[PC] Crysis 2 - Information Thread

You should perhaps look at legendary

 

I can't imagine any decent modern PC will be unable to best 720p with 2xMSAA at console equivilent settings. Seems a bit of a waste to get the console version tbh if your packing a 9600GT or faster. Especially given the key/mouse controls.

 

If CE3 techdemo is a guide for perfomance and in comparision* with CE2 at same spots of "Island" map then a 7900GT and opteron 185 is quite close +/- depeding on scene regarding 'framerate and visuals'*. Then CE3 with more optimisations... So what I am saying is a 8800GT and Core2Duo should be far more than enough to do it at very high res + same settings or higher settings. Especially with such a large amount of occluders not possible in previous Crysis games.


*DF Crysis/console article.

 

I'm betting an 800GT will smash Crysis 2 at 720p with AA enabled with not too much troubles..

 

New info and interview with Nathan Camarillo

Bolded parts, especially the last one (no "next-gen" bloom/brown!) - fuck yes.

And

 

Sounds good although coincidently New York with tall buildings/buildings lends itself perfectly to control rendering as opposed to previous Crysis games.

However I am delighted we get a break from jungle forests and tropical islands. Also wasn't that apocalyptic movie with Will Smith set in NY?

I feel the vibes...

 

There are going to be a lot of comparisons to Prototype just from the similarity of the setting.

 

Yeah, occlusion culling doesn't sound good in PR.

Me too, although I would've liked much more some mountain forest setting like in that CE3/Eyefinity demo.
Maybe that's reserved for some PC exclusive title Cevat in post-GDC09 interview said they were not giving up on in the future. Though probably we will see Crytek's next "full" title when next-gen consoles arrive, especially wrt what they've said - http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/crysis/news.html?sid=6215393

Yes, I am Legend.

 

True.

Would be nice if they used those surroundings. Crytek also apart fro mwha tsaid in link is that they would hop onto the next train ride at ~2012 with or without consoles being out that time IIRC.

My memory is failing me...

 

It's worth mentioning that particular demo (sadly) is actually from a title that has been officially cancelled for some time now.

More accurately, they've stated they believe the next hardware cycle is directly tied to the console cycle, and CE4 is due to target tech of that time period (Specifically, PS4, Xbox, PC, possibly Nintendo, and possibly Mac, but the last two are officially iffy according to Crytek). They basically don't want to start without console - they see it as the lynch pin of the whole thing.

 

Maybe it's me, but from things they say, I get the idea that they want to continue being PC only/first and the "only" way to do that is to have crossplatform on console.

IE - being able to release on console limits the potential damage of a small buying consumer base (due to piracy or whatever). Thus it allows them to continue to push the graphics envelope on PC rather than stop.

Regards,
SB

 

It seems obvious Crysis is one of the few developers who strive for excellence no matter how many games they sell....but to do this they need to make at least enough money to cover development costs. If this means making console ports then I'm all for it.

Afterall, the first crysis wouldn't run on any hardware at high quality settings when it was released. Why would they do that if profit was their only motive?

 

Utter BS. A 8800GTX could do very high at 720p and would do high easily at higher res. Sure some slowdowns here and there but if that is a factor to class a game as "not run" then apply that to a huge amount of this gen games.

I remember a bench with 3x8800GTX in snow level which are the most taxing doing about 40fps very high settings at 1920x1200 resolution. 2x8800GTX was around 30fps and single 8800GTX around 18fps.

 

This "buy our game now, play it as it was meant to be played 2 or 3 years later"-PC developer mentality certainly was the reason why I abandoned the platform many years ago. Just built myself a new system and I totally love how things have changed: now I buy a multi platform game, max all the settings and play at ridiculous framerates. Console games look good enough for me at the moment, and playing them with great image quality, at awesome framerates and possibly with 3d glasses is just sweet. I guess I just can't stand it when a developer teases me with features that are totally out of my reach.

 

Yeah at 720p, and xp dx9, Crysis could defininetly be played at 30fps VH settings. And if that's too much it's always possible to lower particle amounts or a few other barely noticeable settings and gain even more FPS. Hell with my 8800gtx I could play it at 1440x900 DX10 just by lowering some settings (again, not very noticeable).

 

And I have a problem with the mentality that all games must always run on your favorite "fairly priced" video card. At just what point is technology good enough? Was Voodoo Graphics "good enough"? It seemed like it at the time but I'm sure as hell grateful that they didn't just stop there.

Hell, Unreal ran 15-25fps on my Voodoo Graphics card at glorious 640x480. You can find lots of bitchy posts on Usenet (Google Groups) from those times about how they made the game "too advanced for their own good".

Of course the modern day console takeover of the gaming industry and massive development costs are really normalizing everything quite thoroughly.

 

But that is the problem. It was playable at relase as I stated in post above yours but at 720p res. obviously those that couldn't play it with those systems where those aiming for much higher res and possibly AA or those with old/outdated PC hardware thinking they will get highest quality that is reserved for the high-end hardware. And the 8800GTX released 2006 still to this day can pull all games at max/high settings at varying HD resolutions.

 

I'm a bit wary about the setting. The quoted article/interview/thing a couple posts up mentions freedom of gameplay and sandbox and stuff, but NYC is extremely flat and consisting of mostly big, or very very big buildings laid out in a mostly grid-like fashion. There doesn't seem to be room for much variety, or freedom. I doubt they've designed interiors for all of the thousands of 10+ story buildings on manhattan, or even a decent fraction of them...

If they wanted to make an urban setting, why couldn't they have placed the action in San Fransisco instead? At least there'd be hills and stuff, and a good mix of low and tall buildings. Also, west coast meets the pacific ocean, and is facing roughly in the direction of the island of the previous game. How did the monsters reach NY? It makes about as much sense as the 1990s Godzilla movie for fuck's sake.

 

I played crysis on a laptop with a 8600 GT at the time and at playable settings it was still the damn best looking game on any platform.

 

Then it's your "problem", isn't it?

Why everyone wants to max out whatever bleeding-edge game comes out at ridiculous resoltions and framerates? It's like "bua bua bua if I cant have it then I dont want others to have it, bua bua bua", right Nebby?


The point is and since the dawn of time always was:

- If the game itself is very good/excellent/genre-redefining (like FC was ) like Crytek's titles (although, that's highly subjective, but the same goes for all others anyway) graphics won't matter much. I've played FC on Northwood and 9600XT, sure not on all things maxed out, and it simply blow away all other titles at the time not just in the bling department but much more in fantastic gameplay, which wasn't yet another shooter and much different from games in the genre of the time (hell, it's still different from alot of today's ones). I know people played it on everything even down to GF4MX and they had a great time too.
- If the game has average/below average/mediocre gameplay, then all the graphics in the world won't save it. *cough FC2 cough*



Btw, how can we define what constitutes the "meant to be played"?

1920x1080p + what ammmounts of AA/TSAA/AF + at what framerate? 60 locked + triple-buffered? RGSSAA? Highly unlikely with today's and future games' complexity.