Meh, I don't mind. Let them take their time, every day it's delayed is a day given to the hardware to catch up. The last thing we'd want is another Crysis.

 

As long as it has optimization i don't mind.

 

I was really anticipating this game...

Meh, I don't mind. Let them take their time, every day it's delayed is a day given to the hardware to catch up. The last thing we'd want is another Crysis.

I still don't get why people give Crysis such low points in this criteria. My thoughts on it are that if you can settle for just a bit less then absolute max settings then it wasn't badly optimized at all. I mean back when I had my ATI HD2400 Pro I could play Crysis on low-medium settings at 30fps, which, btw, trumps many other not to notoriously hog games like Tom Clancy's RSV 2.

Moving onto my 9600GT (which, by today's standards is pretty sub-par), I was able to play at 1280x1024 with all settings on high. So unless you absolutely must have 16x AA and 1920x1200 it's not shabby at all.

 

Well truth be told Crysis run pretty decent on a sempron 3000+ with a ATi 9600 XT. Overall the game wasn't that bad except the last stage which did need a lot of more work with optimization that's for sure.

 

If you've got the effects turned up then nevermind the AA cuz you're going to experience a hit and a big one. I used the Chain Gun on the invisible nano-suit copies and afterwards my frames dropped to below 20 as the haze of heat being given off from the gun drifted accross my screen. Same goes for the exploding bots later on though it's a slightly lesser hit. Now apply even just a little AA to that at a big res and even the strongest cards chug occasionally.

 

Strange. I never experienced this hit, with all settings on "gamer" i.e. high (no AA, AF or Vsync though).

 

Could be cuz they're DX10 effects which you had no access to.

 

I was also really expecting to play Crysis 2 this year. Well, as long as they really improve the game a bit more, it's okay.
They delayed it to 2011 Q1, its not a really huge delay time.

 

Could be cuz they're DX10 effects which you had no access to.

Unless he played the game on XP that sentence makes no sense.

 

Actually I did xD

 

Unless he played the game on XP that sentence makes no sense.

Actually it does cuz an HD2400 could not do DX10 to save it's life regardless of which OS was being used. So all he would have seen was 5-10FPS regardless of what was happening onscreen...plus I remember that at the time Gamefreak was still using XP.

 

Yes, but he also mentioned his 9600 , that's what i said what i said, for the 2400 your right ^^.

 

Actually it does cuz an HD2400 could not do DX10 to save it's life regardless of which OS was being used. So all he would have seen was 5-10FPS regardless of what was happening onscreen...plus I remember that at the time Gamefreak was still using XP.

it actually supports DX10 but that 64 bits mem. interface can hold the card back a lot .
the problem back then was that if we wanted to play in DX 10 we had to use Vista which at least can chop off 10 FPS in a game hardly getting 25 Fps
damn vista stupid vista

 

it actually supports DX10 but that 64 bits mem. interface can hold the card back a lot .

That's what Schumi said as well , that due to the low performance it doesn't count.

the problem back then was that if we wanted to play in DX 10 we had to use Vista which at least can chop off 10 FPS in a game hardly getting 25 Fps
damn vista stupid vista

I admit when i played it i had Vista SP1, but i did not have such a problem on my end, in fact i played it DX 10 on medium 1280X1024 with a 3650 with 256 DDR2 3 GB DDR2 and a Athlon X2 5000+ and until the last stage it ran good. Tested several games (mostly hawx) and all i got was a -6 FPS drop on Vista but with added DX 10 effects.

 

That's what Schumi said as well , that due to the low performance it doesn't count.


I admit when i played it i had Vista SP1, but i did not have such a problem on my end, in fact i played it DX 10 on medium 1280X1024 with a 3650 with 256 DDR2 3 GB DDR2 and a Athlon X2 5000+ and until the last stage it ran good. Tested several games (mostly hawx) and all i got was a -6 FPS drop on Vista but with added DX 10 effects.

could be your 3Gb rams

when I played it i still Had a C2D 6750 2GB rams and a 8800 Gts 320 , didnt run so good on ultra high 1024*786 (except for motion blur and shadows oon low) , then i got 4870 things started to look and play better , although all of my 2Gb rams were consumed , could be the game itself , still I prefer to blame vistas poor memory management

 

Memory most probably, this game eats it for breakfast.

 

The problem with Crysis is not the requirement per se... but that you need to set the game at the highest possible settings to be able to "view" anything in the distance. Try climbing up a mountain and look down at a village and you'll see what I mean. It's a miracle if you can see a tree or two...

Granted, it ain't that bad at lower resolutions where you can't even make out which is the ground and which is a tree, but... at higher resolutions, it's annoying. So the Medium and lower settings just don't play well at higher resolutions, at all. Blame that to poor level design. Most of the levels in Crysis consist of dense jungles with really vast view distance...

So you are pretty much forced to push higher settings at higher resolutions if you want the game to "look" right. In which case, a bigger and badder graphics card is almost absolutely a necessity...

Now, onto Crysis 2, the main problem still remains. Level design consists of really large landscapes with very vast view distance. You can expect up to 1000 trees or even more in any random view. But then consoles only have that much RAM, so obviously, even 200 trees is already asking a bit much. By standard, though, Crysis only displays around 30 trees or so on the screen at once, which is fine if you keep looking forward. Distract yourself a bit and try to look at the scenery, and expect either a crazy frame drop, or a bland scenery to look at. For a game touted for its graphical prowess, this is just not really acceptable... Back to consoles, the view distance has been greatly decreased... to the point where now you can barely see a barrel 8 meters ahead of you. Is that bad?... Yes... how are you supposed to take advantage of the exploding barrel if you don't even see it?

YouTube - ‪CryEngine 2 vs CryEngine 3‬‎

[end of rant]

 

Quit ranting and just buy a smaller monitor

 

Exactly!

No seriously, it's a shame... other games that are supposed to be "hogs" work so well on large monitors...

 

Well don't know with 1280X1024 (19") i didn't notice nothing wrong .

 

Go up a mountain and look down at a town. I think there are several spots like that in the game.

Alternatively, go to the beach and look at the other beach.

If you still can't notice anything, then upgrade to 24" 1920x1200 or 30" 2560x1600.

 

I finished the game on high and DX10 and then decided to try again at much lower settings and DX9 to get my frames up...and the game barely ran any better and I kept on sniping at people with invisible rocks in the way (Used binoculars and there's rocks, switched to weapons and theres no rocks...)

 

Exactly... That was one of the problems as well. For some weird reason, Crysis doesn't do LOD or occlusion the way other games do... It prioritizes humans over trees, then trees over rocks.

So you'll see a human first, then trees, then rocks... Whereas if you try to hit a human, there would obviously be some sort of invisible tree or rock in the way...

 

Hmm, I haven't played at lower settings and wouldn't know. I just know that after all the horror stories I had heard since its release, I found Crysis to be a rather optimized game when I finally played it. The only issue I had was that it consumed my 2GB memory making the final level impossible to play. Otherwise the game ran much better than the recent Splinter Cell game, and visually it is a lot more impressive. It definitely raised the bar for games, but right now it still looks better than anything released recently AND manages to keep a higher, or at least a more stable framerate.

 

Could have sworn this game was already out... Oh well.