The interesting thing is that they included the Level Editor called "Sandbox Editor 2" in the demo so - if you have a top system - you can create your own photorealistic islands without the need of rendertimes!!! Unfortunatelly the interface/workflow is very different from Vue so it's hard to understand how to start to do anything but you can easily load and edit existing maps. (I noticed that the first level is 862 Mb after loading it into the editor; amazingly, you can rotate and zoom it smoothly with zillions of polygons)

It's hard to undertand how Crytek could create such a great engine (watch the Youtube Crysis high-res videos); how is it possible to get a living ocean, wind, godrays, volymetric world and clouds, breakable objects in a photoreal environment without rendertimes while in Vue one have to wait hours to render a simple landscape ? (not to mention an entire animation) 

I love Vue and it would be great if they could implement the same "miracle engine" (somehow using DirectX 10) into coming  versions.

(In-game pic is from web, my old graphic card in the laptop can't handle the highest photoreal settings)

I saw a demo some months ago and I had the exact same questions that you have. That engine seems like magic. The camera movement is perfectly fluid. The environment even has wind and waves in realtime. It has clouds, sun, fog, whatever. And you can interact with the environment, break stuff or create stuff. It's not a static environment. In the demo I saw, the person was creating a road from scratch. A photorealistic road, created from scratch, in seconds, across a mountain (the mountain profile adjusted itself to the road, automatically). And it was immediately possible to go there, zoom in and out. All real time, all with a perfect image. I was fascinated. If Vue could render at this speed...

I enjoy demo so much cutting palm trees with machine guns...LOL :-)

I'm a Crysis mapper myself.

You can make spectacular shots,

BUT

wonder why those shots are all in dark shadowy lighting?
Well the answer is, because in broad daylight the look sucks!
The light - shadow engine is good but in broad daylight you will see that an island looks pretty uniform.

Distant trees will over distance either not be shown or become a 2d picture that in color has to be adjusted to the ground texture or it will look ugly and unfitting to the background.

You can set the textures dependant to angle, altitude etc. just like in Vue, but it doesn't have the detail like a render engine, you will notice that very soon.

Closeup shots WILL challenge Vue shots, the vegetation is outstanding... and that's why I don't do that in Vue ( ... lol )

What CryTek does is creating a FAKE look of a carribean ocean by simply making it a picture, the reef is NOT real and infact is a plain rock texture ground with just a "mapped picture" like we say in vue applied.

This is a procedural applied texture map that I made. Atmosphere very simply in broad daylight. The angles are set to 45-90 for the mounts, and stuff is also altitude dependant. As I said it looks very uniform unless you apply a Photo of a real Island and that is pretty cheaty =D

http://s6.directupload.net/images/080326/l8w5a5e8.jpg

That's things you should know about "amazing" Crysis pics :D

Sceneic yey! Landscape... ney!

and this is what it looks like on my island in daylight:
http://s1.directupload.net/images/080326/3ycjdtr3.jpg

Yeah, I remember seeing some of this some time ago. There's no doubt it's very impressive, especially for gaming because it needs to be in real time.
Graphically it is very good, but for a still shot is it any better than Vue? Maybe not, but I know the real issue here is render time rather than actual full blown detail.
I think the big advantage for an app like Vue to incorporate this technology is for previewing your scene before you go for the full render. You could do a full pan & make quick adjustments rather than having to keep test rendering which we all know takes alot of time if you're doing a complex scene. Now, for this reason alone I would really like to have it.

Quote - the miracle has to do with DirectX 10.

Wrong! I get all DX10 Details + more ( custom config with even more detail ) on Dx9. DX10 in Crysis is a F.R.A.U.D.

Quote - I saw a demo some months ago and I had the exact same questions that you have. That engine seems like magic. The camera movement is perfectly fluid. The environment even has wind and waves in realtime. It has clouds, sun, fog, whatever. And you can interact with the environment, break stuff or create stuff. It's not a static environment. In the demo I saw, the person was creating a road from scratch. A photorealistic road, created from scratch, in seconds, across a mountain (the mountain profile adjusted itself to the road, automatically). And it was immediately possible to go there, zoom in and out. All real time, all with a perfect image. I was fascinated. If Vue could render at this speed...

The waves look good for midsea, they SUCK at beach, there are NO beach breakers at all. They removed em from the game completly. There's still entities for it but no actual model.

It looks like the beach sits in mid sea where it doesn't belong, or the beach would be overswum right now.

I hope they wil implement something, cause atm FarCry beaches look more realistic.

The clouds are nowhere near the detail of a true render, they can look good, but they lack shape and depth.

You can break Guerilla houses, palmtrees, crates, but stones will stop your tank Lol.

Please don't be hyped, it's a good game engine but it's no miracle. And the quality is far from a render engine.

Xpleet: I could only judge from the Youtube videos not having a proper system ; for me it looks like CryEngine beats Vue on many aspects...I was watching the living ocean for example; I don't know how many days would it take to create that texture not to mention rendering it; it simply wouldn't work.
I can't tell much more until I ran Crysis on a top system; I hate to say but CryEngine really beat Vue on many things despite what you say; it's almost embarrassing that it renders in real time...I think that with the latest graphic cards (Nvidia 8800 GTS) the mentioned artefacts maydisappear.
I can admit that the CryEngine can't render Global Radiosity so indeed the shadows or black areas look a bit strange...I can't say more without testing it on a high-end system; I just wish Vue could learn something from these guys.

Another impressive thing is that I can load a 800 Mb Crysis file into the editor and it moves around smoothly...it would be impossible with a Vue file!

I rather believe in MY eyes than in hypes or in your explanations Xpleet; again, CryEngine beats Vue in the animation area and even some outside stills. I just think it's really embarrassing with all the Vue hype when you can make your world in real time...the biggest problem for me is the Sandbox interface.

Another problem is that Vue was built on an old core and on old ideas; it seems that one can take another approach nowadays in landscaping based on the latest graphic technology...but e-on probably wouldn't admit this unconvenient fact; it would cost a lot to create a totally new Vue engine.

I don't know why you're so negative Xpleet, but I've NEVER EVER seen such beautiful realtime graphics; it would be darn hard to create them in Vue/Max and then render the animation for MANY WEEKS...are you trolling me? :-)

I wouldn't care about the Crysis hype if it weren't INDEED so true and groundbreaking...come on, give me some oceans waves and breaks in Vue so that I can dive into it and swim around...LOL

Xpleet, allow me to completely disagree with you. It seems we are not even talking about the same thing. I saw perfect waves at the beach, really good clouds and mountains.

It may not have the same quality of a render engine (well, for those who can use their render engines properly...) but I would completely disagree on being "far" from it, as you say.

I agree with attileus. Vue is based on a traditional approach. Each version of Vue is an evolution of the previous, bringing more features, better quality, etc, but it's still the same old concept.  To bring Vue closer to this game engine, e-on would need to make a "revolution", not an "evolution" and e-on wouldn't probably want to do that.

Quote - I rather believe in MY eyes than in hypes or in your explanations Xpleet; again, CryEngine beats Vue in the animation area and even some outside stills. I just think it's really embarrassing with all the Vue hype when you can make your world in real time...the biggest problem for me is the Sandbox interface.

Another problem is that Vue was built on an old core and on old ideas; it seems that one can take another approach nowadays in landscaping based on the latest graphic technology...but e-on probably wouldn't admit this unconvenient fact; it would cost a lot to create a totally new Vue engine.

And I'm running Crysis with a 8800GTX in ULTRA ( higher than CryTek offers ) quality.

Stuff in CryEngine is made up to the scene just like Vue.

Just cheat youself out of the mission area and it becomes so uuuugly you don't wanna be there.

I wonder what it would look like If i took that island picture and imported it over the same terrain in vue lol.

From what I've seen Crysis animations rocksox.
It has a pretty cool functioneditor "flow graphs"...

but as I said you can't make a landscape only near Vue quality. And the water is a disappointment atleast for me. ( beaches )

Yet I haven't seen a photorealistic scene to my means but ok..

Here is a look on my forest and waterfall :D

http://s1.directupload.net/images/080326/u9urgs4c.jpg

Quote - Xpleet, allow me to completely disagree with you. It seems we are not even talking about the same thing. I saw perfect waves at the beach, really good clouds and mountains.

And I'm mapping the final version. As I said the beach breakers or any beach relative waves were removed. It looks like in mid ocean on the beach now.

Much of the mountainscape is hidden by trees actually :D. You have an option where the vegetation of your choice plays chameleon to it's grounding texture making it fit more to the look of a background.

Here is a professional Crysis Sandbox Editor guy (http://www.helderpinto.com/) he makes Crysis levels; I thought his scenes are really awesome being a totally interactive environment.

Yes, you CAN render amazing photo-like stills in Vue pushing every slider to its limits  (especially Global Radiosity)  and wait for weeks but the CryEngine does it for "free" (no render times).

My point is that it's time for E-onsoftware to take a serious look at what CAN be done using the latest graphic cards and other new technology;they should stop improving the old Vue engine and get inspired by the new realtime-render graphic engine generation like CryEngine, Dunia, Unreal3!

Peace

I can only repeat, as I said before, landscape ney, Sceneic yay.

Keep the mountains dark and it'll look fine :P.

Helder Pinto made the greatest graphics config  that picture features his Ultra Quality.cfg

Greetings from Tropica Island!

Xpleet, did you make these pic in the Sandbox editor?

They look pretty sweet; amazing "feeling" of the water in the first one...I want to go for a late afternoon swimming...great work there!

Attached Link: http://www.crytek.com/technology/cryengine-2/videos/

Yepp...and CryEngine is not the only one with all the goodies; there's "Dunia" for FarCry 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMAqTXCd1Sg  -  it's  like a wake up call for the landscaping companies! :-) I want to create in real time and maybe trade Global Radiosity for a dynamic landscape with a little lower? quality! LOL

Software is waaaaay behind the curve regarding graphic processors designed for games which has let them become juggernauts.
but
games still lack certain features that require CPU power if you want 'em rendered.
"Game engine, your 300k poly poser person will barf on!" says Yoda :D

Would take a new paradigm to utilize the GPU as a true renderer, and I don't know if it's got the ability, plus they are not so standardized as CPU's are.

And I remember playing FarCry when ti came out and going "OMFG! these graphics rule!" ;)

At some point, real time ART rendering will become possible.

Wait until you see FarCry 2, with dynamic smoke influenced by wind direction and burning trees and bushes.

I am still waiting for the next generation of hybrid 3D renderer, with advanced realtime previsualization, shaders and sculpting tools on one hand, and GPU optimization for final 'baking' of the image with realistic algorithms.

I put the issues with the Crytek engine reported above to the lack of time or motivation from developers to model everything on the islands that were not necessarily part of the story. What I have seen live of Crysis is already lightyears ahead of any realtime preview from any 3D modeler I know of.

Crysis is a game, designed for fast rendering of views at ground level. They had to take shortcuts somewhere, and that includes distant landscapes. 

Give me that kind of tool for composition of a scene and hook it up to a final renderer such as Renderman or Maxwell.  With the emergence of multi-core machines and improvements in GPU calculations, I am sure we will see such a tool one day.

I am a bit disappointed by the CryEngine.

QuadCore is still not fully supported.

It's like [''''''] ['''''''] and cores 3 and 4 [----] [__] similiar to Supreme Commander.

Core 3 and 4 are not really busy.

Dualcores are a ticking timebomb and yeah...when is Vue 7 coming out?

Much stuff I see on the Vue6 gallery looks just outdated ( and sadly it could be looking better in a game engine! ) but Vue isn't a producing thing, it's a tool and the artist is the motor.

The next generation will kick it.

The crazy thing is that Crytek could make a pure landscaping software out of Sandbox 2 giving it a Vue/Bryce interface+workflow together with advanced render functions - if you want trade real time dynamics for high quality; then  we only would need to figure out how to project our consciousness into those amazing, living worlds...I really love those tropical islands. :-)

I thought the scenery was great, then I brought the antialiasing level up to 8... Holy cow!

Crysis isn't a new game, and CryEngine2 has been in development for years.  Does it look good?  I thought so, even with all options up on my 7950GT.  Unreal III also looks great, it's a matter of preference which one looks better...  I've played both engines extensively and both are great leaps forward in realtime.

But keep in mind these are realtime solutions, my friends.  That means NO raytracing, anywhere.  Shadow maps instead of accurate shadows.  BSP tricks instead of actual rendering going on.  It's like if you took a snapshot in Vue or Maya of ONLY the non-occluded pixels on your screen.

For example, Maya's OpenGL preview looks as good if not better than Crysis or Unreal, especially on an actual VFX card (Quadro, FireGL).  So Crysis and Unreal don't really impress, they're well done but nothing fancy.

There are no photons here, no GI, no transparency/refraction, no caustics, and no actual shadows involved.  If you (could) render from CryEngine or Unreal, you still wouldn't touch what Vue does mathematically even in preview renderings.  Also, good luck trying to hit print size with a realtime engine.

All of the above effects are faked using shader technology.  So for example, if you modeled a simple wine glass and rendered it in Vue with caustics and GI, you can get photorealism which doesn't just LOOK good, but is actually accurate.  This won't happen in realtime for many years to come.  Refractions and caustics and even reflections are faked with shader maps.  No light calculations are actually occuring.

We all had similar conversations when FarCry came out, then Oblivion, then Jericho, Assassin's Creed, and on and on.  Realtime raytracing?  Sure, when CPU's and GPU's are 1,000 times faster!

That's why I am not asking for real time raytracing.

What I was envisioning is a tool with the realtime capabilities of the Crytek sandbox editor for composing scenes and have a quick preview of where you want to take a shot of.... coupled with a full raytracing enging for 'offline' rendering of that shot (with the time it needs to render the scene). 

The geometry is still there, it would be a matter of substituting instances of objects from simplified realtime form to the detailed offline one. I don't see why such a tool wouldn't be possible.

InfernalDarkness,
or when much better coding is created ;)
I've seen amazing stuff pulled of over the years with little memory/resource usage, just because someone created precise, ultra efficient coding.

Software is sitll not close to properly utilizing 64 bit systems and GPUs, from what I've heard, it's just not easy to do improve the coding at all. Coding for games/apps is bloody complex as heck, alas.

Apps have to be backwards compatible, which limits what can be done in new releases. Also, we're dealing with the fact Humans are trying to code for machines...so major practical interface problem right there.

And I started with Bryce 3 (well bryce 2 I had a shot with), difference since then is enormous, thats only 10 years or less. :)

Hah!  I love your quote there, Silverblade33...

I also started with Bryce 3(d!), and RayDream Studio 5.  You're right about coding though...  Truth is there aren't many differences between Vue's (or other rendering engines) abilities and CryEngine's or Unreal's when it comes to output, mostly just heavy-duty functions, but the difference is that Crysis and Unreal are still obviously video games, no matter what machine they are running on.  Vue and many other packages are capable of photorealism if not actual realism, or at the very least painterism.

I like the new generation of video games a lot too, but I don't think they're any more groundbreaking than Unreal 1 or the Quake 3 engine from 1999 in terms of their impact on the VFX industry. 

"There are no photons here, no GI, no transparency/refraction, no caustics, and no actual shadows involved.  If you (could) render from CryEngine or Unreal, you still wouldn't touch what Vue does mathematically even in preview renderings.  Also, good luck trying to hit print size with a realtime engine."

I suffer from not having the latest desktop so I can't really check the highest Crysis settings...I'm not sure why you're so negative when I talk about CryEngine...NO WAY IN HELL that you can do the same things in Vue IN REAL TIME what you can do in Sandbox; that's the point.
For me it's a miracle to see those beautiful, dynamic Crysis waters and vegetation...after testing real time composition in the level editor it feels like torture to go back to Vue and waaaaait for update after every single change  I make in the scene...Vue feels outdated after checking Sandbox which is not even a pure landscaping/render prog. (the Sandbox GUI sucks though so that's why I continue with Vue) :-)
 

InfernalDarkness,
bows :)
Came up with that as my motto ages ago...makes more and more sense every day ;)
Couldn't get RayDream at the time back then, lol, wanted to model...ended up finding Rhino, later on (thankfully at college so it didn't cost BOTH arms and legs :p)

STALKER shadow of Chernobyl is about best game I've played since XCOM (UFO-enemy unknown, over here). DAMN is STALKER a great game as well as great eye candy. Better than nearly every Hollywood film I've seen in years.

Meh, Hollywood sucks now, sigh. LOTR = fantastic, but, most of the rest is "unrealistic" dross. Compare "The French Connection" to current stuff, which is all super smooth, slick and dead. 
OT, but you know what I mean? There is a serious lack of realism in films at the moment which bugs hell out of me, thus I'd rather play a good game :p

There's a bit in STALKER when the...won't spoil it. ..jumps you in the underground army base ...OMFG...scared crap out of me, fantastic stuff! :)
THAT is great cinema.

Attileus,
for animation I'd love STALKER or Crysis engines as for animation, well, stuff I do, "realism" isn't essential.
But for stills, no, still not nearly as good as Vue etc

Game engines do produce, now, very damn good art, IMHO, some areas of DOOM3 were fabulous. But, if we had render farms and could do wide screen renders 30 FPS...mmmm!!!!

There IS a real time art renderer at moment, but it's for product visualization, can't recall name off hand. So, eventually I'd bet real time will occur.

Holy heck, my current quad core PC renders x10 faster than  P4, which was my last art PC!!! My dual core game/back up rig renders x2.5 faster than the P4. The sheer power being thrown at such things in CPUs..plus fact possibilities of 64 bit are often not fully realized (I'd suspect Vue does use 64 bit effectively, due to massive render increase, even for a quad core??)

:)

But the point, guys, is that you want to create a picture of ART using real 3d software.

And point being that you are limited with a realtime engine which is IMO for moving pictures...

you wanna make me this in a game lol...?

And trust me when i tell you midday landscape shots in CryEngine s.u.c.k.... that's why i got Vue.

Stuff in a game is designed just for where you go and if you go out of area Crysis KILLS you for that.

Crysis together with Half Life 2 have got the BIGGEST game hype in game history. With half of promo-screenshots of both games being FAKE...One then automatically thinks a game is bigger and better than it actually is.

What is really cool in the Sandbox² is that you can paint  your own forests and walk through :P but that becomes boring.

@silverblade,

how dare you! Stalker is dark and ugly and blegh!

I only feel a bit frustrated after years of rendering when I spent many days of rendertime on a single pic; I really miss a landscaping software like Sandbox where you trade some quality for realtime fun! :-)

I feel e-on needs to drastically change their render engine in Vue 7 so it can render images a lot faster. If Vue 7's renderer is only marginally improved then I may not want to upgrade. I think the time has come where it needs a complete overhaul so it renders a LOT faster.

I think, as respectfully as possible LMcLean, that e-on has made Vue extremely fast.  It's among the fastest around, given it's functionality.  Much faster than most of "the Big Dogs", in many cases, and especially when dealing with hundreds of millions and even billions of polys.

Vue has many optimizations that other renderers lack, but also lacks a few itself.  As far as I know, it doesn't have per-object render overrides, which is something you get used to in more expensive studio applications.  It also lacks the GI and radiosity optimizations you'd see in mental ray or Vray, but also costs far less than either, and I daresay mental ray is incapable of rendering billions of polys short of having 64GB of RAM or more.  On my 2GB home machine, I can't even get 1 million polys out of mental ray / Maya.  But Vue's still ruthlessly fast when rendering spectral and volumetric scenes, especially considering

It's one thing to wish for something irrational, but entirely different to expect something impossible.  To put it bluntly : get a faster computer.  Or invest in some cheap AMD boxes and use them for network rendering, where AMD's really shine.  Another option is to study up on Vue's current optimizations and try to utilize them more.

I'm certain we'd all like to see Crysis / Unreal quality in preview mode though, but then again...  That's almost entirely GPU-dependant, and Vue has to be compatible with every OpenGL-capable GPU, not just top-end Geforces and Radeons.  So people with Geforce 8600's or less would be left in the cold.  Does that make sense?

In short, Vue can't expect average users (hobbyists) to buy it if it had a requirement that you also needed 1 or 2 $500 graphics cards to make it functional.  Just like Maya comes with the obvious disclaimer : **no Quadro, garbage preview mode. ** If Vue's makers expected you to have a $1500 graphics card to go with it, I think it would leave a great many users in the dust!  And that's not really Vue's price range; studios using 3DS or Maya have already spent several thousand dollars per license, so spending more on Quadros will already be in the budget, and aren't a big deal for professional users...

To sum up, you get what you pay for.  Vue is only as fast as your CPU/RAM will allow it to be, and that's true of every software package available.

Quote - I think, as respectfully as possible LMcLean, that e-on has made Vue extremely fast.  It's among the fastest around, given it's functionality.  Much faster than most of "the Big Dogs", in many cases, and especially when dealing with hundreds of millions and even billions of polys.

The fastest around, Not by any chance. I am rendering out 400 frames at high quality in another 3D application in about 1.5 hrs. I tried the same scene in Vue and it took 2 days so I don't know where you are getting your information from > Quote - Vue has many optimizations that other renderers lack, but also lacks a few itself.  As far as I know, it doesn't have per-object render overrides, which is something you get used to in more expensive studio applications.  It also lacks the GI and radiosity optimizations you'd see in mental ray or Vray, but also costs far less than either, and I daresay mental ray is incapable of rendering billions of polys short of having 64GB of RAM or more.  On my 2GB home machine, I can't even get 1 million polys out of mental ray / Maya.  But Vue's still ruthlessly fast when rendering spectral and volumetric scenes, especially considering

Trying to compare mental ray to Vues renderer is an unfair comparison. Remember Vue is not actually rendering billions of polygons, but it is rendering out "instances" so it's not fair to say Vue can render out billions of polygons and mental ray cannot, because the billions of polygons aren't real physical polys but instances. > Quote - IIt's one thing to wish for something irrational, but entirely different to expect something impossible.  To put it bluntly : get a faster computer.  Or invest in some cheap AMD boxes and use them for network rendering, where AMD's really shine.  Another option is to study up on Vue's current optimizations and try to utilize them more.

Well I disagree with you that wishing for a faster Vue render engine is "irrational" or impossible. I'm hoping it wil be a "REALITY" in Vue 7. I've heard a lot of people say that Vue's render engine could use some improvement and you point about getting a faster computer is not making a lot of sense, when as I explained above I rendered the same scene on the same computer using Vue and then another 3D application and there was a "Huge" difference in render times so although a faster computer woud be nice it still doesn't mean that Vue's render is fast by any means. Don't get me wrong I think Vue is an excellent application but IMO the render engine needs the most attention at this point before adding other improvements. Thanks

"*Trying to compare mental ray to Vues renderer is an unfair comparison."

Then your comparison to another unnamed renderer is fair?  I'm not sure where the logic is in that one...

"I am rendering out 400 frames at high quality in another 3D application in about 1.5 hrs."

*That's less than 1/4 minute per frame.  Obviously not a very complex scene.  Why it took 2 days in Vue is anyone's guess.  Perhaps you are using a Mac or some type of hardware that isn't optimal for raytacing?

*"...not fair to say Vue can render out billions of polygons and mental ray cannot..."

*Mental ray cannot, short of having 16+ GB of RAM.  Mental ray chokes on 1 million polys with 2GB of RAM.  And the landscape (terrain) objects are the hi-poly displacement objects in Vue, not the Ecosystem instances.  Those aren't instanced terrains, they are displacement objects.  I have no problem pushing 2 billion polys through Vue in mere seconds, or minutes at high quality.  This is due to BSP optimization, more than anything, of course.  If I export said terrains to Maya, there's no chance  mental ray would render them.

But I mostly just wanted to point out the differences between Realtime (Crysis) and raytracing...  I think that point was pretty clear?

IIRC, don't high end apps use "scanline" or such (forget term), to do low quality NON-ray traced versions of renders for animations, if you chose? :)

Indeed, Realtime engines are merely modified scanliners.  Bryce, for example, has no scanline optimization but raytraces everything, which is why it's the slowest renderer on the planet.  Vue has many optimizations for it's raytracing but I'm not certain if it can be turned off entirely...

Games follow a completely different modeling methodology.  Every single model in crysis is optimized polygon wise.  When downloading assets for Vue/Poser  you can easily download an object with 50,000 poly's, where in crysis the same object would only be 300-400 poly's, plus normal mapping, plus displacement maybe and you got a low poly object that looks exactly like a high poly object.

There are a lot of modelers out there who get too crazy with meshsmooth & turbosmooth, making objects have more poly's than they need.

Zanzo

Xpleet,

Is it feasable to create your own scenes in Sandbox and use the Crysis Engine for rudimentary visualizations - the ability to move around and visualize the different perspectives?  What is the largest terrain size one can have inside sandbox?  (ie) how many square kilometers or miles? 

Quote - Xpleet,

Is it feasable to create your own scenes in Sandbox and use the Crysis Engine for rudimentary visualizations - the ability to move around and visualize the different perspectives?  What is the largest terrain size one can have inside sandbox?  (ie) how many square kilometers or miles? 

Not sure what you mean in your first question.

I've seen people making visualizations of architecture in the CryEngine since interiors is one of the powers of the CryEngine.

SandBox editor works just like Vue but more practical.

Simply press CTRL+G and you're instantly landing in your scene as a player. But the 3d view is full quality and realtime while you edit things. When you jump into the scene the only gfx thing changing is that the daycycle becomes activated.

As I said landscape is not really a great deal in the engine, put some smoke and dark shadows or cloak ugly parts out with distant trees - yeah may look fine...

You can certainly make very artistic pictures using just the SandBox.

The maximum terrain size is at 16000 which I'd say is a terrain of I don't know what...10km?

I guess it defines the world of a whole roleplay game ( Oblivion ).

BUT unlike to Vue the size of the terrain defines the size of the map. So you always have the same quality of terrain/per meter. Atleast I haven't managed to increase it.

Does that answer all the questions?

All except, "Do you believe that Oblivion is that small?"
(smirks)

Xpleet,

It kind of answers it.. I'll have to start playing with Sandbox and see.  FYI - I do some highway and sub-div design, and it may be fun to drop the tin models into Sandbox, fully texture the models and add trees and see what it is like to move around the scenes.  May be good for "public open houses" stuff.  Thoughts?

You know I might mention it to Nick see if we can get one of the Vue techs to be spotlighted here at Renderosity. I know E-On is always looking for feed back from users . This just might something that both sites might benefit from, relating to the future of Vue 7 and beyond.

CryEngine has some nice realtime effeX...and an excellent lighting/shadowing too! Probably the best environmental realtime engine and probably the best for interior and home visualizations.

and fire at night :D

Xpleet,

AAARG!H you've messed the browser windows up, put a SPACE between the pics in your post 2nd one above, please? :)
I'ts made massive horizontal row, even this 1680x1050 monitor can't show that, so everyone on 1024x768 must be getting whiplash ;)

And it's great for a game..it does not look as good as proper renders.

Quote - Xpleet,

AAARG!H you've messed the browser windows up, put a SPACE between the pics in your post 2nd one above, please? :)
I'ts made massive horizontal row, even this 1680x1050 monitor can't show that, so everyone on 1024x768 must be getting whiplash ;)

And it's great for a game..it does not look as good as proper renders.

Can't! The editing time is over.

Why don't you just scroll right...lol

The engine is impressive for real time walks around, and for many effects. But objects can look pretty bland, like that plane. Plus you're limited in what's available. You're not gonna import a Poser char in your real time scene.

Xpleet - I took the liberty to edit your post and align the screenshots vertically.

Agiel,
thanks ! :)