9600GT to be the first product of Geforce 9 series

[helmutcheese]

Crysis for me is not a well optimised game yes it has better graphics than cod 4 but cod 4 runs much better and is not far behind on the visuals. If crysis is the future of gaming engines then we better get our credit cards out and spend mega money as we will need it to run it at any decent fps

If Crysis looked 2x as good as the nearest other Game, I could live with 2x less FPS, that would means 40ish FPS for me.

But it dont look 2x as good, at places its like a cartoon, other places its nice, but not nice enough to get 3-30FPS and no hardware avail runs it well, tjhats what you call badly coded and in need of fixing.

It does not bother me as my card using 1 year old tech cant run it well, it does not bother me if you needed TRI SLI to run it, whats does bother me is the BS the CEO fed us and some here are happy to swallow it and argue about facts claiming the exact opposite of what we were told.

Yes I go on and on about this, but I do not change my story daily like some.

I think he is a lair through and through and now the patch aint here even more so, Nvidia even gave the driver as promised that does nothing without the Crysis Patch ( even states in Read Me), peeps moaned at Nvidia even then, for what ?, keeping a promise

@ flibby, You dont need prove anything, he can Google or use the Search same as the rest of us.

GOTY is BioShock, followed by CoD4 nuff said.

Crysis and UT3 both sold only approx 300,000+ copies and are classed as failures so far going by sales. (could change).

I think BioShock and CoD4 sold over 1 million in same time (I really cant remember, but read it few days ago) so dont quote me on it, you need go read up.

 

[Teaf]

Surely if you're going to make a bold claim like "Crysis is badly optimised and that's why it runs so badly on current hardware", something completely contradictory to what the guy who actually made the game has been saying for ages, then you'd have the evidence to hand.

No offense to you as an individual, but the words of the actual creator hold a bit more water.

I cannot disprove him, it's a matter of opinion after spending so long on the configuration files getting it sorted for my own machine. If I have to spend X hours on a configuration file tweaking it to get better performance on a game they made, and using an engine they made, then I believe that to be badly optimised from their end and is not good enough. No offense taken also, I wouldn't expect someone to believe me over said creator, but I personally believe his claim is false and that the game could have been optimised much better than it is/was for the retail version of the game.

 

[Darkwave]

I have played both sp's and just can't see the leaps and bounds. Answer me though is it 2 times better looking maybe 3 as thats what the fps difference is. Those screen shots are a pretty bad example 1 guy has a mask on with no decent visual background.

I changed the picture for a better example of the facial texturing etc.

Keep in mind that Crysis has massive levels with a huge draw distance, full of realistic foliage. Call Of Duty 4 has small levels and the foliage is nowhere as complex. The textures, especially on characters, are nowhere near as detailed as those in Crysis. As for the COD4 shots not having a decent visual background, that's just a failing of the game IMO as much as I love COD4, it didn't have memorable environments at all.

Crysis is simply the more visually stunning game, and yes I'd go as far as saying the FPS difference is pretty understandable considering how much better one looks.

I cannot disprove him, it's a matter of opinion after spending so long on the configuration files getting it sorted for my own machine. If I have to spend X hours on a configuration file tweaking it to get better performance on a game they made, and using an engine they made, then I believe that to be badly optimised from their end and is not good enough.

To be honest you can say this about any game with config files because you have the time, and the experience with your own machine's strengths and weaknesses, to tweak it for your individual machine.

You can't say there is one, universal config edit that suddenly gives improvements across the board on all hardware. It's a matter of trial-and-error tweaking of many variables.

Developers cannot configure a game for each individual machine because the variation is just endless. Some try to make up for this by adding as many options as possible or by adding an "auto detect" function (which is always very dire), but they can't get it perfect without testing that could theoretically take years.

No offense taken also, I wouldn't expect someone to believe me over said creator, but I personally believe his claim is false and that the game could have been optimised much better than it is/was for the retail version of the game.

Time will tell on whether or not his claim of designing the game with future hardware in mind was false, but it fits with Crytek's business model. They produce few games and their games are designed to last.

It took a long time for us to be able to run Far Cry maxed out with antialiasing etc.

 

[TheRealDeal]

Your attitude speaks volumes about how much I was wasting my time trying to have a sensible discussion with you. I am going to consider it a blessing that someone like you has me on ignore.

Surely if you're going to make a bold claim like "Crysis is badly optimised and that's why it runs so badly on current hardware", something completely contradictory to what the guy who actually made the game has been saying for ages, then you'd have the evidence to hand.

No offense to you as an individual, but the words of the actual creator hold a bit more water.

Crysis visuals are leaps and bounds ahead of Call Of Duty 4 and this is coming from someone who loves both.

So are you trying to say that those visuals are very far apart cause i can't see what you are getting at. Crysis is a badly optimised engine for me it does not look so much better than the cod 4 visual that it needs to run so slow.

 

[TheRealDeal]

Your attitude speaks volumes about how much I was wasting my time trying to have a sensible discussion with you. I am going to consider it a blessing that someone like you has me on ignore.

Surely if you're going to make a bold claim like "Crysis is badly optimised and that's why it runs so badly on current hardware", something completely contradictory to what the guy who actually made the game has been saying for ages, then you'd have the evidence to hand.

No offense to you as an individual, but the words of the actual creator hold a bit more water.

Crysis visuals are leaps and bounds ahead of Call Of Duty 4 and this is coming from someone who loves both.

Lmao when you actually play cod 4 sp theres explositions bombs tanks firing everywhere. Must be hard on a gpu with all that happening all around you. Get me a shot of all the action on screen not a guy sitting down looking out of a helicopter. Just for the record though i know crysis has the better visuals but for me it is not twice to 3 times as good and thats the fps drop you have to take.

 

[Darkwave]

Lmao when you actually play cod 4 sp theres explositions bombs tanks firing everywhere. Must be hard on a gpu with all that happening all around you. Get me a shot of all the action on screen not a guy sitting down looking out of a helicopter. Just for the record though i know crysis has the better visuals but for me it is not twice to 3 times as good and thats the fps drop you have to take.

Those two screenshots were pretty much purely to demonstrate textures, especially on character models.

I've played Call Of Duty 4 single-player mode three or four times now so I think I know what kind of action there is, and there's a lot in Crysis as well. Imagine the action in Call Of Duty 4 with all of the foliage, interactive environments and the giant maps that there are in Crysis, then tell me it wouldn't run like crap.

 

[helmutcheese]

TheRealDeal, If your quoting him for your own posts fine, but if your doing so I see him please dont, I set him to ignore again for a reason.

@Flibby, Im going to show you something on topic just for you m8.


"Maximum PC - Cevat Yerli Crysis Interview
Maximum PC magazine published a technology focused Crysis interview with Crytek CEO and President Cevat Yerli on their October 2007 issue. Below is a short summary of the main topics from the one-page interview. Thanks to littlecheez9 for this!


- The game physics in Crysis will be handled by the CPU only so there will be no GPU or PhysX PPU aided physics acceleration.
- What comes to digital distribution Crysis will not be available on services such as Steam but on EA Link (EA Store).
- Crysis is highly optimized for both single-core and multi-core CPUs.
- The benefit from having multi-core CPUs will only be better performance i.e. higher and smoother frame rates.
- Cevat believes that GeForce 8800 GTS or Radeon 2900 will be good for running Crysis at 1280 resolutions on maximum settings but for 1600x1200 or higher you'll need faster hardware. "

He dont mention the GTS 640 specifically but I assume he means GTX/Ultra to go 1600x1200 and above.



This will prove the CEO is a liar and the words of the actual creator hold NO water only urine.

I could go and also get all info about Game using the CPU/GPU/Memory in that order (or supposed to) and also about Todays hardware and Patches for Tomorrows Hardware but quite Frankly its the Saturday before Xmas and the Search Results are massive and I have far better things to do that prove BS was said by the CEO when others claim it was not.

He may have well being telling what he thought was the truth but it all went wrong, but he should at least have came forward and been honest same with this belated Patch.

 

[Darkwave]

TheRealDeal, If your quoting him for your own posts fine, but if your doing so I see him please dont, I set him to ignore again for a reason.

Yes we know you have me on ignore, grow up.

- The game physics in Crysis will be handled by the CPU only so there will be no GPU or PhysX PPU aided physics acceleration.

This is true.

- Crysis is highly optimized for both single-core and multi-core CPUs.

This is true, it uses all four of my cores as I've broven with benchmarks/graphs.

- The benefit from having multi-core CPUs will only be better performance i.e. higher and smoother frame rates.

I've not compared my quad against my dual core as I can't be bothered swapping them out and reseating my heatsink purely to benchmark one game, but judging from the fact that the game uses all four of my cores this is probably true.

- Cevat believes that GeForce 8800 GTS or Radeon 2900 will be good for running Crysis at 1280 resolutions on maximum settings but for 1600x1200 or higher you'll need faster hardware.

Seeing as you can run it on Very High at 1280x960/1024, this is true. It doesn't say running perfectly smooth.

If you were trying to prove that Cevat Yerli tells it like it is, you've done a great job.

 

[Tute]

For me, Call of Duty 4 looks as good as, if not better than Crysis. Yet it can do so on a fraction of the hardware.

I have no proof, but i'm still going with poorly coded.

 

[Darkwave]

For me, Call of Duty 4 looks as good as, if not better than Crysis.

I'm sorry but I have no idea how you can say that with a straight face, at all.

I love both but I've completed COD4 thee or four times and not completed Crysis yet which speaks volumes about if I "prefer" one game over the other or whatever. So there's no bias here, just an objective opinion that Crysis is a miles better looking game which I back up by explaining all about the textures, the models, the environments, the sizes of the levels, the interactivity with objects etc.

 

[Fire Wizard]

- Cevat believes that GeForce 8800 GTS or Radeon 2900 will be good for running Crysis at 1280 resolutions on maximum settings but for 1600x1200 or higher you'll need faster hardware. "

Surely that is stating that we will need faster hardware to run Crysis and not that it is buggy?

 

[Tute]

I'm sorry but I have no idea how you can say that with a straight face, at all.

I love both but I've completed COD4 thee or four times and not completed Crysis yet which speaks volumes about if I "prefer" one game over the other or whatever. So there's no bias here, just an objective opinion that Crysis is a miles better looking game.

Just what I think, that's all.

Given the standard of games recently, there's nothing I can see in Crysis to justify it's hardware demands. And it's my opinion that CoD4 is an example of how it should be done.

Surely that is stating that we will need faster hardware to run Crysis and not that it is buggy?

It's something that there will never be a straight answer to - Yerli's hardly going to admit it if it is the case is he?

 

[helmutcheese]

Surely that is stating that we will need faster hardware to run Crysis and not that it is buggy?

Are you reading some other info than the above, its in plain Eng whats so hard to grasp and why is there a Patch due ?.

Do the math, 1280's on a 8800GTS, so higher hardware needed for 1600's and Higher, so whats higher hardware than a 8800GTS ?

(I can name 2 cards right now for a fact and I do not mean the recent refresh ones as I posted above months ago).


CoD4 much higher standard game IMO and seems in majority as its 2nd in the GOTY awards and sales also.

BTW this Topic is supposed to be about the Nvidia 9000 series not Crysis (dont know how it got on that).



(In amongst this rabble, I am actually in other threads trying to help peeps with real issues, esp the HDD one).

 

[Darkwave]

Given the standard of games recently, there's nothing I can see in Crysis to justify it's hardware demands. And it's my opinion that CoD4 is an example of how it should be done.

I agree that COD4 was done really well and for me it's an example of how a game can be fantastic without being the best looking game out, but playing through them both I just can't see how anyone could think that it looks better than Crysis. Crysis to me is a huge technical achievement in terms of graphics and environments.

 

[Fire Wizard]

It's something that there will never be a straight answer to - Yerli's hardly going to admit it if it is the case is he?

Hey Tute, has Yerli actually said that Crysis is buggy? (I am guessing he hasn't) If this is the case, where are the people who are saying "Crysis is buggy" getting this information from?

(I do apologize, I am having a hard time working out what is what in this thread)

 

[helmutcheese]

They get the info from trying to run it, do you think the CEO is going to admit the game is a POS in its current state (if you indeed think its a POS).

He wont admit anything.

Do Asus admit the Crosshair and Striker E are buggy crap ?, if No does that make all owners and sites wrong ?.

M8, do you actually need a Vendor to publically say something is crap/broken/buggy before you believe it ?

Can I borrow your rose coloured glasses

 

[TheRealDeal]

http://screenshot.xfire.com/screenshot/natural/b83ae8c066b19e3091d04e69c72ed7e2522d293a.png

Thats call of duty 4 all on high does not look much worse than crysis imo. Straight from my pc also.

 

[Fire Wizard]

snip

Hey helmutcheese, so really everyone that has said Crysis is buggy (Not saying it isn't) is in their opinion?

 

[Tute]

Hey Tute, has Yerli actually said that Crysis is buggy? (I am guessing he hasn't) If this is the case, where are the people who are saying "Crysis is buggy" getting this information from?

(I do apologize, I am having a hard time working out what is what in this thread)

I don't have a source for mine.

I just don't believe Infinity Ward can make a game that is, in my opinion, better looking than Crysis but will run well on hardware going back 2 or 3 years.

 

[helmutcheese]

Hey helmutcheese, so really everyone that has said Crysis is buggy (Not saying it isn't) is in their opinion?

Yes ofcoarse, an opinion is like a butthole, we all got one