Next Crysis actually to be playable;)

geoffry

Senior member
Sep 3, 2007
599
0
76
http://pc.ign.com/articles/882/882940p1.html

Seems a $620 should get decent framerates on the 2nd Crysis on high settings.

They claim it to be optimizations but with how cheap and powerful the new 4850s are shaping up to be it might just be due to advancement in GPU technology by the time it comes out, which I'm not sure actually happens.
 

Nightmare225

Golden Member
May 20, 2006
1,661
0
0
Well, they've been doing a lot of enhancements to the Cryengine 2 over the past few months, and judging from looked screenshots, it'll look even better while running faster. :)
 

geoffry

Senior member
Sep 3, 2007
599
0
76
Originally posted by: gersson
I want to believe!

But that is the same thing they said last year :(

Lol, thats true.

And my supposedly high end 8800 GTS could barely play it on medium smoothly, lol.
 

duragezic

Lifer
Oct 11, 1999
11,234
4
81
What? As always, no mention of resolution. I hate that, people always saying "runs great, 60fps high details" but no friggin' resolution mentioned.

And it probably means a $620 PC at the time of Warhead's release. :) But even now, just the box, for $620 I think Crysis would run pretty well at a decent resolution and details.
 

911paramedic

Diamond Member
Jan 7, 2002
9,448
1
76
I have 2 8800gts 512 cards in sli. I never noticed a single glitch running it on the highest settings at 1910x1200, 4x AA (I think). My video cards alone were more than half the price of that system.
 

Canai

Diamond Member
Oct 4, 2006
8,016
1
0
We won't see truly playable Crysis fps until the next GPU update. Not the current shit, which is fine tweaking of the same crap we've had for over a year, but the next, true, update.

nVidia and ATi need to break the stupid fucking 'let's pack more GPU's onto the same board / SLI/CROSSFIRE to get awesome' shit and develop a new generation of cards.
 
Mar 11, 2004
23,239
5,685
146
Originally posted by: Canai
We won't see truly playable Crysis fps until the next GPU update. Not the current shit, which is fine tweaking of the same crap we've had for over a year, but the next, true, update.

nVidia and ATi need to break the stupid fucking 'let's pack more GPU's onto the same board / SLI/CROSSFIRE to get awesome' shit and develop a new generation of cards.

I'm a little confused with what you're saying, by current do you mean 8800GTX/HD38x0 era, or GTX2x0/HD48x0? I wouldn't expect things to change as processing in general moves to more being more parallel.

I'm bothered by that article, mostly the end. They say they could improve the original Crysis, but they're focused on this second game. If it sells for $50 they are going to have quite a bit of angry people, and thus we'll likely see Crytek complain about poor sales and blame piracy for it again.

It's good to see them working to improve their game engine, and it sounds like they're doing a good job of making it more efficient and better looking. I just hope they don't try to stick people with another game that doesn't sound like it will be a sequel for full price.
 

Northern Lawn

Platinum Member
May 15, 2008
2,231
2
0
I upgraded my computer to e8400 core 2, OZ Reaper kit ram, Striker II mobo and 8800GTS 512 and I still can't play Crysis on Ultra high settings. It just gets real choppy. I had allow the system to set recommended settings, which were all High and even then, I turned the shaders to Medium and now it's very fluid and playable.

Great game (beat it before) but the coding or whatever is pretty bad.
 

Canai

Diamond Member
Oct 4, 2006
8,016
1
0
Originally posted by: darkswordsman17
Originally posted by: Canai
We won't see truly playable Crysis fps until the next GPU update. Not the current shit, which is fine tweaking of the same crap we've had for over a year, but the next, true, update.

nVidia and ATi need to break the stupid fucking 'let's pack more GPU's onto the same board / SLI/CROSSFIRE to get awesome' shit and develop a new generation of cards.

I'm a little confused with what you're saying, by current do you mean 8800GTX/HD38x0 era, or GTX2x0/HD48x0? I wouldn't expect things to change as processing in general moves to more being more parallel.

I'm bothered by that article, mostly the end. They say they could improve the original Crysis, but they're focused on this second game. If it sells for $50 they are going to have quite a bit of angry people, and thus we'll likely see Crytek complain about poor sales and blame piracy for it again.

It's good to see them working to improve their game engine, and it sounds like they're doing a good job of making it more efficient and better looking. I just hope they don't try to stick people with another game that doesn't sound like it will be a sequel for full price.

Well, the new (48xx / 2xx) era is basically giant previous era cores. Crysis basically needs a new GPU architecture. The new Crysis update is NOT a new game, nor an expansion. It is an update. A patch that should have been free. There will be a ton of piracy, and Crytek will be fucking stupid bitches (excuse my language, but I believe it applies) about it again. Crysis sold over a million copies, yet they complained and said piracy killed the game. Last I checked one million units sold was a pretty great achievement.

There won't be a 1.3 patch for Crysis why? Because Crytek (COUGH EA FUCKING CUNTS COUGH) will be including those updates in a new PAID "update" to the game.

Crytek sold out to Micro$hit with Crysis, disabling a bunch of features for XP, claiming that you needed Vista to use the features. A simple text file edit enabled the features in XP. Needs Vista my fucking ass. Fuck you, Crytek, and your sellout ways. The Crysis engine was neutered hardcore for Crysis. Look at the many promo vids compared with the released product. There are many config tweaks out there that enable (most) of the full engine. Crytek is nothing more than a sellout, piece of shit company, and their games deserve to not be bought based on this. They flat-out lied to us, telling us that the 'very high' game settings REQUIRED Vista to use, when a simple edit of a text file enabled them in XP.

I bought Crysis at launch. I fully plan on not buying whatever shit they release next, since it will be nothing more than patches an updates that should have been free. My true feelings and intentions cannot be written here, for I will be banned for telling the truth. Such is the world today.

Bottom line: why is there no 1.3 for Crysis? Because they want you to pay for it. Because paying for patches and updates is the future of PC gaming. Look at the 1.6 patch for CoD4.

PC gaming is becoming fucking ridiculous. Piracy is running rampant because PUBLISHERS (not developers) are pushing for profit profit profit profit. Plain and simple.

Updates that would have been free in the past now cost money. Welcome to the new world of PC gaming.

Originally posted by: Northern Lawn
I upgraded my computer to e8400 core 2, OZ Reaper kit ram, Striker II mobo and 8800GTS 512 and I still can't play Crysis on Ultra high settings. It just gets real choppy. I had allow the system to set recommended settings, which were all High and even then, I turned the shaders to Medium and now it's very fluid and playable.

Great game (beat it before) but the coding or whatever is pretty bad.

The Crysis engine is built for future hardware. All you idiots (not you, just in general :)) complaining about it running slow need to realize that Crysis will NEVER run well on current hardware.
 

skace

Lifer
Jan 23, 2001
14,488
7
81
Originally posted by: 911paramedic
I have 2 8800gts 512 cards in sli. I never noticed a single glitch running it on the highest settings at 1910x1200, 4x AA (I think). My video cards alone were more than half the price of that system.

It's not that I don't believe you. I mean I only had 2 8800GT so the slight bump in models could possibly explain for what you are saying. But I highly, highly doubt it. Was this DX9 or DX10, although I wasn't even sure that made much of a difference.

I played Crysis on a 2 8800GT, 8GB of ram, Quad Core Intel, 64bit Vista, DX10 at a res of 1680x1050 and I went from high to medium by the end of the game eventually turning all AA off.

In fact, all of recent Anandtech reviews have benchmarks of Crysis and even they don't run the game at highest settings with a 9800 GX2. And at 1920 res it dips all the way down to 20fps. So congrats on your magic machine.
 

MBrown

Diamond Member
Jul 5, 2001
5,724
35
91
I don't believe that. Remember all that talk of a how they had Crysis running at this super high resolution at 60 fps running on an ordinary 8800? So much for that...
 

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
13,545
8,442
136
And we are quite sure it isn't a mistranslation, i.e. by $620 'rig' they didn't actually mean $620 graphics card? :)
 
Oct 18, 2007
25
0
0
I'm a bit more inclined to believe it this time around than the last. Consider that when Crysis was released, there were no decent mainstream-priced cards on the market. Eveything was either an underpowered/outdated GPU, or cost $300+. The 8800GT didn't exsist, so you were looking at a minimum of an 8800GTS 640 to play the game at high settings. The 8800GTS 640 was going for about $325 at the time, assuming you could find a good deal. That's more than half the cost of the rig, right there.

$620 will buy you a much better PC now than it would, say 8 months ago, and it's almost entirely due to the long-overdue price drop on GPUs.
 

Lonyo

Lifer
Aug 10, 2002
21,938
6
81
Originally posted by: Slimy
I'm a bit more inclined to believe it this time around than the last. Consider that when Crysis was released, there were no decent mainstream-priced cards on the market. Eveything was either an underpowered/outdated GPU, or cost $300+. The 8800GT didn't exsist, so you were looking at a minimum of an 8800GTS 640 to play the game at high settings. The 8800GTS 640 was going for about $325 at the time, assuming you could find a good deal. That's more than half the cost of the rig, right there.

$620 will buy you a much better PC now than it would, say 8 months ago, and it's almost entirely due to the long-overdue price drop on GPUs.

Um, sure.

Crysis release date: 13th November 2007.
8800GT review on Anandtech: 29th October 2007.
HD3850/3870 review: 15th November 2007.

The cards existed when Crysis was released. Sure, they've dropped a bit in price since then, but they were not unaffordable at the time Crysis came out.

But things have got cheaper and better, and it probably will be easier to make a cheap system that can play the new Crysis game fairly easily, which is good news for us (we're getting better performance for our money and mainstream is good value) and good news for the developers: it's more affordable to play their game with nice settings.
 

Canai

Diamond Member
Oct 4, 2006
8,016
1
0
Originally posted by: BadRobot
Originally posted by: Canai
ZOMG CRYTEK DIIIIIEEEEEEE

*Sits on therapists couch*
Tell us how you really feel Canai

Pretty much sums it up. I loved Far Cry, and I thoroughly enjoyed Crysis, but Crytek is turning to crap. I think the big red flag for me was when it was revealed that simple config tweaks unlocked the supposedly Vista-only graphics options. Although it could be said that Crytek made those config tweaks easily accessible to help XP users get the Very High settings. Then again, Crytek did disable them in the first place. :brokenheart:
 

TehMac

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2006
9,976
3
71
Originally posted by: Canai
We won't see truly playable Crysis fps until the next GPU update. Not the current shit, which is fine tweaking of the same crap we've had for over a year, but the next, true, update.

nVidia and ATi need to break the stupid fucking 'let's pack more GPU's onto the same board / SLI/CROSSFIRE to get awesome' shit and develop a new generation of cards.

If you've been paying attention, ATi has been doing just that. The 4850 has 800 stream processors and is a beast of a card...for as low as $170 in some areas.

nVidia is countering with the 9800GTX+, which is about 1/3 of the 9800GTX's price.

That is, a 4850s in Crossfire beat out a GTX 280 in some games.
 

LittleNemoNES

Diamond Member
Oct 7, 2005
4,142
0
0
Originally posted by: Canai
Originally posted by: BadRobot
Originally posted by: Canai
ZOMG CRYTEK DIIIIIEEEEEEE

*Sits on therapists couch*
Tell us how you really feel Canai

Pretty much sums it up. I loved Far Cry, and I thoroughly enjoyed Crysis, but Crytek is turning to crap. I think the big red flag for me was when it was revealed that simple config tweaks unlocked the supposedly Vista-only graphics options. Although it could be said that Crytek made those config tweaks easily accessible to help XP users get the Very High settings. Then again, Crytek did disable them in the first place. :brokenheart:

They had already done something similar with Far Cry and the AMD 64 bit only content, though.
 

Piuc2020

Golden Member
Nov 4, 2005
1,716
0
0
Originally posted by: Canai
Originally posted by: darkswordsman17
Originally posted by: Canai
We won't see truly playable Crysis fps until the next GPU update. Not the current shit, which is fine tweaking of the same crap we've had for over a year, but the next, true, update.

nVidia and ATi need to break the stupid fucking 'let's pack more GPU's onto the same board / SLI/CROSSFIRE to get awesome' shit and develop a new generation of cards.

I'm a little confused with what you're saying, by current do you mean 8800GTX/HD38x0 era, or GTX2x0/HD48x0? I wouldn't expect things to change as processing in general moves to more being more parallel.

I'm bothered by that article, mostly the end. They say they could improve the original Crysis, but they're focused on this second game. If it sells for $50 they are going to have quite a bit of angry people, and thus we'll likely see Crytek complain about poor sales and blame piracy for it again.

It's good to see them working to improve their game engine, and it sounds like they're doing a good job of making it more efficient and better looking. I just hope they don't try to stick people with another game that doesn't sound like it will be a sequel for full price.

Well, the new (48xx / 2xx) era is basically giant previous era cores. Crysis basically needs a new GPU architecture. The new Crysis update is NOT a new game, nor an expansion. It is an update. A patch that should have been free. There will be a ton of piracy, and Crytek will be fucking stupid bitches (excuse my language, but I believe it applies) about it again. Crysis sold over a million copies, yet they complained and said piracy killed the game. Last I checked one million units sold was a pretty great achievement.

There won't be a 1.3 patch for Crysis why? Because Crytek (COUGH EA FUCKING CUNTS COUGH) will be including those updates in a new PAID "update" to the game.

Crytek sold out to Micro$hit with Crysis, disabling a bunch of features for XP, claiming that you needed Vista to use the features. A simple text file edit enabled the features in XP. Needs Vista my fucking ass. Fuck you, Crytek, and your sellout ways. The Crysis engine was neutered hardcore for Crysis. Look at the many promo vids compared with the released product. There are many config tweaks out there that enable (most) of the full engine. Crytek is nothing more than a sellout, piece of shit company, and their games deserve to not be bought based on this. They flat-out lied to us, telling us that the 'very high' game settings REQUIRED Vista to use, when a simple edit of a text file enabled them in XP.

I bought Crysis at launch. I fully plan on not buying whatever shit they release next, since it will be nothing more than patches an updates that should have been free. My true feelings and intentions cannot be written here, for I will be banned for telling the truth. Such is the world today.

Bottom line: why is there no 1.3 for Crysis? Because they want you to pay for it. Because paying for patches and updates is the future of PC gaming. Look at the 1.6 patch for CoD4.

PC gaming is becoming fucking ridiculous. Piracy is running rampant because PUBLISHERS (not developers) are pushing for profit profit profit profit. Plain and simple.

Updates that would have been free in the past now cost money. Welcome to the new world of PC gaming.

Originally posted by: Northern Lawn
I upgraded my computer to e8400 core 2, OZ Reaper kit ram, Striker II mobo and 8800GTS 512 and I still can't play Crysis on Ultra high settings. It just gets real choppy. I had allow the system to set recommended settings, which were all High and even then, I turned the shaders to Medium and now it's very fluid and playable.

Great game (beat it before) but the coding or whatever is pretty bad.

The Crysis engine is built for future hardware. All you idiots (not you, just in general :)) complaining about it running slow need to realize that Crysis will NEVER run well on current hardware.

I agree that publishers are running PC Gaming into the ground because of their obsession with piracy (Blizzard will revive PC Gaming, the consoles will never get games like Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 :)).

However I don't understand your patch logic, first of all what the hell is wrong with the 1.6 CoD4 patch? It features free maps for PC users and it's free :confused:, also how is Crysis Warhead a patch? It features a completely new storyline and levels, it actually does classify as an expansion pack though it's weird to see them release a game like that, all they did was create a bunch of new levels in the editor.

Publishers should learn from publishers like Stardock, their game has ZERO copy protection and yet it's selling like every other game out there, better even. Wake up and realize piracy does not affect sales as much as they like to believe.