Real Lifesis (Crysis mod)

marlos · 28 Apr 2009 at 19:52

Rybo89 said:
marlos im guessing you now saving up for a new system after that stunt

Why do you say that.

mattyj1085 · 28 Apr 2009 at 19:56

psychas said:
when next gen gpu will arrive end of this yea crysis will be game of the past , something else will take over probably doom 4.

it always happens

doubt it, neally every game is designed to run on console so its generally crud

Rybo89 · 28 Apr 2009 at 20:15

marlos said:
Why do you say that.

because there isnt a system on planet what run crysis on full whack, so u must have dipped down to no more then 3fps after putting it on full graphics

psychas · 28 Apr 2009 at 20:41

i think u can play game on full , but on 1280x 1024 :rolleyes:

marlos · 28 Apr 2009 at 20:50

Rybo89 said:
because there isnt a system on planet what run crysis on full whack, so u must have dipped down to no more then 3fps after putting it on full graphics

For your Information my FPS is between the low 30's and high 40's.

Please look at my sig for rig details

Jono8 · 28 Apr 2009 at 21:45

Rybo89 said:
marlos im guessing you now saving up for a new system after that stunt

he has sli 260's :confused:

I'm sure he is actually egtting fairly good framerates.

Rybo89 · 28 Apr 2009 at 21:59

didn't think it was at all possible to get crysis at max detail at 1920x1200 with 16xAA with even 2x295's

KNiVES · 28 Apr 2009 at 22:12

mattyj1085 said:
However note the FPS in the screenshots with the depth of field at 2 and then 1. The final FPS is without the mod

We'd need to change the config ourselves it seems. In my opinion the graphics settings for in the distance beyond the depth of field are too unnecessarily high.

Jontain · 28 Apr 2009 at 22:18

Tried this earlier on ToD2

Does look nice but as has been said i think the depth of field might be a slight intense as standard.

Rybo89 · 28 Apr 2009 at 22:29

Ive just tried it with DX10 full detail and 16xAA and had a steady 23+ fps :eek:

thats with just 1 260GTX

but thats only with 1280x720, does anyone know why in DX10 mode it wont let me go any higher then this res?

Spektor · 28 Apr 2009 at 22:41

I didn't realise that the key to rendering truly realistic graphics was just to take any game and set the depth of field to bat**** insane.

Sash · 29 Apr 2009 at 08:02

Real life sucks. Computer graphics are better lol.

arknor · 29 Apr 2009 at 08:08

Sash said:
Real life sucks. Computer graphics are better lol.

lies sexy women in RL look better than women in a game by far

Sash · 29 Apr 2009 at 08:14

arknor said:
lies sexy women in RL look better than women in a game by far

Theres no sexy women in crysis. I think more people go wow over crysis than when they see a jungle. We are used to seeing jungles and stuff now but are more impressed when we see a pc rendering one. The last statement was a joke anyway.

Gimpymoo · 29 Apr 2009 at 08:24

Sash said:
Real life sucks. Computer graphics are better lol.

Is that why you still have a floppy drive?

Sash · 29 Apr 2009 at 08:41

Gimpymoo said:
Is that why you still have a floppy drive?

Maybe, but your girlfriend told me your hard drive wasnt much bigger than my floppy drive.

*for the lulz not as an insult*

Gimpymoo · 29 Apr 2009 at 15:00

mattyj1085 · 29 Apr 2009 at 15:17

Jontain said:
Tried this earlier on ToD2

Does look nice but as has been said i think the depth of field might be a slight intense as standard.

It looks quite good but compairing it to ultra settings it still looks no where near as good. I do like the depth of field but at 2 its way too high. 1 is good but does not increase FPS. Instead of having everything there and blurring it they should have tried making it reduce draw distance, foliage etc when 2 is set and increase when 1 is set.
maybe this couldnt be done as a level reload must be needed to reduce object detail, draw distance and other stuff like that

CK61938 · 29 Apr 2009 at 16:33

Rybo89 said:
Ive just tried it with DX10 full detail and 16xAA and had a steady 23+ fps

thats with just 1 260GTX

but thats only with 1280x720, does anyone know why in DX10 mode it wont let me go any higher then this res?

Are you using XP? I know in Vista I can set the details to Very High on DX10. I can get a steady 30-40+ FPS using full res of 1920x1200 2xAA and with VERY HIGH settings across the board.

CK61938 · 29 Apr 2009 at 16:37

marlos said:
For your Information my FPS is between the low 30's and high 40's.

Please look at my sig for rig details

I have a 4870 X2. I had 32xCFAA, 16xAF along with 1920x1200 and VERY HIGH settings. I was getting 3FPS...I will try with 16xCFAA and 16AF. In game itself tho you can only go as high as 8xAA so using the CFAA can certainly help.