Crysis 2 being redesigned for GTX580?

[faxon]

I was kidding :whiste:

Though I'm still baffled as to why it'd be less demanding just because it's in New York.

its easier to render big blocky skyscrapers with repeating textures than it is to render OMFGWTF levels of ultra high detail foliage, typically speaking. its the same idea in games like oblivion where you walk outside and your framerate tanks to shit (or at least it did when i got the game on my 9800PRO 128)

 

[ArchAngel777]

its easier to render big blocky skyscrapers with repeating textures than it is to render OMFGWTF levels of ultra high detail foliage, typically speaking. its the same idea in games like oblivion where you walk outside and your framerate tanks to shit (or at least it did when i got the game on my 9800PRO 128)

Yep, this is very true. Foliage is very difficult to render properly, which is why the original CryEngine was so incredable. They figured out a way to do it better than any of engine of its time.

 

[Gloomy]

They could throw in a lot of dust, grit and smoke. Then they could put in a bunch of Physx plastic bags floating around.

Rinse, repeat, everything tanks to shit

 

[betasub]

Don't forget plenty of broken glass.

 

[RussianSensation]

http://www.neoseeker.com/news/14688-cryengine-3-can-use-up-to-8-cpu-cores/

Speaking as a hexacore owner, I say it's about time more games used more than 4 cores.

Even if they efficiently utilize 4 cores, I'll be more than thrilled. With most games, the GPU is most important. However, when a game is coded to take advantages of faster CPUs/more cores, the impact on minimum framerates is quite noticeable.

P.S. Blasting, you are like a research wh*re! No important information can hide from you!! We could probably create Blast-zilla-accurate.com with your research alone.

Then they could put in a bunch of Physx plastic bags floating around.

What about PhysX on character models (like jackets, t-shirts, hair), bullet shells/holes, fallen debris, explosions? Minor PhysX effects here and there and:

1) For the first time, without pre-computation or geometric limits, you can experience light-bounces, color bleeding and specular effects in a real-time game engine. Add to this SSAO, HDR, deferred and natural lighting, and dynamic soft shadows.

2) Prestine motion blur that can be applied to individual objects, depth of field, subsurface scattering on trees/plants/human skin

3) Extreme tessellation

... you could easily be looking at a slideshow on TriSLI GTX580. I bet secretly AMD is loving the fact that NV is paying "for 3 years of frantic videocard upgrades" just for this game.

 

[Silverforce11]

I just hope for once a game will use tessellation right, make scenes look a lot more detailed that the gamer will immediately notice the difference. It doesn't matter if performance will be utter crap, that's for people with CF/sli to handle. Just make it cutting edge so it can push the technology further so when consoles get refreshed we can all reap the benefits.

 

[Idontcare]

Welcome to the forums KitGuruFaith! :thumbsup:

 

[Dark_Archonis]

Crysis 2 is a console port that is set in New York. Don't expect it to be as graphically demanding or innovative as the original.

Wrong. Crysis 2 is a PC game first, ported to console second. It is an extremely scalable engine. Crysis 2 was not designed specifically for consoles. It was designed specifically for PCs, and then downscaled for consoles.

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

Wrong. Crysis 2 is a PC game first, ported to console second. It is an extremely scalable engine. Crysis 2 was not designed specifically for consoles. It was designed specifically for PCs, and then downscaled for consoles.

Right...CryEngine 3 was designed specifically to be multi-platform. Every demo that has be shown is running on the Xbox 360. Crytek themselves have said that all the versions are identical. Wake up. If this game is successful, it will be the next Call of Duty or Halo and every release for the PC will be progressively worse. This is how it works on the PC. Release your first game on the PC, then once you have enough money you focus more on consoles.

 

[Makaveli]

sad but true

 

[tviceman]

Right...CryEngine 3 was designed specifically to be multi-platform. Every demo that has be shown is running on the Xbox 360.

This is actually completely untrue. Most demos shown have been on PC using an xbox 360 controller. The devs were caught red handed doing a demonstration specifically for the xbox360 during E3 when the game crashed to a windows 7 desktop. It was an LOL moment, and IGN took the video down after about 24 hours.

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

Lol, I just watched that: http://ve3d.ign.com/videos/70779/PC/Crysis-2/Gameplay/E3-2010-IGN-Live-Gameplay-Presentation. How embarrassing.

 

[RussianSensation]

Right...CryEngine 3 was designed specifically to be multi-platform.

Yes, that can also mean that it was first designed on the PC and then adopted/downscaled to consoles based on their specific limitations. This is not the same as taking GTAIV or Halo which were designed for consoles from the beginning and then porting them to the PC. I am pretty sure CryEngine 3 has been designed for PCs from the groundup just like the Unreal 3 Engine. Crytek likely envisioned selling its own game engine for various games. Don't forget, probably half the features in CryEngine 3 can't be used on consoles due to their limiting processing/video abilities....Personally, Crysis 2 on consoles won't even look as good as Crysis 1 on the PC if I had to put $$$ on it. Remember consoles only have 256mb of VRAM and are stuck in DX9.

Also, we have seen what good a multi-platform design team can do with Metro 2033 - the most demanding game out right now with arguably the most advanced graphics features including everything under the sun from ambient occlusion, tessellation, depth of field, etc. - and it brings any videocard to its knees despite being a multi-platform game.

 

[Dark_Archonis]

Right...CryEngine 3 was designed specifically to be multi-platform. Every demo that has be shown is running on the Xbox 360. Crytek themselves have said that all the versions are identical. Wake up. If this game is successful, it will be the next Call of Duty or Halo and every release for the PC will be progressively worse. This is how it works on the PC. Release your first game on the PC, then once you have enough money you focus more on consoles.

Huh? Crytek themselves have *admitted* that the PC version will DEFINITELY look better than the Xbox 360/PS3 versions they have shown so far. Please do more research into this before making assumptions.

Also you are incorrect. Every demo shown with regards to CryEngine 3 has NOT been shown on the Xbox 360. I have seen tech demos of CryEngine 3 running on a GTX 285 on a PC setup.

I have seen tech demos and tech capabilities of CryEngine 3, so I think I know what the engine can and cannot do.

You prove my point by saying it was designed to be multi-platform. In other words, that means it will be very scalable.

If you think that Crysis will turn into some joke series like Halo or Call of Duty, well you can keep thinking that. Others including myself would strongly disagree with that.

Crysis 2 is going to be MORE intensive on PC hardware than Crysis. Just wait and see.

 

[Lonbjerg]

Huh? Crytek themselves have *admitted* that the PC version will DEFINITELY look better than the Xbox 360/PS3 versions they have shown so far. Please do more research into this before making assumptions.

Also you are incorrect. Every demo shown with regards to CryEngine 3 has NOT been shown on the Xbox 360. I have seen tech demos of CryEngine 3 running on a GTX 285 on a PC setup.

I have seen tech demos and tech capabilities of CryEngine 3, so I think I know what the engine can and cannot do.

You prove my point by saying it was designed to be multi-platform. In other words, that means it will be very scalable.

If you think that Crysis will turn into some joke series like Halo or Call of Duty, well you can keep thinking that. Others including myself would strongly disagree with that.

Crysis 2 is going to be MORE intensive on PC hardware than Crysis. Just wait and see.

Yup, just look at Cryengine 1 on the PC vs. Cryengine 2 on the consoles:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6a6tUIA7LA

 

[T2k]

Too bad it won't fix your tessellation performance...:whiste:

Well, we use our cards for games, not for benchmarking - and as we all know the higher the regular shader load goes the shittier NV's tessellation becomes hence some of us prefer constant decent tessellation over a benchmark-only card. :awe)

 

[T2k]

Yes. Given what we've seen with nVidia in how they "helped" Batman AA (Vendor ID check to lock out AMD from features) and Ubisoft Assasins Creed (Released a patch to remove DX10.1 support when AMD was shown to outperform nVidia) and recently HAWX 2 (More shenanigans used to slant performance and/or features), i'd say this is possible if not likely regarding nVidia's 2 million dollar handjob they gave Crytek.

It's Nvidia, what did you expect?

OTOH they are perfect couple with Nvidia: the lying Turk (that lowlife Cevat Yerli) and The Great Leader giving him the paycheck... soooo fitting. :awe:

We'll see, what happens when it ships but I suspect it's just another game that won't concern me (for me first Crysis was a rather boring piece of crap too.)

 

[Lonbjerg]

Well, we use our cards for games, not for benchmarking - and as we all know the higher the regular shader load goes the shittier NV's tessellation becomes hence some of us prefer constant decent tessellation over a benchmark-only card. :awe)

Enjoy your lower performance in games then *shrugs*

I wonder what your excuse will be when the next batch of DX11 games arrivies?

 

[Aristotelian]

Enjoy your lower performance in games then *shrugs*

I wonder what your excuse will be when the next batch of DX11 games arrivies?

There won't be an excuse in that case.

If new games come and if those games use lots of tessellation and if Nvidia's cards begin crushing AMD's cards in gaming performance, what excuse could there be?

Notice all those ifs, though. Let's see it.

 

[Keysplayr]

It's Nvidia, what did you expect?

OTOH they are perfect couple with Nvidia: the lying Turk (that lowlife Cevat Yerli) and The Great Leader giving him the paycheck... soooo fitting. :awe:

We'll see, what happens when it ships but I suspect it's just another game that won't concern me (for me first Crysis was a rather boring piece of crap too.)

Forgive me for asking this but, is this all highly personal to you? It just seems that you do have a great deal of contempt over certain aspects of video gaming. And I'm just curious as hell as to why???
I think we've put up with your very bitter comments long enough now to earn the right to ask...... What's up??

I mean, Cevat Yerli a lowlife. The lying Turk. Wow. Much hateness there.

Oh yeah, and this:

"Well, we use our cards for games, not for benchmarking - and as we all know the higher the regular shader load goes the shittier NV's tessellation becomes hence some of us prefer constant decent tessellation over a benchmark-only card"

Is a pure lie. The red handed type. Would you like me to explain? Or would you like the opportunity to clear the air?

 

[RussianSensation]

the lying Turk (that lowlife Cevat Yerli) :awe:

Funny thing that Far Cry 1 (Crytek) and Crysis (Crytek) happen to have a vastly superior single player campaign to half the call of duty games, Doom 3, Quake 4 and the new Medal of Honor. For people who are actually interested in single player FPS games, Crysis was one of the few that actually brought some innovation with the nanosuit and the ability to play the game how you want - go all out and shoot your enemies, or use stealth. Also, I can't recall people upgrading their videocards as much as they did for Far Cry 1 or Crysis. Surely they weren't doing that just to benchmark the games?

Think of it another way, there are what 8 COD games with probably 4 of them running on the same old engine, then there are BF1/2, BF:BC2 and BF3 coming out? Most of these have sub-par single player campaigns, since they are made as multi-player games first with campaign being secondary. The gaming world wouldn't miss a beat of there were "only" 6 COD games or just 2 BF games. However, the graphical innovation that Crysis brought, in-game world physics effects, and at least an attempt of some innovation in the campaign mode, would be missed. Today, it's way too easy to make a good online multi-player shooter - just take your previous version, add better graphics, change the maps a little, and you are done. Yet, it's very hard to make a good FPS game with a great single player campaigns like HL2 or Fallout 3.

They should just title COD by the year 2011, 2012, 2013, because that's what Activision's release schedule is going to be like.

 

[extra]

Extremely unlikely that crysis 2 won't run perfectly fine on AMD cards. If they cripple it somehow the backlash will be huge and it would cost them (and nvidia) TONS of sales. Not to mention, they want the cryengine to be used for other games--including ones on consoles...and you know, the x-box 360 has an AMD/ATI video card. This is just needless fearmongering imho. The game won't be crippled for half the market. If there's nvidia specific optimizations it'll probably be like mafia2--you get a few little perks, but nothing preventing the game from being just as good for AMD users.

So anyway, don't panic! Enjoy whichever brand you prefer most.

 

[T2k]

Funny thing that Far Cry 1 (Crytek) and Crysis (Crytek) happen to have a vastly superior single player campaign to half the call of duty games, Doom 3, Quake 4 and the new Medal of Honor. For people who are actually interested in single player FPS games, Crysis was one of the few that actually brought some innovation with the nanosuit and the ability to play the game how you want - go all out and shoot your enemies, or use stealth. Als

How is it "innovation" compared to any FPS/RPG hybrid or even just changing your role after respawn?
Yep, it isn't.

o, I can't recall people upgrading their videocards as much as they did for Far Cry 1 or Crysis. Surely they weren't doing that just to benchmark the games?

FYI there are people who do it anyway, like me. I personally didn't know anyone upgrading solely for Crysis.

Think of it another way, there are what 8 COD games with probably 4 of them running on the same old engine, then there are BF1/2, BF:BC2 and BF3 coming out? Most of these have sub-par single player campaings, since they are made as multi-player games first with campaign being secondary. The gaming world wouldn't miss a beat of there were "only" 6 COD games or just 2 BF games. However, the graphical innovation that Crysis brought, in-game world physics effects, and at least an attempt of some innovation in the campaign mode, would be missed. Today, it's way too easy to make a good online multi-player shooter - just take your previous version, add better graphics, chanage the maps a little, and you are done. Yet, it's very hard to make a good FPS game with a great single player campaign like HL2.

Well, Crysis was probably the biggest flop in MP history.
And while Far Cry was somewhat interesting, Crysis was a huge disappointment, rather an attempt to re-work Far Cry into a fancy, shiny something, resulting in a very cheesy, truly tasteless design work with pretty boring game.
Of course, it's a matter of opinion.

They should just title COD by the year 2011, 2012, 2013, because that's what Activision's release schedule is going to be like.

Now that's even dumber than Crysis, I agree.

FWIW my beef with that lying sack of %^$# Yerli is not the game but the disgusting lowlife claims about how much money lost due to piracy - while he became a billioniare, of course, using mostly cheap labor in Central-EU and cashing in Nvidia's "developer & marketing assistance" checks.

 

[Qbah]

Well, I can't wait. I really enjoyed both Crysis and Warhead. I'm sure my Radeon will play the game fine, no matter how much nV-friendly the game will be. They won't be using PhysX IMO because:

1. That's cutting half the PC market from getting advanced physics
2. Their in-house physics engine is amazing, so it would be like taking 5 steps back

Tessellation? I sure hope they implement everything they can to improve visual quality that everybody can (eventually) experience. I'll probably need to drop it to low or something, but I'm sure the game will still look amazing.

 

[RussianSensation]

FWIW my beef with that lying sack of %^$# Yerli is not the game but the disgusting lowlife claims about how much money lost due to piracy

I think calling Crysis a MP failure is being unjust. It was developed as a single-player game...so not sure what you expected. We have enough online multi-player games already.

I am sure you have taken the time to look at PC vs. console sales charts.

Let me break it down

Best selling PC games of all time
#21 - highest PC game - The Sims (not a first person shooter)
#28 - 2nd highest PC game - WoW (not a FPS)
#33 - 3rd highest PC game - Starcraft 1 (not a FPS)
#53 - 4th highest PC game - Myst (not a FPS)
#57 - 5th best selling PC game - HL1 (FPS)

vs.

#30 - COD4: MW2 (FPS) - this for the Xbox 360 version ALONE.

Look I love PC gaming, but consoles outsell similar PC games by a mile.

Medal of Honor
Xbox360 = 1.09 M
PS3 = 1.01 M
PC = 0.11M (so 1/19th of total console sales)

COD4:MW2
Xbox360 = 11.77 M
PS3 = 8.77 M

Now, imagine you are Yerli. You are in business to make $$. You are faced with a decision to make Crysis 2 multi-platform and make 10-20x as much $$ or keep it exclusively on the PC. Do you blame the CEO of Crytek for wanting to make more $$? That's his job.

Besides, the more $$ Crytek makes, the more likely we'll see even better PC games from them. Developing games cost a lot of $. So I don't see it as a negative when a PC gaming developer expands into console market, which allows them to make more $. Look at Fallout 3: NV sales. If they only released it on the PC, they would be lucky to break 5 million over 5 years.