Author Topic: Crysis 2 (Read 8705 times)

TMRNetShark · « **Reply #40 on:** March 25, 2011, 12:21:48 AM »

Quote from: Takeshi on March 24, 2011, 11:40:48 PM

Quote from: TMRNetShark on March 24, 2011, 10:04:55 PM
Quote from: Takeshi on March 24, 2011, 08:40:51 PM

Well, seeing as the game was developed for consoles...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdVE4KvJTBA
Hahahahahahahaha... no it was definitely made for PCs. I would even think to say that it's the best looking Xbox 360 game to date... but the PS3 suffers a little bit behind the 360 version (and the PC version is bar none, the best looking PC game to date).
No, it was definitely developed with consoles in mind. PC graphics being better is only better because PC hardware are miles ahead of the outdated console hardware. If it was truly for PC, then we would have gotten a way more different release from the one we got. A much better one.

It doesn't take a genius to see that consoles made Crysis 2's graphics settings...

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/295000/news/crysis-2-pc-players-unlock-graphics-options/

Ehem... clearly it does...

Annnnddd it DOES take a genius (apparently) to use google.

http://www.industrygamers.com/news/pc-roots-are-still-important-for-crytek--crysis-2/

And I quote Crysis 2 executive producer Nathan Camarillo here...

Quote

Our goal with Crysis 2 was to bring a Crysis experience to consoles. So that means fundamentally we’re starting from our PC roots and then wrangling the console to our will in order to create that kind of gameplay and gameplay experience on consoles

I really want to stomp out this myth of the game being made only for consoles... sooo...

Quote

Consoles have been lacking the kind of gameplay experience that Crysis-style games offer. That’s what caused us to build CryEngine 3. We ripped the guts out of CryEngine 2 that we used for Crysis 1 and rebuilt it from the ground up to run regardless of whether you’re on a PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, or a PC. So it was a fundamental goal for us to create that Crysis experience and bring it to consoles, not the other way around. We’re not making a console game and bringing it to PC

Hell, even to add insult to injury... here is the actual interview of Nathan Camarillo.

http://games.on.net/article/11963/Video_Interview_Crysis_2

Crysis 2, once and FOR ALL, was developed for PCs, then brought to the consoles AFTERWARDS. Not the other way around. Anyone who tries to deny it now, well, you just won't listen to reason.

newy · « **Reply #41 on:** March 25, 2011, 12:34:44 AM »

Then do tell... Why does the PC version not support DX11 from the start

Sorry, I don't really believe Crytek anymore... They say that the PC is their most important platform but their actions don't prove that...

Takeshi · « **Reply #42 on:** March 25, 2011, 12:35:36 AM »

Quote from: TMRNetShark on March 25, 2011, 12:21:48 AM

And I quote Crysis 2 executive producer Nathan Camarillo here...

Quote
Our goal with Crysis 2 was to bring a Crysis experience to consoles. So that means fundamentally we’re starting from our PC roots and then wrangling the console to our will in order to create that kind of gameplay and gameplay experience on consoles

I really want to stomp out this myth of the game being made only for consoles... sooo...

Quote
Consoles have been lacking the kind of gameplay experience that Crysis-style games offer. That’s what caused us to build CryEngine 3. We ripped the guts out of CryEngine 2 that we used for Crysis 1 and rebuilt it from the ground up to run regardless of whether you’re on a PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, or a PC. So it was a fundamental goal for us to create that Crysis experience and bring it to consoles, not the other way around. We’re not making a console game and bringing it to PC

Oh, wow, Nathan Camarillo!! Everything he's saying must be true!! His word is shit now that we've seen how the PC release is. Hell, I was one of those people who were waiting until the PC release to comment on the whole console matter.

Quote from: TMRNetShark on March 25, 2011, 12:21:48 AM

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/295000/news/crysis-2-pc-players-unlock-graphics-options/

Ehem... clearly it does...

Eh, I don't know what you're trying to prove here, it only makes it worse that players have to manually go in and set the graphics settings the way they want it. I still don't believe many of them work even though a lot of people are using them. Actually, some of the tweaks were available in the multiplayer demo, but for some reason Crytek decided to remove them.

How about playing the PC version before trying to defend Crytek?

TMRNetShark · « **Reply #43 on:** March 25, 2011, 01:04:01 AM »

Quote from: newy on March 25, 2011, 12:34:44 AM

Then do tell... Why does the PC version not support DX11 from the start Sorry, I don't really believe Crytek anymore... They say that the PC is their most important platform but their actions don't prove that...

I don't know why DX11 is not supported in the game (yet). What I do know is that neither consoles have DX10 either. You know how I know this? DX10 was released November 20th, 2006. PS3 was released November 11th, 2006 while the Xbox 360 was released a whole year before both of them. So this whole argument about "OMG, since it can't run DX11, it HAS to be a console port." Well, if it was a console port, it wouldn't even run in DX10, now would it? Sadly, for your argument's sake, it does run in DX10 while the consoles run on DX9 (well, I don't know what the PS3 runs, but probably something similar to openGL or something).

Quote from: Takeshi on March 25, 2011, 12:35:36 AM

Oh, wow, Nathan Camarillo!! Everything he's saying must be true!! His word is shit now that we've seen how the PC release is. Hell, I was one of those people who were waiting until the PC release to comment on the whole console matter.

Sooo... we're suppose to believe you? Have you run the game yet on your PC and what is your PC specs?

Quote from: Takeshi on March 25, 2011, 12:35:36 AM

Eh, I don't know what you're trying to prove here, it only makes it worse that players have to manually go in and set the graphics settings the way they want it. I still don't believe many of them work even though a lot of people are using them. Actually, some of the tweaks were available in the multiplayer demo, but for some reason Crytek decided to remove them.

How about playing the PC version before trying to defend Crytek?

What I'm trying to prove is that PC gaming is dead and/or dying. Yet game developers are trying their damn hardest to make games for the PC and well, make money off of it. So denying the words of an executive producer is fine, but that guy is there to make money off a game that he made. People steal that game very easily on PC to try and "see if it runs well" before they buy it. If it runs well before they buy it, what incentive is there to buy it at all then? I'm not saying that you personally are to blame, but it's ten times easier to steal a PC game than it is to mod a PS3/Xbox 360 and then burn the DVDs/Blu-rays or run the games off an external drive. Making a console game is easier because it's all one or two sets of hardware you have to develop for. PC's is a little harder with the combination of Intel, AMD, ATI, and Nvidia hardware that would be able to run the game. Denying the words of someone who made the game just makes you look like a hater, just for the simple fact of being a hater. The game looks and runs best on PCs, yet you still think that it's a console port. Denial is denial.

Tatsujin · « **Reply #44 on:** March 25, 2011, 01:17:00 AM »

Core 2 Quad Q9550 2.83Ghz 12 MB Cache
8 Gigs of RAM DDR2 G.Skill DC supported
2x GTX 560 Ti Superclocked
P5N-D Asus Mobo
Razer Naga and Razer ... whatever keyboard.

Will be testing this tonight after this raid. I just downloaded the game so I'll install it later and get back on how good it looks on PC.

Set on Hardcore graphics, 1920x1080 with Vsync enabled at Full Screen, running over 50 and clocking at 60 FPS (with Vsync of course). I don't think they're going to allow you to adjust the game's graphics yet until DX11 comes out. It does look very well on PC and it can look much better with DX11.

Havoc10K · « **Reply #45 on:** March 25, 2011, 06:46:59 AM »

Commercials are showing PS3 and crapbox, not a word about PC

so, no, it's done in mind with consoles, also, from the little bits I already saw, it's console port.

tomoya-kun · « **Reply #46 on:** March 25, 2011, 06:54:21 AM »

I am still under the impression that this is a crappy console port, I am running it on max and the textures look worse than crysis 1.

Havoc10K · « **Reply #47 on:** March 25, 2011, 07:09:01 AM »

because it is a port, piece of crap work, gonna play Crisis and Crisis warhead instead, I only hope Fable 3 for PC will not be a port, considering how much time it takes, it just might be a very good convertion.

Tatsujin · « **Reply #48 on:** March 25, 2011, 07:41:15 AM »

The game does require a serious processor to run just FYI. A Dual processor will be okay to run on "gamer" and probably "advanced" level and of course it needs a good average GPU. Thou' right now if they do release the DX11 and they don't allow us to play around with the graphic options then this maybe a port from a console version. The 360's does look better than the PS3 so right now they either made this on the 360 or the PC then ported it to the PS3.

IMHO this should have stayed exclusively to PC ...

blo0d · « **Reply #49 on:** March 25, 2011, 08:25:59 AM »

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/graphics-comparison-crysis-2/712179
here is a comparison video, the pc version is of course superior, but what it obviously lacks is the dx11 support.. seems to be en vouge this days, as dx11 from the get-go probably would delay the release for the console versions by too much, so the developer just postpones dx11 implementation in favor of an earlier release on all platforms.

Tatsujin · « **Reply #50 on:** March 25, 2011, 10:15:04 AM »

Yea I worded my sentence wrong, I edited it. The PC version is far superior to both consoles.

Havoc10K · « **Reply #51 on:** March 25, 2011, 10:46:43 AM »

it doesn't matter, the game was released too soon, rushed, the patch will be likely around 1.5 gig, so what we are supposed to just download it, run the patch, go to work, come back home and hope it didn't crash ?
and then what ? waste a dvd to burn a stupid patch for future ?
they just didn't want to waste space in game content to make an installer and game disk (2 disks) so that all textures are installed and ready to use, same thing with DA2, the patch in DA2 is already out but the patch for crisis2 is in the works, that means crytek actually expected players to just don't think about better visual experience ?

lately game developers don't listen to good advices us players make, they think they know better what we want to see, and thus they sell less than expected, why cuz it's just not worth the money.

newy · « **Reply #52 on:** March 25, 2011, 02:16:38 PM »

Quote from: TMRNetShark on March 25, 2011, 01:04:01 AM

it does run in DX10 while the consoles run on DX9

It does not support DX10. It uses DX9 according to my sources.

FYI Crysis supported DX10...

Havoc10K · « **Reply #53 on:** March 25, 2011, 02:18:02 PM »

I wonder why new games don't support DX10 anymore, DX9-DX11, where is the tenth ? hello ?

tomoya-kun · « **Reply #54 on:** March 25, 2011, 02:59:13 PM »

Quote from: Havoc10K on March 25, 2011, 02:18:02 PM

I wonder why new games don't support DX10 anymore, DX9-DX11, where is the tenth ? hello ?

Maybe 11 includes all the advantages of 10.

Havoc10K · « **Reply #55 on:** March 25, 2011, 03:00:02 PM »

10 has all advantages of 9, your point ?

tomoya-kun · « **Reply #56 on:** March 25, 2011, 03:00:44 PM »

Quote from: Havoc10K on March 25, 2011, 03:00:02 PM

10 has all advantages of 9, your point ?

Maybe there is no need to support DX10 because supporting DX11 renders DX10 obsolete.

Havoc10K · « **Reply #57 on:** March 25, 2011, 03:06:07 PM »

likewise, 10 and 11 support makes 9 obsolete as well, you aren't making any valid points, DX10 is supported by probably all current GFX cards, but they are only available on Vista/7 systems, while 11 requires high end GFX card and decent CPU to make it work properly (nothing super), however people running on XP systems won't get any advantage of 11 anyways, if they have Vista/7 DX9 is inferior to 10 support, but a lot of games don't even use it anymore, it's sad but Games Developers don't even make use of half the engine possibilities in Crysis 2 anyway.

blo0d · « **Reply #58 on:** March 25, 2011, 03:37:50 PM »

I think the problem with dx10 is that it has no real purpose anymore. The difference in performance compared to 9 was almost nothing if i recall correctly, and if the argument is backwards compatibility with anything below vista, directx9 support seems the better choice. developers do not specifically include dx10 support because dx11 is where it's at now. and in THEORY, any game running on dx11 mode would support the dx10/10.1 instructions if the GAME would support it. blame the programmers really.

but i do not think you miss out on any groundbreaking features by playing in dx9 instead of 10 in the end, so it's not as bad as it may appear i guess. the real problem is being forced into using dx9 mode, under a system that is using dx11, and hardware that is using dx10, because the software does not support 10. getting confused here.. correct me if i'm wrong

Havoc10K · « **Reply #59 on:** March 25, 2011, 04:49:26 PM »

thats quite correct, problem is on the devs side, although, I will be laughing if the DX11 patch for C2 is gonna be less than 2.1 gigs