-
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
ZombieSupaStar
Member
Prime crotch said:
i agree
i think we are riding out of this "Doom to Quake ZOMG 3D ACCELRATOR GET!!!" era, its just not gaining traction, NOW that being said, bring up the standard onboard video card to a decent 3d solution with 128/256 of seperate ram would help things abit.
ZombieSupaStar said:
On board video isn't the way to go.
Give people a slot to replace the video card (enclosed in a cartridge) without having to open up the PC. I know that this will never happen, because of certain elitists within the PC community who don't want to admit to how simple it really is to build a rig, but making computers more outwardly modular is the best solution for accessability. Folks get scared when they see wires and circuit boards, even if the task is incredibly simple.
I don't know what else to say, you're simply wrong. It does have a huge impact on the way the game is played. That's all there is to it.Evander said:
Look, you've said yourself that your opinion was based upon a demo of the game. How can you expect the game to show its full hand in demo form? The scenarios become much complex as you progress through the game and begin to demand more from the player. It doesn't even seem as if you've properly tested each power the suit provides.
They are tools designed to aid you in your method of playing the game. The suit was not designed with the same goals as individual powers in Bioshock. Bioshock very clearly spells out what each power can do and runs with it. What initially seems like freedom becomes pretty etched out. I love the game, but it does not offer the freedom you claim and the fact that you pretty much complete the game using just a wrench should demonstrate that plasmids are hardly even necessary. That certainly isn't the most enjoyable way to play, however, just as failing to use the suit in Crysis is not the best way to play. The suit was designed to augment standard abilities with improved performance and allows for creative play.
I simply don't feel that you've given the game a fair chance before slamming it. I can speak with authority on Bioshock (and the two previous System Shock games) as I loved all three and FINISHED them. You can not do the same for Crysis.
You're just as bad as those who used to claim that Halo brought nothing new to the table...
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
dark10x said:
dark10x said:
Except, it isn't
The point that I'm getting at is that it can have an impact if you go out of your way to give it an impact, but simply changing your suit, and then playing exactly the same, will give you no difference. In essence, what changes the game is you roleplaying that the change in the suit affects you, not the actual change in the suit.
The game isn't a bad game, but it just really isn't remarkable.
Halo, on the other hand, was remarkable for its sheer accessability. Kind of a stange comparisson to Crysis.
edit:
An "argument from authority" is fallacious logic. Your "authority" may give you information I lack, but it's that information that is relevant; your percieved authority has nothign to do with anything, and honestly makes you look bad for resorting to bringing it up.
I have made quite explicit the fact that I've only played through the demo a couple of times, and not the actual full game. The thing is, you haven't mentioned any ways which the game differs from the demo, and actually said that even in the full game it takes a couple of hours to get into it. For me, having to commit a couple of hours before starting to like a game is a huge mark against it. There are far too many games out there that if a game is going to draw me in from the begining, my time is better spent on something more enthralling.
But if I am under false impressions from the demo, then let me know how the game gets different when you get further in? Does your suit upgrade, or something? Do you getto the point where, say, when you are cloaked you can walk right up behind a guy and he won't know, or when you are in defensemode you can take a rocket to the chest like it was nothing? HOW does the suit affect gameplay, in your experience. I'm looking for specifics, not just insistance.
Dandare4444
Member
LOL @ Crytek, might not have been funny if done before launch. Experiment pffff.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
"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."
Providing context for what? At the end of the day their kojima's and crytek's arguments are the same, there is nothing preventing it from being playable on a 360 if they have anything to potentially complain about it maybe hardware which is what Crytek was complaining about. The statement of the ds shows this pretty well for Crytek too since they could but at what point do you say that's not really what we were going for. Like I said before it's a bigger leap from the computer in the op to ps3/360 then it is from ps3 to 360. I agree Kojima did say it nicer and less blunt than Crytek but I don't know how you can seem to call Kojima's excuse acceptable, when coupled with their general unwillingness to port (same goes for Crytek) is the reason why we'll probably never see a port of either game. Bullshit is bullshit no matter how one dev wants to dress it up more than another.
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."
Providing context for what? At the end of the day their kojima's and crytek's arguments are the same, there is nothing preventing it from being playable on a 360 if they have anything to potentially complain about it maybe hardware which is what Crytek was complaining about. The statement of the ds shows this pretty well for Crytek too since they could but at what point do you say that's not really what we were going for. Like I said before it's a bigger leap from the computer in the op to ps3/360 then it is from ps3 to 360. I agree Kojima did say it nicer and less blunt than Crytek but I don't know how you can seem to call Kojima's excuse acceptable, when coupled with their general unwillingness to port (same goes for Crytek) is the reason why we'll probably never see a port of either game. Bullshit is bullshit no matter how one dev wants to dress it up more than another.
That is exactly the point. The suit is designed to enhance whatever choices you decide to make. You can run and gun without taking advantage of it (though that becomes far more challenging as you progress), but using it to its fullest is simply more fun. There is no correct way to play Crysis. They leave it up to the player. They provide the tools and you put them to use.
Why do you equate the suit to plasmids in Bioshock? Plasmids themselves served special functions as weapons in and of themselves. The suit in Crysis is designed simply to augment and enhance capabilities you already have. When you match the suit with your play style, you simply become stronger and more efficient. It has a different impact on the game than something like plasmids, sure, but that should not diminish its importance.
You are getting far too hung up on the suit, however. It is simply meant to enhance the experience and is not the sole purpose of the game. The quality of the game stems from its fantastic scenario design. The demo was limited in its scope, but as the game progresses, you'll have entire forests to explore that spread out for miles as well as large towns with 20-30 builds instead of 2 or 3 shacks. The environments become much larger and more difficult to handle. It's the freedom to approach these situations that becomes so engaging. In the second area, you have to inflitrate a town and secure a hostage. You have a general idea of where they might be, but the town before you is quite large, surrounded by mines, and filled with enemies. How do you approach it? The fun comes from figuring that out and executing.
This wouldn't matter if the core mechanics were poor, but that is not the case. The gunplay is well designed, the AI is solid, and the scenario design is immersive and exciting.
The demo presents one of the more simplistic scenarios to the player in an effort to ease them into a new way of thinking. You CAN approach most situations like any other shooter early on, but they slowly begin to teach you that you will have much greater success by modifying your playing style and taking advantage of your full toolset. If you elect to play on a higher difficulty, you'll find that the AI becomes far more capable and the game more demanding. Use of the suit is required for success.
Besides, it can be a lot of fun when mastery is achieved. Using maximum speed to launch off a cliff, switching to strength in mid air, punching a hole in the roof of a building, grabbing the first enemy you see by the neck and launching him into his friends (causing the wall of the building to collapse along with objects in the way), and then tossing a grenade on top of them while you maximum speed out of there is great fun. Creating these mini-scenarios where you put your tools to use is a blast.
...and yet you've formed such a strong opinion on the game.
This suggests that you have yet to come to grips with its capabilities. The cloak, for instance, can hide you from enemies even if they are looking directly at you (though if they walk into you, they'll begin to fire where they believed you to be). You can immediately sneak up behind enemies and silently dispatch them.
When using shield, it acts just as a shield in Halo, actually. It takes damage for you and quickly recharges. Without it, damage draws directly from your health bar. It's very much akin to the original shield system in Halo 1 (only you have control over whether or not that shield is active).
I am constantly using the various suit enhancements in battle and in scouting. Maybe it all in how I'm approaching the combat, but I can't see getting too far along without using the suit tech. It's not only crucial to the experience that I've had with Crysis, but more importantly, it's intuitive and fun to use.
Barry Lightning
Banned
haha. this is a desperate move, in my opinion. even if they thought it was a kitsch thing to do. it gives the wrong impression.
So, can Crysis be run on Very High settings at 1600x1200 or higher resolution with full AA and everything using currently available technology? What would that take, regardless of the cost? SLI GTXs? Other cards? A certain quality of RAM? Specialized Nvidia drivers and Crysis config settings? Can anyone elaborate? If it is indeed possible, how much would it cost? Let's assume money is no object for me.
I really would like to play Crysis, and the gift copies of FEAR, SupCom and CoH that I've gotten, and to do so I need to upgrade my PC. But I feel like if I do it now, it will cost a lot, whereas if I wait until say, StarCraft 2 comes out (which is my drop-everything-you're-doing-on-consoles-and-play-this-game-until-your-eyes-bleed PC GOTY), I'll be able to play Crysis the way it was meant to be played, and pay less than half the amount I would have to now.
I really would like to play Crysis, and the gift copies of FEAR, SupCom and CoH that I've gotten, and to do so I need to upgrade my PC. But I feel like if I do it now, it will cost a lot, whereas if I wait until say, StarCraft 2 comes out (which is my drop-everything-you're-doing-on-consoles-and-play-this-game-until-your-eyes-bleed PC GOTY), I'll be able to play Crysis the way it was meant to be played, and pay less than half the amount I would have to now.
Zaraki_Kenpachi said:
That isn't what CryTek said at all.
CryTek was asked about the possibility of a port to the 360 and PS3. Their response was to compare those systems to the DS, and state that it could easily be done, but they don't want to scale down the graphics. So, they are saying that they could put the exact same game, only not as pretty, on the consoles, whereas Kojima's claim was that a port would affect the game itself. Whether or not he's bullshitting, it is still a DIFFERENT line of bullshit.
My complaint wasn't about whether or not what CryTek said is true (honestly, I think it is much more true than what Kojima said), my complaint was about their sentiment that they are "too good" to put the game out on consoles, even though it CAN be done (according to their own statement.)
dark10x said:
I never said anything about plasmids specifically, actually. I justtalked about the different options that Bioshock gave you. This includes plasmids, but also hacking the various robots, or fighting indirectly (manipulating the environment to damage enemies, rather than attacking them yourself.) Plasmids did factor in to those things, sometimes, but it was those sorts of things that gave you options within the game, rather than simply being able to choose whether you shoot some one with fire or with lightning.
My point about the suit was simply what you said. It doesn't give you any new options. The fact that it can be used to enhance your play style is not a bad thing, but it's no more different than choosing the proper gun for the way you like to shoot at enemies. Like I said, not bad, just not remarkable.
As for the rest of the part of the game that I played, like I said, it wasn't bad, but it wasn't anything special either. I played on an easier difficulty setting, and the AI was absolutely horrible. It's one thing if enemies have poor aim, or take a while to figure out where shots are coming from, but when you can stand right next to a guy shooting him, and he doesn't even draw his weapon, or when a guy decides to run towards you through a barrage of fire after you've begun shooting (not like suicide style, trying to take you out, just reacting to your presence) or when a guy is standing RIGHT NEXT TO cover, but stops to reload out in the open, that isn't about easy settings, that is just poor AI implimentation.
Borys said:
I played the demo, which by all accounts, including 10x's, is the same as the game itself, just a simpler mission than most. I'm not complaining about the mission, by the way, which I thought was perfectlyfine for a demo. I actually really enjoyed the part where I was coming over a hill to find that my objective was smack dab in the middle of an enemy base, and having to plot out my route of attack before they saw me up on the hill, and came for me.
MickeyKnox
Member
Please stop making a fool of yourself.Evander said:
The demo in comparison to even the very next level that comes after it feels as restricted as something like Half Life 2.
Crysis is the best shooter of last year, bar none, the range of experiences and gameplay is mostly limited by the end user's creativity.
To alter a quote from Jodorowsky: "If you are great, Crysis is a great game. If you are limited, Crysis is limited"
GallonOMilk
Member
Or you can just buy an 8800GT for $250, throw it into your current rig, maybe big up another gig of RAM and, in most cases, you should be fine. Crysis isn't the beast everyone makes it out to be. I played through it on a GeForce 6200 @ all lowest, 20 FPS, and I enjoyed it.
Spoiled people these days....
Spoiled people these days....
MickeyKnox
Member
The easiest way to expalin this is that the demo level, being a tutorial stage, is quite small and restricted geographically and limited in the amount of possible firefights and encounters. This isn't a knock against the first level by any means as it's an introductory map and is already more open ended than other shooters, it's just that the very next stage has so much fucking shit to do and so many different possible ways to go about it. Dense jungle patrolled by tons of enemies, shore line, cliff side road, totally optional encampments, and an awesome urban combat area inside a village that allows you to go wild with your powers, by the time I cleared it out I felt like I just spent the last X amount of time playing a really great multiplayer game.Evander said:
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
"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.)"
"That isn't what CryTek said at all.
CryTek was asked about the possibility of a port to the 360 and PS3. Their response was to compare those systems to the DS, and state that it could easily be done, but they don't want to scale down the graphics. So, they are saying that they could put the exact same game, only not as pretty, on the consoles, whereas Kojima's claim was that a port would affect the game itself. Whether or not he's bullshitting, it is still a DIFFERENT line of bullshit."
I'm just going by what you said where you said nothing about comparing porting a game from pc to 360/ps3 with porting a 360/ps3 game to ds. It doesn't matter anymore all I was saying is that they're both full of crap and it seemed like you were trying to say Kojima even though you disagreed with him and thought it he was wrong still made a valid point where as Crytek were just assholes, if I misunderstood then fine. This really isn't worth fighting over.
"That isn't what CryTek said at all.
CryTek was asked about the possibility of a port to the 360 and PS3. Their response was to compare those systems to the DS, and state that it could easily be done, but they don't want to scale down the graphics. So, they are saying that they could put the exact same game, only not as pretty, on the consoles, whereas Kojima's claim was that a port would affect the game itself. Whether or not he's bullshitting, it is still a DIFFERENT line of bullshit."
I'm just going by what you said where you said nothing about comparing porting a game from pc to 360/ps3 with porting a 360/ps3 game to ds. It doesn't matter anymore all I was saying is that they're both full of crap and it seemed like you were trying to say Kojima even though you disagreed with him and thought it he was wrong still made a valid point where as Crytek were just assholes, if I misunderstood then fine. This really isn't worth fighting over.
MickeyKnox
Member
Unless the amount of ram in the current generation of consoles magically trippled you are not getting even a barebones version of Crysis on them.Azih said:
The engine could probably be diluted enough to shit out some linear shooter though.
Where's the Awesome Contribution Jpeg?camineet said:fixed
MickeyKnox
Member
I'm not about to go hunting through the internet to list out the interviews where it was repeatedly pointed out by the developers how the open ended design of Crysis is impossible to duplicate on consoles.Azih said:
They have said multiple times, that they could put a "version" of Crysis on many different platforms, but that it would have to be a completely re-designed (read, totally linear) game.
WHOAguitarninja
Member
I hate to jump in mid discussion but this is quite wrong. Strength mode gives you new options in how to deal with environmental obstacles, giving you the ability to smash through cover or vault over buildings/fences. Cloack gives you the ability to begin your assault from any angle you choose, speed gives you the ability to be far more mobile than you otherwise would be allowing you to assault from multiple angles much faster than your enemies can react, armor is somewhat useless on higher difficulties, but it's uses are fairly obvious for the most part. The game teaches you to use these until they become a part of your style. The options it gives you are not clearly spelled out for you, they're left up to you to discover how these abilities can be brought to use on the battlefield, which is part of why the game is so cool. You're still figuring out new ways too aproach a situation even late in the game.Evander said:
I never had any of these problems in the full game, for what it's worth. I also played on the highest difficulty (which isn't even really all that hard...you just have to focus and plan your movements ahead). Given how open and interactive the environment is, the AI is stunningly capable. The only AI issue is sometimes they have issues finding good cover even after they know where you are, and even that problem didn't present itself terribly often.
The first level is a beach area. It's really very narrow and linear unless you venture out into the water. As the game moves on it starts to move inland, and the areas become less and less linear and more and more rectangular. I'll try and find a pic of the second level to show what I'm talking about in a bit. But the concept of moving "forward" becomes much less defined as the game moves on. Theres usually still a fairly well defined general objective point, but it's often in the center of a battlefield and you're not simply marching from point A to B, but figuring out the best way to approach it.
EDIT - Okay here is a shot of an area in the second level. This is not even the full area. What is hidden by the trees to my left is an ocean area where you can go out and swim around to the other side of the camp (there my be a boat, not sure) and assault from the opposite side of the camp. But just from this pic you can see how much more open things are.
Chairman Yang
if he talks about books, you better damn well listen
dark10x (and the others who jumped in), thanks for your commentary on Crysis. You've sold me on the game, and actually provided some insight into how it really plays (something the majority of reviews were useless at doing).
KyanMehwulfe
Member
It's rampant. Most folks just don't seem to grasp how much creative freedom and satisfying feedback the open terrain and physics provide to the gameplay. As gorgeous as it looks in screenshots, its real strength is that gameplay and it's what will keep you around day after day.Chairman Yang said:
We heralded it pretty strongly back during the demo thread even and most folks just couldn't grasp it -- much easier to just say "lol $5000 pc" and fall back to the comfort of their cod4/fotm* game.
(*flavor of the month, not be be mistaken for a r:fom error)
WHOAguitarninja
Member
The game actually uses considerably less ram than you might think. I don't think I've ever seen the total ram usage from crysis go over a gig, which is absolutely astounding given how much shit it's gotta fit in there.Draft said:
WHOAguitarninja
Member
Thats a good point. The point remains though...Crytek has been very smart about their memory management. The game even loads relatively quickly. The claim that the engine is bloated and unoptimized really just strike me as people who can't play it whining that their computer is slow.Zzoram said:
:lolbee said:
http://www.canadacomputers.com/Cory_t_ said:
http://www.ncix.com/
http://www.tigerdirect.ca/
I've used both Canada Computers and Tiger Direct. Both were good (and Canada Computers is fantastic)
