Ive about had it with Far Cry

[kre62]

The fuckin game will just not run consistently smooth. Am I the only one seeing this? I can't stand it. The image quality of the game is somewhat good somewhat bad. Certain things are aliased beyond control, and turning AA on dosent fix it. Ill get 80FPS one minute and 21 the next. It's bullshit. I understand that I'm running it compleately maxed out, but I run plenty of other games maxed with no problem, most notable CS:S and Doom3. Do the people who have finished the game actually just put up with this shit? I have had the game since it came out, and still have yet to get past the fort level as I was "waiting until it ran well" to play it. That included building a new 2K game machine and waiting for 1.3 patch. Does anyone have suggestions?

-Athlon64 3500+
-GF 6800Ultra
-2gb Corsair Ram
-Audigy 2 ZS
-Asus A8V

Settings:
1600x1200
16X AF
SM 3.0
No AA

[eloj]

Figure out which settings to reduce?

[kre62]

I shouldnt have to reduce any of them chief, and Ive tried all settings possible.

[eloj]

> shouldnt have to reduce any of them chief,

Why not? You think games shouldn't be made to scale onto future hardware? You have some kind of "divine right" to be able to run at full settings and at screen refresh rates?

It's simple. Put the settings where they give you the performance you want.

[kre62]

Holy shit are you serious? Ive seen plenty of other people with lesser systems who are running this game at these specs. My question is: Have they found some magic way to run the game satisfactorily, or are they just taking it up the ass in performance and accepting it. No more reduce the settings drama posts please.

[Stereophile]

Your system should handle that game with no problems. If it's not to your satisfaction, wait another year and try again. I think you're being too picky.

[Syphon Filter]

Your system should handle that game with no problems. If it's not to your satisfaction, wait another year and try again. I think you're being too picky.

agreed.

[NowhereMan]

Make sure that you have the latest drivers (video, bios, sound).

I also noticed a big boost in performance after installing XP SP2 on my machine.

And if all that fails, resort to patience. :D

[denaps]

maybe you're not good enough to beat it. keep practicing.

just kidding. every level ran great on my machine and I ran it on the same settings with the hardware in my sig.

[kick@ss]

A lot of people greatly exaggerate how smooth the game runs on their system at high resolution. Also, people have different ideas of what's considered smooth.

[Lunt]

The fuckin game will just not run consistently smooth. Am I the only one seeing this? I can't stand it. The image quality of the game is somewhat good somewhat bad. Certain things are aliased beyond control, and turning AA on dosent fix it. Ill get 80FPS one minute and 21 the next. It's bullshit. I understand that I'm running it compleately maxed out, but I run plenty of other games maxed with no problem, most notable CS:S and Doom3. Do the people who have finished the game actually just put up with this shit? I have had the game since it came out, and still have yet to get past the fort level as I was "waiting until it ran well" to play it. That included building a new 2K game machine and waiting for 1.3 patch. Does anyone have suggestions?

-Athlon64 3500+
-GF 6800Ultra
-2gb Corsair Ram
-Audigy 2 ZS
-Asus A8V

Settings:
1600x1200
16X AF
SM 3.0
No AA

very strange...Im running damn near the exact same fear (I only have 1 GB ram) and asus v9999 gamers edition and I have no problems whatso ever...everything runs smooth...mind you I have only played it for a grand total of 4-5 hours (just go it)...awesome game for sure.....

[pageian]

I doubt anyone will be able to convince you of this chief, but it sounds like you've got some problem either with your system hardware or with the game software/drivers etc... I haven't experience any problems like you're suggesting and my system isn't as high-end as yours. XP 3200, 6800 GT, 1gb Kingston HyperX. I don't run with everything maxed out, but most of it is.

[Tricky]

My system isn't that much weaker than yours and I play at 1280x1024, 8x af, 2x AA (recommended playing by [H], http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjcyLDg= ) I think your just pushing it too hard. Farcry isn't a simple game to render...and your box isn't THAT OMGWTFBBQ uber.

[afirawker]

1600*1200 is kind of redundant. try bringing it down to like 1280*1024. still very high yet not at max setting, if that smoothens things out then you know its a cap on your harware, if lowering the settings doesnt help smoothen the gameplay out then you have a problem with your hardware/software configuration. completely uninstall, reboot and install the latest and greatest drivers which should work.

i understand why you think you should be able to run at 16*12 with everything turned on after spending 2k on a machine, but then again if you upgraded by spending 2k on a system just to play this game at full res, well then.....

[Chubz]

First of all, calm down and stop taking a hissy-fit.

Second of all, maybe it is just a driver issue of some kind or it is killing your RAM?

FarCry is a game that viciously goes after RAM, even if you have 1GB.

Also, believe it or not, I've heard that having 2GB of ram can cause "problems" in games since your PC doesnt need to "use that much".

Sounds stupid, I KNOW, but that is what I've heard..........

Just chill out, and maybe then we will be able to help you. :)

[raz-0]

OK, you are running 16x AF, that's going to be a bit of a strain on the video card. Cut it back to 8x and you should notice some improvement in speed, and little to no decrease in visual quality. The textures just aren't that high quality and the engine's optimizations are working against you getting crisper images at 16x.

As for the aliasing, lots of the foliage uses transparency for bits rather than geometry. AA only takes care of the edges of geometry, not aliasing in the textures themselves.

I also suspect that your expectations of smooth are too high. I get smooth gameplay, but I'm playign at 1280x1024 rather than 1600x1200 I'm running 4xAA 4xAF have geometry instancing on and sprite replacement ratio at 100. All settings are at very high, not ultra or custom. I get smooth gameplay, but there are places it IS going to dip low, no matter what. It appears the engine just chugs when you move from a shader heavy indoor area to a geometry heavy outdoor area. If that ruins it for you, sell your copy, because that isn't going away.

With your setup, try running 1280x1024 with the options set by clicking the very hgh setting tab under advanced video and see what framerates you get. If it still isn't smooth then, you may have something up with your system (BTW, this isn't telling you to run at those settings, just test, your system should be capable of making that run smoothly with the exception of the indoor/outdoor transitions and the apparantly new nvidia sound loading hiccup).

[Kevin Lowe]

Also, believe it or not, I've heard that having 2GB of ram can cause "problems" in games since your PC doesnt need to "use that much".

Sounds stupid, I KNOW, but that is what I've heard..........



That was an issue with Win9x. 2000/XP don't have this problem.

[TheRapture]

I play the game with satisfactory speed...this is a very detailed game that is indeed going to scale well with upcoming hardware....they are pushing the current performance envelope pretty hard, kudos to Krytek. Yes, the game has some issues, but what games DOESN'T? But nothing that will ruin the game...


This is what I play at in SP and MP with my current rig (see the specs in my sig below)..

-ATI control panel AA and AF set to "application preference"
-ATI control panel image settings to "quality"

In game settings:
-resolution 1024x768
-AA to 4x
-AF to 8x
-Advanced options: everything to VERY HIGH except water to MEDIUM and shadows to HIGH.

This gives me framerates varying from Carrier lows of 35fps or so up to 90's-100's indoors...if you can make the Carrier level play smooth then the rest of the game will be good to go. I am an old school FPS gamer and find it hard to accept frame rates lower than 40 but with these newer games I just have to if you want high IQ....

Of course this is on my XT PE modded card but still a 6800GT or Ultra should be able to run fairly close to these settings...


I think ALOT of people fudge about how smooth a game runs...not to mention everyone's idea of what is "fast enough" varies. I CAN play this game at 1600x1200 with 2x fsaa and 4x af but it just gets toooo sloooow in certain maps and situations to be enjoyable...

[ysaric]

I've never had an uber-machine, but I sprung for a 6800GT, and I have a 2500+ Barton. I play with most stuff on "very high", but at 1024x768 (with my aging, small 17" monitor) and if there are dips, well, that's life, and the price I pay for trying to have something left over for my daughter's college fund. Because I've compromised so often on upgrades, I think I've gotten used to dips in fps that frustrate other people who can spend a virtually unlimtied amount on their machine and are always used to running at 100fps. They just don't bother me, and Far Cry I think runs great on my machine.

Most of you are still showing AA settings, but I turned mine off for the 1.3 patch to get HDR and I like it--I know some people don't. For some reason, I didn't have to restart my 1.2 campaign . . . not sure why.

You know, some of the dipping problems may just be coding. Every time I've done a significant upgrade to my system, I re-install X-Wing: Alliance to see if it eliminates the dip you get in game when a large cruiser comes into view. It never does.

[Hooligan]

the problem is between the chair and the keyboard.

http://www.lafilateliamexicana.com/images/MGHZ.jpg

[Catch22sk8r]

lol to above ,

have u check ur refresh rate ? that can sometimes cause problems specially if ur monitor sucks and cant handle 16 12. maybe a slow or dieing hdd. it seems to be more software related to me. i suggest full format and updated drivers.

or ur just really picky. and if its that , wah wah wah wah

[afirawker]

the problem is between the chair and the keyboard.

http://www.lafilateliamexicana.com/images/MGHZ.jpg


PEBKAC

Problem Exists Between Keyboard And Chair :p

[Brent_Justice]

The fuckin game will just not run consistently smooth. Am I the only one seeing this? I can't stand it. The image quality of the game is somewhat good somewhat bad. Certain things are aliased beyond control, and turning AA on dosent fix it. Ill get 80FPS one minute and 21 the next. It's bullshit. I understand that I'm running it compleately maxed out, but I run plenty of other games maxed with no problem, most notable CS:S and Doom3. Do the people who have finished the game actually just put up with this shit? I have had the game since it came out, and still have yet to get past the fort level as I was "waiting until it ran well" to play it. That included building a new 2K game machine and waiting for 1.3 patch. Does anyone have suggestions?

-Athlon64 3500+
-GF 6800Ultra
-2gb Corsair Ram
-Audigy 2 ZS
-Asus A8V

Settings:
1600x1200
16X AF
SM 3.0
No AA

what driver version are you using?

you could be having the same problem others are experiencing with 66.xx driver verisions and Patch 1.3: http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=Njc4LDM= and http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=824445

[texuspete00]

Settings are too high... chief. :p

Interesting reaction to the truth. Like said you may just be able to lower aniso and be fine... so hop to it instead of dissing advice. Sounds like you want SLI or something. Read the reviews before spending 2K on your machine. Can't play farcry at 1600*1200 with 16x aniso? welcome to the club.... chief^2.

[MeTaSpARKs]

I always considered FARCRY the system killer. Programmers over at Crytek are geniouses but not game gods like Carmack at iD. They don't know how to optimize the code well enough for everyone.


But I would check to make sure you have a static swap set. Preferably on an alternate drive or partition. Even with your 2GB, it'd be best to leave a set size of around 3.0GB on your drive somewhere. Even 1GB may be fine. Also, visit www.blackviper.com. Kill all unneeded processes in the background. And make sure you have the least amount of processes and most amount of memory available when you play.

Also, try turning off fast-writes in the bios. For some chipsets, the videocards just perform better with them off. I recommend 128MB Aperture Size. That seems to give me the best performance.

And if this doesn't work, try an format/reinstall. It's always a fresh feeling when you start back from 0 without your registry being filthy with driver uninstalls/reinstalls.

Most importantly, don't forget that people spend thousands more on their "dream" systems than you have on your system. It'd be nice to play everything at the max in everygame you own, but that just won't happen unless you are spending more than 5k on your system...

Is it worth it? I guess if you got the money to wipe your ass with. For me, fuck it.. it's not all about the craziest graphics at the sickest FPS, but the enjoyment and experience of the game. FARCRY has it.. you should give it a chance at lower settings....

PS.

Tweaktown.com has a great FARCRY tweaking guide. You should check it out, too!

[darktiger]

My farcry runs smoothly, no hiccups at all and I run at 1920x1200 high settings, with sm3.0. With the settings in my sig...

[MooCow]

Also, believe it or not, I've heard that having 2GB of ram can cause "problems" in games since your PC doesnt need to "use that much".

Sounds stupid, I KNOW, but that is what I've heard..........

God damn, I hope this is not true...

[retardedchicken]

yes the 1.3 patch is out, im using it so i can use HDR :D

http://img8.imgspot.com/u/04/301/14/FarCry0052.jpg

theres proof, and the studdering problem was on the 66.81 driver set, i use the 66.70's and its pertty smooth at 1156x864 8xAF (cant use aa or else HDR doesnt work) and im clocked at ultra speeds

[t. shuffle]

But I would check to make sure you have a static swap set. Preferably on an alternate drive or partition. Even with your 2GB, it'd be best to leave a set size of around 3.0GB on your drive somewhere. Even 1GB may be fine. Also, visit www.blackviper.com.

First of all, a three gig swap file is just ridiculous. With two gigs of ram, you can run with no swap file at all. Hell, with one gig, you can run with no swap file. I'd definately not set it for any more than 512 megs.

Second, please take anything quackviper says with a grain of salt. He's helped quite a few people hose their systems.

[afirawker]

First of all, a three gig swap file is just ridiculous. With two gigs of ram, you can run with no swap file at all. Hell, with one gig, you can run with no swap file. I'd definately not set it for any more than 512 megs.

Second, please take anything quackviper says with a grain of salt. He's helped quite a few people hose their systems.

and lemme guess most of them were n00bs.

his advice has helped me tweak my system in the past without any problems

[Vanskater]

ID107 error maybe?

[t. shuffle]

and lemme guess most of them were n00bs.

who else goes there?

[ysaric]

Tweaktown.com has a great FARCRY tweaking guide. You should check it out, too!

Do you have a link? I can't seem to find it.

[aZn_plyR]

well i have almost the same setup except for the 2 gig of ram and i have a 3200+ clawhammer which i clocked a tiny bit pasted 3400+ with 277 htt.... i played it at 1600x1200 2xaa and 8xaf and it ran pretty good.. not as fast as i wanted it to run though.. but i found the most playable settings was 1280x960 2x aa and 4x af... and the diff between 1600x1200 and 1280x960 is hardly noticable imo... and you'd get a huge performance hit with 1600x1200.. so anyways yeah like someone else suggested.. the 16xaf is wut's really slowing ur card down put it to 8x or even 4x and you should be fine.. or wait till next year when the new cards come out and maybe you'll get to run it at the specs you want :)

[kre62]

Settings are too high... chief. :p

Interesting reaction to the truth. Like said you may just be able to lower aniso and be fine... so hop to it instead of dissing advice. Sounds like you want SLI or something. Read the reviews before spending 2K on your machine. Can't play farcry at 1600*1200 with 16x aniso? welcome to the club.... chief^2.


Ya you like that terminology, bitch? J/k thanks to everyone who replied. I am feeling a little better seeing more people admit that their rigs do not play this game OMGSMUUUTH at all times whatsoever at these settings, which seemed to be what I was seeing. I'm going to use driver cleaner and re-install the 61-77 Omegas probably. It just frustrates me sometimes that no matter what games always slow down it seems. Can't these programmers get this together? I guess 'll just play Id software and source based games because those are the only engines that are smooth almost 100% of the time. It just pisses me off and makes me wonder why I PC game. When the next gen consoles come out, I'll have a hard time justifying continueing to upgrade the PC at huge cost when I can just hook up my PS3 to my 55" HDTV.

[MeTaSpARKs]

Sorry it was tweak guides...

http://www.tweakguides.com/Farcry_1.html

Thats the new 1.3 tweak guide people.


As for BlackViper.. I do not think the n00bs go there.. there is an immense amount of information this guy has made available to the public and those who think they don't have something to learn from his site are just too arrogant and ignorant for their own good.

As for the 3 GB swap file, I was going on the 1.5x times your ram rule. I know 2GB is a lot of ram to have and almost in no need of a swap, but there are some games out there that REQUIRE a swap file to run correctly. Even with 1024 MB of ram, I still have 1024MB of a _STATIC_ swap to help deal with any problems that may occur in the background without me knowing.


Best of luck to you all.

[Hooligan]

try playing farcry on a console

better yet, try any FPS game on a console w/ no keyboard and mouse (and those that do have keyboard support suck ass)

ill trade u a PS3 (when they come out) for ur PC :D

[kre62]

Ya dude, thats a good deal (wtf). I'll have to let you know what kind of features the PS3 has when I see it at E3 next year.

[kre62]

Hell ya this thread is linked from the front page. Thats what I'm talking about.

[MooCow]

Even with your 2GB, it'd be best to leave a set size of around 3.0GB on your drive somewhere.
BS...

My swapfile min/max is set at 64MB. If Windows wants more then tough shit.


Second, please take anything quackviper says with a grain of salt. He's helped quite a few people hose their systems.
I also don't see how Black Viper has helped "people hose their systems". Doesn't he have disclaimers on his site as well as warnings to back up your registry? I've found his information pretty helpful and I haven't killed my system with his information. Maybe some users are complete retards.

[Emret]

what i hate about farcry is the frigggin M-O-U-S-E L-A-G
I will get good FPS but the lag just kills it..

[PerfectCr]

http://www.cs.haifa.ac.il/~shuly/inbal/020131/crying.jpg

[Saa|3]

http://www.cs.haifa.ac.il/~shuly/inbal/020131/crying.jpg
LOL, HOLY SHIT... HAHAHAHA well placed...

Saa|3

[Cigolon]

man. if you can't run farcry smooth on your system. either your system is built like crap, you have a ton of crap installed on it. or you are a moron. only 3 options. thats it. no other options. no 'god hates me' ; no 'the game is coded bad'.
it runs great on a lot less than that.

[Archaea]

I'm bragging - I got the BEST SYSTEM IN THE WORLD AND I CAN'T RUN IT AT MAX SETTINGS BOOO HOOO HOOOO HOOO HOOO.

But i still got a better system than you....I'm the king of the world,, check out my useless stats, 2 gigs of RAM, Who's your DADDY....a 500 dollar graphics card! I got money to burn baby!

and I can't play a game that came out a year ago....waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah.


SHUT UP!

Notch down your res, because 1600x1200 is STOOOOOOOOOOOPID.
Turn down your shadows one notch cause the shadow's on ultra/high are a KILLER to performance and play the best game of all time, enjoy it and then fire it up again in a year if you absolutely must play on max settings.

I played through this game months ago on my 2.4 P4 system with 512MB of ram on a 5800 non ultra card....I had to play with the settings on medium-high and the game STILL looked absolutely georgous. It's my favorite game of all time so far, even besting half-life.

So what if you can't max everything out, grow up, notch it down a few settings and play a very enjoyable game.

[Archaea]

Doom3 does NOT have better programing than Far Cry...I've heard 2 people in this post say that...That's simply untrue. Far Cry has much better graphics than Doom3, much more realistic enviornments, and a overwhelming draw distance. Doom 3 has none of those things. Everything is inside, and like the 2 times in the game that doom3 tries to deliver an external enviornment the frames drop to a slideshow. Some of the creatures look really 2d ish(think about the yellow spiders), and all the creatures look like they are made of bland tupperware. Far Cry is so much more of a graphical acheivement. Not to mention the coding on the AI is infintely better in farcry instead of just being grab armor, spawn dumb monster. On my system Far Cry runs better, higher fps. In my book there is no way Doom3 is coded better.

p4 2.4C o/ced to 3.0Ghz
Abit IS7
512MB PC3500 Geil Golden Dragon DDR
Geforce FX 5800
36GB Raptor 10,000RPM Sata

[GeForceX]

Quackviper, Blackviper, etc...

Basically, the problem with his site is that they tend to be *misleading*. It can help but he falsifies his information on what each process actually do. Basically, he tells you to turn off things (on his own opinion) just because it doesn't seem to be needed. While I follow some of his steps (only *some*), many of them are quite unnecessary since the release of SP2. He relies on that thought of, "If it's there, it will take up memory" while it actually doesn't. Processes loads and unloads itself when it is needed and not needed anymore. I don't agree with the 'he helped people hose their box" because if someone's PC did get hosed, then they are simply hands down not computer savvy (otherwise they would've known what to expect out of messing with the core implementions of Windows XP). Either way, I would overall recommend you to only use their "Top 10" of optimizing your PC, such as turning off updates, indexing, etc...

-J.

[MrWoot]

Just tone your settings down dude, the game will still look great.

[Cigolon]

Just tone your settings down dude, the game will still look great.
he shouldn't have to with that system. something is funky with his machien if that doesn't ace farcry.

[kre62]

he shouldn't have to with that system. something is funky with his machien if that doesn't ace farcry.

Finally someone with half a brain.

To all the people who are saying I'm whining, this dude hit the nail on the head, and that was the point of this whole thread.

Well I uninstalled the 66.81's, used driver cleaner in safe mode, and put the Omega 61.77's on. The game runs much smoother now. I did knock it down to 12x9 anyway, added 2X AA, left it at 16X AF, left settings maxed, and I now have a good gaming experiance. So I will play this game after all.

And to the fuckstick above who said the game came out a year ago, check your dates bitch. Didnt this game come out in March? Thats 7 months CHIEF. What a fuckin retard.

[MONST3R]

dang with components like that you should own

[pageian]

And to the fuckstick above who said the game came out a year ago, check your dates bitch. Didnt this game come out in March? Thats 7 months CHIEF. What a fuckin retard.

Carefull now. I know that you're new to the forum but you did read the rules.....right?



Or is your box so 1337 that you don't need to read rules (or faq's, or readme's, or advice, or troubleshooting tips, etc)? ;)

[Hooligan]

someone call the WAAAAAAAAMBULANCE

[MONST3R]

oooo gotta read the rules, watch your temper kre! it can lead to bad things.

[Ryan7968]

Doom3 does NOT have better programing than Far Cry...I've heard 2 people in this post say that...That's simply untrue. Far Cry has much better graphics than Doom3, much more realistic enviornments, and a overwhelming draw distance. Doom 3 has none of those things. Everything is inside, and like the 2 times in the game that doom3 tries to deliver an external enviornment the frames drop to a slideshow. Some of the creatures look really 2d ish(think about the yellow spiders), and all the creatures look like they are made of bland tupperware. Far Cry is so much more of a graphical acheivement. Not to mention the coding on the AI is infintely better in farcry instead of just being grab armor, spawn dumb monster. On my system Far Cry runs better, higher fps. In my book there is no way Doom3 is coded better.



I'll take the Doom 3 engine over the Far Cry engine anyday. I think you just prefer Far Cry as a game and are just talking from a fans perspective. It's alright though, Crytech hasn't been around as long as ID software, you can't blame them for making a fun game on a not so optimized engine.

[MeTaSpARKs]

Doom3 does NOT have better programing than Far Cry...I've heard 2 people in this post say that...That's simply untrue. Far Cry has much better graphics than Doom3, much more realistic enviornments, and a overwhelming draw distance. Doom 3 has none of those things. Everything is inside, and like the 2 times in the game that doom3 tries to deliver an external enviornment the frames drop to a slideshow. Some of the creatures look really 2d ish(think about the yellow spiders), and all the creatures look like they are made of bland tupperware. Far Cry is so much more of a graphical acheivement. Not to mention the coding on the AI is infintely better in farcry instead of just being grab armor, spawn dumb monster. On my system Far Cry runs better, higher fps. In my book there is no way Doom3 is coded better.


I wasn't particularly talking about graphics programming, or even AI programming. FarCry has the one up on Doom3 in those areas for sure. But what I was talking about was system efficiency and compatability. Doom3 runs without hitches on plenty of old ass systems. FarCry makes P4s feel like Pentium MMXs for some people... its all about efficiency and I think Carmack does a better job at it than the CryTek dudes...

but thats just an opinion. :)

[computerpro3]

Okay some people in this thread:

1. Have never played Far Cry before.

OR

2. Are pretty fuckin stupid

With my 3.0C @ 4ghz and radeon 9700 pro @ 425/360 with 1GB ram I could run @ 1280x1024, every single setting maxed, with visibilility distance maxed out and some other IQ increasing console tweaks and NEVER GO BELOW 30fps, even during intense firefights outdoors, in the caves with water refracting all around, with flashlight on, w/e. And his system is a lot more powerful than mine. Granted, I run with no aa and no af but a $500 video card, another 1GB ram, and an a64 3500 should afford more than one notch res higher and 16x af.....

Somethings wrong with his system. I'd look at drivers, spyware, and the age of the windows install first. Is your hard drive properly defragged? Page file defragged? Is it churning while you play? What's your page file and ram utilization during playing? What's your idle cpu usage while sitting in windows?

Something is def. wrong.

When my fx-55/vapochill LS/6800 ultra come in I'd BETTER be able to play @ 1600x1200 ultra settings with 4xAA....

[pageian]

When my fx-55/vapochill LS/6800 ultra come in I'd BETTER be able to play @ 1600x1200 ultra settings with 4xAA....

And if you can't then will it be the games fault, your systems fault, or will it be caused by all the people who don't share your opinion therefore have never played the game? ;)

If you can't play with all your new stuff then send a complaint to Crytek, maybe they'll give you a refund for all your troubles. :)

[retardedchicken]

put HDR in the game and then see how high of a res you are going to run at :p


and even i can stroll along at 1600x1200 8xaf so something might be wrong with the drivers, etc etc

it really is not a big deal though, go down to 12x10 and kick in some AA with that 16xaf

[aZn_plyR]

i have almost the same set-up as him but with a clawhammer 3200+@ 2.22 ghz and i cant play that high... 1600x1200 is too much.... with all settings maxed at least :) i can play 1600x1200 maxed settings aa and af.. but fps are as low as 30(in firefights).. but its still playable..

but anyways i play my far cry at 12x9 2xaa and 8xaf.. to me 8x and 16x af is no real diff.... and in the option does far cry even support 16x af.. but anyways 12x9 2xaa and 8xaf is da sweet spot... and o yeah i finally figured out whymy overclock on my 6800ultra was not stable.... my voltage was 1.5 for the core.. but i didn't upped the throttle voltage to 1.5 too.. so yeah crashes.. but not no more... hehe maybe i'll try 1600x1200 with my clocks @ 450/1.17 :)

[kre62]

Okay some people in this thread:

1. Have never played Far Cry before.

OR

2. Are pretty fuckin stupid

With my 3.0C @ 4ghz and radeon 9700 pro @ 425/360 with 1GB ram I could run @ 1280x1024, every single setting maxed, with visibilility distance maxed out and some other IQ increasing console tweaks and NEVER GO BELOW 30fps, even during intense firefights outdoors, in the caves with water refracting all around, with flashlight on, w/e. And his system is a lot more powerful than mine. Granted, I run with no aa and no af but a $500 video card, another 1GB ram, and an a64 3500 should afford more than one notch res higher and 16x af.....

Somethings wrong with his system. I'd look at drivers, spyware, and the age of the windows install first. Is your hard drive properly defragged? Page file defragged? Is it churning while you play? What's your page file and ram utilization during playing? What's your idle cpu usage while sitting in windows?

Something is def. wrong.

When my fx-55/vapochill LS/6800 ultra come in I'd BETTER be able to play @ 1600x1200 ultra settings with 4xAA....

Nothings wrong with my system bro, thats just the way the game is. The system itself is less then 2 months old, so the install is clean. I keep the hard drive at 0% fragmentation at all times. I run virus and 4 types of spyware caneers 2-3 times a week.

Its starting to seem like the bottom line is, this game does not run smooth at 16x12. At least not my definition of smooth. I want smooth, high framerates that allow me to whip my gun around fast and it be like butter. I cant stand 30FPS and below, Id have to say at least 45 and thats pushing it for me. I think its possible to play at 16x12 if you turn AF off. But thats something I am not willing to do. All Im saying is dont be dissapointed if you cant play maxed out.

[coffee33]

Nothings wrong with my system bro, thats just the way the game is. The system itself is less then 2 months old, so the install is clean. I keep the hard drive at 0% fragmentation at all times. I run virus and 4 types of spyware caneers 2-3 times a week.

Its starting to seem like the bottom line is, this game does not run smooth at 16x12. At least not my definition of smooth. I want smooth, high framerates that allow me to whip my gun around fast and it be like butter. I cant stand 30FPS and below, Id have to say at least 45 and thats pushing it for me. I think its possible to play at 16x12 if you turn AF off. But thats something I am not willing to do. All Im saying is dont be dissapointed if you cant play maxed out.
It runs totally smooth on my computer and its nothing to brag about....specs below.
AMD 3200+ 64
Saphire 9800Pro
1Gig ram

[TheRapture]

The fuckin game will just not run consistently smooth. Am I the only one seeing this? I can't stand it. The image quality of the game is somewhat good somewhat bad. Certain things are aliased beyond control, and turning AA on dosent fix it. It's bullshit. I understand that I'm running it compleately maxed out, but I run plenty of other games maxed with no problem, most notable CS:S and Doom3. Do the people who have finished the game actually just put up with this shit? I have had the game since it came out, and still have yet to get past the fort level as I was "waiting until it ran well" to play it. That included building a new 2K game machine and waiting for 1.3 patch. Does anyone have suggestions?

-Athlon64 3500+
-GF 6800Ultra
-2gb Corsair Ram
-Audigy 2 ZS
-Asus A8V

Settings:
1600x1200
16X AF
SM 3.0
No AA


Wow.....imagine that, swap the words "far cry" out for "crysis" and it is the same thread, just fast forward 3 years :p

And I found the thread via Google because I was looking for the old 64 bit Far Cry patch to run under a 32 bit OS. No forum thread digging here.

[zmjone2992]

I was very confused until I ready the dates:p

[MrFace]

Wow.....imagine that, swap the words "far cry" out for "crysis" and it is the same thread, just fast forward 3 years :p

And I found the thread via Google because I was looking for the old 64 bit Far Cry patch to run under a 32 bit OS. No forum thread digging here.

You know, in three years, cry babies still exist! LOL

[Rock&Roll]

2004, Jesus! This resurrection actually brought me a laugh. Good find Rapture.

[TheRapture]

I just found it funny about how the more things change, the more they stay the same.

When Far Cry came out, it pushed current hardware to the max, but soon after, faster stuff came out that could run it nicely.

Here we are, again, straining to run a new engine (crysis) and people seem to forget that it happens over and over....Far Cry, WoW, Doom3, etc., et al.

Have a good day all!

[Oomps]

Here we are, again, straining to run a new engine (crysis) and people seem to forget that it happens over and over....Far Cry, WoW, Doom3, etc., et al.


WoW? lol

[jbzx86]

Yeah... WoW doesn't really push hardware and never will. I run it maxed out at 1680x1050 4X AA and I consistently get 60FPS (in-game limit due to my forcing Vert sync). I've never seen it drop below 30 even running bitorrent.

[SEALTeamSix]

Holy thread resurrection, Batman!

It does put things in perspective though... good find.

[Chombo]

My old system specs are very similar to yours. I had a similar problem, I reinstalled my drivers and it seemed to solve the problem for me.

[skadebo]

Wow.....imagine that, swap the words "far cry" out for "crysis" and it is the same thread, just fast forward 3 years :p

And I found the thread via Google because I was looking for the old 64 bit Far Cry patch to run under a 32 bit OS. No forum thread digging here.

That patch was a bitch to find, but it was worth it. Crysis didn't look much better thatn FarCry on my x800, haha.

[TheBluePill]

FarCry.. Wow.. This thread rocks.

[inotocracy]

EDIT: LOL! Thought he was talking about Crysis. God this threads old.

[Domingo]

This is too funny. Oddly enough, I can't recall ever having performance issues with Far Cry. I must've upgraded just prior to its release.
With Doom 3...different story. I don't think I got something that consistently went over 40fps for 2 hardware generations. The might be why games like Prey and Quake 4 still look good.
In terms of Crysis - I can't wait to see what it'll look like in 2009. Considering Far Cry is still amazing looking after all this time, I bet Crysis holds up for a long time, too.
If only more people would use this engine for 2009's games...

[TheRapture]

Yeah... WoW doesn't really push hardware and never will. I run it maxed out at 1680x1050 4X AA and I consistently get 60FPS (in-game limit due to my forcing Vert sync). I've never seen it drop below 30 even running bitorrent.

It did when it first hit the streets.......which is the point of this resurrection:p that every generation of new game engines pushes current hardware past it's capabilities, and people bitch and moan about how badly coded it is, etc., and soon, we are flying at 100's of frames a second with it.....Crysis will be that way too....

[Finn]

This only shows Crytek always released unoptimized code since all other latest titles ran smoothly at that time. :D

Concurrent trends you know..

[Oomps]

It did when it first hit the streets.......which is the point of this resurrection:p that every generation of new game engines pushes current hardware past it's capabilities, and people bitch and moan about how badly coded it is, etc., and soon, we are flying at 100's of frames a second with it.....Crysis will be that way too....

Not really...part of the reason WoW is so popular is that it will run on damned near anything, even back then.

[TheRapture]

Not really...part of the reason WoW is so popular is that it will run on damned near anything, even back then.

You know what....I am thinking of OBLIVION....:D My bad.....I don't play those RPG's so they all seem the same to me :rolleyes:

[The T-man]

you need a 8800 card it will run like butter

[TheRapture]

you need a 8800 card it will run like butter

Who does and why? Did you understand what this thread was about?