Exclusive - Crysis 3 Remastered on Switch - First Look, Graphics Comparisons + Performance! 

Mercenaries is a great game. I honestly want a new Killzone..If sony wanted a multiplayer game they could do that or resistance.

Killzone Mercenary even to this day looks a lot better than it has any right to. It's amazing what they able to squeeze out of the hardware. Because you have to consider how the Vita is a lot more comparable to the PS2/OG Xbox in processing power than it is to a PS3.

Mercenary is still absolutely absurd. Not only did it best so many console games graphically but especially gameplay wise. Still one of the best multiplayer FPS there is.

Here here ... All on 512mb RAM and a mobile chip from 2010!

@@_TheElMan Yeah but can it run Crysis?

It wasn't the rain, it was the cloth physics blowing in the wind. (you can disable it to improve performance)

I was mind blown with those incredibly detailed grass lands. It just didn't seem possible a ps3/360 could move all that geometry in real time.

It's really the lighting that is so impressive. It's why Crysis 3 looks like a PS4 generation game and will still look great for a PS5 game too when the remaster is released.

mate my first experience was the PS3 version, after that start bit I was like nah this is way to laggy

@@NonsensicalSpudz I just hated how blurry it was. It actually plays shockingly well for a sub 30 fps game. They really nailed the controls. Can't wait to see what 60 is like on ps5

the magic would be 11 years newer video game system... the ps3 was from 2006

@@simlife445 but the cell processor in the PS3 rivals today’s processors. It was just hard to program for.

Saber ruined the C1 remaster. Crytek was way more hands-on here and is probably the reason they turned out so good.

@@silverbags1208 Rival's today processors? Absolutely not

@@hyrulelink16 I would like to know what you mean. Everything I read (up until 2019-2020) mentioned that the Cell processor was “a far stronger processor than modern Intel CPUs.” Respawn claimed “Intel core 9-9900k not as powerful as PS3 Cell Processor.” The processor was just very hard to program for. If you have any information to the contrary I would love to have a link to read about why it is “absolutely not.” I am an IT professional, and I always like learning new things. :)

I can't tell if this is back handed compliment to the Switch or not, but it cracks me up when people have to always cite the year the Tegra X1 was revealed. It would be like year dropping PS5 and Series S/X are 2019 chipsets when complimenting them (in 2023)

@Garrus Vakarian jeez just give credit where credit is due.

@Garrus Vakarian but ps3 version sucked.

@Garrus Vakarian Nintendo version has better graphics, resolution and fps than ps3 and i think it's obvious

@Garrus Vakarian The PS3 was way more capable CPU wise when used properly. Thats why we dont see PS3 Emulation on 4 and even 5.

Hey does anyone know how well the Deck would handle this game

In my opinion Saber Interactive should get credit for this, since they're the ones that did the Switch port

Crysis games: runs amazing on low end hardware with good graphics Also Crysis games: Struggle to run on 3090's and 6900xt's

Technically as low as a $200 tablet if you buy a Switch lite! Crazy how a dinky little $200 handheld with an underclocked 2015 chipset is performing better in games than a full-blown console that cost $599 at launch (PS3)! Technology improves so fast these days it's practically blinding.

@@fearlesswee5036 the ps3 was that expensive because of using rare components and having nearly a dozen USB ports

@@fearlesswee5036 Miracle starts when you overclock switch gpu cpu and ram. 60 fps Crysis trilogy on switch is real, or 30 fps with grafix mod.

Yep that's a better decision than whatever Ubisoft decided to do for Assassin's Creed 3

@@Dev-nr4dw to be fair, doom Eternal is a much more modern game. This game was on ps3. But still, overall I do find this game better looking on switch than doom Eternal, yes. I'm just saying it's hard to compare as the ports come from two very different starting points.

@@Dev-nr4dw crysis 3 is a 7 year old game that was made to also run on 16 year old hardware. Its nowhere near comparable to Doom on the switch

Will love to see a Crysis 3 comparison between the Switch and the Steam Deck in December. How they compare in Image quality and framerate. As well as controls. Will be interesting. Props to Crytech for optimizing this game just like ID / Bethesda with the Doom series

Its not just a bump of resolution/IQ but better textures, grass, shadows, reflections, AO and an almost perfect frame rate (compared to the 24 fps average if PS360). They did such an amazing work.

Im not that amaze..since it was made for the last gen ps3 xbox 360 era

Is it amazing that 2017 hardware runs a game better compared to 2006 hardware?... ok, sure.

@@MrBenedick14 You really lack attention in your life, do you...

@@edu7385 Correction, that MOBILE hardware from 2015 run a game made for HOME CONSOLES from 2006. And better at that. With a less powerful CPU. I mean is it new that mobile hardware is late due to power consumption / heat issues ?

@@MrBenedick14 its amazing because even the ps4 could struggle to run this game at its full graphical potential. PS5 wouldnt even be able to run this at max 4k res at its highest settings without some complete optimization.

That's cute.

Wont be disappointed.

Is your vacation 1 day long? XD

I wish the other Crysis games had kept that story up with the alien invasion properly. But the designs got changed (along with a lackluster explanation as to why), and the original designs were genuinely interesting, creepy and ... well ... "Alien". They didn't stand on legs. They more resembled squid, but that's besides my point: the reveal of the aliens in the mountain in Crysis 1, and the interior exploration in zero gravity, when we get into their base, is some of the coolest shit I've ever seen in video games, period. And I've seen a lot. To have that all thrown into the bin and have it replaced with generic "baddies" was such a disappointment, that I stopped halfway through Crysis 2.

Switch is a great traveling machine. For my gaming need since i work a lot i always have it by my side.

N64 games look better then Arceus

@@steve833333 Don't be so exaggerated lmao

@@tribbeh Ok fine, Gamecube games look better than Arceus 😁

Preach

Deam it's a fact

Same, played crysis 2 on 360 instantly fell in love

Which ports don't hold up to their last gen counterparts? I can only think of LA Noire, everything else is a straight improvement.

Also i saw that the game has way less aliasing in switch compered to the ps3. In xbox one and ps4 this game will have even better settings than the switch version. And better fps if this game can have max settings on ps4 and 60 fps i will be very impressed.

Most devs that work on the Switch version don't give a shit is why. This is what happens when a dev cares about the quality of their work

@@JackFrost-1856 deadly premonition

@@3dgelord187 true all they care about is money but in this remaster i think they have done a good job.

oh god, yeah the audio crust in that part was horrid

What style of dancing is Alex doing? 😂

Wt..🤣

oh wow fear, now that would be something, dead space too though it's art still looks great imo.

FEAR Remastered Trilogy in 4K would be epic! Including Extraction Point and Perseus Mandate obviously.

@@ordimanipascal Yes to all of it. Such an underrated gem but so was Kingdoms of Amalur and Dragon's Dogma so maybe there's a chance.

@@xXJeReMiAhXx99 I agree and most importantly, it's still hella fun.

I would love for the FEAR series to be remastered

my order from best to good would be 3-2-1

@@kassperplus No. Its 1>3>2

@@JaimeIsJaime yeah but thats not my order thats yours.

I had a really fun time with Crysis. Only ever played it on the switch, and I will definitely get the collection on there too.

And one of the most demanding games too

I’ve never played crysis. Which one out of the trilogy is the best?

@@Benmeglei1 i recommend to play all the trilogy since all the 3 games are goodm

@@Benmeglei1 All three games are very different, so It really depends on what you like. If you're into big open maps and player freedom then the first one, if you like more linear FPS games then you're gonna like the second one more. The third one tries to appel to both C1 and C2 fans and suffers for it big time, It's definitely the worst.

@@maximumpain4579 But C3 has the best and most beautiful final sequence.

So you’re saying that Pokémon game will have better graphics and performance than Crysis 3?

@@KombatKastle the exact opposite

@@KombatKastle It's Irony

Get ready for 600p 25fps Pokémon BAY BEE

*beer slips off Game Freak's hand and shatters on the ground*

Don't forget that Tales of Arise also had a demo this week (on the 18th)

@@Independenceday95 Always gonna have that one guy 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️...

@@MikeUK66 Tht sounds more like ur *that* guy with the way u responded to him. Did u really get bothered by him adding onto wht u said? How is tht bad???

@@Daigon95 Lmao someones salty. Go outside, get some fresh air and a girlfriend while you're at it.

@@MikeUK66 wow someones salty. Hav a good day ma'am.

Like gta V on 360 and ps3

@@WayStedYou last of us and uncharted 3 looks vetter than gta 5

Looking at your replies, like danm what are these guy's talking about. 😂

@@ash_1419 GTA 5 is a different take on those old hardwares with its massive scale open world. Obviously it will look worse than more linear games. It's still as ambitious though

I think best looking game of 8th gen is a tie between Red Dead 2 and Last of Us 2

Jungle 2 Jungle

A concrete jungle

Me too

The last time I was this early the fiance was disappointed 😂

Yeah. I honestly thought he just liked seeing peak frameless while staring up at skyboxes.

Yeah I’ve always wondered about that

I’m so confused by this comment. What’s taking a dump on what? Is this a compliment?

Wonder how it would run on he steam deck

@@kiaelinkx Sorry for my less-than-optimal analogies.. I mean Crysis 3 somehow manages to look a ton better than almost anything that gets put out on Switch today. It's weird how the devs were able to make such good use of limited hardware resources back then. Meanwhile Pokemon Arceus gets shown few days back and people argue that the Switch can't handle anything more than that.. The game looks like some janky asset flip barf, where nothing fits together as it should. Yet we see so many gorgeous open worlds on the console from this gen and the last one which make Arceus look laughable in comparison. All I'm saying is, making great looking games is and always has been up to the talent of the devs. I think the x360 and PS3 generation saw so much innovation and tech pioneering, and Crysis 3 is a testament to that.

Now i believe that dying light port is real

He did make his own video on Quake if you want to watch that

@@superwhizz114 Watched it, hoping for a deeper dive with a few 'bespokes' thrown in

John is doing a panel at Quakecon later today regarding the Quake remaster

@@Sneedus Just saw this, it was at 3:30pm BST with Machine Games

@@Sneedus That's not on the schedule on their website. Got a link?

It needs a lot more work than just a 60+ tps simulation rate, though that would be a start.

So you never played Warhead?

@@ash_1419 I did not.

@@M1tZk1 you should definitely try it...it improved so much on the 1st game

EA is not the owner of the Crysis IP. Crytek owns it.

I'm confused why people go so over the top with AA combinations etc, does it really look that much better? especially at 4k most games I think I could play without any whatsoever.

UC4 is a beautiful game tbf.

@@Loundsify It really is. It also made me realize how important lighting and effects can be. The quality of the lighting just brought the atmosphere to another level. I still feel like it's one of the absolute best looking games ever and only recently has been eclipsed by stuff like Demon's Souls, Metro Exodus Enhanced Edition (best lighting in any game atm), Death Stranding, and of course, the Last of Us Part II

Yeah lol what the hell does rich feed his dog??😝

Can't make hardware cry if there's no hardware at all

@@obamaprism9876 genius

It's a ps3 game. Years into the switch life cycle and you people are still "surprised" games turn on lol.

The Switch chipset is several chip generations ahead of Xbox360 and PS3. Stop it lololol

Ps3 was playing this game with only 256mb of vram...256!!

@@theanimerapper6351 John and Rich explicitly say that the Switch's Tegra CPU is weaker than the PS3's CELL. We also know that the Crysis games are very CPU intensive, which is again mentioned in this video. What makes the Switch version impressive is that even with a weaker CPU than the PS3, it's able to turn in much better performance with improved image quality all on mobile hardware with a power draw of 15w vs the PS3's 120-200w power draw. It's a remarkable feat.

@@mrratchet don't acknowledge the fact that I also pointed out that it's years later and you guys are still somehow surprised. It seems like cap that you guys are still surprised even though Witcher 3 and immortals fenyx rising, modern open world games run on switch. When is this not going to be "surprising"?

Yes, the resolution of the shadows is lower but their filtering is better at a distance. In that specific scene It seems they have entirely switched out the leaves that are casting those shadows. Maybe transparency of textures is no longer considered for shadows? But that would be really obvious in many places. It's really strange that DF didn't pick up on that when reviewing and editing their footage.

I remember playing it on PS3, you could tell it was pushing the hardware right to the limit. Switch should be able to cope a bit better (I hope)

That's true, it was known from the start that NS is slightly more powerful than PS3/X360, but it's still impressive to see a game like Crysis 3 run this fluidly on a handheld device. Would have been much better if Switch got similarly looking games soon after its lunch.

@@mikeuk666 That's not unreasonable. The switch is more powerful than a 360.

Still Crysis Trilogy is probably the best port. Some other third part ports really don’t look as good on Switch.

expectations get raised and you can definitely feel it

I never really noticed the frame drops on ps3 until me and a few friends decided to place c4 all over the map and detonate it in multiplayer damn near crashed the game

They'd have to work their magic doing alot of CPU optimizations, the game has serious CPU bottlenecks, especially in the main crowded city with lots of NPC's walking around.

You know what. I'm with you on this. Those videos would be pretty dope. Crysis 3 is like the best looking game that is getting a remaster.

It's not like any other developer on the planet has produced a better looking and performing game for Switch. The Switch is not a particularly powerful piece of hardware.

Didn't know that 1024x720 and 1600x900 looked the same, silly me

@@ThibautMahringer It's dynamic resolution on the Switch, it rarely goes that high.

@@TheGoncas2 How do you know ? It haven't been tested enough

It looks good for sure on Switch and cleaner than on PS3/X360.

The DF team loves Chad Warden. This certainly isn’t the first time they’ve referenced it :)

@@bearpuns5910 I guess I've just never picked up on it lol

you've haven't been that attentive then - this is like the third or fourth time this year :D

They have made heaps of Chad Warren references

Which frostbite games are on switch? Just the fifas?

@@ihormuzyka8553 Fifa on Switch doesn't use frosbite but I think there's one frosbite game on Switch, a game related to Plant vs Zombies

Welp, Crysis 1-3 was on the 360 and ps3, and the switch has more power in every aspect

I wouldn't say "no business", they came out on PS3/360 and the Switch is more powerful than those. These versions definitely seem a good step up from those though.

The people saying Switch is more powerful don't understand PS3 and Xbox 360 didn't have access to TAA and DRS. Never mind the fact that grass actually pops in more more often on Switch and seems to draw in farther on PS3. Sure the grass seems thicker and fuller on Switch... because the grass blades are actually about 2x thicker than on PS3 and Xbox 360. That walking scene John showed off shows large patches of tall grass popping in on Switch but those patches were already visible on PS3 much further out. The engine seems to be more aggressively culling geometry for Switch in areas were more varied object LoDs are visible. This makes sense given the geometry buffer is a weak point in mobile GPUs and that is a problem on Switch too as evidenced by other games ported from last generation to Switch including RE4 and L.A. Noire. PS3 and Xbox 360 are likely still computationally more capable than Switch and we know even back then PS3 was more capable than Xbox 360 and yet PS3 runs Crysis 3 worse than Xbox 360 while Xbox 360 never had games that looked as good as Uncharted 3 or Killzone 3 or even Gran Turismo 5. So what's the deal??? The knowledge gap. The reason Crysis 3 looks better on Switch could be simply because PS3 and Xbox 360 can't leverage the tools derived from the knowledge gained over the past 8 years of development on limited hardware but ultimately Switch is running the PS3/X360 era game at a higher resolution with better AA and less visual effects that has been re-optimized to run better on PS3/X360 era hardware.

You clinically focused on some grass details not understanding that resolution here Is consistently higher, framerate is in a different league (constant 30fps versus 20 to 25fps on PS3 and constant sub-30 on X360), texture are better, shadows are better, ambient occlusione is better. Switch Is a more powerful and way more modern architecture and this game is another example... But It seems that It does not matter how 99% of portings to Switch are a big jump in almost every aspect, you and people like you always insist in finding awkward ways to say the contrary.

@@MrMorotep Not just grass, but overall LoD as well as shadow quality and some textures also look worse on Switch (which is completely unexpected). So no I'm focused on the fact that the Nintendo Switch despite _being more powerful than PS3_ isn't pushing better visuals. The resolution is higher which is expected because the Switch has higher fillrate than PS3/Xbox 360 and the image is cleaner due to using a better AA solution (which is also much cheaper to implement than SMAA which PS3/Xbox 360 use). So Switch isn't showing that it's more powerful than PS3 or the weaker Xbox 360. Yes, I know this game runs better on Xbox than PS3 at a higher resolution too, but that doesn't change the fact that PS3 is a more powerful machine that Crytek didn't know how to really hone performance for.

That just goes to show that "weak" is subjective, because context matters.

Switch has more RAM, a better GPU, a more modern CPU architecture and most important of all, upto date software development practices.

@@PursuedByAMemory Uh... that bit about a better GPU and more modern CPU architecture is wrong or simply not the limiting factor. Yes, Switch has more RAM overall and more RAM available to games but that doesn't make games look better when the GPU is less able to push the same level of geometry as PS3 (which had the weakest GPU of the "HD twins" meaning we're obviously excluding the Nintendo Wii and the Wii U). The Tegra X1 (including that inside Switch) has more limited capacity to draw triangles and quads which is the basis of all objects in games. The less restricted RAM allows for better textures and the higher fill-rate of mobile GPUs including Tegra X1 allows for better textures and higher resolution output buffers (higher native resolutions). Don't believe me? Well take another look at this video particularly the long walking bits comparing PS3 and Switch where PS3 is actually drawing in more foliage at a higher LoD while Switch's grass pops-in. This is contrary to John's own assessment claiming falsely that Switch draws in more grass when you clearly see the grass blades are thicker on Switch, but no more or less numerous in the specific comparison shot in which John mentioned the better grass rendering on Switch. Switch has a better pixel fill rate... which is why the game runs at a higher resolution but some of that fill-rate is consumed by rendering better textures than the PS3 version and to support that they developers relied on DRS and TAA to help keep up performance. Switch appears to lack particle shadows (which eat up more in the way of geometry and processing power) as well as having a more well optimized geometry culling process which also seems to respect what the player might be seeing nearer the center of the screen leaving LoDs to pop-in at the periphery when they're much closer to the viewport (which makes sense and produces more fleshed out visuals at the center of the screen sacrificing detail at the edges more than on PS3/X360). So there are nips and tucks that were deployed to make this game run better on Switch and if you care about the flourishes more than the image quality and performance you can easily see the Switch port is actually using slightly lower overall graphical quality settings than the PS3/X360 original in many small ways that ultimately don't impact the overall appearance of the game much.

@@VariantAEC This is all great knowledge, thanks for sharing!

I mean DOOM and Wolfenstein are both current gen games unlike Crysis 3 which is a PS3/360 era game - so no surprise they're more demanding.

Well, they're different generations of games, this would certainly be easier to port than Doom 🤔

@@JohnnyWestlake Maybe Eternal but not sure about DOOM 2016. Much smaller maps and CPU load is minimal compared to Crysis 3. Also, this is basically a PS4 gen game, they just needed to squeeze some cash from the consoles that were on the market at the time. I bet some Crytek devs wanted this to be a PS4 only title.

Doom an Wolfenstein was ps4 port ...crisis is ps3 port big difference

@@denisruskin348 Doom 2016 was actually more demanding than Eternal. There's a whole video about it, but basically the engine 2016 runs on is older, and was not built to be as scalable as the one Eternal uses. If you compare framerate between them, you'll notice framerate drops in the Switch version of 2016, but Eternal holds a completely solid framerate throughout. It has something to do with a thing called Megatexture, which was carried over from older versions of the IDTech engine, but puts more strain on newer systems that can use more detailed texture work.

Probably not so actually. Because it will just scale with the Pc specs where this was custom made for specific hardware.

@@TheChrisRolla FSR could make a difference.

Steam deck version will use the PC version and not be any different at all from the original release.

@@TSL73 Yeah and the pc version is 1000 times better lol

@@LemonRush7777 fsr is shit, its only somewhat decent at 4K

you mean the console version of Crysis 3 adjusted resolution based on what monitor is plugged in?? never heard of that before.

@@forasago not only Crysis 3. All games on consoles do that. CRT TV got 480i or 576i so consoles stuck in this settings when you connect console with Composite cable and games runs in this resolutions. Its a lot less than stock 720p or 1080p. Even on PS3 when you use HDMI you can set 480p or 576p only in XMB and games will get better pefrormance than in native 720p but they will looks worse. You dont know that lol?

I first played Crysis 1 on a PC, man that game looked great even though I got 20-25 fps, I'm hoping that I can finally play it on PS5 in better quality even Crysis 2 was great on PS3

Damn. You waiting a long time. Never built a pc in that time period either?

@@kishenkoolskills90 Not a pc gamer anymore?

That's really an old debate now, ever sinds Doom released in 2017 it has been proven these games sell on the Switch. It's literally the stigma you also hold that people won't enjoy these games on Nintendo comsoles.

I also noticed the lack of cloud shadows on switch on outside scenes. Think they simplified the shadows for better cpu perf.

@@Bramagon It's shadows from transparent textures that they simplified or outright removed. For grass they simplified it a little but also turned ON shadows on more of the grass so it often looks better until you look up close (nearby, on the ground or the gun). For trees they simplified it drastically which is a big downgrade. And clouds they just removed outright! Huge downgrade.

Just wait until the Steam Deck comes out

@@bearpuns5910 You missed his point. The point is that both consoles are underpowered, therefore playing such games on them is impressive

Yeah it was impressive they got it running on the Vita...what blew my mind more is how poor the framerate was. It's a shame, it could have been a killer app for the Vita.