as the topic..
mind to state ur view?

It's a bit hard to differentiate between two engines built for different types of games...

Both games not officially out yet..but judged from the video n demo..i will go for frostbite 2.0..

me too

bila BF3 mau out aya mau beli

lolz..still lama lagi bro...ujung taun nnt..im waiting for the pre-order beta..

i like frostbite

from my POV, frostbite more to destruction and dust effect..superb
and crytek engine known for very nice environment like HDR, blooming etc..
1st time ever introduced in far cry i think

both engine have their pros

This post has been edited by MjMax15: Mar 6 2011, 11:15 PM

well said!
for immersion, i'd love frostbite 2.0 personally. cryengine 3 would be the visual

Both game engine is great! Its just the matters of how the game developed.

My personal opinion so far would be,

Crysis 2, great graphics, gameplay just so so..

Battlefield 3, great gameplay with great graphics.

If just comparing the products (games), i'll go for Battlefield 3. I want to play great game. Impact of gameplay really give a hit rather than just good looking graphics

Crysis 2 only runs on DX9, am I right?

crysis 2 dx9 upon release. dx11 later.

frostbite 2.0 for destructible enviroments.

true...great graphics is to compliment great gameplay.

LOL
currently crysis 2 using dx9
no wonder gameplay very smooth

er i tot crysis 2 also got destructible enviroments?

most of the videos shown are on the x360 running at 60fps. their engine is refine to run smoothly on any machines and to showing off that they make do with hardware limitations.

@seraph8660
demo dont show any destructible enviroments similar to bfbc, only cosmetic destruction.

in crysis we cannot shoot rpg/nubetube through walls

so far as i know, Red Faction can beat frostbite engine hahaha..
but no many knows this volition engine..

I'll let you all be the judge.
CryEngine 3.0


vs.

Frostbite 2.0

must.....must...work harder to get both :|

Wow..thx for the share..both looks awesome..!