• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Crysis then and now

Dethfrumbelo

Golden Member
Nov 16, 2004
1,499
0
0
Pics

What the hell kind of hardware would you need to run that early build? Even with those obvious cutbacks, the demo still runs like Leonard Nimoy in depleted Uranium shoes.
 

PremiumG

Platinum Member
Jun 4, 2001
2,030
0
76
yeah, what's up with that?

Doom 3 was like that too. The alpha built had way better lighting and graphics.
 

pontifex

Lifer
Dec 5, 2000
43,806
44
91
I think the original pic is BS. i think its either a real pic or its a FMV type render video, not in game.
 

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
78,923
11,848
126
Originally posted by: pontifex
I think the original pic is BS. i think its either a real pic or its a FMV type render video, not in game.
Yeah, I think somebody later admitted that was like a Maya render or something similar.
 

DannyLove

Lifer
Oct 17, 2000
12,876
4
76
have you considered that maybe the demo is what it means... a demo?
Why speculate and assume on a demo release. WHy not just wait for the actual release before asking these questions???

danny~!
 

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
78,923
11,848
126
Originally posted by: DannyLove
have you considered that maybe the demo is what it means... a demo?
Why speculate and assume on a demo release. WHy not just wait for the actual release before asking these questions???
Dude, seriously.
They are NOT going to increase polygon and lighting detail 10 times between the retail and the demo. It would delay it even longer and they cant afford it. Demos are put out so people can see what a game is actually going to look like on their system.
BETAS are designed to gauge performance and discover problems and get player feedback, but they are already past that.

 

EvilComputer92

Golden Member
Aug 25, 2004
1,316
0
0
I think the original was clearly prerendered. Just shows you how stupid all those omg crysis comments from an year or two ago turned out to be.
 

Dethfrumbelo

Golden Member
Nov 16, 2004
1,499
0
0
They did the same thing with that Killzone game, pretending that it was being rendered realtime, as if someone was actually playing it. What's the point of doing that? People are going to find out in the end.
 

Canai

Diamond Member
Oct 4, 2006
8,016
1
0
Originally posted by: Sniper82
Wow I will still play Crysis but man does that disappoint.
Yeah. Hopefully there will be some heavy graphics mods for Crysis.
 

Polish3d

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2005
5,501
0
0
Originally posted by: EvilComputer92
I think the original was clearly prerendered. Just shows you how stupid all those omg crysis comments from an year or two ago turned out to be.

I have been bitching about this for so long. They pulled it with Oblivion, they pulled it with HL2, it keeps happening.


The difference is tremendous between those two pics.


It does disappoint, and the foliage does look shitty compared to the earlier previews. At the very least they ought to include that setting in the full version, allowing for hardware to keep up. Assuming it even exists anymore or ever did in the first place
 

schneiderguy

Lifer
Jun 26, 2006
10,763
31
91
This map that someone made for the demo looks just as good as the promo video from 1 year ago. Basically if you choose the correct lighting and time of day settings for a map it will look almost exactly like what they showed in the trailers a year ago.
 

Mr. Lennon

Diamond Member
Jul 2, 2004
3,492
1
81
Originally posted by: Frackal
Originally posted by: EvilComputer92
I think the original was clearly prerendered. Just shows you how stupid all those omg crysis comments from an year or two ago turned out to be.

I have been bitching about this for so long. They pulled it with Oblivion, they pulled it with HL2, it keeps happening.


The difference is tremendous between those two pics.


It does disappoint, and the foliage does look shitty compared to the earlier previews. At the very least they ought to include that setting in the full version, allowing for hardware to keep up. Assuming it even exists anymore or ever did in the first place
Yeah I have noticed the same thing. I remember all this crazy AI that half life 2 was suppose to have. When it was released the enemies didn't do half the stuff they had in the videos.
 

SexyK

Golden Member
Jul 30, 2001
1,343
4
76
I disagree with the OP and all the others jumping on the slam-Crysis bandwagon. The scenes being rendered in the "comparison" photos are completely different. It's like comparing apples and oranges. One has motion, smoke, and a low-hanging sun, while the other is completely static and has completely different foliage and a completely different lighting scenario. The comparison is useless and says nothing about the quality of the engine then and now.

Its also hilarious that half the threads complain that it looks too good and they should have designed for lower hardware requirements, and half the threads say it looks like crap and should be more "future proof" to take advantage of tomorrow's technology. Make up your minds people!

Personally, I think they game looks great and it plays well in my book considering what you're getting graphically. I will play it and enjoy it and not complain (unless its buggy or doesn't function correctly, in which case I will complain since we all waited so long for the game to come out).
 

clamum

Lifer
Feb 13, 2003
26,219
383
126
Originally posted by: SexyK
I disagree with the OP and all the others jumping on the slam-Crysis bandwagon. The scenes being rendered in the "comparison" photos are completely different. It's like comparing apples and oranges. One has motion, smoke, and a low-hanging sun, while the other is completely static and has completely different foliage and a completely different lighting scenario. The comparison is useless and says nothing about the quality of the engine then and now.

Its also hilarious that half the threads complain that it looks too good and they should have designed for lower hardware requirements, and half the threads say it looks like crap and should be more "future proof" to take advantage of tomorrow's technology. Make up your minds people!

Personally, I think they game looks great and it plays well in my book considering what you're getting graphically. I will play it and enjoy it and not complain (unless its buggy or doesn't function correctly, in which case I will complain since we all waited so long for the game to come out).
Whining about sh!t on forums is the thing these days.

I think, from the demo at least, they've done a pretty damn good job. Can't wait for the full version... I'll have my informed opinion after that.
 

LightningRider

Senior member
Feb 16, 2007
558
0
0
Even with these comparisons... Crysis still looks better than any other PC shooter out there today and really than any other PC game period (especially on highest settings)... So I don't think we can complain too much. Plus imagine if the game still did look like that? I don't think any of us could run it even with quad SLI.
 

spunkz

Golden Member
Jul 16, 2003
1,467
0
0
i'd rather watch a pre-rendered video of the whole game with the early graphics shown rather than play it as it is now. the original crysis videos looked amazing.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
1
61
Originally posted by: schneiderguy
This map that someone made for the demo looks just as good as the promo video from 1 year ago. Basically if you choose the correct lighting and time of day settings for a map it will look almost exactly like what they showed in the trailers a year ago.
I feel better now. That video looked good.
 

Xellos2099

Platinum Member
Mar 8, 2005
2,277
13
81
This topic remind of when ps2 was about to launch and sony show a video of the famous FFVIII ballroom dance scene and claim that ps2 game are going to look as good as the dance scene and when ps2 launch, it look no where close to it
 

danEboy83

Member
Jun 7, 2007
176
3
91
there was an interview where the crytek guys that even said the hardware out right now isn't capable of rendering the game with all it's bells and whistles, they said something along the lines that they are going to update the game as the newer hardware becomes available, i'm not sure if they'll stay true to their word but that's what the guy in the interview said.
 

Zenoth

Diamond Member
Jan 29, 2005
5,081
103
106
It makes me laugh when people around complain about Crysis running at 15 FPS on max settings. I wonder if those persons ever wondered if the GeForce 8 and Radeon HD2900 were the very last generation of GPU's to ever see the light of the day in the rest of humanity's existence. It's as if every single game of so called "next generation" HAD TO run at 60FPS on this OLD generation.

Look, guys, this is what we call a regular evolution cycle.

Have the gaming community of the PC platform FORGOT about that ?!

1) New GPU Gen is made
2) That new Gen runs somewhat old-to-recent games much better
3) It lasts so for a year or so
4) New game generations arrive
5) The GPU Gen in question starts to show signs of age
6) New game generation pushes the envelop of today's GPU Gen
7) People complain about it
8) Newer GPU Gen is released
9) People don't complain about it anymore
10) Everyone is happy for a year or so ...

And the cycle resumes. So, are the GTX owners getting frustrated that their little puppy can't run ANY games at 40+ FPS now ? I think so. Just face it, Crysis is the BEGINNING of a new gaming era, it really is just the tip of an iceberg to come, and everyone is going to need a special new boat to resist the impact on that one.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Fanatical Meat PC Games 0
Kaido PC Games 0

ASK THE COMMUNITY