Recommended Posts

'Crysis 3' leaked screenshots show off stunning lighting

Four new screenshots of Crysis 3, showing off the "Canyon" environment seen in the

, leaked today.

The gorgeous images were posted on the blog of Pierre-Yves Donzallaz, a senior lighting artist at Crytek, who has since taken them down.

According to Donzallaz, the lighting and post-processing effects exhibited in the screenshots are running in real time. They make the game world look particularly alive, which it is ? Crysis 3 takes place in a New York City that has been terraformed after the events of Crysis 2, turning it into a literal urban jungle. It also brings back some of the wide-open spaces that were characteristic of the original Crysis' tropical setting, while retaining the verticality of its sequel.

Crytek, the German studio making Crysis 3, has stated a desire to maintain parity across all three platforms, both in terms of visuals ? as much as possible ? and gameplay. "If something would radically change the experience on one platform, and we can't translate across all of them, then the feature will not be there," director of creative development Rasmus Hoejengaard told Polygon in April.

Crysis 3 is set to launch on PC, Xbox 360, and PlayStation 3 in February 2013.

Source: The Verge

OvQSx.jpg

Bu8ud.jpg

Glmal.jpg

bdOnD.jpg

The screenshots look really fantastic. I'm definitely looking forward to the game after seeing their E3 demo, and these shots are just tantalizing. Hopefully Crytek won't neuter the PC version this time around, and we'll get proper graphics support.

Yeah I'd say these are renderings rather than screenshots of the game itself. I don't think that's the story here though, this is...

Crytek, the German studio making Crysis 3, has stated a desire to maintain parity across all three platforms, both in terms of visuals ? as much as possible ? and gameplay. "If something would radically change the experience on one platform, and we can't translate across all of them, then the feature will not be there,"

I read that as "PC players will get screwed out of a great shooter because the consoles aren't as capable". It's Crysis 2 all over again :(

I read that as "PC players will get screwed out of a great shooter because it's more the consoles aren't as capable". It's Crysis 2 all over again :(

I interpreted it that way too. I'm still hopeful though.

As for the shots being touched-up, that doesn't bother me. Crytek has always had really good looking games. I don't doubt that Crysis 3 will look really close to those shots when it's done.

I read that as "PC players will get screwed out of a great shooter because the consoles aren't as capable". It's Crysis 2 all over again :(

Or more specifically, "we'll continue to introduce and overuse shaders, to try and disguise the fact we're still using 2006-level texture and mesh resolution because consoles can't handle anything better".

That and the fact that Crytek have never heard of the term "artstyle".

If those shots are 100% true, you'd better start saving for dual sli 680gtx's, extra memory and the latest overclocked cpu's, otherwise it's gonna run like ass, or nothing remotely like those screens as a result of turning down graphic settings to get the damn thing to work.

If this is what we call "stunning lighting" these days then wow, we've really stopped progressing haven't we? Cause these shots are rather unimpressive and don't look like anything all that beyond what we've currently seen.

Gameplay is what I care about. Sorry but Crysis 1 and 2 sucked in the gameplay department. Boring as hell. Crytek has a long way to go before they are on the Valve level of single player campaign FPS production. Half Life 2 this is not.

I'd have to say the opposite, that crysis(the first one atleast, haven't played 2) was more enjoyable gameplay wise than HL2 was. Probably because you had some degree of freedom, rather than being pretty much completely confined to a single narrow hallway with no other way to get to where you were going.

Gameplay is what I care about. Sorry but Crysis 1 and 2 sucked in the gameplay department. Boring as hell. Crytek has a long way to go before they are on the Valve level of single player campaign FPS production. Half Life 2 this is not.

And a good thing that is. HL series are crap, I don't understand why people think they gameplay or story in that pile is so good.

I guess you just don't like things that the majority of people do.

pg2fM.png

Majority liking it doesn't make it good, it just means it targets the lowest common.

or are you saying the new Ghost recon games are better than the original, that the new Rainbows six games are better than raven shield and it's predecessors. and I put very little faith in reviewers for what I like. if I did I would only be watching boring drama movies.

You said " I don't understand why people think they gameplay or story in that pile is so good."

People think it's good because it is good. Your opinion isn't with the majority on this one and the mile of great reviews and the fact it made game of the year etc just shows how good the game was received. A game doesn't need to only tickle the fancy of 10,000 people and be a total niche to be great. Tomb Raider is a great game, you obviously play it based on your Signature and it also got rave reviews when it released on the PC and PS1. Do you disagree that Tomb Raider is a great game?

We get it, you didn't like Half Life 2, that's fine. It is still a great game and one by which other FPS's will be judged.

I believe Crysis 2 utilized a large majority of the 360/PS3 hardware so I doubt Crysis 3 will use much more (since much more isn't available these days, it's rather late in the generation cycle).

So basically the game will look practically the same as Crysis 2 on the consoles. These "amazing screenshots" look the same as the Crysis 2 screenshots to me.

In fact, the PC version will highly likely look very similar to Crysis 2 also. Two reasons:

1) The game is made along-side old consoles, which will bring down the PC visual quality a small amount (not as much a PC gaming fans fear) 2) PC hardware hasn't changed too much since Crysis 2, and Crysis 2 already included the latest DX11 features (with the official patch, that is) which still make only but the very latest mid-2012 hardware run at <60 FPS in maximum detail (tessellation is still a killer).

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • All these CEOs got the biggest boners thinking about firing employees for AI. Turned out it was just a wet dream.
    • And the fact that the majority of people from Poland are white European Christians while the people you are complaining about in post after post are not is just a coincidence... Every sentence in your post I am replying to is racist nonsense. None of it is actually based on any facts whatsoever. All immigrants are seeking a better life too. It's literally the only reason they would risk everything and leave their homes, families, and homeland. They are working and contributing to the economy too, as you even admit. They get the same benefits your partner did AND that YOU are eligible for as well. That is one of the key things of the EU and a mark of a civilization. That is the definition of a society where everyone is given a chance, treated equally and fairly, and is judged by the content of their character, not their different skin color or which version of ignorant superstitious nonsense their parents lied about as children. Racists around the world said the same things about the Irish and Jews and Poles (like your partner) and...every other immigrant movement over the centuries. What's your family's heritage, by the way? Were your ancestors lied about with racist fearmongering crapola by self-entitled locals the same way as you are now? If someone like that said the same things about all people from Poland, like your partner, would they be right? Or would you want them to judge your partner based on who they actually were, not where they just happened to come from?
    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!