Archive Thread of Screenshots of Ridunkulous Quality and Size [2007-2015]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Heh, I'm sure Crytek could have released it like that if they wanted, but imagine the additional whining on the net when people tried to play the game like that and their system slowed to a crawl. ;)

Regards,
SB
 
Heh, I'm sure Crytek could have released it like that if they wanted, but imagine the additional whining on the net when people tried to play the game like that and their system slowed to a crawl. ; )

Regards,
SB

Mind you that I am running that in realtime with 25-40fps at 1680x904 and my config. And that is without any optimisations as occluders and cleanup of objects on non visible, non culled, forbidden areas aswell as excessive amount of wildlife that needs to be tinned out. The mountain vegetation on the non visible areas needs to be removed and far distant ones dont need so much to yet look 'dressed up'. The mountains alone contain ~280000 vegetation objects.

However the TOD is for free and as such it would have been nice if they had similar TOD setups for Crysis rather than the pale white/grey TOD they used. Also they should have bumped the ground geometry more to give that natural rought terrain look, it does a lot for overall IQ. This would aswell serve as good occluders to increase perfomance. I have made the ground geometry 'bumpy' and with moderate amount of polygons and I haven't even put in occluders to increase perfomance!

Ingame play with counter.


EDIT: Actually my perfomance is better by a good 5-8fps for same spots above, it's just that I did have a VM running in the background and KIS2009 was spiking the CPU usage to 15-20% for some reason (noticed this bug before). Heck I can disable LODs and have ~9m polygons per frame and 3000DIP and still be at 25fps with huge vista and same res and settings aswell as map layout. ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, but Crysis I always felt for most people was a little more CPU heavy than GPU heavy. Add in AI, physics, etc and would it still run as well?

Regards,
SB
 
Yes, but Crysis I always felt for most people was a little more CPU heavy than GPU heavy. Add in AI, physics, etc and would it still run as well?

Regards,
SB

12 AI's where active following routines + wildlife in zone and physics as normal as all vegetation bends by force and wind/AI. Ofcourse enaging them all face on would shave off ~5-6fps but mostly due to my particle mod. The bullet collision sparks etc has a large amount of ray tracing put on the CPU to collide with all materials. However with optimisation ~30+ is no problem. Mainly occlusion, cbuffer usage if possible and no need for such dense foliage on the mountains as it looks as good with half the amount etc. Also to shave off clutter on ground that is covered by other clutter. No reason to render what isn't visible in any condition.

Otherwise for this map I am heavily GPU bound. Running at 720p almost nets me 10fps more depending on place.

But moderate amount of AI's put on different locations with script activation when entering zone + moderate amount of wildlife (heavy on resources) will be no problem. Say the amount found for general Crysis SP maps has low pefomance impact.

Also this is a 'compressed' map regarding design. The optimal would be to have nice areas like in the map and then roads with lightweight foliage down to next section. This would let the object/vegetation LOD to ease up the perfomance quite some. Like first mission in Crysis. As is right now this map of 512x512 heightmap size contains 655000 vegetation objects.

Also took some more as I did a jungle. Really funny dropping AI's in here and using the dense foliage as cover, both for me and how they use it... fantastic. Really setup for an amazing AI showcase! ^^



Edit: First picture borked :(
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Those aren't god rays, that's just a lens flare.

Those look like god rays but they look fake (there's lens flare there as well). I'm guessing they're nothing like the volumetric light rays as seen in Crysis or similar. I haven't played it though so I can't say for sure.
 
Sweet lord!

Fooling around with Crysis thought why not push my PC some to see what it can do on this engine. Disabled geometry instacing completly, disabled terrain LOD and upped water tesselation factor to give me water geometry mesh with millions of polygons. To bad the water surface dont align correctly with camera though from the default v.hgih 200-250k water to 3m is perhaps a bit over the top.

Man cant wait for more games to use CE2 and CE3 as my lonely 4890 and E8400 dual-core at 3.6GHz breaks necks!

Serious geometry and DIP numbers.. and framerate! :eek:
http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/8546/crysisbeyond3d.jpg
http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/3503/crysisbeyond3d1.jpg
http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/1344/crysisbeyond3d2.jpg
http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/4741/crysisbeyond3d3.jpg
http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/7069/crysisbeyond3d4.jpg

[Moderated : Incorrect image size]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not really breaking any graphical barriers with this one, but I thought it was humorous. This is my computer last Friday during Blizzcon. I ordered a virtual ticket which gave me access to both days via a live internet stream. As you can see directly next to it I decided to play WoW at the same time. Forgive the empty white box. I love you all, but not enough for you to know my real name ;)

blizzcon.jpg
 
As disccused in the "what are you playing now" thread. Here's a blind comparison of AC running in both DX9 and DX10 modes. These shots were taken almost immediatly after each other so aside from the rendering path, there should be very little difference.

Cheers.

First is dx10 :?:
 
I'll let a few more guesses come in first. Suryad, I think you should put your guess in here. Reuptations on the line though mate!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top