:lol Yeah, it really smokes at video encoding, 3D rendering and other intensive tasks.The Abominable Snowman said:So you're suggesting we buy 2 nextgen consoles and an Eee PC?
:lol Yeah, it really smokes at video encoding, 3D rendering and other intensive tasks.The Abominable Snowman said:So you're suggesting we buy 2 nextgen consoles and an Eee PC?
And eeeeeeeeeeeeverybody does video encoding and 3D rendering. Really, the 'other uses' people have for PC's usually include e-mail, web browsing, office usage and maybe listen to some music and watch some video. I think the EEE PC can handle that shit.cedric69 said::lol Yeah, it really smokes at video encoding, 3D rendering and other intensive tasks.
xabre said:Nope.
I don't know of any game that does, or will in the foreseeable future.
Supreme Commander has been out for a while.xabre said:Nope.
I don't know of any game that does, or will in the foreseeable future.
xabre said:Nope.
I don't know of any game that does, or will in the foreseeable future.
Zaraki_Kenpachi said: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.
DaFish said: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
Borys said:WOW SO AWESOME, thanks dude updating the OP as fast as I can. Not.
[HP] said:The game runs just fine for me, I'm on a 8800gt and a AMD x2 4600+!
Very high @ 20/25 FPS
Bidermaier said:Great iniciative. But too late.
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:Wait for the intel Q9450, Crysis capable cards will be cheaper in 3 months and you can probably bad a better motherboard too.
urk said:Looks pretty good to me. You could probably step the PSU down to 500w, but I don't think you'll save too much there. Best to shop the usual suspects and grab parts when they offer deals/rebates/free shipping.
Quazar said:So...anyone see anything wrong with the setup? Who can put together a better one.
In my case, that'd most likely require a fresh mobo, and probably on top of that a new CPU for that mobo... so we're back to a new PC again, pretty much. Or can AGP still hack it for the 8800GT? I suspect not.Draft said:In that case, you spend $250 to put in a video card, and maybe another $25 for an extra gig of RAM, if you don't already have 2. Congrats, you just turned your boring ass PC into a monster gaming ninja box for less than $300.
Intel has done a fine job of convincing the world they need screaming fast processors to check their email and watch Youtube, and Microsoft has done a fine job of building software that chokes and dies on anything less than a gig. The only thing separating most PCs bought in the last 3 years from playing modern games is on-board video, which can be easily remedied for as little as $150 (and that's not getting you a POS either, that's getting you a very decent gaming card.)
mclem said:In my case, that'd most likely require a fresh mobo, and probably on top of that a new CPU for that mobo... so we're back to a new PC again, pretty much. Or can AGP still hack it for the 8800GT? I suspect not.
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: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.
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.I'm not bashing the game. It isn't bad, IMO, just not the amazing all-new experience that it was touted to be. If you have nothing else to play, and a machine that can run it, you could do far worse, but it really isn't a game worth upgrading your machine for, let alone building a whole new one. The AI is poor, the big mechanic, the suit, doesn't make all that much of a difference. The game plays the same regardless of what setting you have the suit on, with the one exception of needing to switch it to strength to jump over tree trunks and rocks, which honestly just feels shoehorned in to remind you that you have the suit in the first place.
dark10x said:See, this tells me that you really haven't spent that much time with it (or really just blasted through).
Evander said:To be fair, I haven't played the actual game, but I was planning on running out and buying the special edition, until I played through the whole demo, and realized that I'd probably just quit half way through to go play Half-Life on my PS2
dark10x said:See, this tells me that you really haven't spent that much time with it (or really just blasted through).
dark10x said:Good stuff.
Ha ha, oops. Didn't read that part.Borys said:He only played the demo.
bee said:how did you get that pc and that couch so close together? surely they should be repelling each other
Zaraki_Kenpachi said:"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.
Zaraki_Kenpachi said:"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?
anthunit said:Half-Life on your ps2 with that computer.... WHY!?
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: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.
That's why you use Xpadder.Not looking to get into the whole argument about that. It's just personal preference. I personally find gamepads to be more fun.
dark10x said: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.
dark10x said: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?
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).
Zaraki_Kenpachi said:"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.
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.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?
That's not true at all.That isn't the game giving you "options", it poor implimentation of the mechanic.
SexConker said:the average user is incapable of building their own machine
Yeah because the game already looks old and all.Bidermaier said:Great iniciative. But too late.
End of the day, they're just not interested or motivated to port, in either case. Getting hung up on either's reasoning is silly. "Why" doesn't matter for the consumer.Evander 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.
dark10x said: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.
SexConker said:The fact that you post on a message board other than Game FAQs / IGN means you are above average.
Of course, you still post 4 times in a row.