Support NeoGAF

[Kimi]

For those planning to play on PC, here they are!

MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS:

CPU: Pentium 4 3.2 Ghz, Pentium D 2.66 Ghz, AMD Athlon 64 3500+ or better

RAM: 1 GB

Video card: NVidia 6800 or ATI X1650 or better
Shader Model 3 required
256 Mb of graphic memory

Media reader: DVD-ROM

Hard drive space: ~12 Gig of HD space. (TBD)



RECOMMENDED:

CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo Family, AMD 64 X2 5200+, AMD Phenom or better

RAM: 2 GB

Video card: NVidia 8600 GTS or better, ATI X1900 or better
512 Mb of graphic memory

Sound: 5.1 sound card recommended



SUPPORTED VIDEO CARDS:

NVidia 6800, NVidia 7000 series, 8000 series, 9000 series, 200 series. 8800M and 8700M supported for laptops.
ATI X1650 – 1950 series, HD2000 series, HD3000 series, HD4000 series.

 

[fartblast]

fuk dat

 

[zoku88]

You know what devs should do? They should tell us how well the recommended specs actually run...

fuk dat

Those specs aren't high at all...

 

[Iced_Eagle]

Man, my secondary PC is exactly the min spec. My laptop, and main machine, actually meets the recommended specs which is awesome.

 

[VictimOfGrief]

Above and beyond all of that. BRING IT ON!

fuk dat

GD Junior Members with 10 yr old computers who by default hate PC gaming. :lol

 

[godhandiscen]

Oh shit, Phenom recommend, QUAD CORE SUPPORT! Fuck yeah!

 

[avatar299]

I hate when people put the minimum before the recommend. For a second, i had hope

 

[Crayon]

You know what devs should do? They should tell us how well the recommended specs actually run...


Those specs aren't high at all...

I don't quite hit the minimum. :lol

But my machine runs dos Mechwarrior 2 like a beast.

 

[burgerdog]

You know what devs should do? They should tell us how well the recommended specs actually run...


Those specs aren't high at all...

They want more people to buy the game, people with minimum requirements will buy the game and then see that it runs like shit. So they will be forced to upgrade their hardware.

 

[CounterSeal]

The recommended specs are lower than I expected. Good news I guess, hmmm.

 

[fresquito]

You know what devs should do? They should tell us how well the recommended specs actually run...


Those specs aren't high at all...

Yeah, I just got a new PC and I can run this on recommended (well, almost, as my video card is 8600gt only). I spent little money on it. In fact I got the most modest setup I could find.

 

[MrTroubleMaker]

nice! i should get a real good fps on this

 

[gray_fox224]

I can run on recommended.

 

[LAUGHTREY]

Man, my secondary PC is exactly the min spec. My laptop, and main machine, actually meets the recommended specs which is awesome.

Recommended sometimes means being able to play at lowest settings/resolution and having full frames.


I'll get the demo and see how it plays on my PC, then decide. It's between PC and 360 for me, I hope they fixed the tearing.

 

[rollingstart]

I have no doubt this will run great on my PC, now I just need to figure out if I want to buy the game. I would ask for a demo, but I think Ubi already said no demo for it.

 

[domokunrox]

My 3 year old computer meets the Recommended requirements

Stop crying, noobs.

 

[evlcookie]

Sweet i can finally run a game at a recommended spec!

 

[Kabouter]

Pretty much expected.
Looks like the 360-version for me though, no laptop support for the 8600M.

 

[Victrix]

Still confused this game is called Far Cry 2. Looking forward to this more than I ever was for Crysis

 

[zoku88]

They want more people to buy the game, people with minimum requirements will buy the game and then see that it runs like shit. So they will be forced to upgrade their hardware.

I was actually talking about recommended. :lol

Pretty much expected.
Looks like the 360-version for me though, no laptop support for the 8600M.

I just use drivers with the hacked .ini files.

 

[Hunter D]

Those recommended specs are pretty much bulls imo. No way does the game look close to what has been show on the recommended specs and any graphic card released before 2007 probably won't be good enough to run this game.

 

[fresquito]

Those recommended specs are pretty much bulls imo. No way does the game look close to what has been show on the recommended specs and any graphic card released before 2007 probably won't be good enough to run this game.

No. Recommended specs for Crysis are lower than this. Can I run Crysis like whaat's been shown? No. Can I run in medium settings? Yes, I can. And well, the game is plain awesome in medium settings, so I don't care if I won't be playing it to the top.

 

[tahrikmili]

RECOMMENDED:

CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo Family, AMD 64 X2 5200+, AMD Phenom or better

SHIT My X2 4200+ is already outdated and it's not even a year old..

Time to go shopping for a new CPU I guess

 

[Blackface]

Farcry 2, in 1080p, with full AA? Win.

 

[godhandiscen]

I have 8GB of RAM, a Quad Core at 2.6GHZ and soon a 4870x2, will it run at high settings?

Come on, how about we stop being assholes, I bet that not even my system will run it at max settings, it will be Crysis all over again. I think these recommended specs are the same as for Crysis and see how that went.

 

[fartblast]

Pretty much expected.
Looks like the 360-version for me though, no laptop support for the 8600M.

http://laptopvideo2go.com

 

[Blackface]

SHIT My X2 4200+ is already outdated and it's not even a year old..

Time to go shopping for a new CPU I guess

Your X2 4200+ might not be a year old, but the X2 4200+ is much older then that.

However Good CPU's are cheap now anyway. You can pick up a new motherboard + 8400 or 6600 for way under $200 now.

I am building a computer for a friend and

-Western Digital Caviar SE 160GB SATA2 7200RPM 8.9MS 8MB Hard Drive OEM

-A-DATA PC2-6400 2GB DDR2-800 240PIN DIMM Memory

-LG 16X DVD-ROM 48X CD-ROM IDE UDMA33 INT OEM

-Gigabyte GA-EG31M-S2 mATX LGA775 G31 DDR2 1PCI-E16 2PCI SATA2 Video Sound GBLAN Motherboard

-Intel Core 2 Duo E7200 Dual Core Processor LGA775 2.53GHZ 1066FSB 3MB Retail Box

-Palit GeForce 8800GT 600MHZ 512MB 1.8GHZ DDR3 PCI-E DVI-I HDCP HDTV Out Video Card

-Coolermaster Elite RC-330 ATX Black Mid Tower Case 4X5.25 2X3.5 5X3.5INT 460W Front USB & Audio

That costs $520.

 

[dLMN8R]

Very nice - 4+ year old CPU as a minimum spec and a graphics card that's nearly that old.

And an 8600GT for a recommended card? Sounds promising - that's a card just about on par with the graphics cards in the current-gen consoles, which bodes well for good optimization.




OP - any chance you could provide a link for a source?

 

[Rapping Granny]

I have 8GB of RAM, a Quad Core at 2.6GHZ and soon a 4870x2, will it run at high settings?

Come on, how about we stop being assholes, I bet that not even my system will run it at max settings, it will be Crysis all over again. I think these recommended specs are the same as for Crysis and see how that went.

seriouz or jokez?

 

[zoku88]

seriouz or jokez?

I'm pretty sure he's joking. I think he has a 3870X2

 

[OmegaRed]

Woo, hopefully I can run it on high.

Current Specs.

Intel Quad 2.4 GHZ Processor
4GB RAM
Geforce 8800GT

 

[Hunter D]

Your X2 4200+ might not be a year old, but the X2 4200+ is much older then that.

However Good CPU's are cheap now anyway. You can pick up a new motherboard + 8400 or 6600 for way under $200 now.

I am building a computer for a friend and

-Western Digital Caviar SE 160GB SATA2 7200RPM 8.9MS 8MB Hard Drive OEM

-A-DATA PC2-6400 2GB DDR2-800 240PIN DIMM Memory

-LG 16X DVD-ROM 48X CD-ROM IDE UDMA33 INT OEM

-Gigabyte GA-EG31M-S2 mATX LGA775 G31 DDR2 1PCI-E16 2PCI SATA2 Video Sound GBLAN Motherboard

-Intel Core 2 Duo E7200 Dual Core Processor LGA775 2.53GHZ 1066FSB 3MB Retail Box

-Palit GeForce 8800GT 600MHZ 512MB 1.8GHZ DDR3 PCI-E DVI-I HDCP HDTV Out Video Card

-Coolermaster Elite RC-330 ATX Black Mid Tower Case 4X5.25 2X3.5 5X3.5INT 460W Front USB & Audio

That costs $520.

Where did you buy the parts?

 

[alistairw]

Your X2 4200+ might not be a year old, but the X2 4200+ is much older then that.

However Good CPU's are cheap now anyway. You can pick up a new motherboard + 8400 or 6600 for way under $200 now.

Hell yeah, now's an awesome time to build a sweet rig.

 

[godhandiscen]

seriouz or jokez?

No joke (just a 3870x2 OC'd right now, the 4870x2 hasnt released yet), and even then I can't fuckign achieve 60fps stable on Crysis. So yeah, this game could still turn out like Crysis, and thats why I am scared. I am more excited about Project Origin.

I'm pretty sure he's joking. I think he has a 3870X2

I said "soon" for the videocard. I am getting it at the end of the month if I don't make any stupid purchases until then.

 

[Blackface]

Where did you buy the parts?

Ncix Canada.

 

[Blackface]

No joke (just a 3870x2 OC'd right now, the 4870x2 hasnt released yet), and even then I can't fuckign achieve 60fps stable on Crysis. So yeah, this game could still turn out like Crysis, and thats why I am scared. I am more excited about Project Origin.

I said "soon" for the videocard. I am getting it at the end of the month if I don't make any stupid purchases until then.

No game, will ever be coded as horribly as Crysis was again. I am pretty sure many game companies saw how bad Crysis failed due to it's horrible coding, and will take the time to refine theirs so it doesn't happen.

 

[godhandiscen]

No game, will ever be coded as horribly as Crysis was again. I am pretty sure many game companies saw how bad Crysis failed due to it's horrible coding, and will take the time to refine theirs so it doesn't happen.

At least you understand. Watch the Crysis Graphics Defense Force show up and try to convince you that Crysis is actually displaying effects that are worth the hardware it cripples. BTW, I love Crysis, I just think it doesn't perform like it should.

 

[AmMortal]

I do not understand :s

 

[dLMN8R]

No game, will ever be coded as horribly as Crysis was again. I am pretty sure many game companies saw how bad Crysis failed due to it's horrible coding, and will take the time to refine theirs so it doesn't happen.

Jesus christ enough of this crap already. Anyone who's played the game knows how drastically technically superior it is to anything else out there. You might get 1/3 the frame rates in Crysis compared to something like Unreal Tournament 3 at comparable resolutions, but there's easily 3x the stuff going on as well.

And what failure are you talking about? Even with this "horrible coding", the game went on to sell nearly 2 million copies. Despite the lack of any mainstream marketing whatsoever, despite the absolutely terrible PR disaster they had with "nothing" able to run it (not true), and despite all the alleged piracy.



Go look at a video of Far Cry 2 on 360 and you'll see why, exactly, Far Cry 2 appears to run smoother. The level of detail scaling is absolute shit, with trees turning to flat sprites when they go any distance away, the explosions are particle details are crap, and the destructible buildings aren't nearly as impressive. At the same time, the AI looks like crap and the draw distance isn't even as good.

Until anything comes out that comes even remotely close to doing what Crysis does, any discussions about the game having "horrible coding" are absolutely baseless, unsubstantiated claims. The only game that could possible meet that requirement is Crysis Warhead, and I'll believe what Crytek is saying about how optimized it is when I see it.

At least you understand. Watch the Crysis Graphics Defense Force show up and try to convince you that Crysis is actually displaying effects that are worth the hardware it cripples. BTW, I love Crysis, I just think it doesn't perform like it should.

You're welcome.

 

[godhandiscen]

Until anything comes out that comes even remotely close to doing what Crysis does, any discussions about the game having "horrible coding" are absolutely baseless, unsubstantiated claims.

*cough Warhead... cough cough...*

 

[dLMN8R]

I just edited my post to address that. If Warhead comes out and lives up to Crytek's grand claims of how much better optimized it is, allowing an 8600 to run it at fantastic-looking detail levels, I'll be happy to eat my words. But until then, I'll believe it when I see it. Until then, there is absolutely nothing that comes close to doing what Crysis does technically - regardless of what you think of the game itself. All there is now is its competition, and based on that competition, Crysis' performance is absolutely justified for what it does.

Yeah, it would be great to run the game at 60fps, but considering that it's perfectly playable at 20-30, I'm willing to sacrifice the performance for the looks in this case.



Anyway, back to Far Cry 2.

 

[godhandiscen]

I just edited my post to address that. If Warhead comes out and lives up to Crytek's grand claims of how much better optimized it is, allowing an 8600 to run it at fantastic-looking detail levels, I'll be happy to eat my words. But until then, I'll believe it when I see it.

Ok, I am bookmarking this topic now. I don't want to argue about this anymore, we all like Crysis.

 

[Ysiadmihi]

Damn, I'd have recommended if my 8600 had 512MB : /

Guess it's finally time to upgrade.

 

[Teknoman]

For those planning to play on PC, here they are!

MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS:

CPU: Pentium 4 3.2 Ghz, Pentium D 2.66 Ghz, AMD Athlon 64 3500+ or better

RAM: 1 GB

Video card: NVidia 6800 or ATI X1650 or better
Shader Model 3 required
256 Mb of graphic memory

Media reader: DVD-ROM

Hard drive space: ~12 Gig of HD space. (TBD)



RECOMMENDED:

CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo Family, AMD 64 X2 5200+, AMD Phenom or better

RAM: 2 GB

Video card: NVidia 8600 GTS or better, ATI X1900 or better
512 Mb of graphic memory

Sound: 5.1 sound card recommended



SUPPORTED VIDEO CARDS:

NVidia 6800, NVidia 7000 series, 8000 series, 9000 series, 200 series. 8800M and 8700M supported for laptops.
ATI X1650 – 1950 series, HD2000 series, HD3000 series, HD4000 series.

Alright!

 

[dLMN8R]

So anyway, where's the source for these specs again?

 

[the TMO]

Nice specs. And nice tokidoki avatar in op!

 

[Stop It]

Lower than I thought it might have been, my rig easily meets rec specs; let's hope the game is good.

 

[Brimstone]

According to this interview, Far Cry 2 will support DX 10 features if your GPU can handle it.

13) Do you use advanced features of Direct X 10 like Geometry Shader, Virtual Texture Management etc.? Can you please give examples how they are utilized! In what way do these features improve or simplify the rendering process?

DG: We do use some DX10 specific features.


14) Will the DX10 visualization differ substantially from the graphics that are rendered with DX9 hardware? What are the visuals that can only be rendered with shader model 4 hardware? Can you supply us with a visual proof via screenshot too?

DG: We are not ready to show our DX10 version yet or give details on it. For sure, we are able to push the graphic details and quality with DX10 hardware.

http://extreme.pcgameshardware.de/actionspiele/8308-pcgh-technical-q-far-cry-2-dominic-guay.html

 

[Blackface]

Jesus christ enough of this crap already. Anyone who's played the game knows how drastically technically superior it is to anything else out there. You might get 1/3 the frame rates in Crysis compared to something like Unreal Tournament 3 at comparable resolutions, but there's easily 3x the stuff going on as well.

And what failure are you talking about? Even with this "horrible coding", the game went on to sell nearly 2 million copies. Despite the lack of any mainstream marketing whatsoever, despite the absolutely terrible PR disaster they had with "nothing" able to run it (not true), and despite all the alleged piracy.



Go look at a video of Far Cry 2 on 360 and you'll see why, exactly, Far Cry 2 appears to run smoother. The level of detail scaling is absolute shit, with trees turning to flat sprites when they go any distance away, the explosions are particle details are crap, and the destructible buildings aren't nearly as impressive. At the same time, the AI looks like crap and the draw distance isn't even as good.

Until anything comes out that comes even remotely close to doing what Crysis does, any discussions about the game having "horrible coding" are absolutely baseless, unsubstantiated claims. The only game that could possible meet that requirement is Crysis Warhead, and I'll believe what Crytek is saying about how optimized it is when I see it.


You're welcome.

Are you honestly trying to tell me the game wasn't coded like garbage?

Crysis is one of the worst coded games in the history of PC games. I don't think you understand what I mean when I say that. When you are a computer programmer, you have the ability to program something in many different ways. It's up to the computer programmer to find the most efficient way of doing this. When a programmer programs something badly, you will have thousands of lines of extra code, operations and actions sitting being executed that don't need to be there. Those thousands of lines of extra code could have been removed if the programmer took his or her time to refine what they were doing, and find the best possible way to get it done.

The Crysis programmers didn't refine there code. You have thousands of useless unneeded operations executing as you play the game, which destroys PC performance.

In fact, they have addressed this issues, and have launched various patches to the game to help REFINE the code. They also promised Warhead would be a far more refined game, and run better then the original.

Crysis’ high system specs were another bone of contention, and Yerli acknowledges that the launch specs were high. (Patches have since better optimized the code.) Warhead, he promises, will reward those who upgraded to play Crysis. “If you were able to run Crysis, you’ll be able to run Warhead better,” says Yerli. That’s not to say that Warhead won’t push the graphics barrier. In addition to those easier-to-digest system requirements, Warhead’s graphics will benefit from a new global ambient lighting system that will boost visual acuity in the game’s environments and models. Improvements in the way lights and shadows interact with the world enhance small details previously unnoticed, and spotlight the game’s shader effects. And, though it hasn’t been added to the engine yet, Crytek plans to include new particle effects that are “dense and intense,” says Yerli.

None of these enhancements will impact framerates on current-gen machines, he notes. “We tried to push image quality and particle effects, but not at the cost of hardware performance.” And don’t worry about having Windows Vista and DX10 on your machine - you’ll be able to max out all settings in Warhead with your DX9-capable videocard. Crytek also listened to complaints that Crysis’ enemy AI was lacking, and is working to improve it for Warhead, especially in the aliens, who will appear to have more human-like organization. Group tactics will be improved, and Korean combat chatter will receive an upgrade to better inform you of what the North Korean soldiers are up to.

http://www.gamesradar.com/pc/crysis.../a-2008062711373466094/g-20080609143756441028

Taking time to refine code and better optimize your engine will help players experience it the way it is meant to be played. Rushing the game out with convoluted code ruins this experience. I am not attacking Crysis, it's just a fact of reality. There are many other things I could say if I wanted to attack Crysis as a game.

I suggest reading Crymod more, where various other programmers regularly discuss how horribly unoptimized and coded Crysis was, because Crytek was rushed to put it out.

 

[dLMN8R]

:lol :lol

You're talking to a guy with more than a decade of programming experience who recently moved to Seattle after accepting a competitive job in the software development industry. I know my shit, dude. And after spending hours upon hours with Crysis as well as countless other games on my PC, the performance I get out of Crysis compared to what those other games offer is absolutely justified. Nothing else comes close. The AI, destructible environments, massive draw distance, great level-of-detail scaling, all running with the most phenomenal real-time graphics ever produced in a game is nothing short of astonishing. There isn't enough hyperbole available to describe just how far and above the game is from a technical standpoint compared to its competition, and until there is, there is no base in reality for claiming that the game is coded like shit.

Right now, using Far Cry 2's performance as a platform to kick off a discussion of Crysis' optimization is flawed for two reasons. 1) The game's not even out yet and you have no idea how it'll actually run and look. 2) The videos that *are* out there of the 360 version are ridiculously disappointing, for the reasons that I described in a previous post. If the PC version isn't heavily improved - not just visuals, but AI too - then by absolutely no means whatsoever is Far Cry 2 performing better an indication that Crysis is poorly optimized.

Every single sequel on in the entire history of 3D gaming has performed better than its predecessor did when using the same engine. Every single 3D PC game throughout history has had its performance improved through patches. Just because something is able to be further optimized in the future doesn't mean that it was "coded like shit" before.