PDA

View Full Version : Crysis SP Demo (Yay!)


TiE23
10-27-2007, 01:38 AM
Good luck running this sucker...

Crysis System Requirements

Minimum system requirements
from Crytek and EA

OS - Windows XP or Windows Vista
Processor - 2.8 GHz or faster (XP) or 3.2 GHz or faster* (Vista)
Memory - 1.0 GB RAM (XP) or 1.5 GB RAM (Vista)
Video Card -256 MB**
Hard Drive - 12GB
Sound Card - DirectX 9.0c compatible

Recommended System Requirements
from Crytek and EA

OS - Windows XP / Vista
Processor - Intel Core 2 DUO @ 2.2GHz or AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+
Memory - 2.0 GB RAM
GPU - NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS/640 or similar

1.8 gigs, but the server is pretty reliable right now, getting 800kbps download.

Direct link:
http://na.llnet.cdn.ea.com/u/demos/Crysis_SP_Demo.exe

Official Site:
http://www.crysisdemo.com/

I'm downloading it, but I have a feeling it's going to be pretty bad for me. I've already played this at a convention and even though the PC was probably over $3000 it ran frankly like **** and was hard to play. But it was pretty enjoyable despite the fact of the average 20fps with everything turn on. It feels a lot like playing HL2 or Morrowind or Oblivion for the first time ever.

Jeff
10-27-2007, 02:04 AM
No way I'll be able to play this with a 2.4GHz P4... Too bad because its a game I'd be interested in but I guess I'll have to upgrade my machine eventually anyways.

Monkey Mania
10-27-2007, 03:42 AM
Congrats for the 5 people who can play it.


the PC was probably over $3000 it ran frankly like **** and was hard to play.

This is why I'm a console gamer.

Pho3nix
10-27-2007, 05:59 AM
Congrats for the 5 people who can play it.
You're over-exaggerating. The recommended specs ain't that bad actually.

swphreak
10-27-2007, 08:32 AM
Alright, let's see what this sucker can do.

Sabretooth
10-27-2007, 09:30 AM
Minimum system requirements
from Crytek and EA

OS - Windows XP or Windows Vista
Processor - 2.8 GHz or faster (XP) or 3.2 GHz or faster* (Vista)
Memory - 1.0 GB RAM (XP) or 1.5 GB RAM (Vista)
Video Card -256 MB**
Hard Drive - 12GB
Sound Card - DirectX 9.0c compatible

My system can't even meet half those system requirements. :indif:

Monkey Mania
10-27-2007, 11:48 AM
You're over-exaggerating. The recommended specs ain't that bad actually.


That's because you're one of the 5.

Tyrion
10-27-2007, 01:14 PM
I'm going to assume that my sadly already antiquated AMD 64 3200 processor can't run it on XP without imploding from too much awesome.

Stupid people and their stupid mutli-cores.

IG-64
10-27-2007, 01:16 PM
Been definitely looking forward to this game mainly for it's engine. However, the demo runs like ****.

Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6800 oc'd to 3.2GHz
1 Nvidia GeForce 8800 GTX
2GB RAM
Vista 64-bit

The auto-detect sets everything on very high but I end up getting about 8-fps. On the crysis EA forums, theres a 6 page-long thread about people with high-end comps that get low frame-rate, with a bunch of people with different combinations of quad-core/dual-core 2GB RAM/4GB RAM and 1 8800/2 8800 SLI and most of them are getting pretty bad framerates on highest settings.

Either this is a demo-only issue and the final product will run better, or Crytek wants us all to use future-computers.

http://forums.ea.com/mboards/thread.jspa?threadID=300093 <-- thread

Crow_Nest
10-27-2007, 01:45 PM
Just completed the demo twice or thrice. I must say this game has the best visuals ive ever seen, and its not even at max settings. Was running on 1024x768 on medium - high settings. And the game is almost like a slideshow, but im used to playing under such conditions. Gameplay wise, its exactly like far cry imo. Only much better. You've got a lot of variety in completing your objectives. Overall, the gameplay was pretty much what i expected from crysis.

swphreak
10-27-2007, 06:17 PM
It ran fine on High for me. I only noticed a small jitter during a cutscene. It sure looks pretty, but I think I'll pass.

TiE23
10-27-2007, 11:06 PM
Can I has ur computerz now plz?

Also, I'm playing this on my lesser computer, the one with a 7600GT. I have 1280x1024 with most settings low except medium on shaders, shadows, and game effects. It's frozen on me twice but luckily it's a gentle crash to desktop.

I'll try it on my other computer, will probably have a better experience with it on that computer.

Crow_Nest
10-27-2007, 11:34 PM
You're over-exaggerating. The recommended specs ain't that bad actually.

Yeah but its too bad even going above the recommended specs cant even play it decently... :rolleyes:

Darth Groovy
10-28-2007, 04:19 AM
And this, ladies and jelly spoons, is why Groovy gave up on PC games.

This was the ONE PC game I wanted to buy. Why? because Crytek pwns, and I loved the Far Cry games. Unfortunately this sucker is not coming out on consoles. I feared this would happen, and ashamed that I reserved the game thinking it would run.

Here are MY specs from the computer I just bought earlier this summer.

AMD Athlon 64X2 Dual Core processor 3800+ 2.00 GHz

NVIDIA Geforce 6150 LE

Forgetaboutit...

This is why PC games are failing in the consumer market. At the end of the day, we just want to install the damn thing and play it...without the hassles. And NO game is worth the pricey upgrades. Ever.

TiE23
10-28-2007, 01:07 PM
^^^ CPU is mkay. You can play it on lower settings. That video card is atrocious, you'll want a 7800GT or higher... And I'm guessing you don't have 2gb of RAM. But meh, you're right.

Monkey Mania
10-28-2007, 01:44 PM
$300 console vs. $3000 PC

PC wins for crispness and resolution, but the little graphics improvement is not worth the price difference.

acdcfanbill
10-28-2007, 02:33 PM
anyone who spends $3000 on a PC is either rich or a fool. You can build a great gaming rig for under $1K. Most prebuilt computers are going to screw gamers in two areas, parts, or price. Groovy got screwed on parts, while the 6150 cards are from 2005, the GeForce 6000 series was introduced in 2004. Essentially, you got a cheap integrated version of 3 year old tech with your computer. :(

Kjølen
10-28-2007, 04:17 PM
Athlon 64 X2 4000+ 2.0GHz
2GB DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) SDRAM
GeForce 7950GX2 1GB GDDR3 PCI-Express
Sound Blaster Audigy 4

1280x1024, all settings on Medium, and it's running fairly decent. Everyone wait for tomorrow, when the 8800GT comes out. That thing will price $200-$250ish and will outperform everything but the 8800GTX (barely).
Click for review (http://forums.vr-zone.com/showthread.php?t=197629)

Anthony
10-28-2007, 07:03 PM
Considering after im done playing pretty much any game I have to extinguish my PC before it sets fire to the wall, I'll pass.

Datheus
10-28-2007, 08:11 PM
Woot. I get to try out my 8800 GTS that I won this weekend!

RoxStar
10-28-2007, 10:13 PM
This game ran better than its installer did. I thought my comp was hosed like 5 times during installation :|

The game ran fine on lowish settings.

Pentium D 3.4 ghz
768 mb DDR ram (no fancy number after that)
Nvidia 6600
XP Pro

TiE23
10-28-2007, 11:40 PM
Stuff I'm doing:

Chopping down trees with my guns. Breaking down a beach house with my bare hands. Stacking cans of gasoline next to a GPS jammer to destroy it because I don't have any grenades. Using camo and grabbing a dude by his neck. Killing a guy by throwing him off a cliff. Taking out enemies one by one like I'm the ****ing predator. Gunning down retreating soldiers with my dual handguns. Taking out each solider in an area one by one as the others get more and more scared. Throwing a grenade into an outhouse as a guy uses it and watching it disintegrate. Throwing a dumpster through walls of a house.

swphreak
10-29-2007, 12:19 AM
Yeah, after playing the demo a third time, I gotta say, the game is pretty frickin' awesome. I was shooting at some soldiers hiding in the forest and was suprised when the trees started to fall. Not to mention the explosions look awesome.

Now I just need to find a cheat code that will let me cloak indefinately a la the Predator.


Tie, you know you can just... turn off the jammer, right? :p

PR-0927
10-29-2007, 12:49 AM
Yeah, it auto-detected to medium settings for all for me. It lagged like no other. So, I've been making changes, and it hasn't run with a good frame rate yet (I hate trying to shoot people with a bit of choppiness, 'cause I always miss 'em).

I have a Dell Vostro 1500, 2 GB RAM, Windows Vista Business, Intel Core 2 Duo (2.0 GHz), and an nVidia GeForce 8600M GT 256 MB RAM. I'm using a modded driver from LaptopVideo2Go (I'm using modded 169.01).

- PR-0927

TiE23
10-29-2007, 03:08 AM
Yeah, after playing the demo a third time, I gotta say, the game is pretty frickin' awesome. I was shooting at some soldiers hiding in the forest and was suprised when the trees started to fall. Not to mention the explosions look awesome.

Now I just need to find a cheat code that will let me cloak indefinately a la the Predator.


Tie, you know you can just... turn off the jammer, right? :p
What? I walked up to the panel on the side and I didn't see any buttons or anything... Anyway, blowing **** up is more fun, ya pansy.

TiE: 1, Phreak: 0

:xp:

BongoBob
10-29-2007, 12:08 PM
Plus, they could always go back and turn it on. Blowing it up, while insanely more fun, is also smarter :D

swphreak
10-29-2007, 03:33 PM
Am I the only one who hijacks a boat just to admire the water?

I've noticed a few small things like walking/driving through some objects, and the water splashing through the bottom of the boat. I realize this is just a pre-relase demo. Just hope it's not in the final build.

Has anyone else modified the config file to allow infinite cloak? It's awesome to see how the AI reacts when they get picked off one by one.

Q
10-29-2007, 04:07 PM
Hey, SWP:

What are your system specs and/or what might you be doing differently to make this hardware-breaker of a game run smoothly?

Inquiring minds want to know.

acdcfanbill
10-29-2007, 09:37 PM
I'm betting water will come thru the bottom of the boat in the final build and in most games until they can find a way to make a cheap water particle system.

swphreak
10-29-2007, 10:00 PM
Hey, SWP:

What are your system specs and/or what might you be doing differently to make this hardware-breaker of a game run smoothly?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Specs:
XP Pro SP2
Intel Core 2 Quad CPU @ 2.6 Ghz
2GB RAM
GeForce 8800 GTX with drivers from April - I should probably update them.

Running the game at 1024x768 on High. I'll give 1280x1024 a try and see if that effects anything, but either way, I usually play my games at 1024.

Edit: Yeah, it looked like it was stuttering more.

Darth Groovy
10-29-2007, 10:41 PM
anyone who spends $3000 on a PC is either rich or a fool. You can build a great gaming rig for under $1K. Most prebuilt computers are going to screw gamers in two areas, parts, or price. Groovy got screwed on parts, while the 6150 cards are from 2005, the GeForce 6000 series was introduced in 2004. Essentially, you got a cheap integrated version of 3 year old tech with your computer. :(

I really should have ran it by you before I bought it. You and I have been talking shop about computers for years. Then I got sucked into consoles and forgot about PC Gaming until Crysis came along. I have had my eye on that game for quite some time. I agree with Billeh, I should have built it myself. These days I just don't have the time to do it. I am NOT going to say I don't have the money or the resources, just over all lack of free time.

My last compy was bought in 2002, or 2003. It ran it's life, and had at least 2 or 3 upgrades. I weighed in the price of future upgrades vs, another prebuilt pc, and I could not pass up the sale they had that week. I guess you get what you pay for.

I also agree that PC game developers should stop trying to out do each other and take a step outside of the box for a minute. If all these parts were more affordable to the general public, then PC games would be more popular. Games like Crysis appear to be developed for hard core pc gamers that have no problem what so ever at spending a week's pay check on a top of the line gaming rig. I am sick to death of the guess work. PC games have faulty misleading info on the boxes they are packaged in. They advertise what you need to run it. Sure it will run at minimum specs, but will run as a slide show. Rarely do you get "recommended" specs from any other source, other than forums, or websites. These companies want to sell the games, but they don't give a damn if the customers are satisfied with the end result. I am pretty honest with my customers, and I am also sympathetic to customers who bring back games that don't run. I loose money on those returns, but at the same time, I warn them before they buy it. Usually they exchange for an older game that is not so demanding of a system. Don't even get me started on Bioshock for the PC...

IG-64
10-29-2007, 10:57 PM
anyone who spends $3000 on a PC is either rich or a fool.
I spent over $3000 on a PC, and I'm not rich.

However, I did not just buy it for games, I bought it for 3D stuff. The games are a bonus for having a really good comp (which is why I kept it to gaming parts).

Stuff I'm doing:
Stuff I'm doing:
Chopping down trees with my fists.
Running like a girl from any koreans.
Admiring the graphics.
Trying to get it to work with my comp so it wont run like drunk snails.

Kjølen
10-30-2007, 09:58 AM
Well, I just found 2GB of DDR2 800 SDRAM on Newegg for $40 after a rebate that ends today (clickie (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820146673)) and paired it with a new Athlon 64 X2 5000+ 2.6GHz Black Edition (Unlocked multipliers). Hopefully the kick-ass processor will get rid of the bottleneck of my current 2.0GHz 4000+.

Ray Jones
10-30-2007, 10:49 AM
Long gone are the times where you fought clock and timing settings for many nights until you managed to run your DX/2 100 processor at virtual 110MHz and that actually was like a day/night difference.

What I wonder is why would the same game needs higher specs for Vista as it does for XP? Makes no sense.

BongoBob
10-30-2007, 11:22 AM
Because Vista is a hueg resource hog?

Det. Bart Lasiter
10-30-2007, 12:52 PM
because dx10 has xtreme grafix. YOU CAN SEE THE BEADS OF SWEAT ON YOUR ENEMIES' FOREHEADS RAYSTON SO YOU KNOW IT'S WORTH THE EXTRA CASH

TiE23
10-30-2007, 07:29 PM
Lots of anti-Vista bitterness going on in this thread. If you can't run this game, well then too ****ing bad.

RoxStar
10-30-2007, 10:17 PM
Is there not an Xbox 360 Version in the works?

BongoBob
10-30-2007, 10:38 PM
If you are smart and don't like running an OS that takes 12 gigs to install and requires at least 2 gigs of ram to run smoothly and is as stable as Britney Spears at best, too f***ing bad.

Fixed.

TiE23
10-31-2007, 02:47 AM
Not a problem. I have 700gb of space on my computer. And I have a "TV Shows" folder that weighs over 180gigs alone. And the 2gb for my computer only cost $60. And Vista owns XP no matter what you say. You shouldn't judge an OS from downloading the open beta from a year ago.

Johnpp
10-31-2007, 05:58 AM
Minimum system requirements
from Crytek and EA

OS - Windows XP or Windows Vista
Processor - 2.8 GHz or faster (XP) or 3.2 GHz or faster* (Vista)
Memory - 1.0 GB RAM (XP) or 1.5 GB RAM (Vista)
Video Card -256 MB**
Hard Drive - 12GB
Sound Card - DirectX 9.0c compatible

Oh noes. Let's start from the start:

OS = Fine.

Processor = Not fine.

Memory = Not fine.

Video Card = :|

Hard Drive = Fine, though I'll have to free some space.

Sound card = Fine-ish.

This will never run on my Gecube 9600 ATi Radeon, will it? 512 Ram, anyone? How about 1.7 GHz?

I need to upgrade. :p

MrWally
10-31-2007, 07:04 AM
Not a problem. I have 700gb of space on my computer. And I have a "TV Shows" folder that weighs over 180gigs alone. And the 2gb for my computer only cost $60. And Vista owns XP no matter what you say. You shouldn't judge an OS from downloading the open beta from a year ago.


If I remember correctly Bongo had Vista installed on his machine... what? Last month? Last week? It was quite recent...

Ray Jones
10-31-2007, 09:30 AM
No one said anything against Vista. I just found it interesting that with Vista you need 50% moar powah to run the same game coming from one and the same installation DVD. :) Either way, tonight I'm going to download the demo, and check if it will run with WINE and linux. :p

TiE23
10-31-2007, 10:46 AM
Well, XP is 5 years younger than Vista. So I would guess a RAM increase would be needed.

Darth Groovy
10-31-2007, 12:28 PM
Is there not an Xbox 360 Version in the works?

Nope. Otherwise I would not even be in this discussion. Going to have to sit Crysis out.

BongoBob
10-31-2007, 12:35 PM
Not a problem. I have 700gb of space on my computer. And I have a "TV Shows" folder that weighs over 180gigs alone. And the 2gb for my computer only cost $60. And Vista owns XP no matter what you say. You shouldn't judge an OS from downloading the open beta from a year ago.

A) Vista does not own XP no matter what I say. It uses more resources than XP no matter what anyone says. No OS should use up that many resources. All that does is take away resources from other applications. Such as games. Explain to me why I got an average of 25 fps on the CS:S stress test with Vista, and then booted into XP and got an average of 60. And this was from the finished product, not the beta. There's just no reason for that **** TiE. In addition to the annoying as hell UAC asking me for permission every time I tried to move a f***ing file (it's done it on all 4 computers I've ever ran vista on), f*** that. I have no reason to ever use that steaming pile of s*** called vista.
B)I'm not judging it from the Open Beta. I'm judging it from my experience with the finished product on 4 different computers, 3 of them being within the last 2 months.
C) Yes, I had vista recently. It came on my laptop. However as soon as I got to an internet connection, I downloaded an ubuntu disk and a windows disk (couldn't find mine, using my license and key though) and got rid of it as soon as the disks were burnt.

MrWally
10-31-2007, 04:15 PM
On operating system should be something that simply runs in the background of your machine that you should never have to deal with. Sure, it can look beautiful and have nice effects but if it's going to do that then it shouldn't have to use up tons of resources. Just take a look at Gutsy Gibbon. In my opinion Gutsy looks much better than Vista with all the effects turned on and you can do much more (and much more useful) things within the operating system itself. However with Gutsy my computer has NEVER slowed down once while performing any normal, standard actions or even while abusing all of the nice special effects of beryl/compiz.

TiE23
10-31-2007, 07:10 PM
Wall of text.
My computer doesn't slow down from any of the settings. And the first thing I ever did on Vista was turn off UAC- it takes 2 minutes and a reboot.

And personally, I'm not sure Ubuntu would really do it for me, I use way too many Windows only applications right now. And if someone tells me that I can run them on Linux using some sort of emulator program, that's just an extra barrier that I don't want to have to deal with. I was raised on Windows and I think I'll stay that way for a little bit longer.

And lastly, I didn't even know you even had a laptop. And you should have gotten a OS-less laptop if possible, or a one with XP for a better price. But alas, I don't know the situation around that.

And anyway, the BEST OS EVER has already been made, and it's called Windows ME OS X Leopard (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2207556,00.asp?sr=hotnews).

MrWally
10-31-2007, 07:42 PM
And anyway, the BEST OS EVER has already been made, and it's called Windows ME OS X Leopard (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2207556,00.asp?sr=hotnews).


QFT

TiE23
10-31-2007, 09:01 PM
Lol. Actually, I'm at ends with no one now.

Seriously, strong computer for Vista? More of a system hog? Hell yes.
Ubuntu has a ton of cool **** that if you take the time to integrate can make it an Uber computer? Totally.
OS X Leopard one of the smoothest pieces of programming to come out in years? Definitely.

It's really all personal preference in the end, and using whatever OS you like is your decision. I know that Anthony at one time had a Window, Linux, and a Mac all at the same time. Bongo clearly, along with many others, lurves their Ubuntu partitions.

Johnpp
10-31-2007, 10:10 PM
Not coming out for 360? I'm sure I saw an advertisement of it on Filefront...

Ahh, it is coming out for 360, just not a direct port. http://digg.com/gaming_news/Crysis_Confirmed_For_Xbox_360

Then, someone commented with this: http://www.crysis-online.com/?id=177

I'm getting very confused.

IG-64
10-31-2007, 11:48 PM
Yes, lets get back on topic people, this is not an OS war thread.

You know, even if the demo is running at 8FPS on highest settings for me, it is still an amazing achievement.

As a Halloween treat for people who can't run Crysis on highest settings or at all, I've whittled down my 382 screenshots to a select 20 I can now share with you. Everything is in-game:

In-engine cut scenes. (http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/52/crysis1yq6.jpg)

Guys standing around looking manly. (http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/1038/crysis2al2.jpg)

Awesome. (http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/2630/crysis3ih9.jpg)

Good caustics. (http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/3484/crysis4gx7.jpg)

Note: Banding in sky is not in actual gameplay (http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/2277/crysis5pk5.jpg)

Even underwater looks amazing. (http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/2946/crysis6sl7.jpg)

Mountain in background is not skybox. (http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/5809/crysis7nh2.jpg)

Foliage. (http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/8055/crysis8as5.jpg)

A slightly too sudden but still cool sunrise. (http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/255/crysis9hn1.jpg)

A few things to notice: The glare arond the plants in front of the sun; the sun rays filtering through the trees; the flock of birds in the sky; and the light shining through the big leaf on the left. Oh, and the mountain. (http://img139.imageshack.us/img139/9180/crysis10wf0.jpg)

Nice grass lighting. (http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/687/crysis11ev7.jpg)

A nice vista (not talking about the OS) (http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/8246/crysis12ys3.jpg)

Nice ocean specular. (http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/5086/crysis13rw8.jpg)

Clouds are volumetric (3D) (http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/7113/crysis14oe8.jpg)

Indoors looks good too. (http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/1015/crysis15vp1.jpg)

Facing a dual-pistol-wielding solder in a nano suit with a calm demeanor is no small feat. And what's the guy on the right shooting at? (http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/3796/crysis16qx6.jpg)

That's a lot of trees (and really good shadows). (http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/7562/crysis17es1.jpg)

Some of the best ground textures in a game. (http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/7066/crysis18nt5.jpg)

Looks great at all distances. (http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/2523/crysis19mx8.jpg)

How so many good-looking trees can be rendered at an observable framerate is beyond me. (http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/1305/crysis20ci3.jpg)

I'd also like to note that all of the trees are breakable and break at whatever point you're shooting at/punching. You can even break the pieces of trees into smaller pieces, and if the tree was small enough, you can pick up the pieces and throw them at people.

Enjoy.

Johnpp
11-01-2007, 04:47 AM
Wish this game would work on my PC. When I upgrade, this will be the first game to test. Looks awsome!

Those trees must be over 50 thousand polies in one model...wow. That + my PC = :(

Edit: Ughh, on one of those pics there are over 100 trees...what FPS did you get there?

Ray Jones
11-01-2007, 08:38 AM
Nice screenshots there, IG. :)

And if someone tells me that I can run them on Linux using some sort of emulator programWell, technically, if you're using WINE, WINE Is Not an Emulator. It provides nothing but the Windows API wrapped around native linux calls and does not *emulate* anything. It's fast, really fast, at least as fast as Windows, and it's cheap, really cheap, at least as cheap as "no cost at all". :xp: :xp: :xp:

swphreak
11-01-2007, 10:48 AM
I bet the Crysis devs are smacking themselves right about now. (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=522) It seems you can try out some more vehicles and guns in the demo.

I really want to try the chopper.

BongoBob
11-01-2007, 01:58 PM
Oh man, the amount of things they've discovered.

My favorite so far is editing the ini file to be able to use "Dx10 Exclusive Features" on XP with Dx9

IG-64
11-01-2007, 04:40 PM
Edit: Ughh, on one of those pics there are over 100 trees...what FPS did you get there?
It depends on what I set it on. If I turn the AA off, and shadows and shaders to high instead of very high I'll get about 15-30 fps. If I turn shadows and shaders to medium I get about 30-60 fps with a few severe framerate drops here and there depending on what's happening. If everything's on very high it's about 5-8fps.

Btw, all those screens were supposed to be 1680x1050, but imageshack resized a bunch of them.

Commander Obi-Wan
11-01-2007, 05:37 PM
I played the demo the other day.

The physics of the game are great. Though, some parts could be edited a bit. Which is probably going to happen to the full-version.

Better? :p I'll just not include it.

Kjølen
11-01-2007, 07:09 PM
I was impressed by most of it, though I except what happens what happens after you've killed the guy. Otherwise, it was enjoyable.

You might want to consider reconstructing that sentence.

Sabretooth
11-01-2007, 11:42 PM
You might want to consider reconstructing that sentence.
Thank the Lord you preserved it using the awesome powers of Quote.

BongoBob
11-01-2007, 11:49 PM
I lold.

Monkey Mania
11-02-2007, 01:43 AM
I was pleasantly surprised that my comp was able to play the demo. So screw myself.

My setup:

Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB
1.7GHz CPU
1.5GB RAM

I was able to run the game at about 20fps on minimum settings. So anybody thinking their comp won't run Crysis with anything above my settings is foolish.

Johnpp
11-02-2007, 02:04 AM
Hmm...my processor is the same, and my graphic card is a Radeon 9600, but I've only got 512MB RAM. Does it use RAM for loading textures/2dgraphics?

Ray Jones
11-02-2007, 05:18 AM
I just love it. It's awesome. Though, with 2 GiB of RAM + a T5500 at 1,67 GHz + nVidia 7400 256 MiB I only can play it at 800x600 and medium settings. I may consider to do 'finetune' some clock settings.. however, as I did in FarCry, water will be always set to high. :D

Maxstate
11-02-2007, 06:22 AM
It doesn't really matter what you set things to, I've set everything but shaders on very high (using a .cfg 'hack') and keep my shaders on medium and I never fall below 40 fps. Once you start touching the shaders option, you're playing with the old gameplay - - visuals meter. And to tell you the truth, I've ran it on DirectX10 and I still prefer shaders on medium.

Crow_Nest
11-02-2007, 06:40 AM
Shaders kill most of the FPS and causes more stutter, thats for me at least. Ive heard someone saying that post processing is the biggest FPS hog for this game. Hopefully the extra 2GBs of RAM im getting next monday will help me out in some way. :)

Maxstate
11-02-2007, 06:48 AM
Yeah but something tells me the game isn't finished yet, and it's not the "PRE-RELEASE VERSION" in the top of the screen. Changing most of the sliders has no effect for me for some reason. Try changing post-processing to low after you've switched to high or very high shaders.

Then there's the rumours of it not using the true available power that CPUs can produce, which I can attest to; Jedi Academy gets my CPU far hotter than crysis.
AND if you have an 8xxx series card you're bound to notice that the drivers SUCK. Just seriously they're poopoo in every way. I've tried numerous games on my 8600GT and it just performs below average, the same goes for any 8 series Nvidia card currently on the market, the technology is new and the drivers seem to echo this fact.

Crow_Nest
11-02-2007, 10:52 AM
Just seriously they're poopoo in every way. I've tried numerous games on my 8600GT and it just performs below average, the same goes for any 8 series Nvidia card currently on the market, the technology is new and the drivers seem to echo this fact.

In compared to their predecessors? The DX10 mid range cards by ATI and NVIDIA are more like experimental DX10 cards to me. Like the 8600GTS is on par with the 7900GT in terms of performance. Even though the technology and specs of the 8600GTS are way better. The mid range DX10 cards of both companies have seen to perform better or worst than their predecessors which basically makes them the same in terms of performance. The only real advantage these cards have is the support for DX10.

So if you say your 8600GT performs below average you know why. Its just a GeForce 7 with a little more bells and whistles.

Ray Jones
11-02-2007, 10:53 AM
Hell, I've suffered years due to the fact that I had *no* shaders at all. Until last year's Christmas. I will not, never ever so to say, tone down or disable any pixel or vertex shader settings that are available. I rather set them high and go down in resolution or texture quality or watch a slide show XD

But I think what kills FPS are the physics and in game effects maybe also post processing, in fact my FPS get a real boost when I switch those to low.

Anyone got a good .ini file guide?

Pho3nix
11-02-2007, 10:54 AM
The incredible AI in Crysis. (http://youtube.com/watch?v=LJkCWQcZYKo)

:D

Kjølen
11-02-2007, 01:11 PM
Anyone who is planning on upgrading or building a new gaming computer, I love you, and want to help you pick out the parts. I'm great with a budget. I love Newegg. Contact me via AIM or MSN. I want to build your computers.

BongoBob
11-02-2007, 04:21 PM
He also wants to have your babies.

Crow_Nest
11-04-2007, 09:59 AM
But I think what kills FPS are the physics and in game effects maybe also post processing, in fact my FPS get a real boost when I switch those to low.

Anyone got a good .ini file guide?

You dont need one, just use the Maximum Framerate function in your nanosuit. :twogun:
Hell yeah i got like 200 FPS the moment i turned it on.

Maxstate
11-04-2007, 10:14 AM
In compared to their predecessors? The DX10 mid range cards by ATI and NVIDIA are more like experimental DX10 cards to me. Like the 8600GTS is on par with the 7900GT in terms of performance. Even though the technology and specs of the 8600GTS are way better. The mid range DX10 cards of both companies have seen to perform better or worst than their predecessors which basically makes them the same in terms of performance. The only real advantage these cards have is the support for DX10.

So if you say your 8600GT performs below average you know why. Its just a GeForce 7 with a little more bells and whistles.
That's the general consensus under people that sadly don't know any better and use it to console themselves for having bought something even ****tier :(

Anthony
11-04-2007, 03:54 PM
http://www.actiontrip.com/link.phtml?http://www.crysis-online.com/forum/index.php?topic=11837.0#msg203789

doing this can enable all the shiny Vista/DX10 only stuff in XP.

Sorry if that was posted earlier but I dont feel like reading through the whole thread.

I find I get better overall performance in XP even WITH all the Vista shininess enabled.

TiE23
11-04-2007, 04:20 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v123/Tie23/9e39fbd9.jpg

You'll still need a DX10 video card still, right?

Monkey Mania
11-04-2007, 04:49 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v123/Tie23/9e39fbd9.jpg

You'll still need a DX10 video card still, right?

Of course! You just don't need Vista.

Q
11-04-2007, 06:13 PM
http://www.actiontrip.com/link.phtml?http://www.crysis-online.com/forum/index.php?topic=11837.0#msg203789

doing this can enable all the shiny Vista/DX10 only stuff in XP.

Sorry if that was posted earlier but I dont feel like reading through the whole thread.

I find I get better overall performance in XP even WITH all the Vista shininess enabled.
Man, what a cool hack. Thanks for posting this!:thumbsup:

Up yours, Vista!

Ray Jones
11-04-2007, 07:02 PM
Okay, so far it runs on wine.

In-game it looks rather ugly though. :)


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v93/RayJones/Screenshot-5.png

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v93/RayJones/Screenshot-6.png



I have to wonder why the installer complains that he couldn't adjust the firewall settings? :confused:

Monkey Mania
11-04-2007, 07:26 PM
That's what you get for running it under a different OS.

BongoBob
11-04-2007, 08:42 PM
That's what you get for running it under a different better OS that's handicapped by microsofts monopoly of the PC game market.

Fixed.

Personally, I'd rather fight for a while to get it working in linux than use windows.

What distro are you running Ray? What's your computers specs?

Monkey Mania
11-04-2007, 08:58 PM
Developers can just as easily make their games for other OSs.

Anthony
11-04-2007, 09:35 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v123/Tie23/9e39fbd9.jpg

You'll still need a DX10 video card still, right?

I dunno I might be stupid but I think I get a little bit of an improvement with a DX9 card.

Not as much as i would though.

either way the game still runs better for me in XP than Vista :P

(that is, I can play a game, not a slideshow)

Jeff
11-04-2007, 10:05 PM
Developers can just as easily make their games for other OSs.I think he meant more of the fact that MS has a monopoly on the OS market, so why would developers waste time making games for others OS's.

Johnpp
11-04-2007, 10:16 PM
That's better than what it would look like on my rig. :lol:

Isn't Vista free for 60 days or something though?

BongoBob
11-04-2007, 11:19 PM
...it starts up in half the time as XP. It looks pretty, and the desktop never lags like it did for me all the time on XP.

I call shenanigans. What was the computers specs with XP and what's the computers specs with Vista? Because I know that XP started for me in half the time it started vista on my laptop. Yes, even after removing the bloatware on Vista and installing everything I use on XP.

And no, I don't particularly love the fact that I have to jump through 9 f***ing hoops to play CS:S on linux. However, until more developers like id Software and Epic decide, "Hey, lets support linux also." we have to do that. Yes it sucks, however, when I can get just as good a framerate on Linux with a game as I do on windows (which by comparison is slower and less secure with less customization), I'm happy. Am I happy that it took 3 days of troubleshooting to work? No. But until more developers support linux, that's what we gotta do.

BongoBob
11-05-2007, 12:50 AM
How old was the xp install? Was it time for a format?

Prettier icons and eye candy aren't worth a DRM infested bloated OS.

Ray Jones
11-05-2007, 02:38 PM
Personally, I'd rather fight for a while to get it working in linux than use windows.It was, however, the result of a "no fight just out of the box" installation. :)

What distro are you running Ray? What's your computers specs?Debian sid@linux 2.6.22-ck1-FBiNC, intel Core2Duo T5500@1,67GHz, 2 GiB RAM, nVidia 7400 Go PCIe w/ 256MiB.

Det. Bart Lasiter
11-05-2007, 06:29 PM
Not a problem. I have 700gb of space on my computer. And I have a "TV Shows" folder that weighs over 180gigs alone.
ITT e-Penis.

And Vista owns XP no matter what you say. You shouldn't judge an OS from downloading the open beta from a year ago.So, Vista for Crysis = Loss of a few frames per second in performance.
then Linux = It's completely ****ing broken. But I didn't want to play Crysis anyway, it sucks/needs a super computer to play.
ITT butthurt Vista users attempt to justify paying over 9000x more for a broken OS.

...it starts up in half the time as XP. It looks pretty, and the desktop never lags like it did for me all the time on XP.
ITT USO DA

Kjølen
11-05-2007, 07:05 PM
ITT butthurt Vista users justify paying over 9000x more for a broken OS.

Nothing justifies paying OVER 9000 for a broken OS, not even Doom music.

Det. Bart Lasiter
11-05-2007, 07:09 PM
Nothing justifies paying OVER 9000 for a broken OS, not even Doom music.
While I appreciate you pointing that out, I despise you for saying 'not even doom music".

Kjølen
11-05-2007, 07:15 PM
I'd better keep my head down, before this thread, too, becomes a festering spawn-hole for lolcats.

Det. Bart Lasiter
11-05-2007, 07:17 PM
http://i24.tinypic.com/9tpw6b.jpg

Tyrion
11-05-2007, 09:39 PM
I'd better keep my head down, before this thread, too, becomes a festering spawn-hole for lolcats.

http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/9558/ibtlwh2.gif

TiE23
11-05-2007, 10:04 PM
Please do not delete threads that have posts in them. Thanks.

~9