Anyone else playing Crysis Warhead already ?

[43st]

Originally posted by: skace

Originally posted by: 43st
I don't think is so much it.. the main issue I think is once you start pulling the sliders back the game quickly starts looking like a 20 fps dog turd. It spans the range of beautiful slide show to hideous slide show.

The game automatically recommended gamer settings for me @ 1680x1050. I've been running those w/ 30-40 FPS. Which I wouldn't call a slide show. (20-29 = stuttering, <20 could be considered a slide show).

However, I'm prepared to lower my settings to medium if required, just like I did the first time around. And the game looks completely fine on medium - definitely not a "dog turd".

I didn't have the same experience. The game was hitching fairly badly when I tried turning around. This was both at high settings and low settings. The only thing that really helped was testing out custom autoexec.cfg files for others. Maybe it was a texture streaming issue or something. It was also very helpful to enable the -dx9 switch.

I have 8800 GTS 512 and Vista 32, all latest drivers. I don't expect to run on high settings, but low should at least work be playable without tweaking settings.

 

[QuadDamage2k]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: QuadDamage2k
I get 80 to 90fps with my Ati 4850 clocked up a bit Might be my killer cpu tho

or your 800x600 resolution? cuz with that card at 1440x900 on MAINSTREAM (i.e. crap) settings you are only pulling 46fps

http://www.techspot.com/articl...performance/page5.html

Look at there test rig

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ 3.00GHz (LGA775)

I have a E8500 @ 4.15
with 4 gigs of Gskills 8500
and my 4850 is oc'ed

I'm just going by what r_display shows me during muti player and it was good

 

[sticks435]

I dropped down to Gamer settings and edited the config's to add things like God rays, water refractions, etc to get easy eye candy parts from enthusiast setting and at 1680x1050 0AA, I'm now getting 35 and up avg. I'm going to add the -dx9 switch and see what my numbers are. I wish Crytek would hurry up and release the 64-bit patch already.

 

[Raider1284]

Originally posted by: QuadDamage2k

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: QuadDamage2k
I get 80 to 90fps with my Ati 4850 clocked up a bit Might be my killer cpu tho

or your 800x600 resolution? cuz with that card at 1440x900 on MAINSTREAM (i.e. crap) settings you are only pulling 46fps

http://www.techspot.com/articl...performance/page5.html

Look at there test rig

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ 3.00GHz (LGA775)

I have a E8500 @ 4.15
with 4 gigs of Gskills 8500
and my 4850 is oc'ed

I'm just going by what r_display shows me during muti player and it was good

You are still trying to say you get 80-90fps? you dont, end of story. Cards twice as powerful as yours cannot achieve what you are supposedely achieving. Maybe if stand still, and look up into the sky you can achieve that fps, but on average you are not getting 80-90fps!

Your "killer" cpu isnt that killer, and considering this game is heavily gpu limited, not cpu, a "killer" cpu wouldnt really help anyway. Your gpu is in the top 10 but its not "elite" or anywhere near the top GPUs.

Post a screenshot to prove this claim of yours, otherwise you are full of it.

 

[Rudee]

Shoddy inefficient coding is mostly responsible for poor performance on decently equipped PC's.

 

[TechBoyJK]

Originally posted by: Rudee
Shoddy inefficient coding is mostly responsible for poor performance on decently equipped PC's.

NOPE! This argument has been debunked already. CryEngine2 is very well coded. Remarkably well coded actually. The problem is the LOAD of processing that they've equipped the engine to demand.

 

[error8]

Maybe I'm offtopic or something, but how the hell do you jump on that stupid ship in the ice level? I've tried countless times to jump on it but it just doesn't work. It's been years since a game made me punch the PC......

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: QuadDamage2k

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: QuadDamage2k
I get 80 to 90fps with my Ati 4850 clocked up a bit Might be my killer cpu tho

or your 800x600 resolution? cuz with that card at 1440x900 on MAINSTREAM (i.e. crap) settings you are only pulling 46fps

http://www.techspot.com/articl...performance/page5.html

Look at there test rig

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ 3.00GHz (LGA775)

I have a E8500 @ 4.15
with 4 gigs of Gskills 8500
and my 4850 is oc'ed

I'm just going by what r_display shows me during muti player and it was good

People who have run benchmarks with tri-sli gtx280's or quad-SLI 4870x2 still don't break 45fps. So you see how we'd be skeptical of your results.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: error8
Maybe I'm offtopic or something, but how the hell do you jump on that stupid ship in the ice level? I've tried countless times to jump on it but it just doesn't work. It's been years since a game made me punch the PC......

Maximum Strength, jump from the pier? I actually swam all the way to the back (ocean-side) and crawled up and then ran along the top to the opening.

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: error8
Maybe I'm offtopic or something, but how the hell do you jump on that stupid ship in the ice level? I've tried countless times to jump on it but it just doesn't work. It's been years since a game made me punch the PC......

Maximum Strength, jump from the pier? I actually swam all the way to the back (ocean-side) and crawled up and then ran along the top to the opening.

Thanks. Didn't know that Strength mode increases jump height.

 

[coloumb]

Originally posted by: sourthings
Anyone else playing this yet. On my system (3.6 quad core, 4gb ram, 4870x2) at 1920x1200 all very high under dx10, I average 30fps or so, this is with no AA. In warhead at the same res, same system, everything on 'enthusiast' which is the new max setting.. 20fps.

Seems even worse now.. not better

I am [ finally ] - seem to have the same f'n problem with running Warhead under Dx10 as I did with Crysis - everything is choppy [menu, game, intro, etc]. If I switch to DX9 - it runs smooth as silk. [E6750, 8800GTS, 4gb, Vista32 bit]

 

[dguy6789]

Originally posted by: TechBoyJK

Originally posted by: Rudee
Shoddy inefficient coding is mostly responsible for poor performance on decently equipped PC's.

NOPE! This argument has been debunked already. CryEngine2 is very well coded. Remarkably well coded actually. The problem is the LOAD of processing that they've equipped the engine to demand.

A lot of people say this and I don't buy it. Unreal Engine 3. By the time you turn Crysis settings down low enough to run as fast as Unreal Engine 3, it looks a LOT worse than Unreal Engine 3. That is all there is to it. Doesn't matter what is going on under the hood, all that matters is what you see and it's retarded. There is no excuse for that garbage.

 

[Mide]

I just beat the game in one night. Way too short to be worth $26. Yeah and everyone is right, the requirements are nuts. I have a 9800GTS and I had to put all settings to mainstream for it to run smoothly. If you've played Crysis, then this game would be a waste of time.

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
A lot of people say this and I don't buy it. Unreal Engine 3. By the time you turn Crysis settings down low enough to run as fast as Unreal Engine 3, it looks a LOT worse than Unreal Engine 3. That is all there is to it. Doesn't matter what is going on under the hood, all that matters is what you see and it's retarded. There is no excuse for that garbage.

Unreal Engine 3, possibly the worst comparison short of comparing Crysis to a Dead or Alive game.

And Error8 how did you get through the tutorial without knowing that? I'm pretty sure it requires you to switch to strength mod to make a specific jump. Oh well

 

[dguy6789]

Originally posted by: skace

Originally posted by: dguy6789
A lot of people say this and I don't buy it. Unreal Engine 3. By the time you turn Crysis settings down low enough to run as fast as Unreal Engine 3, it looks a LOT worse than Unreal Engine 3. That is all there is to it. Doesn't matter what is going on under the hood, all that matters is what you see and it's retarded. There is no excuse for that garbage.

Unreal Engine 3, possibly the worst comparison short of comparing Crysis to a Dead or Alive game.

And Error8 how did you get through the tutorial without knowing that? I'm pretty sure it requires you to switch to strength mod to make a specific jump. Oh well

Reading comprehension ftl.

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
Reading comprehension ftl.

Actually, it's your lack of intelligence that is losing right now. I realize you said "Doesn't matter what is going on under the hood, all that matters is what you see and it's retarded. There is no excuse for that garbage." but it still makes you look stupid comparing Unreal 3 to Crysis. That's the part your lack of intelligence won't let you understand. Just like you'd be stupid to say "Wow look how beautiful these dead or alive models are, who cares that the world is a 4ftx4ft box that the system never has to really work at rendering.

Unreal 3 is absolutely nothing like Crysis, at all. There are only a few engines that would make valid comparisons to Crysis, something like Oblivion, but even Oblivion is largely crippled by comparison. When Farcry came out, a few games tried to compete with it, such as Chrome, so we had valid comparisons. We don't as of right now w/ Crysis.

You're the type of person who could compare MMORPG graphics to an FPS because you can't seem to comprehend magnitude or scale.

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: skace


And Error8 how did you get through the tutorial without knowing that? I'm pretty sure it requires you to switch to strength mod to make a specific jump. Oh well

Well if that was in the tutorial, it would have saved me from a lot of trouble.

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: error8
Well if that was in the tutorial, it would have saved me from a lot of trouble.

Start a new game sometime and you'll see it. When your plane crashes it gives you a brief tutorial, these keys move, this key ducks under the bridge through the water, and finally you come to a some boulders blocking your path and it tells you to switch to strength to make the jump over the boulders. No biggy, just thought it was odd you hadn't come to that realization yet. There are other times past the tutorial where you also have to switch to strength to jump over some rocks, IE the first blockade you come across.

 

[MTDEW]

Originally posted by: skace

Originally posted by: dguy6789
Reading comprehension ftl.

Actually, it's your lack of intelligence that is losing right now. I realize you said "Doesn't matter what is going on under the hood, all that matters is what you see and it's retarded. There is no excuse for that garbage." but it still makes you look stupid comparing Unreal 3 to Crysis. That's the part your lack of intelligence won't let you understand. Just like you'd be stupid to say "Wow look how beautiful these dead or alive models are, who cares that the world is a 4ftx4ft box that the system never has to really work at rendering.

Unreal 3 is absolutely nothing like Crysis, at all. There are only a few engines that would make valid comparisons to Crysis, something like Oblivion, but even Oblivion is largely crippled by comparison. When Farcry came out, a few games tried to compete with it, such as Chrome, so we had valid comparisons. We don't as of right now w/ Crysis.

You're the type of person who could compare MMORPG graphics to an FPS because you can't seem to comprehend magnitude or scale.

skace, well said. :thumbsup:
I just cant understand why people cant comprehend a simple concept.
Longer draw distance + more detailed objects rendered + better and more textures rendered + more physics rendered for those objects = a more powerful GPU and CPU to run smooth.

Next someone will post that Gears Of war with its non-existant draw distance performs better than Crysis too.... :roll:

 

[MTDEW]

Seriously, i wish people would quit complaining and blaming performance on poor optimization.

If it wouldnt be for games like Crysis / warhead pushing the limits we'd all still be playing "fake 3d " games with sprites like the original Doom.

Give the Crytek team some credit for creating one of most beautifully rendered 3d worlds we've seen on the pc to date.

 

[Qbah]

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777
The game on Medium looks better than any other outdoor based game out on the shelf currently. You wouldn't be complaining if medium was renamed to high. Oblivion took well over a year to play in full glory. Why should Crysis be any different? Name a game that can render outdoor scenes better than Crysis on medium. Post screenshots and explain how you came to that conclusion - then we can talk.

Sorry, you're right. It was an overstatement on my part. Had a bad day (though that doesn't explain me). Crysis does indeed look exceptional. Ha, what is more impressive with Warhead is that I dropped to DX9, kept Enthusiast settings and the game ran noticeably smoother (looked the same imo). The engine is very impresive. Though there's the fact that there isn't a single game that does similar scenery to Crysis. So we can't really compare it (perhaps when Far Cry 2 hits the shelves?). I looked at HL2: Ep2, the forrst parts and the graphic level wasn't even a contest.

Well, I finished Warhead (the ending was rather... rushed though). Once I dropped it down to DX9 it became a lot of fun (mostly because it was playable ).

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Mide
I just beat the game in one night. Way too short to be worth $26.

Did you miss the 50 reviews that told you it was about 5-6 hours long? Did you miss that it has a good deal of replayability on single player because you can try different routes/strategies to the target areas? Did you miss the great new multiplayer that will provide weeks or months of playability?

You're really complaining about the price at $25? Should they just give it away? As to "way too short", how long should it have been? Crysis was only 10-12 for $50. If you merely sprint through each zone on Max Speed without trying to kill every baddie you encounter you can probably finish it in 3 hours, but what the hell's the point of doing that?

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: skace

Originally posted by: error8
Well if that was in the tutorial, it would have saved me from a lot of trouble.

Start a new game sometime and you'll see it. When your plane crashes it gives you a brief tutorial, these keys move, this key ducks under the bridge through the water, and finally you come to a some boulders blocking your path and it tells you to switch to strength to make the jump over the boulders. No biggy, just thought it was odd you hadn't come to that realization yet. There are other times past the tutorial where you also have to switch to strength to jump over some rocks, IE the first blockade you come across.

So, I've missed that apparently.

The thing is that I used only Speed mode in every situation which implied jumping high, until I finally got totally stuck at that part.

 

[Regs]

I actually liked warhead a lot more than the original. My character was part of the story, the gameplay was straight forward, the vehicles did their job on parts and were not giant suicide caskets, and the hunt was fun.

I played at 1680 x 1050, maxed texture and water; objects at gamer; everything mainstream. Shaders and shadows really slow my frame rate down. Running an overclocked 4850 AMD and a AMD X2 @ 2.8 GHz.

 

[Polish3d]

This game is awesome!!!

It's what the first game should have been. C2D @ 3.3ghz and 8800gtx and it's running very smoothly on enthusiast settings (w/ shadows and post processing to gamer)

The game looks AMAZING, even after having played Crysis. Whatever they adjusted, the look and feel is much more real and immersive.

It has that 'Wow' factor and polish that is the sign of a really great game. Very pleased so far