Think your ready for Crysis 3? Think again

spacing guild said:
I have the proof. It's called common sense. I don't listen to game companies when they lie and mislead about games. Like all those of lesser intelligence who believed Bioware about Mass Effect and the in-game choices actually making a difference to the end of the game.

They say "Alpha" I say, limited release candidate to get people talking. Exclusivity gives it a "do want" appeal. Gets people lathered up. Just because they call it "Alpha" don't mean it's a buggy mess that Crytek desperately needs people to provide testing and feedback for.

And when I'm right when the game comes out, you can come back to this thread and kiss my tuckus too.
Click to expand...

Are you serious? Did you even play the Crysis Alpha? Or do you even been apart of an actual beta test? Crysis was horribly unoptimized and completely shit in alpha/beta. There were shaders glitches everywhere, performance was near 10 FPS on very high for every PC rig out there. By the time the game was released performance increased 100% and they fixed the majority of the issues with shadows and shaders which caused massive performance drops. I can already tell how broken this game is by adjusting one setting and seeing my FPS quadruple.
 
reaper12 said:
Again, Beta' s are much nearer final release than Alpha's.
Click to expand...

And yes... i'm one of the privileged few in the world who get to test it. I am so important to the gaming community, this forum and Crytek that I have been personally selected, like a God, to help optimize this game for noobs.

I know because the unsolicited email I got to my Origin email address tells me so. And I always believe unsolicited emails.

2echwqp.jpg
 
spacing guild said:
And yes... i'm one of the privileged few in the world who get to test it. I am so important to the gaming community, this forum and Crytek that I have been personally selected, like a God, to help optimize this game for noobs.

I know because the unsolicited email I got to my Origin email address tells me so. And I always believe unsolicited emails.
Click to expand...

Wow.. words are simply wasted on you so I will not go on further. You have proven my point and made yourself look more.. like an idiot than I could ever have. Your poor excuse for sarcasm just reiterates my point.

Lets stop feeding the psychic troll.
 
Phishy714 said:
Wow.. words are simply wasted on you so I will not go on further. You have proven my point and made yourself look more.. like an idiot than I could ever have. Your poor excuse for sarcasm just reiterates my point.

Lets stop feeding the psychic troll.
Click to expand...

*nvm*:rolleyes:
 
spacing guild said:
Yes I do know. Because there is always someone making comments like this when Betas and Alphas come out and it's always bullshit. They said the same things about the BF3 Beta and Crysis 2 demo.

They have people play the Alphas for some feedback, but mostly to get people buzzing about the game.

A major gaming company isn't going to put out a shit Alpha, unless the final product they plan to release is shit.

And all the whining about Crysis 2 being a console port that's easy on PCs- Now Crytek is showing some love to PC gamers by putting out the Alpha and showing us that Crysis 3
is going to challenge modern gaming PCs, now all of a sudden people want "optimized.":rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Isn't this always the case? Crysis brought our rigs to its knees and gamers cried and moaned about the game being too tough. Crysis 2 was much easier and could be played with a medium spec'd rig and gamers cried and moaned about console ports. Now Crysis 3 is coming and it looks to be a rig killer and, you guessed it, crying and moaning. Gamers are the biggest bunch of whiney bitches on earth. I'm guilty of it too at times so I can't really throw stones but, damm.
 
Gee Crytek is making a game that looks good by requiring hardware beyond what is currently available. I've never seen that before except every time they've released a game :p.

My prediction? It will also feature some open world stealth play, and then turn in to a shitty monster game.
 
It would be nice if the Alpha even launched, instead it just immediately crashes when I launch it.
 
I'm glad it runs like that. Actually give current hardware a run for it's money. Gives a reason to go out and buy the latest and greatest. Sure, you can run it on medium. But, when the next gen comes out, it gives a reason (other than an extra 10 FPS) to upgrade. I'm tired of buying games that can run on 2 year old hardware. I want something that benefits from the top of the line hardware that you can buy right now and next year.

Alpha/Beta/Final - I'm good no matter what. Sure, optimize the shit out of it, but don't dumb down the graphics to get the optimization. Give me something to work for.
 
It looks like this game is set to release around or after the launch of the AMD 8000 series cards. (Might even be a bit longer) So if the new cards are 40 - 50% faster I think it would be safe to assume that a pair of them should be able to handle 2560 x 1600. That's not really too far out of expectations for a game which is known to push the envelope.
 
Phishy714 said:
Wow.. words are simply wasted on you so I will not go on further. You have proven my point and made yourself look more.. like an idiot than I could ever have. Your poor excuse for sarcasm just reiterates my point.

Lets stop feeding the psychic troll.
Click to expand...

You misspelled! Its spelled psycho.

I doubt he will be back when the game is released since it will change.
 
Hagrid said:
he will be back when the game is released since it will not change.
Click to expand...

Fixed it for you.

I'm here now. I just played an hour or so. Game's a lot of fun. And runs great on High.;)

And I hate to tell you... the game is in Cry Engine 3, which is about 3 years old. So unless the game is released in CryEngine 4, Nothing's gonna change from the so-called Alpha to the release date.
 
Last edited:
It was definitely playable at 1920x1080 on medium on my 6850 and 3570k. Performance can only get better, so I don't think it will be too terrible on harware.
 
forget high... if you want a game that will put your PC in its place aim for vhigh! this is what crysis is all about not that stupid game called crysis 2 that was based on a console port
 
spacing guild said:
And yes... i'm one of the privileged few in the world who get to test it. I am so important to the gaming community, this forum and Crytek that I have been personally selected, like a God, to help optimize this game for noobs.

I know because the unsolicited email I got to my Origin email address tells me so. And I always believe unsolicited emails.

2echwqp.jpg
Click to expand...

What has this post got to do with anything? You keep posting that the beta of BF3 and the Demo of Crysis 2 were exactly like the final release. Beta's are very close to what the final release would be. And a demo is generally exactly what the game will be like, hence why it's called a demo, so people will buy the full game.

Alpha's are much further back in development. The Alpha of Crysis had terrible performance even on the highest of hardware just like NickJames pointed out above.

And even the final release of Crysis was poorly coded. If you want proof of this look at Crysis Warhead, same engine, same graphics but better performance on the same hardware.

And nobody on this thread has whined yet apart from you. People just stated that this was an alpha and that there will me more than likely performance improvements before the final release.
 
of course there will be improvements but by how much? i definitely wont be expecting double the frame rate on the release version. fact is were gonna need much more gpu power to get this game playable in Vhigh, just like the first crysis.
 
dinlee23 said:
of course there will be improvements but by how much? i definitely wont be expecting double the frame rate on the release version. fact is were gonna need much more gpu power to get this game playable in Vhigh, just like the first crysis.
Click to expand...

They'll get a few frames per second here or there with tweaks and such. But there are some who like to drink the "ooo it's just Alpha... so much programming left to do" kool-aid and think it's going to run 120 fps on Very High with Eyefinity on a 7870 when the final release comes out.
 
spacing guild said:
They'll get a few frames per second here or there with tweaks and such. But there are some who like to drink the "ooo it's just Alpha... so much programming left to do" kool-aid and think it's going to run 120 fps on Very High with Eyefinity on a 7870 when the final release comes out.
Click to expand...

But you said it was going to be the exact same and nothing needs to be done. :D

Its all about resolution/eye candy really. These 27" 2560x1440 res's really need dual cards for all the eye candy.
I have played with eyefinity and I just cant get past the bezels sometimes.
 
Robertmarcus said:
at least by 7970 will run it at 1080p. :)
Click to expand...

Im still rocking the 5850 and since I dont run with AA and such, so I havnt had problems running at 1080.
A nice 7950/7970 would be nice to replace this 5850. :)
 
bman212121 said:
It looks like this game is set to release around or after the launch of the AMD 8000 series cards. (Might even be a bit longer) So if the new cards are 40 - 50% faster I think it would be safe to assume that a pair of them should be able to handle 2560 x 1600. That's not really too far out of expectations for a game which is known to push the envelope.
Click to expand...

I hope you're not expecting 40-50% increase in performance with the 8000 series cards. It will be 25% tops. The only time you see a jump greater then that is when there is a process node change (28nm to 22nm).


I need to fire this up tonight to what it looks like on my system.
 
Playing at 2560x1600. Single GTX 680 only since I did not/can't force SLI. C3 kicks my ass. Hehehe. I'd rather think that this is just a game that promised to kick my PC's ass and it's doing it instead of OMG PORLY UNPOTIMMIZD CODE MY HARD EARD MONEY PC CANT BE DIS BAD.

But to each his own I guess.

Even if people think it's a console port...why is the console port kicking your PC's ass? Unoptimized code? When it's already in alpha (public not internal), I'm pretty sure the game's almost done and there's only just little tweaks here and there.

Also looks like I'll have to use hardware to stream/record this game. Disadvantage is it'll only be at 1080p.
 
spacing guild said:
They'll get a few frames per second here or there with tweaks and such. But there are some who like to drink the "ooo it's just Alpha... so much programming left to do" kool-aid and think it's going to run 120 fps on Very High with Eyefinity on a 7870 when the final release comes out.
Click to expand...

Jesus, you are the guy making the claim that nothing will be changed from now to release. Not us, you are the one who started throwing his toys out of the pram because someone mentioned that it was still a very early alpha and performance would most likely improve.

And your constant mentioning of two games as proof is laughable.

Also, stop changing your tune, either it's going to play the exact same or it isn't. In a graphically demanding game 5-10 fps can mean the difference between playable and not playable.

AS for PC gamers whining about graphically demanding games, why shouldn't they? They look at consoles with much lower hardware playing games that look just as good as they do on the PC. A lot of games on the PC are poorly coded. Why shouldn't we get games that take full advantage of the hardware we have? Console programmers can do amazing things with the hardware they have why can't we get the same with PC games? I understand some of the reasons but it still doesn't stop PC gamers getting a little frustrated.
 
reaper12 said:
AS for PC gamers whining about graphically demanding games, why shouldn't they? They look at consoles with much lower hardware playing games that look just as good as they do on the PC. A lot of games on the PC are poorly coded. Why shouldn't we get games that take full advantage of the hardware we have? Console programmers can do amazing things with the hardware they have why can't we get the same with PC games? I understand some of the reasons but it still doesn't stop PC gamers getting a little frustrated.
Click to expand...

Kool-aid. Fitting for election day.
 
Wasn't this pretty much like the first Crysis. Visually not some new amazing feet but rather just ultimately poorly coded to be efficient with current/ any hardware.
 
So the VHQ setting is just mostly post-processing overload probably?
 
SpongeBob said:
Wasn't this pretty much like the first Crysis. Visually not some new amazing feet but rather just ultimately poorly coded to be efficient with current/ any hardware.
Click to expand...

Have you ever play Crysis 1? :confused:
 
This statistic is absolute crap because of the way servers all over the world respond and considering that the game is still in the Alpha stage. It makes no sense to justify whether a card can handle the game or not at the moment. I have a 680 and I can confirm that I get a stable 60 fps with Shaders, Post Processing on High and all others on Very High at 1080p in some servers and horrendous dips in others. I am pretty impressed by the quality of the Gameplay and Graphics tbh considering it`s an Alpha, so in short performance numbers drastically differ depending on which server you are in and at what time you play the game. I am pretty sure anything above a 660ti should easily handle the game on max settings at 1080p upon final release.
 
At least my 680 SLI can run it. Gona change my motherboard and add 2 more 680 in the future. Just to play future games at 1080p.
 
murkris118 said:
This statistic is absolute crap because of the way servers all over the world respond and considering that the game is still in the Alpha stage. It makes no sense to justify whether a card can handle the game or not at the moment. I have a 680 and I can confirm that I get a stable 60 fps with Shaders, Post Processing on High and all others on Very High at 1080p in some servers and horrendous dips in others. I am pretty impressed by the quality of the Gameplay and Graphics tbh considering it`s an Alpha, so in short performance numbers drastically differ depending on which server you are in and at what time you play the game. I am pretty sure anything above a 660ti should easily handle the game on max settings at 1080p upon final release.
Click to expand...

Server latency does not have an effect on in-game FPS
 
Server latency does not have an effect on in-game FPS
Click to expand...

Maybe but I have noticed that the dips happen very rarely, I basically have a smooth experience without massive dips like the others do even at High settings, care to give an explanation for that anybody?.
 
CthulhuDreams said:
At least my 680 SLI can run it. Gona change my motherboard and add 2 more 680 in the future. Just to play future games at 1080p.
Click to expand...

I would rather sell the sli cards and get 2 newer ones instead of running quad.
 
1920x1080, shading and post processing on high, everything else on very high

2012-11-07 08:52:43 - Crysis 3 MP Alpha
Frames: 28915 - Time: 460140ms - Avg: 62.840 - Min: 29 - Max: 88

c3.jpg
 
Where's all the "spare keys to give away"??

Some Neogaf thread had heaps floating around but of course I don't post there.
Cool to see some news though. I am a fair bit of a crysis fan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top