Cysis 2 DX11 and Sandbox Update

kache said:
I don't understand something, though: why didn't they just delay the release of the PC version of the game, instead of releasing it crippled?
Click to expand...

One word: Money

Also I still think Nvidia paid Crytek to do it, that's why Yerli called it a gift. The never intended to release a DX11 patch until November, pretty late to consider something like that.
If you look at the early builds of Crysis 2 for PC/console in June 2010, it looks a lot better than what was released. It's like they changed their mind in the middle of the design process.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-D9oINHI11E[/ame]

As you can see in the video, the game was a lot more advanced during GDC 2010. WTF happened between then and March 2011 is a mystery.
Also look at the detail in Prophets' face at the end, where is that in the game? They were probably going to let the mod community do the work.
 
Last edited:
kache said:
I don't understand something, though: why didn't they just delay the release of the PC version of the game, instead of releasing it crippled?
Click to expand...

This may have served them better but then some people would cry about how we got fucked because the PC launched 3 months after the console version.

Pay a lot of this night, and the bitch looks awesome. Bashers can bash all they want, there's nothing really better looking on PCs right now, at least nothing in my pretty large inventory. BF3 I guess should take top honers this fall in that category however.
 
PrincessFrosty said:
it's a complaint in general, many games don't document console commands, don't enable developer console, some even encrypt the fucking ini files to stop editing, some need special switches for the exe in order to enable command line access, some don't keep the settings saved properly so you need to start write protecting config files, and it goes on and on and on and on and on and on and on.

Wouldn't it just be easier if the developer just compiled the final release of the game with settings which aren't really stupid?!
Click to expand...

I appreciate you coming to the thread, but the constant complaining is getting old.
Are you going to discuss the topic of the thread or continue complaining?

I ignore threads on games I don't like. I think more people should try it.


TwistedAegis said:
In regards to the "majority of people whining about DX11" comments, just look at all the people bitching about how terrible it looks, particularly people who haven't even played the game.

The 2GB of updates makes a bit of a difference graphically, but it is subtle. The game was gorgeous beforehand, yet the lack of a "DX11" mark on the box all of a sudden means that it looks terrible.

Other people bitch about the "consolification" of the game, I guess primarily the more "on rails" bit. Fine, valid, although really even though you could roam in Crysis 1 it wasn't really anything to do there. There have still been PC centric games that have come out that are even more on rails yet don't get the same bitching.

The nano-suit is much improved, the lean system is the best I have seen implemented in any FPS to date.

Let's be honest, if Kyle hadn't jumped on the front page with over the top comments, a significant portion of people wouldn't even be in these threads posting the "zoMG crysis 2 is ugly and consolified and impregnated my sister!" :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

It's this PC Crysis, nope. Is this better than all the other lame FPS singleplayer games, that were also console influenced out there, yep.
They will complain about BF3 too, and every game after that. It's not about games anymore, somehow people feelings has became apart of gaming.

Yerli has hurt their feelings and disrespected them, because he didn't make a "game" they way they wanted. Gimme a break.
I still find it ironic that everything people hated about Crysis 1, is now a positive and should have been in Crysis 2? Double talk much?
 
Last edited:
WorldExclusive said:
I still find it ironic that everything people hated about Crysis 1, is now a positive and should have been in Crysis 2? Double talk much?
Click to expand...

Find those quotes of people being hypocritical. They have to be from the same person, otherwise your argument here is invalid.
 
DX11 benchmarks and screenshots...

http://vr-zone.com/articles/crysis-...11-video-benchmarks--screenshots/12763-1.html

ultraf.jpg
extremet.jpg
 
LeninGHOLA said:
Find those quotes of people being hypocritical. They have to be from the same person, otherwise your argument here is invalid.
Click to expand...

Many things were hated from the first game and now they want those same features back in the second game.
You're getting technical, like this is English class.
 
WorldExclusive said:
Many things were hated from the first game and now they want those same features back in the second game.
You're getting technical, like this is English class.
Click to expand...

Not at all, I just want to see where people are using doublespeak. You can't apply "group" opinions to individuals, nor can you apply individual opinions to groups. I don't know who "they" are in the context of your posts.
 
kache said:
Very nice document.
It actually makes understand how much passion these guys have for their job. :D
Click to expand...

Very nice. The one thing I will say about Crytek is that I really, really like that they push the envelope and push technology forward. While I'm not a fan of the game, from a technology perspective, I love to see this kind of stuff.
 
kache said:
I don't understand something, though: why didn't they just delay the release of the PC version of the game, instead of releasing it crippled?
Click to expand...

It wasn't crippled, it plays identically and had looked good before, now looking great. A delay wouldn't have made sense.
 
defiant007 said:
But that is quite apart from the fact that Yerli blatantly lied about that particular issue (and several others) on the record. I fail to see how users being able to correct the issue, irrespective of any perceived triviality, somehow excuses Yerli or anyone else from such morally bankrupt behavior.

In any other industry/profession you will get screwed to the walls for behaving in that fashion.
Click to expand...

I agree.

Silus said:
I can and I did, especially when some of them are the very same people. Again, go read the Crysis 2 Official Thread...especially the first 40-50 pages.
Click to expand...

Yeah you did which makes your point make absolutely no sense what so ever.

You're damning an entire group of people who have maybe one point of commonality when their collective opinions are contradictory in nature. One position does not necessarily imply another, so people in the group are naturally going to contradict each other on certain points.

When someone uses the "A game without X graphics API sucks" argument, it means one of two things: A) that person is an idiot B) it's just an excuse.
There's no personal reason attached to a graphics API not being in a certain game. If there is, then I point you to point A).
Click to expand...

What except for the fact that DX11 is more efficient and faster than it's predecessors.

The fact that Crytek boasted the best graphics ever yet are missing new technology that other games have had for over a year which is enabled through use of DX11

As for "Too little, too late" don't make me laugh. Some of those people were whining that they would only buy the game WHEN it had DX11 support, but when that support comes out, it's suddenly "Too little, too late" ? Hypocrisy comes to mind, but that's way too common in these forums, so it comes as no surprise.
Click to expand...

Then call out that person on their hypocrisy, I'm not very happy seeing every person who dislikes the fact that Crysis 2 didn't launch with DX11 effects getting lumped into some group of irrational haters when some of us have perfectly good reasons to dislike the game.

No, it's really ONLY your choice. They couldn't care less about you or me. They care about the majority that will give them enough money in sales to justify Crysis 3. So, it's really only your choice of not wanting to support them anymore or until they have something you like better. If by any chance you think ANY other developer is different in this regard, then you really need a reality check.
Click to expand...

My choice is based on their actions, because their actions decide the quality of the game and the quality of the game affects my decision to buy or not.

WorldExclusive said:
I ignore threads on games I don't like. I think more people should try it.
Click to expand...

Yet you can't ignore posts you don't like?

They will complain about BF3 too, and every game after that. It's not about games anymore, somehow people feelings has became apart of gaming.

Yerli has hurt their feelings and disrespected them, because he didn't make a "game" they way they wanted. Gimme a break.
Click to expand...

Gaming is a hobby for many gamers and something they're very fond of. When developers essentially lie to gamers they set false expectations, which when broken makes paying customers unhappy, that's perfectly normal, people get irate when others lie to them.

If Yerli came out and said at the start and said "OK guys we're targeting the consoles as well as PC this time around which means basically we're going to have to neglect the PC version of Crysis 2 to some degree, we'll be giving you lower FOV, mouse acceleration..." and so on...

We could say, "Oh that doesn't sound very attractive to me, I think i'll skip Crysis 2"

And when Crysis 2 rolls around and it's consolized all to hell then it's no biggie, it comes out and we can all ignore it, nothing is a surprise, expectations are met and everyone's happy.

defiant007 said it best, in any other profession this would be completely unprofessional and totally unacceptable.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
Not at all, I just want to see where people are using doublespeak. You can't apply "group" opinions to individuals, nor can you apply individual opinions to groups. I don't know who "they" are in the context of your posts.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, but I've read many posts over the years of how people hated C1, and now they want more of that in C2.
My observation is a generalization of opinions here and in other forums, and for me to list user names of who they are would be foolish at best.
I'm sure it doesn't apply to you from the looks of it.
PrincessFrosty said:
Yet you can't ignore posts you don't like?
Click to expand...

I don't want the thread to be derailed by subjects that has nothing to do with DX11.
 
Pulsar said:
Hm looks like it has something to do with tesselation. Perhaps a new CAP is needed. Putting objects to "extreme" instead of "Ultra" about doubles the performance at 2560x1600.
Click to expand...

I'm also beginning to wonder if CF is not working right. A new CAP probably is needed...

EDIT: It seems that according to the .pdf the object setting controls Tessellation and Parallax Occlusion Mapping. Something isn't right with AMD cards here. That or nvidia cards simply have better tessellation performance.
 
Last edited:
PrincessFrosty said:
What except for the fact that DX11 is more efficient and faster than it's predecessors.

The fact that Crytek boasted the best graphics ever yet are missing new technology that other games have had for over a year which is enabled through use of DX11.
Click to expand...

Crysis 2 ran just fine; efficiency wasn't an issue. It's visuals were also on par or better in most areas even without DX11. In fact, enabling DX11 and it's feature set and adding high res textures, in most accounts, only made a subtle difference in the actual look of the game but is now hitting performance in a major way.

So enabling DX11 made a minimal visual quality improvement at a major performance hit. Judge the graphics solely on the graphics, not what API they were made in. The Mona Lisa isn't considered trash because it wasn't painted using the latest in Dow Chemical oil paint technology. EDIT: Ok, definitely not comparing Crysis 2 with the Mona Lisa, more a generalization! :D
 
I think they should have taken note of Blizzard, Valve, etc, and launched the PC version when it was finished. Launching early and lying to their core fans just made for a bad situation that they will never recover from.

PC gamers don't forget. We worship publishers that do us right. We might not like everything that they do, but what they do right generates a buzz so when they mess up we can forgive to a degree.

Crytek knew that every PC gamer has access to Facebook, Twitter, blogs, etc. It's what we do in our free time. And we love to spread our ideas to others via the internet. That's why for the life of me I can't figure out why they didn't just hold off on the PC release until it was ready.

But it was their call. And it is what it is. So now they have to go to sleep at night with their decision that they made. I don't think the people that are enjoying the game in this thread are wrong. I don't think the ones that feel burnt by Crytek are wrong. I think bashing each other over what the other thinks is wrong as some obviously think it's a great game and some have damned it to hell already.

If the Kyle and them still don't endorse Crysis 2 I don't blame them as they have legitimate gripes as to why they don't like it. Just like the people that love the game. It's their call on if they wanted to include it in their testing suite. It's their call if they wanted to give it a good review on the front page. They are entitled to their opinion on what goes on their website.

And that's all I had to say on the subject.
 
cageymaru said:
I don't think the people that are enjoying the game in this thread are wrong. I don't think the ones that feel burnt by Crytek are wrong. I think bashing each other over what the other thinks is wrong as some obviously think it's a great game and some have damned it to hell already.
Click to expand...

Yup, can we all just agree to disagree and call it a day? :)
 
Bop said:
I'm also beginning to wonder if CF is not working right. A new CAP probably is needed...

EDIT: It seems that according to the .pdf the object setting controls Tessellation and Parallax Occlusion Mapping. Something isn't right with AMD cards here. That or nvidia cards simply have better tessellation performance.
Click to expand...

Seeing as the dx11 features were supposodly paid for by nvidia its stands to reason theyre better optomised for their cards. Tesellation performance is also better on their cards.

From what ive seen enabling crossfire only adds around 10-15 fps or thereabouts, so looks like theres a decent amount of performance to be snagged by amd.
 
Bop said:
I'm also beginning to wonder if CF is not working right. A new CAP probably is needed...

EDIT: It seems that according to the .pdf the object setting controls Tessellation and Parallax Occlusion Mapping. Something isn't right with AMD cards here. That or nvidia cards simply have better tessellation performance.
Click to expand...

The current Nvidia cards have stronger tessellation performance and geometry shader performance. AMDs have better pixel shader performance. If you run (or look at) synthetic benchmarks which test these types of scenarios it shows this. You see this in very heavy tessellation and/or displacement mapping oriented benchmarks, such as HAWX2 and Unigine Heaven as well. This is actually why the current AMD cards are much more efficient in most actual games however, since they are usually more reliant on pixel shader performance.

So AMD current design makes sense. Whereas Nvidia, ironically, did a 3dfx. (I have both companies cards currently, and my current main card is a Nvidia just as disclaimer)
 
limitedaccess said:
The current Nvidia cards have stronger tessellation performance and geometry shader performance. AMDs have better pixel shader performance. If you run (or look at) synthetic benchmarks which test these types of scenarios it shows this. You see this in very heavy tessellation and/or displacement mapping oriented benchmarks, such as HAWX2 and Unigine Heaven as well. This is actually why the current AMD cards are much more efficient in most actual games however, since they are usually more reliant on pixel shader performance.

So AMD current design makes sense. Whereas Nvidia, ironically, did a 3dfx. (I have both companies cards currently, and my current main card is a Nvidia just as disclaimer)
Click to expand...

Never knew that. You learn something new every day. Good information to know, thanks.
 
cageymaru said:
I think they should have taken note of Blizzard, Valve, etc, and launched the PC version when it was finished.
Click to expand...

I think this is where console people have a point, PC gaming 1337ism. Not everyone has DX 11 hardware or high-end systems to play the DX11 and textures upgrade. It's not like this model hasn't been used before where you release a PC update after the initial release.

But of course, Crytek fucked us when other people doing the same thing didn't.
 
Vids of the removed benchmark

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhJEhi_xedg&feature=player_embedded"]YouTube - ‪Crysis 2 в режиме DirectX 11 тест GPU‬‏[/ame]

And same bench on dx9

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbKBXEMTMIY&feature=related"]YouTube - ‪Crysis 2 в режиме DirectX 9 тест GPU‬‏[/ame]
 
Out of curiosity, is anyone running Crysis 2 with a pair of 5850's in crossfire? I'm curious what kind of performance you are getting. Now that Crysis 2 is finally finished, I am debating on picking the game up and giving it a try. If performance with a pair of 5850's will not be acceptable, i'll just hold off on buying this game until I upgrade later this year when the ATI 7000 series and nVidia 600 series hits the market. As an owner of the 5000 series, there just isn't enough of a performance jump with Southern Islands or Fermi for me to justify an upgrade.
 
I have installed the DX11 + HR texture patches and Crysis 2 runs at 25-30FPS everything maxed out with 6970 Crossfire X at 2560*1600.
Hopefully, further drivers improvements will bring performance in the 30-35FPS range.
 
heatlesssun said:
I think this is where console people have a point, PC gaming 1337ism. Not everyone has DX 11 hardware or high-end systems to play the DX11 and textures upgrade. It's not like this model hasn't been used before where you release a PC update after the initial release.

But of course, Crytek fucked us when other people doing the same thing didn't.
Click to expand...

Well most PC people have higher standards than the Console gamers. It's probably because our PC's can handle a lot more than a console. And we expect to see quality game play and HQ graphics.

Even if you don't own a DX 11 card, most PC gamers are interested in what they are missing out on if they did. When we review videocards we go into depth about things such as color gradients, antialiasing, texture quality, etc. We are accustomed to seeing high quality works.

That's why we buy every Blizzard game, Valve game, support Indie, etc. We thought Crytek had joined our club, but obviously they decided to go console for Crysis 2. Which is fine, but they should have stopped the bragging on the DX 11 stuff and expounded on the console features.

If they had done that we would have known what was coming, lowered our expectations, and decided to purchase the game based on the fun from the first game rather than the graphics options that allowed us to benchmark our videocards for many years.

Or they could have just waited 3 months and launched the PC version with DX 11 and nobody would have complained. Well some will always complain but that's life.

:)

Now if what I wrote is elitism to you I apologize. I expect my PC games to look better than a XBOX or PS3. If they don't I scour the internet to figure out what I need to do to enable the high quality textures. If I find out they don't exist I scour the Developer's website to figure out what press release I missed that said, "Console graphics only".

I have never been impressed with console graphics personally. I can write them off if the game play is so addicting that I don't notice them. But the Mario's and Zelda's of this world are few and their release dates are far apart.

But that's just my opinion. And I'm sure others think the XBOX and PS3 look good enough for them. And they are entitled to their opinions also of course.
 
TwistedAegis said:
Let's be honest, if Kyle hadn't jumped on the front page with over the top comments, a significant portion of people wouldn't even be in these threads posting the "zoMG crysis 2 is ugly and consolified and impregnated my sister!" :rolleyes:
Click to expand...


Wow, now I am being blamed for C2 sucking ass. Never saw that coming.
 
amdgamer said:
Out of curiosity, is anyone running Crysis 2 with a pair of 5850's in crossfire? I'm curious what kind of performance you are getting. Now that Crysis 2 is finally finished, I am debating on picking the game up and giving it a try. If performance with a pair of 5850's will not be acceptable, i'll just hold off on buying this game until I upgrade later this year when the ATI 7000 series and nVidia 600 series hits the market. As an owner of the 5000 series, there just isn't enough of a performance jump with Southern Islands or Fermi for me to justify an upgrade.
Click to expand...

I think you're better off waiting for the next generation of AMD/Nvidia gpu's. Even with my system, I get less than desirable frame rates.
 
FranklyShankly said:
Yeah, because the only reason anyone could dislike C2 is if they're Kyle's sheep... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Just like the only reason for someone liking Crysis 2 is because they are an idiot or console kiddie of some other reason.

It's a game, some people like it some people don't. That this thing turned into a Holy War is at some level a testament to the first Crysis, the impact of that game to PC gaming was profound.
 
gotta give some props to Crytek...the could have just put out a simple DX11 patch and called it a day...but they really went all out and not only included official DX11 support but also an additional DX11 feature set (Tessellation etc) with new technology used...they also put out a High-Res texture package which further improved the game...the textures were noticably low quality in the initial release (blame the consoles) but the differences with everything put together is really amazing

far away textures still look poor but now close-up textures look tons better...Crysis 1 still looks better to me but maybe that has to do with the environment (jungle vs city)

2 weeks BEFORE the game was released a report came out which stated that the game would not have DX11 support initially...so people that know how to read did know this before buying the game...then Crytek issued a statement shortly after the release date which stated that DX11 would be coming in the 'next few months'...so they stuck with their schedule and kept their promise and deleivered a really impressive visual upgrade

the people that are still whining and complaining are serial complainers and always need something to cry about

 
cageymaru said:
I have never been impressed with console graphics personally.
Click to expand...

I agree and that's why I don't own a console and why I build rigs like my sig rig. Unlike a lot of games, the original Crysis 2 release did have multi-monitor and decent 3D support, few games in the PC world support both well out of the box. For example, a game I like actually that just came out last week, no support for either out of the box, actually FEAR 3 will never support 3D.
 
heatlesssun said:
I agree and that's why I don't own a console and why I build rigs like my sig rig. Unlike a lot of games, the original Crysis 2 release did have multi-monitor and decent 3D support, few games in the PC world support both well out of the box. For example, a game I like actually that just came out last week, no support for either out of the box, actually FEAR 3 will never support 3D.
Click to expand...

Yes this is true, but for Crysis 2 you know we were all expecting something momentous from Crytek. A new benchmark in graphics even if the game play wasn't so great. I mean look at the 580 SLI review on the front page. There is Crysis Warhead still stressing videocards after all these years.

Then the Developer had the audacity to call the DX 11 patch a gift after even Nvidia advertised it's merits before the game was released. I mean this guy must have the worst PR people in the world or translator.

I'll stick with my guns and say that they should have just waited on the PC version. Tell us it will be released when it's ready and up to Crytek standards. Hype us up with tidbit screenshots once a week like BF3, take 3 months to do it, and everything would have been fine. Instead of losing face like they did.
 
I bit on a deal from eBay for 26$. Looking forward to playing the game. I need a decent shooter, and this should fit the bill.
 
cageymaru said:
Yes this is true, but for Crysis 2 you know we were all expecting something momentous from Crytek. A new benchmark in graphics even if the game play wasn't so great. I mean look at the 580 SLI review on the front page. There is Crysis Warhead still stressing videocards after all these years.
Click to expand...

I get that. But momentous costs money and judging by the reactions of a lot of folks I don't think that it would have done much better. Too many people complained about Crysis 1's demands and the bottom line is that games that crush PCs just don't sell particularly well, that's simply not the mainstream, i.e. consoles.

Yes Crytek sold out to make the Crysis 2 work on consoles and the thing is I would have done the same thing for sales. I don't care for consoles, I don't own a console but that's were the money for games is these days for the most part. Putting the most resources into your smallest customer base, really, who does that especially when they are this vengeful and angry and will go to all kinds of lengths to sabotage your efforts.

Yes, I would have liked Crysis 2 to have remained a PC exclusive pushing the boundaries but there are logical reaons why Crytek didn't go that route and I have a hard time bashing them for it when I would have done the same thing.


cageymaru said:
I'll stick with my guns and say that they should have just waited on the PC version. Tell us it will be released when it's ready and up to Crytek standards. Hype us up with tidbit screenshots once a week like BF3, take 3 months to do it, and everything would have been fine. Instead of losing face like they did.
Click to expand...

This I can agree with assuming that it would have eased the tensions of those most viciously attacking Crysis 2 but I honestly think that most of that comes from the fact they Crytek used to be a PC only company and isn't anymore.
 
Well it's not that I think it's disabled, but it doesn't seem to be used during gameplay like in Crysis 1. You can still see it when you mod your weapon and in the cutscenes, but not while zooming in. Though it would be a terrible idea gameplay-wise, it'd be awesome to have a shallow DoF even when zoomed out lol.
 
Yoshiyuki Blade said:
Well it's not that I think it's disabled, but it doesn't seem to be used during gameplay like in Crysis 1. You can still see it when you mod your weapon and in the cutscenes, but not while zooming in. Though it would be a terrible idea gameplay-wise, it'd be awesome to have a shallow DoF even when zoomed out lol.
Click to expand...

Well, when your almost face-to-face to an enemy or object, the back ground should blur a bit.

A little less DOF than this though, but a good example. Video is done with the Beta SDK.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PYL0n7L-Ak&lc=d8HyKnVWoJqcGdLICYyIaT7Rwgth8HzsDvrthpPXEzA&feature=inbox"]YouTube - ‪[Crysis 2] Showcase Vol. 1‬‏[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dSQ9pdggP8&feature=related"]YouTube - ‪[Crysis 2] Showcase Vol. 2‬‏[/ame]
 
Do you guys think I could max out the settings with my current set up (6950 2GB, i5 2500K) at 1680x1050? Unless I can max it out I don't think I will be getting the game.

Thanks in advance!
 
Chosen Juan said:
Do you guys think I could max out the settings with my current set up (6950 2GB, i5 2500K) at 1680x1050? Unless I can max it out I don't think I will be getting the game.

Thanks in advance!
Click to expand...

Nope, not going to happen. I get subpar frame rates on my setup. AMD cards just don't fare well here at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top