Crysis patch 'full update' today...?

Speaking of nVidia and ATi's guilt in this, isn't SLI support a driver-level feature?

Anyway, I have no problem with the Very High settings as they are now- I actually prefer them. Most games don't scale too well graphically after release- the hardware of the time can handle it but future hardware can't do anything more to it except pile on increasing levels of AA (which, hey, is great, but...). With Crysis, your average user won't be able to hit those higher graphical settings- but the settings they're playing at are still consistent with the times- they look good. And when you get your new graphics card two years from now, Crysis's graphics will once again be consistent with modern graphics. The fault there rests not with Crysis but with idiots who can't think. The same people that go- well, Call of Duty 4 has better gfx than Crysis because I can actually run it on Max! Well, you know what? Even with the texture quality in CoD 4 set to "Extra" and 16xAF, I still often question whether or not I have the texture settings maxxed-out- and that's a question I don't ask when playing Crysis "only" on "High".

Of course, Crytek also pitched the Very High graphics vigorously. Had they concentrated on showing-off the Medium and High gfx, the gfx your average gaming PC would be more-likely to be able to handle, and then just basically pitched the Very High graphics as the future of gaming and something the average user can look forward to a little bit down the road (which they did a little bit towards the end), the reception probably would have been a lot better. But, sites like Gamespy, giving CoD 4 the award for best gfx and Crysis runner-up, do not help either. Sad thing about CoD 4 is that had they implemented some higher resolution textures for the PC version (I sincerely hope that the textures in there already are not higher resolution than the console textures), its receiving such an award would have been more reasonable. But as it stands now...
 
rabident said:
I don't think the performance problems are entirely Crytek's fault. The game has been in development for years, and if ATI & Nvidia had maintained their development pace we would have had the 9800GTX in time for Crysis.

I question some of the trade offs they made in their predefined graphic quality levels. The game can look great and run well on an oc'd e6600/gtx, but you have to edit the config files. I also question the names they used. In the US we don't have small, medium, and large anymore. We still sell the same sizes, but they're called large, jumbo, and super size. Nobody wants their new computer to run on Low or even Medium... even if the graphics in Crysis low beat Unreal in high... it doesn't matter... it's all in the name.

They probably should have clipped the graphic options so the highest settings were still playable on current hardware and renamed the options to something more palatable, like Normal, High, and Very High. I like that they gave us the option for Very High because it's still usable with some trade offs, but it would have saved them some grief. It's not that Crysis doesn't run well on current hardware, it just doesn't run well with all the options on.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I'm sure Crysis would've been better "received" if the did this, like leaving out the Very High option and maybe releasing it as a patch (lol) and adding DX10 to High. Maybe if they removed the built-in FPS counter, too,lol.

~Ibrahim~
 
ikjadoon said:
Exactly. I'm sure Crysis would've been better "received" if the did this, like leaving out the Very High option and maybe releasing it as a patch (lol) and adding DX10 to High. Maybe if they removed the built-in FPS counter, too,lol.

~Ibrahim~
Click to expand...

In actuality, Crysis actually runs pretty well at 25fps- it's amazing really. Not checking the frame count would undoubtedly improve your experience ;) But I still really do not think that simply removing "Very High" would be the answer the Crysis' "woes". People are more infuriated that they cannot reach the High setting than they are that they can't reach Very High (for example, it seems that the 8800GTS 320mb has a tough time reaching High- interesting b/c I have gotten it roughly stable at ~25fps for the first six missions on High w/my 8800GTS 640mb at 1600x1200 and 16xAF- granted, it's factory OCed).
 
Same here. I can scrap over 20FPS, but there some dips that are just not worth it. Slightly off topic, but how much of an FPS drop do you experience running 16xAF?

~Ibrahim~
 
Can't quite tell because I had it disabled while playing the demo b/c of the bug with it, but have had it enabled since I got the retail version of the game- probably due to some optimizations in that, 16xAF is still giving me the same framerates (whereas in the demo it would drop me about 5fps- which was probably more b/c of the bug than the toll AF really takes).
 
TommyTwix07 said:
Umm who hasn't already finished the game? Oh well i guess there is multilayer action....
Click to expand...

I think I've mentioned this already, but I have played the first mission 9 times now ;) The first six missions basically have infinite replay value.
 
TerranUp16 said:
Can't quite tell because I had it disabled while playing the demo b/c of the bug with it, but have had it enabled since I got the retail version of the game- probably due to some optimizations in that, 16xAF is still giving me the same framerates (whereas in the demo it would drop me about 5fps- which was probably more b/c of the bug than the toll AF really takes).
Click to expand...

That's it. Thanks! :D

~Ibrahim~
 
TerranUp16 said:
B/c Crysis has some of the best freeform, tactical FPS gameplay around, and I doubt there is anyone here who would not love to be able to play Crysis on Very High settings (regardless of whether or not you like the game), and with the increased SLI support and increased performance of this patch, that should be doable for many such as myself.
Click to expand...



COD4 has the best tactical FPS gameplay. Other than the sun reflecting off the water and the explosion effects, COD4 wins on everything else IMO. Crysis is so one track compared to COD4's creative intense action.
 
CoD 4 isn't really very tactical (we're comparing singleplayer to singleplayer I presume)- the most tactical part of the whole game is the end of "All Ghillied Up" where you need to devise your defense against hordes of enemies. However, with Crysis (first six missions), every mission is insanely tactical- you have the complete freedom to plan and assess all of your approaches with true tactics. I certainly cannot say that I have used a vastly different set of tactics nine times for any single CoD 4 mission- but I can certainly say that about Crysis and I can certainly say that number will ultimately grow greater than nine.
 
DizzYGuY said:
COD4 has the best tactical FPS gameplay. Other than the sun reflecting off the water and the explosion effects, COD4 wins on everything else IMO. Crysis is so one track compared to COD4's creative intense action.
Click to expand...

CoD4 is not tactical. You just shoot boatloads of Russians and Arabs in every single goddamn mission. Rainbow 6 games are tactical, SOCOM is tactical. CoD4 is nothing but a glorified boomfest that happens to run really well for all it's graphical prettiness.

I had no major issues with framerates on my system, a Q6600 @ 3.0GHz, 2GB of RAM and an 8800GT, until the ending. This was running with all the tweaks to get very high-like graphics in DX9 at 1280x1024. I got 30+ most of the time, even in the icy areas, and only had significant drops during the aircraft carrier missions and the final boss fight (dropped into the mid 20s during the low gravity sequence, still playable). During those, I dropped into the teens and single digits the whole time.

The biggest problem with these video settings is that while they look good in terms of textures and HDR and post-processing, they lack the sharpness and realism that can be achieved at higher resolutions and using real AA. I'm running on a 22" CRT, so this resolution results in relatively large pixels and significant flickering of leaves, fences, basically anything thin at long view distances. This does not disappear until running with at least some real AA at 1600x1200 on this monitor, but that cannot be done in Crysis while still achieving playable framerates at high settings. And for me, these are the most annoying graphical anomalies of all. Jaggies are terrible on large monitors at low resolutions in Crysis, even with r_useedgeAA 2 active. It helps a little bit with the foliage, but nothing beats true antialiasing.
 
I'm just bitter I wasted $50 on Crysis. I looked at the game requirements on the box before buying, and it said something along the lines of a 3Ghz P4 or better, 1GB ram, and 6800GT graphics. Honestly, I don't think it would even run on a system w/ that configuration. My system isn't super great, but it's not THAT bad either, and yet, to get this game to play at a decent framerate, I had to turn everything to low and run it at 1280x800 res. With those settings, the game looks worse than anything from 5 yrs ago.. AND plays slower to boot. With those type of graphics, I was expecting well over 100fps.

I just started playing COD4... and Wow.. That game looks and plays VERY nice. I am playing it at the same 1280x800 res w/ everything maxed out, and it still runs VERY smooth.

Anyways, I doubt I'll play Crysis again ($50 for 1 hr of playtime... most of it spent tweaking the config). I definitely won't be buying anything from Crytek again.
 
Kelter said:
I'm just bitter I wasted $50 on Crysis. I looked at the game requirements on the box before buying, and it said something along the lines of a 3Ghz P4 or better, 1GB ram, and 6800GT graphics. Honestly, I don't think it would even run on a system w/ that configuration. My system isn't super great, but it's not THAT bad either, and yet, to get this game to play at a decent framerate, I had to turn everything to low and run it at 1280x800 res. With those settings, the game looks worse than anything from 5 yrs ago.. AND plays slower to boot. With those type of graphics, I was expecting well over 100fps.

I just started playing COD4... and Wow.. That game looks and plays VERY nice. I am playing it at the same 1280x800 res w/ everything maxed out, and it still runs VERY smooth.

Anyways, I doubt I'll play Crysis again ($50 for 1 hr of playtime... most of it spent tweaking the config). I definitely won't be buying anything from Crytek again.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing you've checked the drivers and whatnot, but meh, that is weird. As I've stated previously (or maybe in a different thread), I have a friend who's using my old 6800 Ultra and is able to get the game to play at 1024x768 on Medium with a very playable framerate.

And, you did dl and play the demo before you bought the game, right? That's part of the reason they release PC demos...
 
TerranUp16 said:
I'm guessing you've checked the drivers and whatnot, but meh, that is weird. As I've stated previously (or maybe in a different thread), I have a friend who's using my old 6800 Ultra and is able to get the game to play at 1024x768 on Medium with a very playable framerate.

And, you did dl and play the demo before you bought the game, right? That's part of the reason they release PC demos...
Click to expand...

Lol.. I actually did download the demo, but I never got around to installing it. Then the game was out in stores, so I figured I may as well just pick it up. I didn't think that any game would be released in such an aweful state.. well.. aside from I think Ultima 9 back in the day?

I can run the game on medium settings, but it chokes in large gun fights, so I have to go down to low so that it stays smooth throughout. I guess I'm kind of a stickler for framerate. Anything less than 30 fps just seems choppy to me. Even when I initially got Doom 3, I ran it at around 30-40fps, and it was ok, but now I can run it at closer to 90fps, and it is so much more enjoyable.

I don't think I'll see Crysis at 2560x1600 w/ high settings and 90 fps for at least another 2 years unless I go w/ something like Quad SLI 9800Ultras.
 
Wally said:
Not to mention that the patches aren't even needed. They fix some superficial and rare issues such as a lean glitch, and add a map.
Click to expand...

Sorry to burst your bubble, but Crysis is a much more technologically complex game than CoD4...
 
DizzYGuY said:
COD4 has the best tactical FPS gameplay. Other than the sun reflecting off the water and the explosion effects, COD4 wins on everything else IMO. Crysis is so one track compared to COD4's creative intense action.
Click to expand...
People like you are the reason we get so many damn sequels and simplified games.

If you think any CoD game's single player mode was tactical, you don't know what tactical means or you simply haven't played enough other FPS games to form a better opinion.

A game where your whole team waits for you to move up in order for them to do anything and in order for enemies to start spawning somewhere else is not tactical. Enemies spawn in the same damn places, each level plays out the same everytime, the same enemies attack the same way everytime you play, etc. There are no tactics involved apart from "go to point A, shoot everyone then go to point B while shooting everyone". When you have no freedom of choice, when you're following specific paths that you can't leave, etc. it's not a tactical shooter...it's a linear mainstream shooter that's aimed at more casual players and made in such a way that anyone can pass the game without any real problems.

Games with open worlds and different ways to approach situations can be tactical...games where you plan how you wanna attack a base, tell your team what to do, etc. and don't just do what the voice on the radio tell you to...those games can be tactical, non-linear and can play out very differently for different people. (like parts of Far Cry, Crysis, older Rainbow Six games, Hidden and Dangerous, etc.) Yeah I'm sure when you're riding in the back of a tank/suv/helicoper in CoD like in an amusement park ride and simply aim your machinegun at random enemies it makes it a very tactical and complex game.

I can't believe you actually think Crysis is "one track" compared to CoD4...when in Crysis you have huge open levels (most of the time), vehicles, customizable weapons, suit powers, lots of physics to interact with, plenty of ways to attack, sneak around, grab people, steal boats, cars, tanks, swim around areas, etc. and CoD4 you follow a pre-determined path and just kill endless hordes of enemies until you get to point A so they stop respawning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top