“Crysis makes me sick”
I’m guessing this title will attract quite a few gamers. It is the direct translation from the title of a swedish article I will be translating into english here today. This is an interesting article written by Andreas Dimestam at SweClockers.com concerning the relationship between the Gaming and Hardware markets. I have done the translation as best I can but if anyone notices a mistake, please make a note of it in the comments! 
Around 3 years ago Far Cry was launched by the same developers behind Crysis: Germany based Crytek. The Game was an average FPS that didn’t bring anything new to the genre, but was still a pleasant game, playable at least one time. Back then just like now, graphics were at the center of things.
Far Cry had beautiful environments that few computers at the time could handle. Hardware websites and enthusiasts quickly made Far Cry a benchmark standard for all types of hardware. A little later however, something happened which became the beginning of this whole story. AMD launched their 64-bit processor Athlon 64 and were hunting for sales arguments.
Due to the fact that AMD were the first to create 64-bit processors in regular home PC’s, there was almost no software that supported this new technology. This made it difficult for AMD to convince the consumers of the advantages of more “bits in the processor”. AMD was simply forced to convince developers to use the new technology, and one of the goals of this campaign was a 64-bit version of Far Cry.
Apparently AMD managed to “convince” Crytek. About the same time that Microsoft released their 64-bit version of Windows XP a patch popped up on AMD’s website promising gold to those with the courage to buy a new processor and upgrade their operating system. The advantages of “more bits in the processor” was demonstrated with snapshots showing more badass explosions and more detailed textures. Isn’t 64-bit wonderful?
For those of us with our feet on the ground, these arguments were not as convincing. 64-bit in fact has nothing to do with bigger textures. To be able to adress more memory and have access to wider registers can make it easier to handle large sums of data, but at the time no personal computer was even close to breaking the 32-bit barrier. Cut short, this PR scam had nothing to do with “more bits in the processor”.
Back to present day and the launch of the Crysis Demo. Just like last time an enormous amount of hype was built up, largely about the astounding graphics. By using Microsofts latest graphics standard Directx 10, which is only available in Windows Vista, the developers have been able to push the boundaries of what is possible with todays hardware. That is the official version at least.
The truth is the true purpose of Directx 10 is to make developing easier by cleaning up registers and supplying new useful functions. This however is nothing the consumer notices, and therefore Microsoft must point out Directx 10’s “graphical improvements” in order to convince gamers to upgrade to Windows Vista. In reality DX10 does not mean drastically improved visual effects, at least not with todays graphics cards. There is a certain repetition of history to be seen here, right?
And then a few days after the Crysis demo launched the bad news was announced. When using Directx 9 you can’t run the game at “very high” settings, which drastically improves the visual experience from lower settings. A member at Crysis-online poked around a bit with the demo files and found a way to get almost exactly the same visual quality with Directx 9. This meant that the developers (Crytek) had purposefully worsened the Directx 9 setting to make Microsofts new technology appear superior. Apparently Crytek dosen’t mind lying to their customers.
This is not all. Crytek CEO Cevat Yerli was interviewed a while back by Shacknews and talked about how beneficial multi-core processors would be for the game. Finally those who had spent big bucks on quad-cores would earn their increased perfomance.
“Multi-core will be beneficial in the experience, particularly in faster but also smoother framerates. [...] We recommend quad core over higher clock.”
Quad core was the advice Crytek had to give to hopeful gamers saving money for upgrades. What was the reality again? The reality is that four cores gives zero, I repeat, ZERO perfomance increase in Crysis. And thats not all, because once again the 64-bit question has to be adressed. Cevat Yerli was also interviewed by Gamespot among others praising “more bits in the processor”:
“I would recommend gamers run 64-bit only under very high configurations.”
Better Performance at higher graphics settings? This was not the reality. The truth is that 64-bit improves NOTHING in Crysis!
This is of course the demo version we are talking about, but everything points toward the full version of the game functioning the same. Is this the kind of behaviour us enthusiasts and gamers will have to live with in the future? Game developers being a part of the marketing of new technology and hardware, no longer concentrating on delivering the best possible product but convincing consumers to open their wallets and unnecessarily upgrading their systems? I assume money has exchanged hands more than once behind the scenes, and who the suspects are need not even be mentioned. As a true gamer and hardware enthusias i declare that Crysis makes me sick.
Source: SweClockers
Comments(136)
was not the acctual thing that it got worse in 64bit? :/ anyway in crysis…
Nice article.. Loads of valid points ty Im sure it will raise alot of discussion..
very nice translation ReeGed. I know for a fact windows is not an OS you want to use for multi core. If I get 4core Im going to be running linux and BeOS/Zeta on it.
Hahah, that guy isnt very good. Crysis the full game DOES support QUAD CORE the demo DIDNT. So it doesnt matter now.
And it is TRUE that some DX10 effects cannot be reproduced under DX9 thats why you cant do DX9 very high. The people that enabled it did NOT get all the effects of DX10 because its not possible.
Wow… very nice post. Only beef I have is with the picture…. the sun is shining in the AMD picture… so if their saying that a 64 bit system makes it brighter in anyway, that would just be foolish.
I’ve played the game on both 32 and 64 bit systems. There is a difference, but it works well on a 32 bit system in my opinion just about as good.
Then again, I Enjoy watching CAMS.
Just meh 2 cents
very true article….
Crysis makes me sick too, I’m glad I dl’ed it before buying, cuz I’d have been choked if I had actually paid money for it. It does not stand up graphically on dx9 or 10 to the original screenshots and movies released by crytek, in fact they PROMISED at the time that the game would look like those screens and vids, but now it just looks blahh. The gameplay does not even compare to Battlefield game standards, and is infact IDENTICAL to Far Cry with the exception of the basically useless ‘nano suit’. The way the game plays out too is EXACTLY the same as Far Cry, in level design to the boats in the water.
I built my comp specifically for this game, and am now attempting to sell it so I can go back to 360 and actually play GOOD games. I was completely duped by Crytek with this game, they will get no more support from me, ever.
Crysis makes me sick too..
@mupet0000
you can get the very high settings in XP you only need to poke around in the files and do the settings manually AND then it looks alomoste the same…
AND anyway i still dont get why so many people say BUY A dx10 card like 8800GTX becuse dx10 is “old” the new stuff is dx10.1 i know thers not big diffrens but hey THERES NOT BIG DIFFRENCE if you check dx9 and dx10 so ST_FU
who cares if hardware companies ant M$ pay off developers to say that gamers should by new hardware and Vista. only those who lack brain or have too much cash could by a new system just for one game even before they tried it.
Crysis would be nothing without its visuals. Every game developer is pushing towards shiny visuals, and the games themselves are bullsh*t.
Crysis itself look good, but you need to play it on ultra hige…
Not many pc can do that
that’s wy they bring out new hardware…
Ho said Gaming would be cheap?
But back to Crysis Gaming makes me sick, YES the game sucks..
The game play is different you get use to it during gaming, but the game ant realistic… this is because some time’s when I ride over the road you suddenly stop and the car Explode because there is a buge again..
Also the aiming in close combat is very weird when I there is close combat and don’t zoom in you almost can’t hit the other dude.. (Single player)
The game is over for me…
2007/2008 the game of the year Scr*w Crysis!
very nice post.
this game is bol**cks – sam as farcry – nice and shiny but empty inside – so what if it looks nice and enemy ai is more than ok – great even while it’s not what they made it for and not how they advertise it – it’s all about so called ’standards’ we make a deal with this company and that company for mucho dinero to promote their hardware and we happy yes is nice mucho dinero i like – sheesh – it’ll blow over faster than you can say ‘directx10 my ar##’
thats always the case …. i feel… everybody does it … right from the Graphics card makers to Chip makers to other related peripheral makers (mouse/kb)… for them its business as usual
Crysis may excel in graphics but utterly fails in gameplay, thus making it no more than a mediocre product.
The hype about it is just ridiculous.
Flamebate. Fanboys wont read it and just bash the game…
dx10 brings some better shadows and larger textures are POSSIBLE.
the thing is, the graphiccards today are not fast enough for the improvements. so dx10 doesn’t look better up to date.
bring on UT3!
@4:ifukurmomma
i guess you are better than him and rlslog is going to ask you to be part of the team… uhm… not!
actually i never understood why 64bits would give improvements, if you think about it, it’s the size of the registers, so i guess the only big difference would be in alu arithmetic operations and in the native functions of the cpu, so yeah bigger calculations, but not necessarily faster (at least from my knowledge) so their might be useful for some games calculations but thats doesn’t mean a huge difference…
Talk about hype used to sell hardware… I waited for the demo before deciding to buy *anything*. Good thing, coz I get around 15 FPS at 1024×768 on my Asus M4N laptop with my amazing Raedon 9700 Mobility chip (after tweaks of course).
Quite playable, thank you very much Crytek.
Sure I don’t have volumetric clouds and swishy water, but who gives a sod? It don’t make for better gameplay. IMO Far Cry was a better “quality” game.
I’ll gladly pay for a good game, but not for new hardware to run something that becomes boring after an hour.
Hanging out for UT3!!
@4 , You must be too stupid to read the article before posting your useless comments. I am not the author of this article, ergo these are not my opinions, although I do agree with a lot being said in it and I think it makes some valid points…
Hey admins,
Change the spam protection to use SUBTRACTION as well. That’ll foil 99% of the idiot posters right there.
Crytek is german based but its ceo cevat yerli & bros r Turk.. Anyway Crysis is beyond the next-gen..
lol.. how about: enter a number between your IQ and 10
@39 very funny
Nicely said. They always want gamers to open our wallets and we always hope for the best then ending up getting far from it.
So, there u have it. I am outrageous and because of that I will start to use german, most of those neonazis anti-Semites are germans anyway.
Seid ihr eigentlich total bescheuert? Warum sind wir Deutschen so gefickt, müssen immer den Schwanz nach innen kehren? Da brauchen wir uns nicht über unseren Hitlerkomplex wundern, wenn da ein paar Affen daherkommen und wieder “jeah Hitler toll, vergast die Juden” brüllen! Euch Kinder sollte man nach Sibierien verschieben (absichtliche Anspielung auf eure gute alte Zeit).
Die beiden CEOs sind keine Türken, die sind integriert mit deutschen Pässen, also Deutsche. Kein Wunder, das Integration in Deutschland nicht hinhaut, weil jeder, der des Urgroßmutter mal in der Türkei gewohnt hat, als Türke bezeichnet wird!
The M$ strategy concerning DX10 is one of the most ugly thing I have ever saw in computer bussiness. There’s no actual reason to make DX10 “Vista only”, there’s no actual reason to shift to Vista and there’s no actual reason to give them our money. The situation with Crysis very high settings under XP prooves it. I’m really pleased that this article got translated (bravo!!! ReeGed), things like this should be unveiled ASAP and distributed widely.
THIS MORON IS TALKING ABOUT THE DEMO, NOT THE FINISHED FULL GAME, DIFFERENT STROKES.
Im sure many have bought this rubbish article, without taking notice of the above. His arguments mean nada for the full game. Many EA haters and anto Microsoft will use this bull to say, seeee, we iz raight, play half live zomg bestest!!!1
And I agree, there should be a game where killing the USA soldiers is a good thing and getting rid of the USA is the final result. I mean we are all for equality right, not propaganda?
dym like it or not the guy who rules everything concerning Crytek IS Turkish, being a Turk is not just a nationailty but a race, from the Turkic race, like a jewish race can have many nationalities.
Cevat was even on Turkish TV documentaries and news saying he is proud to be Turkish and bringing these games to the world. It is his baby, just like Far Cry, and he hired people to work on it, trying to get close to what he wants. So what’s your problem, he likes and recognizes his roots, now the Germans want to pretend he is German, LOL!
@28 spastic_kid.. it’s actually weird that sh1t made it past censors.
They don’t like extreme violence, but they allow extreme stereotyping. “I kill you like dog” WTF??
Shooting ppl, fine.. racial stereotyping not cool.
And the lamest thing is u can’t shoot up dead bodies. And they call this next-gen.
imho article is right and as somene mentioned here Crysis is empty “inside” and that’s the reason why i didn’t bought it and bought CoD 4 – which imho worth it….
this all goes back to when Quake was released, and the subsequently enormous goldmine it proved to be for the entire Windows OS + hardware industry, and is now a commonplace and cyclical phenomenon in order to stoke interest in upgrading
the difference now and in recent years is that there are fewer and fewer reasons to justify ANY upgrade – it’s the MS Office scenario, once you’ve got a program that is more than adequate for people to do things with it, further enhancements become obsolete and companies like Crytek in this case resort to underhand tricks to sell their products
@lame propaganda for sheeple
I must have missed the lesson where it was explained how a religion (like jewish) can be a race…
there is only one race: humans!
@37 dym: Es war eigentlich nur ein Kerl der scheisse geredet hat
Seine Anmerkungen wurden entfernt.
Short talk with dym there. And i do agree with what you have to say about people labelling others. Good point.
@39: If you read the article you will notice that the writer acknowledges the fact that it is only the demo.
@41.. this is a good point. Who looks at the friggin volumetric clouds while playing an FPS?
The gameplay is so very very basic in Crysis. It lacks any kind of interesting complexity. Run and gun.. many games out there do it way better. It’s almost an arcade style game… Oblivion suffered from that, seems Crysis does too.
yes … agreed crysis n crytek suck !…
m sure they have purposely reduced the perfomance in mid-range pc z …so awaiting a custom made patch for that…
until that bring on UT3 !!!!!…. UNREAL is the TRUE WINNER….PEOPLE FRIENDLY !….AND NO NEED TO SPEND FREAKISH AMOUNT OF MONEY ON NEW QUAD CORE CPU N CRAP !!!!…check out the max . rec. requirements of UT3 !!!!!
and yes the graphics r equally mind – blowin !!!!
To use only one game as benchmark for all other games is wrong. It is like using Windows as a benchmark for all other OS’ out there. It leads to a monopoly position for only ONE company which makes games while there are other companies on the market who make great games too.
Most of the PC users in the world don’t have high grade pc’s to run a game on. I only need to look around and see that most people wait until the price drops for the hardware that makes this game run in ‘Optimal Mode’.
Most of us have bills to pay and after that might have some money left to upgrade to new hardware or buy a new system.
Most people are one, or two, steps behind on current technology. I’m not going to waste 400Euros, or more, on a GPU just for one game. That’s 2 months rent for me.
And the second argument is to look at who is saying you need to upgrade to Quad-core…
Yes it is those companies who have a vast interest in you upgrading. GPU producing and the Game manufacturing companies. Those companies only care about you spending every last cent on their products. Most of us hate the advertising here, and on tv, but will believe the advertisements made by these companies.
Some skepticism towards these companies isn’t a misplaced opinion.
@13 g@ywad
Nobody is forcing you, with a gun to your head, to read the comments on this site.
And as for your use of the English language is a poor one too while you are whining about other people use of it.
Most of us aren’t native English language users but most here are able to make their opinions readable enough.
That’s what is more important than being grammar perfect with no typos or slang.
I think the lesson here is for game developers to stop listening to M$ and h/w salesppl and start listening to what gamers want. Just a whacko idea, but maybe that will sell more games!
They’ll find that we don’t care quite as much about DX10 and volumetric farts as much as we do about gameplay.
Crysis could have been Far Cry gfx with a focus on cutting edge gameplay, physics, AI and story, instead of just making it DX10 and *gasp* you can shoot trees zomg!!1!
What a lot of wasted effort. It’s a cryin shame. Next.
People seem very hung up graphics over gameplay on here! I saw the original videos and have played through the parts represented in the videos and have to say it looked identical. I found that one of the more impressive parts of the game was the AI, although no one seems to mention it. The downside to this game is that the processor handles the sound which gets a bit ropey with alot going on, thats one of the reasons crytek were recommending quad core processing.
i installed the demo on my machine, tried it at medium settings and my computer threw a fit and was on the rag for a week afterwards. not sure if i’m willing to get a new computer just for this. i have been following the development of crysis since i first heard of it. looks amazing!
my computer runs f.e.a.r and hl2 episode two perfectly. everything on the highest settings.
is this article fully true, or just some hardware nut going crazy for not getting the benchmark tests he was hoping for?
guess i’ll wait for a review on the full game.
@31&32 {lame propaganda for sheeple},
What the hell are you talking about??
I suggest you get back on your meds quick….
Thats why I got myself an Xbox360 yesterday. I can’t buy a new computer every time a new game coming out. I think the console out there is winning the gaming-segment in the long run. And I think Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo will push the market toward that segment to, even if Microsoft is focus on Windows Vista etc. But is a reason why Microsoft launch an gaming console.
Notable quotable from that gamespot article:
“The hacked very high quality settings under Windows XP were almost 20 percent faster than the Vista frame rates…”
Goes on to say it’s comparing apples to oranges in terms of behind the scenes processing, but who cares? The visuals are almost exactly the same!
So what was the point of Vista again..?
I got this game and team fortress 2.. and i tell u team fortress 2 beats crysis hands down
yay for half life 2 fanboy!
^^ exactly.. what was the point of DX10 again? DX9 does very well if used to it’s fullest.
but was it as good as halo 3
keep an eye on this for dx10 under xp
http://www.fallingleafsystems.com/
haha the game doesnt even run at FULL dx10 it only DX9 with impressive DX10 Eye Candies… non of any present home PC can run fully dx10 “high graphics” game… hope that in a year to two years from now things will be bbetter and we will finally be able to see some “almost” real envirment in games… till then a 8800GT on high will have to do =]
crysis is the best fps i have played to date
cod4 owns crysis
@43 octave: “My computer threw a fit” really made me laugh haha, hope its feeling better now.
The article seems to be very much true. If you click on the links in the article you can see all the sources used to put this article together.
Also I wouldnt recommend buying a new computer just for this game. It simply is not worth it, unless you have a lot of money to spare. There are plenty other games out there with mighty lower min. specs that are much more enjoyable than Crysis. But thats just my opinion :/
@46… hahahahahhhhaha
what have you xpected? the hacked “very high” on XP still doesnt delivers the DX10 eye candies you get with vista… but vista is sh*t so i think unless you have a monster computer with GTX\Ultra Sli the high settings on vista or the (not really) “very high” on XP will be better for most people…
I really don’t care… The Crysis demo runs in my PIV 2.8 with a ASUS 6800 LE in 1024×768… in XP… on a 4 year old POS computer…
So the full will run too… no question…
Crysis is not even a better game than COD4… or TF2.. or HL2… or any other game… it’s just a game with DX10…
These new next-gen graphics games bore me as hell.
Bring me interesting gameplay and story, I want fallout 3.
http://www.fallingleafsystems.com/ are picking up email accounts to spam, nothing more
I’ve been anticipating Crysis for over a year now… I’ve probably seen every movie and screenshot relating it as well as watching interviews and reading articles. I recently built a new computer (not JUST for Crysis… I had milked my last on for all it was worth), and am able to play it on High settings… It’s really not anything that great and is not worth the money.
COD4, TF2, UT3, HL2 etc – they all own Crysis for numerous reasons. Creativity, originality and gameplay. Crysis seems to me like a remake of FarCry (which was awesome… well at least until the aliens came), with the start of the graphics of 2008. This is a game I will burn on to a DVD and instal on my next rig. All that I can see that is amazing about this game is the graphics so I might as well wait until the hardware that can run it maxed out gets produced.
This game is over-rated and has really disappointed me ever since I first got my hands on the beta. Now… back to some COD4 multi, w00h!
^ I agree, why don’t game developer focus more so on gameplay?
I remember the old days, when graphics didn’t matter as much, the days of Counter-strike. And even before 3d graphics, like super mario, and mortal combat, the gameplay used to be amazing.
@58
really? bummer .. I’ll have to recheck them. When I first found it things looked pretty straight-forward. Was not my intent to send anyone for that purpose.
I make Crysis sick!
i have a dual core 2.4 and its slow on crysis
Well,this is nothing new, this games/hardware “forced upgrade” stint has been going on for years now. I bet that if the developers wanted, every cutting edge game could be optimised for older computers at a not too big quality loss just like the fans did with Oblivion. But they don’t want to do that – they want to make you spend more of your money.
Now about Crysis – let’s just say i was pretty underwhelmed. While it was a pretty fun romp the enemy AI was dissapointing and some of sequences were downright annoying (Not to mention the “wait for sequel” ending).
I have a AMD X2 5600+ Dual core, with 2GB of RAM and a Radeon 2600XT. The highest playable DX10 settings for me on 1024X768 were only medium. Maybe it’s because my crappy GFX card (betting on ATI this time might have been a mistake) but i would like to hear from other people with midrange DX10 GFX cards how well (or unwell) the game ran for them.
Great translation. Too bad the full game is out which makes this all B.S.
Crysis is a great game that I enjoyed very very much, Period. All the new DX10 games look terrific, but amount of simultaneous objects and longview the CE1 and CE2 engines are still unmatched by ANY standard. Why be angry that Crytek is a flagship developer? It just is.
I know it sounds like lies, but it is pure truth to say that these recommendations can be utilized (with future patches) if the technology is there. Remember, the developers are USING the hardware they recommend to DEVELOP the game. It match what it was designed on –for the full experience.
Now PhysX, That’s a bunch of crap
Crysis is a good game, and I can play it without any problems at medium settings with a 2 year old PC that was never upgraded (I just invested a lot when I bought it). The “need for hardware” for games isn’t so bad these days. Several years ago it was much, MUCH worse! I remember having to upgrade every half year to be able to play the newest games. 3Dfx, Geforce, Geforce3, More and more memory, Pentium 1, Pentium 2, Pentium 3, it just went on an on and a PC was obsolete after half a year. Luckily, that isn’t the case anymore. Processors demands are pretty stagnant, as is memory use. The only thing still in need of regular updates is the graphics card, but a big investment in that department last a long time too.
It does suck that the big companies go hand in hand with the game developers. But that is called progress. If a game is crap and buggy I mind, if it’s a very good game like Crysis I don’t. And if YOU mind? Go out and buy a console, that’s a small investment compared to the PC these days. And you only have to replace them every 3 years.
COD 4 rocks!!! And Crysis is like Far Cry with some new resolutions and effects.
I thought, it would be the coolest game ever created, but COD 4 is WAR and I like it very much!!! This sounds strange, but it’s true!!!
Ok, it’s only a game!!!
Ok, it’s only a game!!!
Ok, it’s only a game!!!
Ok, it’s only a game!!!
Ok, it’s only a game!!!
Damn, it’s WAR!!!
hey, just look at what 2k done in bioshock.
it’s far superior gameplay, graphics, sound, ambient.
crysis is just a brand.
i built a 2.000 euro’s system on ddr3 and 8800 so now to play crysis in recomanded on medium
non even high for my 320 mb ram, so … COD4 has better gameplay yet of all !
really if u dont play rts is better a ps3 and buying games, too bad that i like pc more
Who cares what it looks or plays like? I’m not buying another game until Duke Nukem Forever comes out!
I totally agree with Osama. Crysis sucks. I’m considering to buy COD 4, because it’s such a good game.
@ 32
maybe he should give his German passport and German education back then. German isn’t a race, Germanic of Indo-European lineage otherwise know as Aryans is the race.
You thought you were being clever – sorry
in my opinion if you hold the passport you are the NATIONALITY on it. Ethnically you can be whatever.
It’s hardly a case of Aryan Germans wanting him to be Aryan – which is impossible since he is of Turkish decent.
Germany didn’t even exist till 1871, and if you knew anything many ‘germans’ consider themselves to be ‘of their region of germany’ before they’ll admit to being german. Ask a Frankonian whether or not he thinks he’s german – happy getting your face mangled.
everything Crytek releases makes me sick!!!
FarCry wasn’t good in anyway (yeah maybe the graphics were pretty good for that time) but still the story sucked big ball!!! some stupid monkeys jumping in the forest and trying to kill u 
Benchmark showed 15% better performance in 64bit than 32
Insecure fools and their money are easily parted. I have to laugh at all the sexless wonders who spend $$$$ so they could blow their load on this game which is really nothing more than just another shooter only with purdy graphics. Still, Crytek and the hardware manufacturers are laughing all the way to the bank. Probably to buy new ferraris to shuttle their girlfriends around laughing at the plebs jerking off to the purdy graphics and boasting about their new awesome super expensive rig in order to compensate for their sense of insignificance.
Well I’m off to buy a sub zero super cooled 4x SLI quintaple core ninjitsu computer instead of spending the money getting a life! That’ll show how awesome I am to all the other anonymous nerds!
@wankstar (74)
I dont know what planet you come from but it’s sure dont Planet Crysis….
He comes from Planet Stasiak
Where are all the luverz?, I see too much hating going around :p
Anyways, I bought the game and I like it. The multiplayer is great fun.
Not to mention, they also delivered such a great editor along the game (sandbox2) which is very easy to use and it just grows on you the more you learn about it :p I’m excited to see those new mods that are on the way.
To add, do you really get those soft smoke effects etc on _tweaked_ dx9? I’m not sure but I think not.
This is the name of the game. You scratch my back, and i’ll scratch yours. Hardware developers, Microsoft and game developers are working along together to sell more of their products and they seem very succesful at it. Nvidia+Intel, AMD+Ati, PCworld, Chip, and all the other hardware magazines, doing tests, just to point out “aaah, this card gives you 2 more fps, gazillion core chip is better at rendering high quality textures in Faraysis” blah blah blah…
You wanna play games ? Fine, go buy a console. If you want a PC, just buy one enough to surf the web, doing work, homework, and all the boring stuff… and the only delight “warez” of course
I hope ppl make games like in the old days super mario or sonic. It was so much fun even it was only 2D. But they think great graphic’s can fix the leak of gameplay what is not true. If the game makes fun it doesent matter how it look’s.
Like CoD 4 it runs great even on older pc’s and looks still good and has an amazing story and multiplayer.
this game is Iike the first one, good graphics but nothing more, the A.I is poor and choppin down trees and houses gets boring after a while
yeah the whole thing with the very high settings just shows what a scam DX 10 and vista is. Remember the same with Halo2 a so called DX10 game (vista exclusive) which can run on XP thanks to the loader.
crysis was a very disapointing game, i was waiting a lot more from it, it looks like a revamped game of 3 or 4 years ago.
and those backstage moves, very sad to the gamming community, looks like we are force to upgrade like crasy by the damn coders.
To get good game experience from crysis, play it at Delta level. The AI is ok at this level and they will try and track you down. One point they through a grenade over cliff edge to get me, even though they did not see me.
As for graphics I thought they are really nice & I got x1800XT. I play game with High Setting but I shadow & water set to low.
Loved the game
.
This is my rig:
Intel core2duo e6600@2.4GHz
Evga Geforce 8800 GTX
P5N32e SLI mobo 680i
4GB Corsair ddr2 800 4-4-4-12
..
I can’t play at 1680*1050 at high settigs cause it lags like mad in XP (in vista is totally unplayable)
Anyway I played at lower res and all I have to say is: Man, what a stinking game; it’s buggy as hell, I spend an entire level levitating after a quick load cause the game wouldn’t “restart” the character’s position after it died, It was somewhat funny though to look at nomad shoot while being laidXD. There’s lots of script bugs too and the go-for-the-sequel-end is pathetic.
Glad I didn’t bought this one. Unenjoyable waste of time.
well graphic is just a part of game but not the whole game.
I remember playing pacman, river raid, stars invaders in my atari and I really enjoyed it that is what our game industry is missing now. We only play now with good graphics and stressfull hard to play games missing the true purpose of game “to relax and have fun” I bet those CEO’s dont even play their games cause they’re not a gamer but an office freaks.
No wonder if most people download games by torrents they have to look for money somewhere else
I even prefer that way – 10 games = good graphic card, how many games do we download a year? so let nvidia/intel pay game developers to release games for free (ageia is already doing that) and we will buy new graphic card each year ^^
@czuk
your my new hero
Thanks for the translation. I didn’t agree with many of the comments as they were only half-truths with little technicality based on a pre-release beta demo.
And it wasn’t simply a matter of money switching hands. CryTek worked very closely with Intel during the development of Crysis, the effort being to make the game scaleable across a range of processors. Likewise with Nvidia – CryTek were given beta hardware (prerelease 8800GTX, etc) to work with to make sure the game was perfect. CryTek also worked with Microsoft to ensure Vista compatibility. So of course Cevat is going to promote it, what the hell do you expect?
DX10 is not superior for graphics quality, thats a fact, but framerates are 10-15% better due to unified shader processing (see 8800). The Swede is skipping far to much detail. Crysis is still a hallmark game for the genre, and will be unsurpassed for months to come. Be sick all you like
i wasnt impressed with crysis graphics maybe even with medium on,my pc couldnt take the high mode even though im running a amdx64×2 4600 with 8800 gts card.
such gimmicks are an argument in favour of open source. If OpenGL became the defacto standard replacing DirectX, All games would be as scalable as HL2 (I played it on a 800mhz/64mb geforce at 800×600 at 50fps before I bought a new system). There would be no way to sneak in gimmicks as the code is right in front of you. And ffs, if game devs made linux native and ati/nv drivers were better maintained, you could easily get a 10% increase in fps.
I’ve stoped reading the article after “four cores gives zero, I repeat, ZERO perfomance increase in Crysis”. After that I realised, that the author has no clue what he’s talking about – he’s a moron!
The CPU type might not affect FPS if you dont move, but once you move and start destroying/moving objects, thats where the CPU power will kick off, that’s what CPU does – the physics!
As of bullsh!t about DX10, the problem here is the graphic card’s drivers, that still basicaly in a beta stage and very, very NOT optimized yet.
All type of comparison made between DX9 and DX10 has been showed we don´t need DX10. If the game sucks in DX9, it will sucks in DX10 too. And Crysis sucks anyway.
Hi i understand the need for this but it not really good for people to handle for gargling
I don’t often vomit that much but on the day that Crysis was first available in the stores I actually got sick that evening into my toilet bowl.
It was a bigger than normal sick too and I think it was because of Crysis making me feel sick.
The sick didn’t look any better than normal either!
CRIKEY…. a post worth reading coz its full of facts
not to say rlslog has any FAKE posts… but well worth reading and definatly… Crysis makes me sick!
dosent see BIG improvements from farcry..
i agree totally with @60 and @68 …
Crysis is wank
100th Comment ! w00t !
For me personally.
I think HL2 EP2 , is about the perfect standard for graphics/game play and overall kick assness of current “next” gen machines.
It looks phenomenal , it plays phenomenal , it sounds phenomenal……….. and well its phenomenally short, but hey!
four out of five aint bad lol
And the article is absolutely correct. This lot are a marketing team cum game design house, who are in bed with the regulars
Take note of the ridiculous dev cycle too. 4 years ? . I have little doubt this game was complete long before it’s release.
They choked this chicken for all it’s worth… i was angry about this last year. I have seen 3 product cycles come and go, since i built this PC, for games such as “Crysis” 4 bloody years ago!…… and now i am still paying off a rig, that cannot even bloody play the thing at any wow-factor settings
I didn’t see any frames improvement from 64 to 32 but I did definitely notice the game ran alot smoother at the low frame rates I get.
I think COD 4 shoulf take any game of the year awards because not only is it great SP and MP but its playable at decent frames and looks fantastic
my computer is 4 years old:
- Pentium 4 3.2 Ghz
- 1Gb ram
- Ati Radeon 9800
since it is Agp based if i wanna buy a new fast Pci Graphics card i need a whole new system,
so 3 weeks ago i spent 170 euros on Radeon X1950 Pro,
the fastest Agp card around,
every game including Crysis runs exceptionaly with their graphics in their full glory,
So my point is that
i gave breath in a 4 year old system with just 170 euros so i still can be able to experience all the high-end gaming of today without whining.
By the way Crysis is the best graphics game ive experienced so far keeping in mind that the high res pics & video shown all over the web dont differ so much from what i ve played.
So i dont mind playing the game in direct X 9c.
In fact i wish every other game released in the forthcoming months can match the same graphics quality i experienced with my specs and just direct X 9c.
Ps. Every power user knows that Vista are the equivalent to lame WinMe, so nobodys gonna install them till the next Ms operating system launch.
Nevertheless if some of you bother so much go buy a console.
Also keep in mind that Crysis (nomatter how crap gameplay some of you think may it has) puts a step forward the standard in gaphics quality in all the upcoming games of all genres.
The video games genre+industry is pushing itself more & more to life-like physics & graphics,
so developers goal is multiple
apart from making a kick-ass game, sometimes they also want to take advantage the top hardware available in the market.
Thats why all pc games have Optionable Scalable Graphics Setup anyway.
Crysis makes me sick. Well don’t eat it then.
I liked the first 65% of this game but when I entered the core it went down hill, had to go back to dx9 to get frames up on a 8800gtx witch I lov all other game are butter on this card.
The shaders are lovely in dx10 but the frames suck.
Im still glad I bought it despite the glitches dx10 on very high looks lovely but it is a slideshow.
beyond the single player of this game (which was a phenomenal letdown), the multi player is absolutely ruined by countless bugs and a horribly “optimized” net code. hopefully the patch will fix most of them but i really doubt it, especially given EA’s outstanding support in the past…
@48 BlackPlastic,
The point of DirectX10 is to try and force people to upgrade to Vista. Sure, it might have some minor improvements and bug fixes, but its real purpose is to be a carrot that MS can dangle in front of gamers and say “See, you NEED Vista to play all the latest games!” There’s no reason DX10 couldn’t have been written for XP. In fact, I was told that at least one group had hacked it to let you install it under XP.
Crysis it’s just a bussines.
And make me sick too.
This is a reply to Yappi, whos comment is 8th from the top. Yappi dude dont be offended by what i have to say to you but its something u must know.
You said “It does not stand up graphically on dx9 or 10 to the original screenshots and movies released by crytek, in fact they PROMISED at the time that the game would look like those screens and vids, but now it just looks blahh.”
Are you alright? Are you suffering from some illness? Are you having eyesight problems? LOLLLLLLL. I can understand that for some people Crysis makes them feel sick, but COME ON….. Is it that fckin bad?????? Crysis looks stunning in every way if you have a high end system with a high end DX10 graphics card and it is also arguably the best looking game EVER.
I seriously dont know what made you say that “now it just looks blahh” That statement of yours gave me a pinch. I am no FAN BOY and i also have all the gaming consoles(360,PS3 and Wii) but i am not a fool to actually think of selling my computer RIG just because may be i thought that Crysis dint play the way it was meant to be played or because it looks ok. I will say it again and a million times if i have to, CRYSIS looks like HEAVEN and any one who says it doesnt then i feel sorry for them. I can go all day with what i have to say but all i can suggest you is buy a good 20″ LCD screen and a Nvidia 8800GT card, pair it up in SLI if you can afford,throw in a dual core CPU and then see the magic of Crysis. It does not work like a dream on and Current gen cards or systems but it is very much playable.
nice article thanks!
SLI is no better apparently.
Bring out the patches EA Crytek
Comment on Dx10.. Its true that the grafical improvment from dx 9 to dx 10 isnt that big.. The main difference is that dx10 i capable of running things more efficient and smoother, thus better framrate.
Cevat yerli said that there will be a patch soon for increasing the performance but what they really need to do is make the A.I better. The A.I is very very very buggy. Take a look on youtube and u will find a bunch of videos of Crysis having all sorts of funny bugs.
^^
Yes but not in Crysis dx10 runs slower in the game, it needs to be optimized or something. But it does look damm good.
@Yappi
You obviously did not play the same game I did, Crysis obviously is the best looking game on the market right now.
UT3 is close, but it goes more for detail than honest to goodness beauty.
If you are running a game on low there may be a reason it looks poor.
Excellent article. I agree with most of it.
Crysis is nothing compared with Call Of Duty 4.
Nice graphics but… aren’t you missing something more important in FPS?
Man, stop the talking.
It has been written earlier the lauch of crysis’s demo that IT WOULD NOT HAVE THE SAME QUALITYS AND GRAPHICS from the full version. Try to read more ;] That’s why it is a DEMO.
Gotta add this to the beginning: I’m NOT a Crysis/Crytek/EA/whatever fanboy. This post is merely an opinion of an single gamer who enjoys cutting edge graphics. Right, now to the business.
The article in hand is a semi-decent flamebait at most. Some points of it hold water (like the fact that you can make DX9 textures/etc to the same as with DX10 graphics setting), but the swede also seems to miss quite a few points quite liberately.
Sure, you can make the game look pretty good on DX9 IF you haven’t actually researched all the stuff DX10 adds in it. How about: Object motion blur, soft texture particles (no cutting to 3d models), 3d waves (look stunning in motion) and not sure if parallax mapping is DX10 treat or not, atleast cvar tweaking didn’t enable it on DX9). All these things are stuff we can’t enable in DX9, and they do make a difference for visual outlook.
I also noticed an increase in the fps by going to 64bit, unlike what the article says. I read somewhere that if you have over 3-4GB ram you should only then use 64bit, otherwise stick with the 32bit for slightly better framerates. Did they take this in to consideration?
I don’t buy the “multi-core gives no performance increase” stuff either. I see all my four cores banging away full steam ahead when I play Crysis. If multi-core doesn’t give a performance increase, what are my other cores doing? Calculating SETI@home in secrecy?
I tried the Crysis demo on my old pc and got pretty bad framerates (less than 20). I still loved the graphics a lot, and for graphics whores like me it only meant a total pc upgrade to come, which I had been planning for a long time anyways. So I spent a good sum of my savings, installed Vista 64 (not sure I can forgive myself), fired up Crysis and I haven’t regretted my upgrade. I can finally play it with acceptable framerates with max graphics.
I think most of the people who whine are merely people without a enough good pc to run the game properly, and therefore they must bash it to kingdom come for no apparent reson. It was the same when Farcry was released, it’s the same deal now.
I’m not gonna list my pc specs here by the way. I think most of the people who flood forums and chatboxes with their pc specs need to hang themself. It’s annoying. Stop it now.
what a waste of time…i feel sorry for all the users that went out and paid big money for the likes of the 8800’s to play this so called new technology engine..yes they have done ok but they aint done nothing compared to the likes of the development team at cod4 hq…flame throwers and the best ai was supposed to lead crysis forward……crytek if you see this then go back to basics again or learn from what you first created in farcry…better learn from the cod4 team
@119 Toni: You state all your four cores “working” as evidence for crysis using all four cores! Click on the links in the articles and you will find actual benchmarks that proves Crysis dosen’t make use of four cores.
I think you’re the one who dosen’t have an open mind here, exactly BECAUSE you spent so much money on a new system. I have a brand new top of the line system but that dosen’t mean I have to praise crysis…
you guys suck. plainly.
Guaranteed 99% of you didn’t pay a cent for crysis, and are still whining like a bunch of spoilt little mama’s girls who’ve just lost the head off their barbie doll.
Even if it isn’t the greatest game in history, lot’s of programmers,artists, and physics/sound engineers put in some hard work producing this game. It’s their livelihood and if they don’t get paid, there’s no more games. Get it?
It’s obvious some of you don’t, and never will.
I agree with both Toni and ReeGed.
We all have to accept one thing which is a bitter truth, that Crysis is IMO the BEST looking gaming my eyes have ever seen and to play it at its full glory we all need high end computers if not super computers. It is totally worth spending a fortune to get Crysis playble at the higest level of detail.
We can say that Crytek could have done better, much better in all aspects of the game starting from the A.I, bugs and etc… and they could have also made this awesome looking game very much playable with settings all pumped up to very high, but i guess as many others have also said, they wanted to mint money from Intel and Nvidia by making us all upgrade to the best hardware possible.
All we can do is wait for a patch that will fix all the bugs and other glitches.
Yes… I expected crysis to be more enjoyable than this. It is the same as Farcry… in some terms Farcry is even more better. The Nano suit can fool a noob, but it is completly useless. The game too…. I played the game under DX 9 and 10, graphics were pretty much the same… I have played many games in DX 9 and 10, but I noticed very small amount of diffrence too… Sometimes DX 9 graphics were finer than 10. ( Eg : Lost Planet ) Crysis is a total failure… They marketed it well… Thats why it is holding up… EA is very good in promoting their games, so everybody talks about it. Indeed the game had nothing which Crytek n EA was boasting about…
It’s obvious someone touched on a vital issue ::)) just look at the comments. I think Crysis has some advantages: If you build a rig that will handle Crysis, you won’t need to upgrade your pc for quite a while. Think of Crysis as a milestone. By the way, I like sci-fi shooters , that’s way I’m defending Crysis, It’s not that great, but every game has it’s flaws.
The folks over at Tom’s Hardware did a write up on Crysis and PC hardware. According to them from benchmarking it appeared Crysis was not optimized whatsoever for Quad core in the the Full Release.
Crysis: Demo vs Full Version Performance
http://www.tomsgames.com/us/2007/11/16/crysis_demo_vs_full/
This was an eye-opener for me.
Yes, crytech can be doing this for the bucks.
All I knew is that the crytech ai is crap.
(Repost since original one disappeared, hmm?)
@121 ReeGed
I never said YOU or EVERYONE should like Crysis. First phrases of my post should make that point rather clear.
“I have a brand new top of the line system but that dosen’t mean I have to praise crysis…”
Why must you bash it then? Did Crysis steal your ex-girlfriend or what’s this all about with these hate articles?
The cash I spent on my new setup wasn’t only for Crysis you know. I’m also an graphics designer, a simulator enthusiast and tech geek and whatnot. The simple fact is, Crysis runs better than on my old computer, and that’s all what matters to me. I don’t really see the point of this “Must get everyone to hate Crysis” -paranoia is about. It’s just a game, ookay?
I also agree totally with post 122 by fluffy. Majority of the people here didn’t pay for Crysis (including me) but yet you folks whine like no tomorrow. How about being happy that you’re being able to have something for free, eh?
Crysis runs well enough for me, that’s all what matters. Silly articles on the intarweb won’t change my mind. I got great enjoyment playing it, now it’s collecting dust. Simple as that.
The game is the best, thus it needs optimization. DOT
You can all go whine anywhere you want; just remember that at least there is a game release which most of the gaming community is happy about…
My rig, 6400+ with MSI’s nx8800 ultra OC edition. I didn’t just build it for the game, I built it for my all around satisfaction; the closest I’ll ever get to being a computer engineer. Now to the point, my game runs great with all settings on high at a resolution of 1920 x 1200. At first it didn’t run so great untill I did a fresh install of my operating system. I now run a triboot setup – two for gameing and one for general perpose use. I am very happy with the game and It’s performance considering that I came from the xbox. I plan on tweaking some files to add to the diffacaulty. Don’t forget to rid your system of recourse hogging software.
@119: The effects you mentioned might be implemented in a DX10 specific form. They could be implemented for graphics cards without a geometry shader pipeline as well, but it might be slower (3d waves), or not look as good (parallax mapping; Crytek wrote about it in a paper… basically they also use real polygons for this, instead of just more pretty pixels like everyone else).
But even though some few improvements might really need a newer graphics card it is technically unjustified to make DX10 Vista exclusive… You could get exactly the same effects (with an appropriate graphics card) on ANY operating system using OpenGL. But then you shouldn’t expect much love from Microsoft (can you say “Games for Windows”?).
I personally just hate it when otherwise great games are degraded to marketing stunts and I guess that’s the point the article is criticizing, too.
Memmaker rules!
Nearly all comments suckkks big time, bunch of stupid angry teens.
It’s the Crysis (and MS) here what sucks, not the actual DX10 (what the people are blaiming it for). Direct X 10 is/will be good, and probably will make a lot iprovements on the future, when the programmers are going to code right dx10 code, not some “emulated” dx10 @ dx9, what every dx10 game today is. Yes atm it’s just useless and bulls**t
And I need to prove this? well of course i can’t… Unless you count in the Microsoft Flight Simulator X (ironically a MS game), what runs on Dx10 at least 5x faster and more better looking at the same time. Just need couple of years before they will make it right, not wrong line with this game.
But all in all, Crysis was here to just boost the next-generation gfx’s, what even aren’t here yet because of lack of ATi vs Nvidia competition..
Im tired of seeing propaganda injected into games, as such I will not be buying this showcase eye candy.
They will need to do much better then this if they want to push people up the hardware/software conspiracy ladder.
Also the story line is clearly written for the average media brain washed american teenager.. absolutely cringe worthy.
“dow u move, i kiw you amewican pig”.. ? this one’s going back on the shelf.
I agree with all that are slagging this game.
My biggest issue with EA/Crytek is this. Im a expat living in Spain and when you buy EA games in Spain they dont have a English language install option this was the same with Far Cry and all EA games I have bought in the past few years.
Why doesnt EA understand this, not everyone who lives in Spain speaks spanish for f**ks sake. I know spanish people who dont like playing games in Spanish and would like the bloody option. I for one will never EVER, EVER, buy another EA game untill they sort this out its a total piss off.
Get it sorted EA cos you will lose your customers!
I also spent almost 3 grand on a new SLI rig to play such games waste of money. UT3 and UT2K4 for me.