPU.
Seasonic 550w PSU.
Samsung UE50NU7472 4k 60hz first TV.
Samsung 40J5100 1080p 60hz second TV.

Gonna upgrade to 5900x + Asrock b550 taichi razer in few weeks.
GPU have no stock or are 2500 $ or more. New RX 580 8 GB was selling for 800 $.
Waiting for proof of stake on ETH or drop in bitcoin, eth making more accessible to buy something.

 

[Wenceslaus]

I already admit lighting is better. Why keep mention that?
We are comparing water Crysis 3 vs Cyberpunk 2077. Not Half Life. Talking about other game is irrelevant.

Q: Which of the water(both underneath and above) looks better, in Crysis 3 or Cyberpunk 2077?

Ignoring the textures not loading, graininess, blurred TAA which does not exist in Crysis 3.

Post automatically merged: Jun 9, 2021

You don't spend time under water in crysis 3 either.
What's that have to do with anything?

And why you keep mention all the things you do? It is important. Do you want to compare games or just the specific parts of games at certain setting? I do not see much of a point of the latter
Using other games to ilustrate point is bad for what reason? I mentioned other game once....

Underwater in CP2077 looks different at different places and setting.
From what you've picked the Crysic 3 looks better, though nothing that woudl amaze me (it would in 2013 though)

You don't spend time under water in crysis 3 either.
What's that have to do with anything?

Well it has to do with the popruse of such coparison.
If something marginal in both games looks better in some cases in one game than it is clearly not that relevant (not saying irrelevant).

 

[sL3nd3rmAnn]

And why you keep mention all the things you do? It is important. Do you want to compare games or just the specific parts of games at certain setting? I do not see much of a point of the latter
Using other games to ilustrate point is bad for what reason? I mentioned other game once....

Underwater in CP2077 looks different at different places and setting.
From what you've picked the Crysic 3 looks better, though nothing that woudl amaze me (it would in 2013 though)




Well it has to do with the popruse of such coparison.
If something marginal in both games looks better in some cases in one game than it is clearly not that relevant (not saying irrelevant).

We are comparing graphics. Water is usually a tool used to compared graphics between games.

So we have established something, that water looks better in Crysis 3. Lighting is better in Cyberpunk 2077.


Q: Do u have texture not loading or loading in real time in Crysis 3? (Yes or No)
Q: Do you have grainy textures in Crysis 3? (Yes or No)
Q: Do you have blurred AA in Crysis 3? (Yes or No)

 

[DC9V]

My pc is
Ryzen 1700 8 core 16 thread CPU.
Asus b350 prime plus MOBO latest bios.
Corsair 16 GB 3200 Mhz RAM.
XFX 580 4GB GPU.
Seasonic 550w PSU.

Gonna upgrade to 5900x + Asrock b550 taichi razer in few weeks.
GPU have no stock or are 2500 $ or more. New RX 580 8 GB was selling for 800 $.
Waiting for proof of stake on ETH or drop in bitcoin, eth making more accessible to buy something.

Finally! The target frame rate on both games for this comparison should be 30 FPS, is that the case?