Crysis 10 years later

P

polonyc2

Fully [H]
2FA
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
30,588
as a performance analysis with 2017 hardware it continues to punish even modern GPUs

Today marks the 10-year anniversary of the release of Crysis, one of the most demanding games ever to grace a computer screen...even after all these years, Crysis can still punish high-end PC hardware...what made the game so difficult to run?...it was a confluence of many factors, combined with a desire by developer Crytek to push the limits of software and hardware...back in 2007, no system could possibly run the game smoothly at maximum settings—and that would be true for years...

http://www.pcgamer.com/10-years-later-we-can-finally-run-crysis/

For Crysis' 10th anniversary, we tested all of the flagship AMD and Nvidia GPUs released over the last decade at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K...

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crysis-10-year-anniversary-benchmarks,5329.html
 
i remember playing the mp beta. and getting that gun that would freeze people, then shooting them while frozen and they crumble. so much fun while getting 15 fps.
 
Last section of game sucked, everything before that was pure awesome!

I might have to revisit this game in 4K, at least the good parts.
 
And 10 y later we can still see that Crysis was the poorest design game ever.

the article also points out that value and performance was not always a one sided issue in the GPU market, going green or red was a choice back in day, unlike 4k gaming today, where 1080ti reigns alone.
 
geok1ng said:
And 10 y later we can still see that Crysis was the poorest design game ever.

the article also points out that value and performance was not always a one sided issue in the GPU market, going green or red was a choice back in day, unlike 4k gaming today, where 1080ti reigns alone.
Click to expand...

Well, a lot of people aren't considering the sheer polygon increase over time when going from 1080P to 4K. Just because monitors can display it doesn't mean GPUs of today can render at those resolutions. If 8K monitors standard we'd all be saying "gah look how 1080Ti sucks it can t even offer playable frame rates at 8K"
 
polonyc2 said:
as a performance analysis with 2017 hardware it continues to punish even modern GPUs

Today marks the 10-year anniversary of the release of Crysis, one of the most demanding games ever to grace a computer screen...even after all these years, Crysis can still punish high-end PC hardware...what made the game so difficult to run?...it was a confluence of many factors, combined with a desire by developer Crytek to push the limits of software and hardware...back in 2007, no system could possibly run the game smoothly at maximum settings—and that would be true for years...

http://www.pcgamer.com/10-years-later-we-can-finally-run-crysis/

For Crysis' 10th anniversary, we tested all of the flagship AMD and Nvidia GPUs released over the last decade at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K...

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crysis-10-year-anniversary-benchmarks,5329.html
Click to expand...
I don't know. My PC managed it pretty well back in the day with almost everything turned up at 1600x1200. I got 50-70 FPS with almost everything on Very High in DX10. A couple of things were turned down to High to smooth things out. I had a Core 2 QX6700 overclocked to 2.93 GHz and 8800GTX SLI.
 
Crysis had a lot of issues. I don't think the game "demands" a lot of the hardware as much as it is just poor coding. With the 64 bit build there is DX10 bug where you are locked at 30FPS and you have to exit full screen to fix... or something like that. I just did a run through of Crysis 6 months back and delt with it the whole time.
 
Armenius said:
The best money could buy at the time.
Click to expand...
Yep. Minus the Ultra *shrugs*

I had a 7800GTX at the time which handled all my other games well. Installed Crysis in hopes of playing medium-high settings at 1280x1024. Wasn't happening. I think it was below 20FPS. I upgraded to 7800GTX SLI (in hindsight I should have went with the 512MB version)because I got a deal on a 2nd card. Helped out a lot. Still couldn't run the game even on "high settings over 30FPS. It wasn't until I moved to a 4890 that I was able to enjoy the game on Very High settings. Which I see they left off the HD 4890 and GTX 285 which were the true halo single GPUs of that generation.
 
Last edited:
Gabe3 said:
i remember playing the mp beta. and getting that gun that would freeze people, then shooting them while frozen and they crumble. so much fun while getting 15 fps.
Click to expand...


Hell yeah Duke Nukem was awesome. Oh wait diff game. :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gabe3
like this
I don't remember what settings I played Crysis on...it definitely wasn't on Ultra...all I remember was that I played the entire game and it looked gorgeous...even less then max settings and the game still looked amazing back in the day...all the people complaining back then about how Crytek made the game too much of a hardware killer, I hope you're happy now...the game was meant for hardware that didn't exist at the time...now we can't have games like that any more
 
FlawleZ said:
Yep. Minus the Ultra *shrugs*

I had a 7800GTX at the time which handled all my other games well. Installed Crysis in hopes of playing medium-high settings at 1280x1024. Wasn't happening. I think it was below 20FPS. I upgraded to 7800GTX SLI (in hindsight I should have went with the 512MB version)because I got a deal on a 2nd card. Helped out a lot. Still couldn't run the game even on "high settings over 30FPS. It wasn't until I moved to a 4890 that I was able to enjoy the game on Very High settings. Which I see they left off the HD 4890 and GTX 285 which were the true halo single GPUs of that generation.
Click to expand...
The Ultra came out a couple months after I built that PC ;).
 
socK said:
Yeah let's not get ahead of ourselves now
Click to expand...

yeah that's some revisionist history...for years people were ragging on the single player story (especially once the aliens hit)...now 10 years later those same people are calling it the best single player story :D
 
polonyc2 said:
yeah that's some revisionist history...for years people were ragging on the single player story (especially once the aliens hit)...now 10 years later those same people are calling it the best single player story :D
Click to expand...
Story and gameplay both took a nosedive once you started into the alien section. Prior to that it was amazing the different routes one could take, boat, swim underwater, finding caves/tunnel/sewers to bypass and sneak up on the enemy. The destructible environment was by far the best and still is on top, destroying whole villages, outpost was sheer joy. Story was good until it became a scripted game towards the end to finish up the story line. None of the other Crysis's had the destructible environments, the larger variations one can do to accomplish the objectives. Concentrating on the console almost killed or actually killed the series. Crytek now are a shell of their former self - too bad for us.
 
AthlonXP said:
What is sad that this game 10 years later is still one of the best single player storylines out there.
Click to expand...

What? Crysis' story is utterly generic and does absolutely nothing special or really all that well. It has some hooks, but it never capitalizing on those and ultimately the story simply exists. It's not even remotely one of the top fps stories of the past decade, much less one of the best sp stories in general. The story barely manages to stay above crap level.
 
tunatime said:
I feel old now thanks:(
Click to expand...
Indeed. This means next year will be the 10th anniversary of my graduation from university :eek:.
Derangel said:
What? Crysis' story is utterly generic and does absolutely nothing special or really all that well. It has some hooks, but it never capitalizing on those and ultimately the story simply exists. It's not even remotely one of the top fps stories of the past decade, much less one of the best sp stories in general. The story barely manages to stay above crap level.
Click to expand...
I always liked it more than any of the other FPS games out around that time. Yes, even Bioshock. I feel that Bioshock is one of the most generic stories out there, and the gameplay is a snoozefest. But, muh plasmids!

Shocking that people can have differing opinions, I know.
 
  • Like
Reactions: M76
like this
Derangel said:
What? Crysis' story is utterly generic and does absolutely nothing special or really all that well. It has some hooks, but it never capitalizing on those and ultimately the story simply exists. It's not even remotely one of the top fps stories of the past decade, much less one of the best sp stories in general. The story barely manages to stay above crap level.
Click to expand...
The story is generic, but gameplay wise it is one of (if not the) best fps games to date. Warhead is slightly more generic, but still much better than Crysis2 and 3 in gamplay quality.
 
Armenius said:
Indeed. This means next year will be the 10th anniversary of my graduation from university :eek:.

I always liked it more than any of the other FPS games out around that time. Yes, even Bioshock. I feel that Bioshock is one of the most generic stories out there, and the gameplay is a snoozefest. But, muh plasmids!

Shocking that people can have differing opinions, I know.
Click to expand...
Don't get me started on Bioshock, it's one of the most overhyped overrated games out there. It re-hashes ideas from system shock, and puts it into a different environment, while removing most of the rpg elements. It's not a bad game, maybe a 6 or 7 on a good day, but nothing to be raving about for years.
 
Armenius said:
Indeed. This means next year will be the 10th anniversary of my graduation from university :eek:.

I always liked it more than any of the other FPS games out around that time. Yes, even Bioshock. I feel that Bioshock is one of the most generic stories out there, and the gameplay is a snoozefest. But, muh plasmids!

Shocking that people can have differing opinions, I know.
Click to expand...
You thinking about far cry? I can’t remember the story for crysis. Koreans and then Aliens and then I quit. Maybe I quit too soon cause I didn’t make it far into the Alien portion.

A great story on a FPS game, in my opinion, has one single reigning champ. Wolfenstein New Order.

Utterly Fantastic!

I just finished old blood and new colossus in the last month. Both sadly pale to New Order IMO.
 
Archaea said:
You thinking about far cry? I can’t remember the story for crysis. Koreans and then Aliens and then I quit. Maybe I quit too soon cause I didn’t make it far into the Alien portion.

A great story on a FPS game, in my opinion, has one single reigning champ. Wolfenstein New Order.

Utterly Fantastic!

I just finished old blood and new colossus in the last month. Both sadly pale to New Order IMO.
Click to expand...
Far Cry came out in 2004, and I never finished it. I nope'd out when the mutants appeared. The game was pretty tight up to that point, though. The first true DX9 game and it was beautiful, and movement and gunplay was spot on.
 
Archaea said:
You thinking about far cry? I can’t remember the story for crysis. Koreans and then Aliens and then I quit. Maybe I quit too soon cause I didn’t make it far into the Alien portion.
.
Click to expand...
Well to me the good part of the game ended when the alien part began. I hated those levels. But the story for crysis is not the driving force it's just set decoration. In other games it's the other way around. The story is the driving force and gameplay is just a chore you get trough to get more of the story.
 
Armenius said:
I always liked it more than any of the other FPS games out around that time. Yes, even Bioshock. I feel that Bioshock is one of the most generic stories out there, and the gameplay is a snoozefest. But, muh plasmids!

Shocking that people can have differing opinions, I know.
Click to expand...

M76 said:
Don't get me started on Bioshock, it's one of the most overhyped overrated games out there. It re-hashes ideas from system shock, and puts it into a different environment, while removing most of the rpg elements. It's not a bad game, maybe a 6 or 7 on a good day, but nothing to be raving about for years.
Click to expand...

Bioshock to me is one of the best examples of story driven gameplay...now would you kindly replay Bioshock :D
 
M76 said:
Well to me the good part of the game ended when the alien part began. I hated those levels. But the story for crysis is not the driving force it's just set decoration. In other games it's the other way around. The story is the driving force and gameplay is just a chore you get trough to get more of the story.
Click to expand...
After escaping the alien ship the gameplay picks back up again. It was such a slog trying to escape the ship because you could never keep track of where you had to go next, and the enemy was the varying gravity.
polonyc2 said:
Bioshock to me is one of the best examples of story driven gameplay...now would you kindly replay Bioshock :D
Click to expand...
Why? Because you had a guy narrate to you constantly over the radio?
 
Armenius said:
Why? Because you had a guy narrate to you constantly over the radio?
Click to expand...

the overall story of Rapture, it's rise, it's downfall, Andrew Ryan etc...all told through audio diaries mixed with solid gameplay made it an all time great...the Fort Frolic level to this day remains one of my all time favorite levels
 
polonyc2 said:
Bioshock to me is one of the best examples of story driven gameplay...now would you kindly replay Bioshock :D
Click to expand...
That twist only feels novel if you haven't played SSII, unfortunately for Bioshock I did. They pulled the exact same shit there, only there it felt better because they didn't drag the reveal out till the very end.

In fact that can be said about the entire game. It's a dumbed down SSII, where they replaced space with water.
 
M76 said:
That twist only feels novel if you haven't played SSII, unfortunately for Bioshock I did. They pulled the exact same shit there, only there it felt better because they didn't drag the reveal out till the very end.
Click to expand...

it's not just about the twist...the entire game was interesting...Rapture was a beautiful place to explore and was filled with stories...combine that with excellent sound and graphics and everything just clicked...
 
polonyc2 said:
it's not just about the twist...the entire game was interesting...Rapture was a beautiful place to explore and was filled with stories...combine that with excellent sound and graphics and everything just clicked...
Click to expand...
I’m not into the horror game genre, but I agree that Rapture was a very intersting game world to explore.
 
polonyc2 said:
it's not just about the twist...the entire game was interesting...Rapture was a beautiful place to explore and was filled with stories...combine that with excellent sound and graphics and everything just clicked...
Click to expand...
It didn't for me. I was repulsed by it, not interested in it. Like Fable, or Dishonored. Those games just feel wrong to me as well. It's definitely not my style. And then they doubled down on it with Infinite, where again they sacrificed the entire story for one big twist ending. I think that's not worth it. Making the entire storytelling vague that you don't reveal anything that could hint at the ending. I hate that style.
 
I still remember trying the demo of Crysis on my PC at the time that had an ATI Radeon X800 XT Platinum Edition. I had to play it on 1024*768 with everything on medium for it to be playable and it was barely playable at that. As for the game itself, it's fun in the very beginning but after a few hours in the game becomes a little too open ended which creates some awkward and cheap moments. I also notice AI glitches where the enemies can shoot you through objects that they shouldn't be able to. I prefer Crysis: Warhead since it still retains the strengths of the original but refines the overall game design. It's a case of a game becoming more linear being a good thing. When I first got my GTX 1080 I tried Crysis: Warhead and it didn't seem to run any better than it did on my 980Ti at 2560*1440 maxed out. It's very playable but the frame rate is all over place going from really high to dipping well below 60fps at certain points. I didn't try the original Crysis so it might get different results but the first CryEngine doesn't seem optimized well for newer hardware. I read somewhere that it's more CPU limited these days.
 
GameLifter said:
I prefer Crysis: Warhead since it still retains the strengths of the original but refines the overall game design. It's a case of a game becoming more linear being a good thing. When I first got my GTX 1080 I tried Crysis: Warhead and it didn't seem to run any better than it did on my 980Ti at 2560*1440 maxed out. It's very playable but the frame rate is all over place going from really high to dipping well below 60fps at certain points. I didn't try the original Crysis so it might get different results but the first CryEngine doesn't seem optimized well for newer hardware. I read somewhere that it's more CPU limited these days.
Click to expand...

Warhead was great...I remember that the game had an activation limit which required a special tool to revoke if you ever needed to uninstall the game (or install on another machine)...if you didn't use the tool 1 of your activations was gone
 
polonyc2 said:
Warhead was great...I remember that the game had an activation limit which required a special tool to revoke if you ever needed to uninstall the game (or install on another machine)...if you didn't use the tool 1 of your activations was gone
Click to expand...

I remember the activation limit as well and having to use the tool to re-install it. It was lame but I've since re-bought it on Steam when it was super cheap so I don't have to dig out my old disc to play it.
 
Crysis was the last game I ever bought from EA, Ha! 10 Years ago wow, that's crazy!!
 
M76 said:
That twist only feels novel if you haven't played SSII, unfortunately for Bioshock I did. They pulled the exact same shit there, only there it felt better because they didn't drag the reveal out till the very end.

In fact that can be said about the entire game. It's a dumbed down SSII, where they replaced space with water.
Click to expand...

I played both SS. Even have my fingers crossed on a 3rd game being great.

I still love BioShock.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top