-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The $900 PC Crysis Challenge (By Crytek)
- Thread starter Borys
- Start date
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
"I really wish that apologists like yourself didn't do this. You make the OS look worse by claiming that absolutely no issues exist, rather than accepting that there are minor ones, which will eventually get worked out, and that nothing is wrong with the OS, but nothing is wrong with taking your time in upgrading either."
:lol Wow, so now I'm a microsoft apologist? Why is it the majority of Vista users on gaf are not reporting major problems and most of the problems you guys describe are pretty isolated. It definately has problems as does every operating system ever but you make it sound like vista is so crap shoot because of your friend having an occasional problem.
"the vista problem is still very real, the performance as a general os is above that of XP no doubt but creative couldn't write a decent vista sound driver if you gave them another 500 years, also gaming performance is below XP in practically every game, i dual boot both os's and i can run crysis in XP then in vista with dx9 forced so its exactly the same settings on both os's and vista is much slower."
So because creative made shitty drivers everything is bad on the OS? I have dual boot too and I usually get around a 5fps boost and that's it. I really don't see what all this hubub is about. Like I said it does have it's occasional problems but it's not like you people are describing where people should be avoiding it like the plague. I also enjoy the bashing by people who haven't even used the OS about problems that were remedied months ago.
:lol Wow, so now I'm a microsoft apologist? Why is it the majority of Vista users on gaf are not reporting major problems and most of the problems you guys describe are pretty isolated. It definately has problems as does every operating system ever but you make it sound like vista is so crap shoot because of your friend having an occasional problem.
"the vista problem is still very real, the performance as a general os is above that of XP no doubt but creative couldn't write a decent vista sound driver if you gave them another 500 years, also gaming performance is below XP in practically every game, i dual boot both os's and i can run crysis in XP then in vista with dx9 forced so its exactly the same settings on both os's and vista is much slower."
So because creative made shitty drivers everything is bad on the OS? I have dual boot too and I usually get around a 5fps boost and that's it. I really don't see what all this hubub is about. Like I said it does have it's occasional problems but it's not like you people are describing where people should be avoiding it like the plague. I also enjoy the bashing by people who haven't even used the OS about problems that were remedied months ago.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
"Not at all.
The devs said that everything in crysis would be exactly the same in a port, except they'd have to scale down the graphics.
Kojima said that the PS3 is the only system that could handle MGS4 at all.
Like I said, I don't actually agree with Kojima, but he's talking about the entire game, not just the graphics.
edit: unless you are going to claim that the graphics are inherently required to appreciate the game, which doesn't make any sense because the game includes the option to run it on low settings, with worse graphics. If the graphics were that big a deal, it would require optimal specs across the board, and only have one graphics setting."
How is that an argument? What about MGS4 is so demanding that it can't be played on any other system? Last time I checked the 360 isn't all that weak, How can you defend that and destroy the statement of the Crytek team?
The devs said that everything in crysis would be exactly the same in a port, except they'd have to scale down the graphics.
Kojima said that the PS3 is the only system that could handle MGS4 at all.
Like I said, I don't actually agree with Kojima, but he's talking about the entire game, not just the graphics.
edit: unless you are going to claim that the graphics are inherently required to appreciate the game, which doesn't make any sense because the game includes the option to run it on low settings, with worse graphics. If the graphics were that big a deal, it would require optimal specs across the board, and only have one graphics setting."
How is that an argument? What about MGS4 is so demanding that it can't be played on any other system? Last time I checked the 360 isn't all that weak, How can you defend that and destroy the statement of the Crytek team?
Bidermaier
Member
I have played GOW and the Bioshock demo on my PC with a 360 controller. I tried Crysis and i went back to keyboard an mouse in less than two minutes.
Dont know if anyone has seen this but...
PC + Linux + PS3 + Whatever these people are trying to sell = Crysis on Couch.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=KeBtgPeul3Y
PC + Linux + PS3 + Whatever these people are trying to sell = Crysis on Couch.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=KeBtgPeul3Y
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
"when did i say everything is bad? performance difference for me is more like 10fps in crysis, some other games are fine and run as good as XP but then theres a lot more like stalker which run much worse, if vista is so good why do you dual boot?"
I only dual booted this past month when I reformatted my drive to see if it was really that big of a deal and all the games I played at least and I had a very negligable increase in fps. As far as creative goes it seemed like you were trying to imply that it's really bad if creative doesn't even have good drivers since that seemed to come out of nowhere. Like I said I'm not trying to convince vista on anyone at all but this blind hate for problems that were fixed a while ago and haven't been an issue since it first came out is just ridiculous.
I only dual booted this past month when I reformatted my drive to see if it was really that big of a deal and all the games I played at least and I had a very negligable increase in fps. As far as creative goes it seemed like you were trying to imply that it's really bad if creative doesn't even have good drivers since that seemed to come out of nowhere. Like I said I'm not trying to convince vista on anyone at all but this blind hate for problems that were fixed a while ago and haven't been an issue since it first came out is just ridiculous.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
.
I wish I could upgrade my 4 year old pc but It's so far behind an upgrade is almost impossible.
It's a P4 2.8 1.5GB RAM and Gefore 7600GS (used to have a Radeon 9800 Pro but it fried). A great machine 4 years ago, it still runs lightning fast in XP. Only two things that are upgradeable now are the card and RAM. Dunno if that would do any good to play Bioshock and SC2 though.
It's a P4 2.8 1.5GB RAM and Gefore 7600GS (used to have a Radeon 9800 Pro but it fried). A great machine 4 years ago, it still runs lightning fast in XP. Only two things that are upgradeable now are the card and RAM. Dunno if that would do any good to play Bioshock and SC2 though.
[HP] said:
What res are you playing at?
I should have a similar set up soon (AMD Athlon x2 4200+ OC'd to about 2.5GHz and an 8800gt) with a 24" monitor, so I'd like as high a resolution as possible. I'm willing to settle for High settings by all means, though. Do you think you could run a quick test to see what the highest res you can get on high settings is?
Visualante
Member
Wait for the intel Q9450 ($306, 45nm, 2.7ghz with 12mb L2 cache), Crysis capable cards will be cheaper in 3 months and you can probably bag a better motherboard too.
Yuppers, shows how much I know. Nobody listen to me enjoy your CrysisBeeDog said:EDIT: Just saw your edit now, shouldn't it be a 12 Mb cache memory on it? Still wondering when it hits shops.
Visualante said:
I've been eyeing that particular Quad Core CPU, but can't find any price indicators for it. Do you have any info on how much that one will be in stores, and when it's supposed to hit retail?
EDIT: Just saw your edit now, shouldn't it be a 12 Mb cache memory on it? Still wondering when it hits shops.
NovemberMike
Member
Quazar said:
Personally, I would get an intel board instead of an nVidia one. Nvidia boards run hotter and use more power, which makes them harder to cool; the only reason to use one is if you want to SLI or you want to use the onboard graphics.
Visualante
Member
I'm really questioning why nVidia just doesn't support P35 and P45 boards, it's not hard and they'll kill ATi in the process.NovemberMike said:
I wouldn't hold your breath, what are the chances of an 8800 series card holding Alan Wake down? Or will it be a case of everyone starts to SLI for that game?
See, this tells me that you really haven't spent that much time with it (or really just blasted through). The AI is actually quite good when you consider it as a sandbox game. It's also true that it becomes significantly more "dumb" when lower difficulties are used. It isn't perfect, but it certainly isn't poor. Your statement is just as bad as those who made the same claim about Halo and its AI. Both games feature excellent, albeit different, AI.
The suit mechanic, however, is something I feel makes a huge difference. It has a direct impact on how you play the game. I've watched two of my friends play my copy of the game on my PC (nobody else can run it
) and each of them handled things very differently. One of them just went with maximum strength and speed so that he could dart between rocks and punch the crap out of enemies. It made him seem like a superior soldier or something and was very exciting. This approach is challenging, but it's a blast.Another friend played through with a bit of stealth mixed with run and gun. He would sneak up into situations and then, when in the best position, let it rip and gun down everyone before returning to hiding. It was very much a hit and run approach. So, in this case, it was a mix of cloaking and shield.
For me, I went straight stealth most of the time and chose to accomplish many objectives without having to engage the enemy at all. When it did come to that, however, I would carefully take them out.
Each play style was completely different and totally changed the way you might view the game. Of course, when you combine those approaches with the multitude of potential paths one can take, the game seem limitless. So, no, the game does not play the same regardless of which powers you use. Unfortunately, the game demands a lot from the player in that it presents and open world with many options. There was one point where I had a KPA checkpoint in front of me with lots of enemies present. Rather than taking them head on with my guns, I gathered up two explosive barrels and dropped them into the back of a pick-up truck. I then drove the truck at full speed into the KPA checkpoint, dove out before impact, and then shot one of the barrels causing everything to explode. I killed every enemy there with that approach. That same checkpoint, however, could be taken in so many different ways. You could use cloaking to sneak by them or to take them out more carefully, you could go with strength and pummell them, you could use any of the weapons and rely on cover + shield, you could toss in explosives (grenades), you could even set up some charges on various points (while in cloak mode) then detonate from a safe distance. This type of freedom is found throughout most of the game and I just can't imagine how anyone could scoff at that.
How you approach a situation is more dependant on the player and their creativity than the powers of your suit. It seems to me that you are the limiting factor here, not the game.
dark10x said:
I had a difficult go of it in the opening levels because I wasn't using the suit's functions to my advantage. When I was just trying to rely on gun play, I could do an admirable job if I scouted the area and was willing to stick and move, dashing into hiding when I found myself out manned and then singling out enemy soldiers, but when I got caught unprepared or got a little to overzealous with the approach, I would get gunned down pretty quickly.
That all changed when I started to fall back on the suit. I really enjoy the feeling of Maximum Reward I get for using a correct tactic. Of course, that's not to say any one is correct, but when I use the suit and the weapons in concert with any given strategy and it works flawlessly, I just gotta smile a bit.
Ha ha, oops. Didn't read that part.Borys said:
I'm surprised he formed such a strong opinion based on such a limited experience, though. Not only does the demo fail to offer up what the full game can provide, but the game itself requires time to fully come to grips with. New players will tend to struggle with the suit and what it brings to the table, but when you truly begin to use it properly, it adds a lot.
In preparation for building a new PC, I would really like to know if someone has any info on the Q9450 Quad Core availability (my lousy searching skills haven't yielded anything on Tom's Hardware for example). When are the new Intel quaddies supposed to hit stores (I've heard they might be delayed because of some bug?)? Essential info for me so I can start planning purchases.
And oh, if I go for a Q9450 (socket 775 right?), what motherboard would you guys recommend that supports the new Intel line?
And oh, if I go for a Q9450 (socket 775 right?), what motherboard would you guys recommend that supports the new Intel line?
Zaraki_Kenpachi said:
This is what I'm getting at, calling you an apologist (Vista Apologist, not MSoft apologist.)
I have said that Vista's issues are not any different from any other new OS. I have said that it is perfectly fine. Then I said that, because of the issues that DO still exist, I am holding off on upgrading.
You see the fact that I am holding off on upgrading as an attack on Vista as a decent OS, and start defending it fervently, despite the fact that no one is actually attacking it. You latch on to the issues that I brought up happening to people I know, and call them unimportant. I'm sure that my father did not think it was unimportant when his computer kept crashing because Vista didn't like certain drivers that were designed specifically for it.
Accept that not everyone is comfortable with upgrading before they have to. I'll probably be with XP until I need to install Vista inorder to run a particular program, and that's just how I've done most upgrades in the past. The fact that you were an early adopter, but I was not, doesn't mean that I think you were wrong in your choice, it just means my choice is different.
Zaraki_Kenpachi said:
Dude, learn to read (and also to use the quote button.)
I DON'T agree with what Kojima said, HOWEVER, his claim was that the game simply wouldn't be the same game on the 360, not that it would just look different. He may be wrong, IMO, but his reasoning is still a matter of not wanting to compromise the game itself, versus just not wanting to scale down the graphics.
Err, you do realize that the problem with porting Crysis to console has less to do with visuals and more to do with the design, right? The gameplay from MGS4 could EASILY exist on 360 even if, for some reason, visuals had to be slightly altered. Crysis, however, would be VERY difficult if not impossible on consoles simply due to the memory requirements and overhead. It's not just about the visuals here, but about the size of the world and the amount of stuff going on. CryTek would have to change the game in order to port it, not just lower the graphical quality. In isolated scenes, the consoles would have no trouble rendering much of Crysis...but they would struggle to do it on such a large scale (which just happens to play a massive role in the gameplay).Evander said:
That's why you use Xpadder.
Of course, most new games have 360 pad support built in. You can simply turn on your pad mid-game and titles like Crysis, Gears of War, Halo 2, etc. will all pick right up on it and allow you to start using it (with rumble and everything).
dark10x said:
What SHOULD have told you that is where I posted previously that I had only played the demo, and decided, based on it, not to invest the money in the full game.
So the AI is bad, but that is okay because if you think of the game as something different from what it is, then the AI is actually good?
Crysis wasn't built as a sandbox game, it is a linear game that gives you options in how you play it. Another example of that is Bioshock, BTW. Now, I have played through all of Bioshock, and quite like it, bt I wouldn't call thata sandbox game.
The difference in the options that the two games give you, though, is that in Bioshock you are given lots of different ways of doing things, whereas, in Crysis, you are given the option between moving a little faster versus being able to take a couple extra hits before dying. That isn't the game giving you "options", it poor implimentation of the mechanic.
Your description of how much you enjoyed the game sounds like you put a lot into it, and got a lot out of it. That's great, and I'm glad thatyou enjoyed it, but my personal preference is for a game not to require me to put a lot in before I start to get a return. I'm not opposed to putting in, but I want a game to draw me in, and make me want to put in, not to require me to buy in before it starts to get good.
A sandboxing game is good because there are always different things to do. Crysis is not a sandboxing game because you are doing the same thing, it's just that you can choose whether you want to be stealthy, or rush the enemy, or whatever. That's nothing new, plenty of games have been that open in the past.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
"I DON'T agree with what Kojima said, HOWEVER, his claim was that the game simply wouldn't be the same game on the 360, not that it would just look different. He may be wrong, IMO, but his reasoning is still a matter of not wanting to compromise the game itself, versus just not wanting to scale down the graphics."
How would it not be the same game though? Again what is so demading that the game could not be done on the 360? I don't remember Crytek saying the only reason they couldn't port it is the graphics cards aren't powerful enough to run it. Maybe they don't want to compromise the game by dumbing things down to run on lower hardware too? Kojima has less of a point if anything than Crytek due to the greater similarity in hardware. As far as the Vista thing you brought up that it's compatability wasn't that good when it's not as bad as you were making it out to be and you were complaining about issues with Zune software that has been resolved for months and was only really a problem toward launch. By now most major manufactuers have pretty good driver sets and everything else working, you bringing up points about so VHS converter not working and issues solved months ago is kind of irrelvant today.
How would it not be the same game though? Again what is so demading that the game could not be done on the 360? I don't remember Crytek saying the only reason they couldn't port it is the graphics cards aren't powerful enough to run it. Maybe they don't want to compromise the game by dumbing things down to run on lower hardware too? Kojima has less of a point if anything than Crytek due to the greater similarity in hardware. As far as the Vista thing you brought up that it's compatability wasn't that good when it's not as bad as you were making it out to be and you were complaining about issues with Zune software that has been resolved for months and was only really a problem toward launch. By now most major manufactuers have pretty good driver sets and everything else working, you bringing up points about so VHS converter not working and issues solved months ago is kind of irrelvant today.
dark10x said:
I'm just talking about the actual comments from CryTek (where they stated that they could even port it to the DS if they wanted to, but they don't want to scale down the graphics.)
I'm not the one arguing for it to be ported to consoles (I could buy it already, if I really wanted to, since my PC can run it.) I was just defending my statement that PC developers ought to stop acting high and mighty about their platform of choice. If a game only works on one platform, that's fine, and if you don't want to put in the effort to do a port, which can be a lot of effot, that's fine too, but claiming that other platforms aren't "worthy" of your product is needlesly arrogant.
Yup. I've got a wireless dongle for my PC that lets me use my 360 pad with it. That's how I played the Crysis demo, in fact (although there was one of the controls that WOULD NOT map to the control pad, either crouch or prone. Hopefully they fixed that for the full release.)
Dumb.
You need a mouse, keyboard, monitor, speakers, and a copy of the game.
Add to the fact that the average user is incapable of building their own machine, and you're looking at $1500 easy, from any of the major vendors.
Oh, that's if you can get an 8800GT...
Edit: JESUS Evander. QUADRUPLE post?
Learn to use the damned edit button.
You need a mouse, keyboard, monitor, speakers, and a copy of the game.
Add to the fact that the average user is incapable of building their own machine, and you're looking at $1500 easy, from any of the major vendors.
Oh, that's if you can get an 8800GT...
Edit: JESUS Evander. QUADRUPLE post?
Learn to use the damned edit button.
Zaraki_Kenpachi said:
Dude, your argument is what is called a "red herring logical fallacy".
I am not making that claim, merely repeating the fact that Kojima made it for the purpose of providing context, so you cannot expect me to defend it. However, his stated reasons, even if they are based on a false claim, are different from CryTek's stated reasons.
Perhaps that quote was bad. In the majority of situations, the AI is actually very good and enjoyable to engage. However, due to the open nature of the game, it is possible to "mess" with them and cause strange things to occur. This was not the case during most of the gameplay I experienced, but it is possible simply because you can come at the AI from so many angles. The AI is probably among the best I've encountered in a recent FPS, actually. My sandbox comment was simply referring to the fact that the nature of the game allows for the player to trip them up in select circumstances.
That's not true at all.
Bioshock, as much as I love it, is much more rigid in that each power does something very specific. The tools in Crysis are designed to give you an advantage in an area of importance. That is, for those who value stealth, the suit will allow you to take that approach and successfully run with it. It's a much more open ended system than what you get in Bioshock.
KyanMehwulfe
Member
Yeah because the game already looks old and all.Bidermaier said:
They could re-release Crysis next Winter and it'll still shit on most everything else on the market -- on everything if they release the 'Very Very High' patch.
Fucking 20kers.
dark10x said:
Not at all.
Bioshock gave you a lot of different specific tools, and let you use which ever ones you wanted to acomplish your goals. Crysis, on the other hand, gives you a couple of extremely vague tools that don't do very much on their own. The settings of the suit do not make any significant difference from how the game whould have been if they weren't there. The cloaking (which plenty of games have had before) didn't stop enemies from hearing you, so you still had to sneak around just like you would have without it. The ability to take a couple extra bullets before dying, or to use a couple less bullets to kill some one, is novel to have, but doesn't change the game in any significant way.
There have been many games in which you play a character with multiple forms, and while most of them have been platformers, rather than shooters, the one called Alter Echo had some shooting elements, and it comes to mind right now. There were gun battle in the game where you could switch between different forms, which played very differently, and go at the game how you like. The different suit settings in Crysis don't really make any difference. The different ways of playing it are coming from within yourself, not from within the game.