Will Crysis hurt 9800GX2 and 3870X2 sales?

X

xp3nd4bl3

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 25, 2004
Messages
2,259
For the majority of us a single 3870 or 8800GT can handle most of the games we play with all the settings maxed out. The only super high-end app that could make a large number of people want to jump onto the multi GPU bandwagon is probably Crysis. The problem is, Crysis scales very poorly with multiple GPUs. The 1.1 patch was supposed to fix that and it didn't. So when the new dual GPU cards come out like the 3870X2 and the 9800GX2, everyone is going to read the review and go straight to the "Crysis Benchmarks" page where they will see sub-amazing performance. The quad GPU performance will be even less impressive. So without significant real-world gains, who's going to jump on the dual GPU card bandwagon? It seems less than compelling at this point.

I can tell you though, if Crysis scaled well with GPUs, I would no doubt go quad SLI with the 9800GX2. I just don't see that happening though, and my rig right now can handle any other game maxed out plus with AA and AF.
 
Well, I know they said with the 3870x2, they system and software sees the card as one card, not a crossfire setup. So hopefully with the new drivers and all that magic they put into it, it will have no effect on the performance [as in negative from crossfire] ?

IMO Crysis is overrated anyways, but thats just me.
 
Crysis will make these video cards it's bitch.

and there probably won't be a large crowd running out to buy these cards all because of one really overhyped video game.
 
doubt that 1 game, 1 crappy game, will hurt video card sales. is it that the coders cant optimize their game (they have had 2 chances now ), or is it the video card manufacturers problem to make their cards play absolutely spectacular with every new game?
 
I think you guys are underestimating the importance of benchmarks in reviews. I think most of us buy graphics cards for the best graphics, and the benchmarks to look for are the ones for the game with the best graphics. That's just my opinion based off my own experience. I could be wrong.
 
so the programmers of one game cant figure out how to get it to run well with sli. how would/should that affect card sales?
 
They'll just see the GX2's as performance cards. Why should it hurt their sales?
 
Crysis will not hurt their sales because it actually didn't sell as well as many think, and it's not a game like TF2 that has potential to keep growing because of it's great multiplayer. Crysis has less than 1,000 people playing it online at any given time, and even if the singleplayer is great, it is a 1 time deal.

Games that are multiplayer-strong tend to have players who get their friends into the game (so they can play together), and I believe that sells more.

Crysis was a necessary step in the evolution of the PC platform, but that doesn't imply it has to be a great seller ;)
 
Well, I certainly wont be buying a new card until it can run Crysis at ultimate levels with good FPS at 1680 X 1050.

Not because I think Crysis is worth spending hundreds on a video card, but because I can currently play every game out there with my 7800 GT, except for Crysis. Not with all settings on high like I used to be able too, but at least on medium and they usually still look pretty damn good. So, once a card comes out that can play Crysis at max settings, I will have a real reason to upgrade.
 
When Crysis is mentioned it’s not cuz it’s a kick a$$ game, it’s the concept of it, people want to make sure they are ready for any game that have similar graphics
I think COD4, Battlefield 2142, CS:S is much better than Crysis (specially my lovely CS:S :D )
btw, is there any heavey graphic games like Crysis around the corner? lets say....the "before 2009" corner?
 
Sr7 said:
Crysis will not hurt their sales because it actually didn't sell as well as many think, and it's not a game like TF2 that has potential to keep growing because of it's great multiplayer. Crysis has less than 1,000 people playing it online at any given time, and even if the singleplayer is great, it is a 1 time deal.

Games that are multiplayer-strong tend to have players who get their friends into the game (so they can play together), and I believe that sells more.

Crysis was a necessary step in the evolution of the PC platform, but that doesn't imply it has to be a great seller ;)
Click to expand...

Thx to BladeVenom for this rather informative link

Haven't the latest drivers and 1.1 patch more or less improved SLI performance to a respectable level?

And, crappy game my ass... (first half anyway)
 
These things make me wonder: how much do people really enjoy Crysis? It seems like it's more to do with the horror that a game exists that people can't play on top settings, most of the time, ignoring whether it's a game that they actually want to play. I'm not saying no-one does (I think it's okay), but I've seen a lot of people critical of the gameplay.
 
crysis sucks anyway IMHO, I payed the game its over and done with, the MP sucks move on.

I dont think the whole graphics universe should hang on a game that looks good but really sucks. Yeah the gfx were impressive but at the end of the day i would play cod4 again and hl2 ep2 again and replay portal and fear series among many others before I wasted my time playing crysis again.

I went SLI when the g92's hit because they are fast as hell and affordable, the benefits can be seen in every game I am concerned with and also with crysis. I get 30 fps with very high config in xp at 1680x1050 with max settings no AA and with SLI i get 50.
 
I think you all are not seeing the big picture here. It isnt about upgrading for crysis or getting the best card to play it. Hate it or love it, Crysis has become the standard or acid test for enthusiasts to measure how well a new card holds up. A dissappointing Crysis benchmark for a new card can make or break the deal for many.
 
I don't think my original question was that stupid. Myself and others have stated that we won't be upgrading our graphics cards until they can play Crysis at the level we think it should be playable at. Bottom line for me is my sytem can handle ANY game but Crysis right now. If Crysis scaled really well with GPUs I would upgrade to quad or Tri-SLI.
 
kadozer said:
I think you all are not seeing the big picture here. It isnt about upgrading for crysis or getting the best card to play it. Hate it or love it, Crysis has become the standard or acid test for enthusiasts to measure how well a new card holds up. A dissappointing Crysis benchmark for a new card can make or break the deal for many.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's what I'm trying to say.
 
You people are insane. Crysis is easily the best FPS (gameplay AND graphic-wise) to have been released since HL2.

I don't get what people hate about it so much, but I'd have to say it's the pseudo non-linear gameplay since they immediately mention how CoD4 is so much better in comparison. I guess corridor shooters still haven't worn out their welcome! Actually, I haven't really heard any constructive criticism from any post on any forum besides the classic "Crysis sux!". But this is another discussion for another board.

But yeap, that's just me. Crysis on Delta difficulty was a joy to play, can't wait for the sequel.
 
xp3nd4bl3 said:
Yes, that's what I'm trying to say.
Click to expand...
I agree with you. If Nvidia and ATI were smart they should hire Caveat and his team to help optimize there next gen of cards just for crysis.From a marketing standpoint this would be a really wise decision.
 
I think it'll be a while before a card comes along to tame Crysis. I remember Doom 3 making hardware it's bitch for a good while...it just takes hardware a bit to catch up. Crysis was enjoyable, but I thought (for example) Oblivion was more engrossing. Then again, I like Stalker (heavily modded, of course) more than both of those games, so what do I know?
 
firas said:
I think COD4, Battlefield 2142, CS:S is much better than Crysis (specially my lovely CS:S :D ?
Click to expand...

Battlefield makes my Cpu and Ram it's bitch big time, Yay for bottlenecking!
I played the Crysis demo for a bit but wasn't really impressed by it game play wise.
 
xp3nd4bl3, I see in your sig SLI GTS 512's. You're not who these cards are aimed at.
They'll still sell many to those running less than the newer G92's.
 
TerranUp16 said:
Thx to BladeVenom for this rather informative link

Haven't the latest drivers and 1.1 patch more or less improved SLI performance to a respectable level?

And, crappy game my ass... (first half anyway)
Click to expand...

That means nothing. If you look at the publicity it's received, and the amount of money Crytek has invested, and the size of the studio (it's a LARGE studio relative to all others), it's not great.

EA shot a bit low on the sales predictions, so the fact that sales are above that doesn't say much.

I never said it was crappy, it just doesn't have the growth power after it's initial release sales surge that a solid multiplayer game would.
 
I'd rather see a game like Crysis come out more often. I dunno about others, but it seemed to me that FarCry stayed under the radar for a long time before people realized how different/revolutionary it was. It combined a lot of great ideas, game play, and story, and the finished product was fantastic. Sure it had some bugs, too much scripting in the AI, w/e, but the game was awesome alone in what it attempted to do and did. I think Crytek delivered again with Crysis. It's shorter, has some bugs, needs some optimization, w/e, give it time. There is nothing out now that looks as good as Crysis does on high, and Crysis on DX10 very high, is just amazing. I think it'll be some time before we see any game that can look that good, it's just amazing (Alan Wake? I dunno). Personally, I'm glad to see a non-consolized game come out that pushes the envelope of what PCs are able to do. I'm glad there's a game that has the ability to use all the muscle thrown at it. That's what drivers the industry forward.

As far as COD4 goes, yah, sweet game, but it's different from Crysis (although at its end they uncannily have the same kind of adrenaline-rushed objective completing gameplay). COD4 has good graphics, but they dont compare to Crysis. The story and gameplay were great, but I still prefer Crysis's more open game play (here's the objective for this portion of the level, figure out how you want to go about it). As far as multiplayer goes, where the hell is co-op? COD4 would have been godlike had it had co-op. I just don't understand why people keep going on and on about multiplayer: it's the same damn thing in every game, run around and shoot the other people, it hasn't changed in over a decade.

Anyway, to answer the question put forward by the OP, only time will tell. The patch definitely helped Crysis out, but how it'll perform with the new cards we won't know until the benchmarks roll out. I'm just wanting to see a company get "hardware" SLI going which can pave the way for future multi-GPU cards.
 
Crysis is a crappy game, so no. I think COD4 is better in just about every way imaginable, and the graphics are nearly just as good. The sales of both games pretty much tell the story. CoD 4 > Crysis
 
RamonGTP said:
Crysis is a crappy game, so no. I think COD4 is better in just about every way imaginable, and the graphics are nearly just as good. The sales of both games pretty much tell the story. CoD 4 > Crysis
Click to expand...

Britney Spears sold a lot of Albums, does not make her any good.
 
Battleneter2 said:
Britney Spears sold a lot of Albums, does not make her any good.
Click to expand...

That is your opinion. The people who bought her albums think she is good. Just like it is my opinion that CoD4 is better. The fact that CoD 4 is selling more than Crysis goes to show that more people are of the opinion that CoD 4 is a better game than Crysis. Most reviews I've read, favor CoD 4 over Crysis as well. I own both, if I could take back my Crysis purchase, I would.
 
RamonGTP said:
That is your opinion. The people who bought her albums think she is good. Just like it is my opinion that CoD4 is better. The fact that CoD 4 is selling more than Crysis goes to show that more people are of the opinion that CoD 4 is a better game than Crysis. Most reviews I've read, favor CoD 4 over Crysis as well. I own both, if I could take back my Crysis purchase, I would.
Click to expand...

Enter the Matrix sold over 1 million copies. Does that mean people think it's a better game than Psychonauts and other critically acclaimed titles that sold under 250k?

Maybe CoD4 is selling better, because, oh I dunno, it's an established franchise and is available on consoles as well? Hell even my non-gamer friends have heard of Call of Duty.
 
one question i have is how do the devolpers run the game maxed out in dx10 and stuff?
 
AceCR42 said:
Enter the Matrix sold over 1 million copies. Does that mean people think it's a better game than Psychonauts and other critically acclaimed titles that sold under 250k?

Maybe CoD4 is selling better, because, oh I dunno, it's an established franchise and is available on consoles as well? Hell even my non-gamer friends have heard of Call of Duty.
Click to expand...

Then compare the same platform to the other. COD4 still wins, and it's not just the sales figures that say so, it's the reviews as well. You're more then entitled to have your opinion, I'm just letting you know that you're in the minority. That is not an opinion, that is a fact. You can keep coming back with all the analogies you want, it will not change the FACT, that more people like COD4 better than Crysis.
 
-=PESTILENCE=- said:
Well, I know they said with the 3870x2, they system and software sees the card as one card, not a crossfire setup.
Click to expand...

Wait, this was confirmed? Link please! If xfire is a hardware bridge, and performance scales right, I'm very interested in this card.
 
RamonGTP said:
Then compare the same platform to the other. COD4 still wins, and it's not just the sales figures that say so, it's the reviews as well. You're more then entitled to have your opinion, I'm just letting you know that you're in the minority. That is not an opinion, that is a fact. You can keep coming back with all the analogies you want, it will not change the FACT, that more people like COD4 better than Crysis.
Click to expand...
"Everyone else agrees with me" is known as argumentum ad populum and is one of the worst defenses dating back to the Romans; use that in a serious discussion and you'll get laughed out of the room.

So you like COD4, that's great, but you missed the entire point of my previous post. We need games that push the genre so that it develops and you don't have the same stuff over and over. To make a point, while fun, COD4 still has your basic run here, do this, shoot that gameplay formula. As I said earlier, I enjoyed Crysis because it allows some free roaming/choose-your-path style and some thinking in the play (more so in the first levels) and I'd like to see more games head in that direction.

Also, graphically, COD4 doesn't touch this:
 
kadozer said:
I think you all are not seeing the big picture here. It isnt about upgrading for crysis or getting the best card to play it. Hate it or love it, Crysis has become the standard or acid test for enthusiasts to measure how well a new card holds up. A dissappointing Crysis benchmark for a new card can make or break the deal for many.
Click to expand...


Crysis is the acid test *because* it brings single-card setups to their knees (not necessarily because the game itself is any good). I seem to remember another game that was the "ne plus ultra" of its day (in demo form, no less). If you went to computer shows, any decent retailer at those shows had the demo running on its demo PCs (either to show off the system or even to show off the monitors). The somewhat hilarious part of that was, when the *retail* game came out, it was universally panned in terms of gameplay (though it still looked drop-dead gorgeous).

The game in question? None other than "Forsaken", still thought of as Acclaim's One-Hit-Wonder for the PC.

The demo of Forsaken (especially in GLide form) was shown off at most computer shows in the mid-Atlantic (and elsewhere) during the late 1990s; even no less than Intel used the demo to help launch their only discrete graphics chipset to date, the Intel740 Starfighter.
Forsaken looked great in 16-bit color on then-populart 3dfx Voodoo (and especially Voodoo II) single or dual-card setups of 1997; it took a whole year (and nVidia's GeForce 3 and ATI's later Original Radeon) for standalone discrete hardware to knock 3dfx from their lofty perch, but when it happened, it happened with a sickening *thud*.
Both nVidia and ATI brought higher color depths (including a shocking 32-bit depth) and ran at speeds no slower than 3dfx ran in 16-bit at the same resolution. The writing on the wall was when nVidia showed an early GeForce 4 Ti4600 running the Forsaken demo at 1280x1024, and in 32-bit color; no 3dfx SLI setup could match either resolution OR color depth due to limitations inherent in GLide and the hardware, despite both types of Voodoo cards being pretty decent Direct3D accelerators also).

Beautiful graphics, but the freedom of movement (shared with Descent) was largely loathed by the reviewing press.

I loved the gorgeous graphics (in fact, I bought the full game, for PC, when it became available) and actually played it, off and on, for two years. (More than I played Descent, actually.)
 
Mr. K6 said:
"Everyone else agrees with me" is known as argumentum ad populum and is one of the worst defenses dating back to the Romans; use that in a serious discussion and you'll get laughed out of the room.

So you like COD4, that's great, but you missed the entire point of my previous post. We need games that push the genre so that it develops and you don't have the same stuff over and over. To make a point, while fun, COD4 still has your basic run here, do this, shoot that gameplay formula. As I said earlier, I enjoyed Crysis because it allows some free roaming/choose-your-path style and some thinking in the play (more so in the first levels) and I'd like to see more games head in that direction.

Also, graphically, COD4 doesn't touch this:
Click to expand...


Ever heard of majority rules? It's certainly a better agument then "Crysis is better becuase I say so" and comparisons to Britney Spears. :rolleyes:

And the chose your path gameplay is nothing new, they already did that with Farcry, so it would have been nice if this time around they put more attention to gameplay. I mean, I really wanted to enjoy the game, heck, I paid money for it and spent an additional $280 to upgrademy video card thinking maybe it was the piss poor performance that killed it for me. I was wrong, the game just sucks.

Obviously, you're a graphics whore, and that's fine. I'm a gamer first and a graphics whore second, so to me, GAMEPLAY > GRAPHICS. Lucikly COD4 gave me both, Crysis gives me one, and the lesser important one at that.

EDIT: I do agree that Crysis is an EXCELLENT benchmark, it's just not a very good game.
 
PGHammer said:
Crysis is the acid test *because* it brings single-card setups to their knees (not necessarily because the game itself is any good).
Click to expand...

Which is pretty much the point I was trying to make... yes? cant tell if you are agreeing/disagreeing....
 
RamonGTP said:
Obviously, you're a graphics whore, and that's fine. I'm a gamer first and a graphics whore second, so to me, GAMEPLAY > GRAPHICS. Lucikly COD4 gave me both, Crysis gives me one, and the lesser important one at that.
Click to expand...

How often does this question need to be asked:

If maximum graphics isn't what you're about, maybe [H] isn't for you...[H] is about being [H]ardcore with your graphics and with your setup, none of this wishy washy "Gameplay is more important" crap :) Let's have a cheer for the bleeding edge!
 
RamonGTP said:
That is your opinion. The people who bought her albums think she is good. Just like it is my opinion that CoD4 is better. The fact that CoD 4 is selling more than Crysis goes to show that more people are of the opinion that CoD 4 is a better game than Crysis. Most reviews I've read, favor CoD 4 over Crysis as well. I own both, if I could take back my Crysis purchase, I would.
Click to expand...

That's not valid, because not everyone buys a game solely based on how much they want it. Sometimes people want a game but know their computer can't run it, so they spend their money elsewhere. So COD4 is not inherently better just because it's sales are higher... it's just close to the average system spec than Crysis is.
 
RamonGTP said:
Ever heard of majority rules? It's certainly a better agument then "Crysis is better becuase I say so" and comparisons to Britney Spears. :rolleyes:

And the chose your path gameplay is nothing new, they already did that with Farcry, so it would have been nice if this time around they put more attention to gameplay. I mean, I really wanted to enjoy the game, heck, I paid money for it and spent an additional $280 to upgrademy video card thinking maybe it was the piss poor performance that killed it for me. I was wrong, the game just sucks.

Obviously, you're a graphics whore, and that's fine. I'm a gamer first and a graphics whore second, so to me, GAMEPLAY > GRAPHICS. Lucikly COD4 gave me both, Crysis gives me one, and the lesser important one at that.

EDIT: I do agree that Crysis is an EXCELLENT benchmark, it's just not a very good game.
Click to expand...
I don't think you understood a single word of my post, and because I and others don't like COD4 as much as you, you result to name calling; real mature, this is why I tend to stay out of "discussions." I never said any game was "better" than the other, I said I prefer Crysis, read what I write not what you want to think; and Britney Spears was the other guy. Obviously we have very different ideas of what game play is, but for some reason you can't hold a decent conversation so I'm not going to waste my effort.
 
I'm not calling anyone names... A graphics whore is simply someone who values graphics above gameplay. I've said in previous post that you are entitled to your opinion, I have no problem with that nor am I trying to get any of you to change yoru mind. I simply let you know that it is you, not me that is in the minority. It's you guys having a hard time accepting that and combing back with Britney Spears, Matrix Revolutions, and Graphics arguments. That's fine and dandy, but guess what, you're still in the minority on this.

I think the Chargers will beat the Colts tomorrow, and guess what, I'm in the minority on that, and I'm fine with it. I'm not going to go try and dig up other instances where the underdog won or show you pictures that the Chargers have better looking cheerleaders to try and defend my position. I recognize that it is my opinion and most people don't share it, and that is fine with me.
 
RamonGTP said:
I'm not calling anyone names... A graphics whore is simply someone who values graphics above gameplay. I've said in previous post that you are entitled to your opinion, I have no problem with that nor am I trying to get any of you to change yoru mind. I simply let you know that it is you, not me that is in the minority. It's you guys having a hard time accepting that and combing back with Britney Spears, Matrix Revolutions, and Graphics arguments. That's fine and dandy, but guess what, you're still in the minority on this.

I think the Chargers will beat the Colts tomorrow, and guess what, I'm in the minority on that, and I'm fine with it. I'm not going to go try and dig up other instances where the underdog won or show you pictures that the Chargers have better looking cheerleaders to try and defend my position. I recognize that it is my opinion and most people don't share it, and that is fine with me.
Click to expand...
What exactly do you believe I am in the minority on? That I prefer Crysis over COD4? Could be, I like an immersive experience over running and gunning, but that's my opinion and others will differ. I just don't understand your steadfastness on being in the majority (based on sales of games?). My point was that Crysis is a necessary step in the evolution of gaming as it pushes developers further with what they can do, game sales has little to do with that (just because Crysis doesn't sell as well doesn't mean devs are going to drop their games and all go for COD's run and gun formula).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top