![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
Crytek Abandons Crysis
- Thread starter TwistedMetalGear
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2004
- Messages
- 32,950
Oh yeah... 1+ million copies sucks man.... pass that stick... ohhh yeahhhh...
dark_reign
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2005
- Messages
- 2,314
First of all, 1280x1024 is fine if that's your monitor's native screen resolution. This isn't acceptable for people running 20"+ LCD monitors unless you like it blurry and possibly stretched unless you can get aspect scaling to work.
Nobody was expecting the game to run at 60fps at max settings at 1920x1200 except for in an SLI config. 30-40 fps would have been more reasonable. But it was more like 15 fps, which made the game unplayable unless you dropped everything down to medium. I had to settle for High to Medium with no AA at 1680x1050 to get more consistent and smooth frame rates. But the ship level near the end was really choppy as well some other areas when there were a lot of aliens. It wasn't unplayable but it broke the immersion.
TwistedMetalGear
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2005
- Messages
- 2,471
I had one hell of a time getting through the final boss battle, I encountered more bugs than you could imagine:
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1285357
This is exclusive to Crysis how? Tweaking settings/resolution to get performance improvement is hardly new to PC gaming.
When a game comes out that pushes the envelope for graphic fidelity, is it really surprising that its necessary to tone down the settings a bit to get better performance?
This is what I find so funny about the PC forum.
First, most of you go off about how PC gaming is all about high end graphics. "Why would I ever want to play a console game, low res, bad textures, PC gaming is where it's at". Then turn around to say that "I enjoyed the game on medium settings" or "Game runs with bad frame rate, but was still fun".
Maybe since I dont consider myself an avid PC gamer anymore, I guess I'm the only one thats not blind to how rediculous some of these statements are.
Yes I got it, but $600 isn't going to do shit with gas soon to be averaged at $4 a gal with no end in sight.
Last I checked, a 40G PS3 was $399 and an 80G was $499. Sony has a deal with one of their credit cards, where if you sign up, free $100 bucks. Some people say they got their PS3 for $299.
I got my PS3 in Dec 06'. $599 + my extra controllers. This year will put my PS3 at the age of 2. No more money spent on it other than games. I get my games off craigslist, so the price of the games is ridiculously cheap, or I rent them for $5 a pop. Looking at 2009 to be another fun year of gaming that I dont plan on investing any more money at my PS3 ... other than just getting more games. I cannot say the same with my aging PC.
As for your comment about the PS2. That's laughable at best. I got a PS2 slim for $100 bucks!!! That has lasted me almost 3 years now, still works if I need it... still plays normal DVDS'... for $100 bucks. (and travels with me very easily)
This all coming from someone who grew up playing Doom, Duke Nukem, Quake, Half-Life, Unreal, all the way up till DX10. Now I see how much money I've wasted on PC gaming.
First, most of you go off about how PC gaming is all about high end graphics. "Why would I ever want to play a console game, low res, bad textures, PC gaming is where it's at". Then turn around to say that "I enjoyed the game on medium settings" or "Game runs with bad frame rate, but was still fun".
Maybe since I dont consider myself an avid PC gamer anymore, I guess I'm the only one thats not blind to how rediculous some of these statements are.
Yes I got it, but $600 isn't going to do shit with gas soon to be averaged at $4 a gal with no end in sight.
Yeah.. when the ORIGINAL Call of duty, C&C Generals, and Max Payne 2 were the pinacle of graphics power. PS2 was still king of the hill back then ($200 for that).. factor in that if you want a top of the line system now, a PS3 with an extra controller cost what... $600? You are coming close to that grand that you dropped for your top end system back in the day.. Pc Gaming ftl? lol.
On top of that, your system can probably still play just about any game out there besides crysis. Crysis is a cluster of fail as far as rendering and making it playable for the average user. Try popping in some of those blue ray games into your ps2 and lets see what happens.. nothing.
Last I checked, a 40G PS3 was $399 and an 80G was $499. Sony has a deal with one of their credit cards, where if you sign up, free $100 bucks. Some people say they got their PS3 for $299.
I got my PS3 in Dec 06'. $599 + my extra controllers. This year will put my PS3 at the age of 2. No more money spent on it other than games. I get my games off craigslist, so the price of the games is ridiculously cheap, or I rent them for $5 a pop. Looking at 2009 to be another fun year of gaming that I dont plan on investing any more money at my PS3 ... other than just getting more games. I cannot say the same with my aging PC.
As for your comment about the PS2. That's laughable at best. I got a PS2 slim for $100 bucks!!! That has lasted me almost 3 years now, still works if I need it... still plays normal DVDS'... for $100 bucks. (and travels with me very easily)
This all coming from someone who grew up playing Doom, Duke Nukem, Quake, Half-Life, Unreal, all the way up till DX10. Now I see how much money I've wasted on PC gaming.
There are alot of people who buy a top end video card and make it last 3years or more. People who got a 8800GTS/X/Ultra are going on 1 1/2 years and they don't have to buy a GTX260/280 when they come out. The 8800's are still going very strong and some will get 4 or more years out of them, others will keep the 8800 much longer then that even.
The video card is where the bulk of a PC build money is spent. If you buy a high end video card your PC can go a loong time with out needing an upgrade.
If done right the PC does not have to cost a ton of money to game with.
The video card is where the bulk of a PC build money is spent. If you buy a high end video card your PC can go a loong time with out needing an upgrade.
If done right the PC does not have to cost a ton of money to game with.
3 years or more? You PC advocates stomp around like graphics mean everything, which is one of the reasons you dont game on console. Yet you settle for low/medium graphic settings to make your card last 3 years?
Here's a few examples in just this thread alone where 8800's are already feeling the hurt... soon they will be like all other cards, outdated and you must upgrade to see anything the way its supposed to be seen.
I was trying to be sarcastic, sadly it doesn't convey well online. I was hoping the "" would help.
My old computer can still play new games such as Crysis. Its just on low/medium settings.
__________________
The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed.
Intel C2D E6550 G0 @3.0ghz...........AMD 64 3200+
Arctic Cooling Freezer Pro 7.............Stock HSF
Gigabyte P31-DS3L.........................Gigabyte K8NS Pro
Evga 8800GTS 512..........................Evga 7800GS
A-Data 4GB DDR2 800.....................1GB DDR 400
Audigy 2 ZS.....................................Mobo sound
80GB HDD.......................................200GB HDD
Thermaltake PurePower 430W...........Logisys 330W
On the other hand, I have my PS3 sitting right here, where the game graphics and performance only improve with time, as game developers learn to optimize code. Next year, the games coming out will look better than the games that came out this year at no added costs to me.
By the time PC gaming actually gets around to looking 10 fold what consoles graphics look like, expect another console to hit the market. I've been in this debate many times before, and if you want to pin-point costs, I will show you every time that in the end, console is the cheapest way to game.
Wow, so much wrong in this post its amazing. First of all, why are you even in this thread, you should go trolling somewhere else.
Good job filtering and finding 2 posts (the 2nd post you quoted is talking about his 7800GS BTW) in here to support your claim when there are numerous other people with 8800's saying Crysis runs just fine on their system. Plus, this is Crysis we are talking about here, a game which Crytek said wouldn't even run on PS3 or 360 due to their hardware. You're kidding yourself if you think any game this console generation will even come close to Crysis technically. Plus, you do realize that most games (including big hits such as COD4, Halo 3) do not even run 720p natively on consoles (and they don't even have AA or AF!).
Oh and you want to talk about price then you proceed to list examples of how you get games off craiglist for cheap? Well, the reality is that majority of console gamers pay $60+ for new releases while PC new releases usually drop under $40 in the first month. Then you have to pay for online play (for 360) and DLC when these are all available on the PC for free. It all evens out in the end.
P.S. You can do more than just gaming on a PC.
dark_reign
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2005
- Messages
- 2,314
I never stated it wasn't. But even lowering the settings in Crysis to medium resulted in a serious drop in fps in certain areas of the game. I don't remember having this issue with Doom 3 on a 9800 Pro. Doom 3 may have been mostly indoors, but Quake 4 wasn't and ran just as good.
I agree it looked superb on my set-up. Anyone who says it looks poor is bonkers. It is quite frankly the benchmark for graphics on the PC.
The concerns for me with the game were its uninspired gameplay. The game may have been stellar graphically but the game was, 'pretty vacant'. The Witcher gripped me alot more than Crysis. So much so Crysis got relegated to the subs bench.
zeroARMY
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2003
- Messages
- 1,195
From wikipedia:
According to the July 2008 PC Gamer UK issue, Crysis has sold over 3 million copies to date.
Previously, a conference call had stated that Crysis has beaten EA's expectations and sold over a million copies worldwide.
Those are some damn good numbers even with piracy. Maybe CryTek is just greedy?
According to the July 2008 PC Gamer UK issue, Crysis has sold over 3 million copies to date.
Previously, a conference call had stated that Crysis has beaten EA's expectations and sold over a million copies worldwide.
Those are some damn good numbers even with piracy. Maybe CryTek is just greedy?
For a PC exclusive, that's pretty good. But obviously they want more.
You're half wrong. PC Gaming is indeed the only place to get great graphics, but when someone says he/she played a game at medium settings, it's not because they wanted to, but rather they had to, in order to play the game smoothly with their current hardware, which may or may not be new. PCs evolve very fast and what was a high-end graphics card six months ago, is now mid-range and very soon to be low-end.
Crysis is the pinnacle in graphics fidelity. There's no other game that even comes close to it and it pushes current hardware to its limits. It is the "killer app" and it's one of the reasons why hardware evolves, just like Oblivion was 2 years ago and FEAR 3 years ago.
This is normal for a PC Gamer and it's actually one of the many advantages over consoles. Yes, we spend more money, but we can upgrade our system to the latest, greatest hardware.
As far as guesses go, I think people were spoiled with NVIDIA's 8800s, that could run everything at the highest settings and insane resolutions. When Crysis came out, they expected to be able to do the same and just couldn't.
Why does every post end up always being console fans vs PC gaming fans?!? That's so aggrivating. Each have their own benefits, and on average people complaining about Crysis performance are trying to run it at high resolutions with video settings at "VERY HIGH" and using a lesser video card. I have mine at 1680x1050 2x AA (look at my sig for my system) and it runs pretty smooth. If anyone remembers Far Cry's release that game was hard on systems back then too, BECAUSE the highest settings were made for cards that werent' really out at that time but were coming out soon. Scalability is nice, if you dont have a top of the line PC you can still play the game. Crysis' problem could very well be bad coding in some areas which is why some people have issues with slowness. BUT it's not all about graphics that people play PC. I choose my pc over consoles (i had a 360 but sold it a month later. BUT i do play a wii and it's awesome). because I like what the modding community does and that i can typically customize whatever game with the provided SDK. It truly makes the PC you're own personal gaming system
Injection of <3
Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2008
- Messages
- 610
So what you're saying is that your fanboy goggles prevent you from seeing ps3's blurry graphics and bad framerates, right? Gotcha.
Now go jerk off Sony elsewhere.
Originally Posted by Baker
3 years or more? You PC advocates stomp around like graphics mean everything, which is one of the reasons you dont game on console. Yet you settle for low/medium graphic settings to make your card last 3 years?
Console fans do the same thing.. brag about how their ps3 or 360 graphics are so amazing. Or they say "i don't want to play that cuz the graphics are weak". Graphics aren't everything, they pc's ability of high res textures, etc. is a reason I'm a pc fan. As I said before there's more reasons than just graphics at why we prefer our pc platform
3 years or more? You PC advocates stomp around like graphics mean everything, which is one of the reasons you dont game on console. Yet you settle for low/medium graphic settings to make your card last 3 years?
Console fans do the same thing.. brag about how their ps3 or 360 graphics are so amazing. Or they say "i don't want to play that cuz the graphics are weak". Graphics aren't everything, they pc's ability of high res textures, etc. is a reason I'm a pc fan. As I said before there's more reasons than just graphics at why we prefer our pc platform
dark_reign
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2005
- Messages
- 2,314
My 8800GTS is holding up rather well. Crysis is the only game I've played that has really pushed it.
That thing will be collecting dust in a few years as games for it dwindle down to nothing. Most people are buying PS3's for the Blu-ray player.
Yes, and expect to pay a lot more for the next game console you purchase. If you have the patience to wait 2-3 years, you might get a good deal on it. Meanwhile, I'll only have to wait about 6 months for price drops on video cards. Plus, I can sell my existing card after upgrading and make the cost be even cheaper. You must assume every PC gamer buys a new video card every 6 months at full price.
damonposey
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2006
- Messages
- 2,320
I was saying this in the new nvidia card thread and that is the fact that cutting edge PC gaming is going to stand trial this year.
After NVidia and Ati's new offerings come out, Then all of the attention will be shifted to game developers. If crysis-graphics games with great gameplay dont' start coming out this year. Nvidia and ATI are going to cut back on their cycles. Developers are lagging behind, either being sucked into MMORPG development, or console development.
Running current games at higher resolutions and with more AA isn't going to cut it for PC gaming this time. Being a PC gamer myself I'm in its corner, but without cutting edge games to go with these new cards this year, they really mean squat to both those who are potential PC gamers, as well as those on the fence leaning toward console gaming.
After NVidia and Ati's new offerings come out, Then all of the attention will be shifted to game developers. If crysis-graphics games with great gameplay dont' start coming out this year. Nvidia and ATI are going to cut back on their cycles. Developers are lagging behind, either being sucked into MMORPG development, or console development.
Running current games at higher resolutions and with more AA isn't going to cut it for PC gaming this time. Being a PC gamer myself I'm in its corner, but without cutting edge games to go with these new cards this year, they really mean squat to both those who are potential PC gamers, as well as those on the fence leaning toward console gaming.
FallenMystic
Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2006
- Messages
- 894
First I wouldn't admit to pirating things, that's a good way to get a vacation stamp.
Second FarCry 2 is not made by Crytek; it's made by Ubi, (they bought the rights to the IP a wile ago.) So you are willing to punish Ubi because Crytek isn't supporting Crysis any longer...?
Second FarCry 2 is not made by Crytek; it's made by Ubi, (they bought the rights to the IP a wile ago.) So you are willing to punish Ubi because Crytek isn't supporting Crysis any longer...?
PanzerBoxb
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2004
- Messages
- 2,109
damonposey
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2006
- Messages
- 2,320
Crysis Warzone, Warhead. those titles have console written all over them.
'How do we appeal to a wider audience of console gamers? Well let's add WARZONE to the end of it, that way they know there is fighting involved!.'
heck im surprised they haven't trademarked 'crysis death killing superbomberzone destruction'
'How do we appeal to a wider audience of console gamers? Well let's add WARZONE to the end of it, that way they know there is fighting involved!.'
heck im surprised they haven't trademarked 'crysis death killing superbomberzone destruction'
So you're going to spend that $600 on gas? Maybe you shouldn't have bought that $600 PS3 then you'd have $12000 plus interest to help cover those gas hikes.
As aznpxdd astutely noted I was refering to my old system which as you can clearly see is a A64 3200+ (Newcastle) with a 7800GS. It ran Crysis on medium (except physics). I was not referring to my new system which runs Crysis all on high. Which only cost me $700 USD including Windows.
As far as graphical increases for the PS3, since the hardware is static there is only so much blood you can squeeze from a turnip. You may think that your PS3 graphics look good. I would be inclined to agree. They do look good, but they don't like great.
damonposey
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2006
- Messages
- 2,320
Hate leads to suffering!
It's not fucking pushing the envelope, there's no new tech in there at all. The only thing in Crysis we'd not seen in another game was sub-surface scattering. Wahey!
People that say Crysis 'pushes the envelope' graphically are basically saying 'I don't realise how poorly optimised the engine is, but fuck that: here's my opinion, and you suck!'.
That's not fair, actually - the game runs so badly not solely because of poor optimisation. The primary reason is the inclusion of half of bastard Brazil's vegetation in entirely superfluous shootable scenery.
meatfestival
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2005
- Messages
- 1,767
You can add Ambient Occlusion to that.
But you don't need to invent new features to be pushing the envelope. There are many engines which are as advanced as Cryengine 2 in some ways, but not a single one can match it feature for feature, or in the scale seen in Crysis. They have pushed the envelope because technology wise they went much further than anyone had before.
ok, it may not push the envelope but please tell me which game is better graphically
http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/52985
This may be the good news they mentioned. Sounds good to me.
This may be the good news they mentioned. Sounds good to me.
One must consider TIME when saying Crysis hasn't pushed the envelope or that it didn't include we haven't seen in other games. Crysis was in development for the better part of 4 years, at least. Many features seen in the game and that were planned for the game/engine were brand spanking new when development began. Hell, the depth of field and movable foliage videos had been around for nearly 2 years before the game released. Which no other game featured before.
That said, yes other games have included features that are seen in Crysis SINCE development for Crysis started. But, no other game has included all of the features that Crysis has.
As far as them abandoning support for the game, it's really a shame. But when looking at it from a business perspective, it makes the most sense.
Clearly, the media and a large portion of the community have already condemned the title because people didn't get the results THEY wanted, despite the reality of what should have been expected. That translates into a bad rep, which means people are not going to continue buying this game when hearing so much negativity about it. Crytek cannot change the opinions of those who contribute to this, so letting it go and looking towards the future in the interest of self-preservation seems to be the smartest thing to do for the company.
As for people with capable machines experiencing shitty game performance, yes you are indeed much better off on a console where everything is handed to you on a silver platter and achieving your own personal preferred experience is not an option for you to fuck up the game doing.
That said, yes other games have included features that are seen in Crysis SINCE development for Crysis started. But, no other game has included all of the features that Crysis has.
As far as them abandoning support for the game, it's really a shame. But when looking at it from a business perspective, it makes the most sense.
Clearly, the media and a large portion of the community have already condemned the title because people didn't get the results THEY wanted, despite the reality of what should have been expected. That translates into a bad rep, which means people are not going to continue buying this game when hearing so much negativity about it. Crytek cannot change the opinions of those who contribute to this, so letting it go and looking towards the future in the interest of self-preservation seems to be the smartest thing to do for the company.
As for people with capable machines experiencing shitty game performance, yes you are indeed much better off on a console where everything is handed to you on a silver platter and achieving your own personal preferred experience is not an option for you to fuck up the game doing.
krameriffic
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2006
- Messages
- 3,214
I bought Crysis for the graphics, I admit it, but I had some fun playing the actual game too. There are two types of games I play on the PC: games with excellent gameplay and games that are an excellent experience. TF2, Quake 3, and CS all fall into the first category, while games like Mass Effect, Oblivion and Bioshock fall into the latter.
It's not like I couldn't play these games on a console, it's just that the PC versions are so incredibly much better and more fun on all fronts that I don't even bother. The games in the secondary category may have better graphics on the PC technically, but when you play them on a 50" 1080p plasma TV, you tend to forget about those differences. Unfortunately, you are subsequently plagued by other ones like shitty aiming and lack of customizability.
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2004
- Messages
- 32,950
3 million copies, I thought it was 1 million but that was close to launch... wow, and they're still whining about piracy killing their sales as though they made nothing? Stupid Crytek...
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2000
- Messages
- 6,348
I waited patiently like a lot of people to get Crysis and spent a ton of $$ upgrading my pc to play when it arrived (only to find out the even the latest hardware couldn't run it at max in SLI)..then I had to wait because I was getting lockups and it didn't even support SLI properly, then had to wait because and couldn't even finish the game. Talk about a limp experience. Didn't even get a money shot this time around.
Did everyone miss the link I posted yesterday ?
Crysis Warhead is coming and is what Crytek meant by "good news". It's either a sort of Episode to Crysis or an exp pack.
http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/52985
Crysis Warhead is coming and is what Crytek meant by "good news". It's either a sort of Episode to Crysis or an exp pack.
http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/52985