• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Crysis 3 at 2560x1440

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ste
  • Start date Start date
humbug said:
+1

I hear ya, whats the point in 100 FPS and a £300 GPU when it looks like it does on an xBox 360?
Click to expand...

Not sure if you're sarcastic or not. Anyway, the difference in smoothness for me is huge between a hard locked constant frametime of ~60FPS/16,7ms and 40FPS or so. Darn, I'm getting too picky for my own good. :D
 
Well..

I initially bought a single 680, and a Dell Ultrasharp 27" 2560x1440, and I found that, with AA and all the bells and whistles turned on, a single 680 was not enough to lock demanding games at 60fps, so I bought a second one.

A single card (670/680) will probably be fine if you are happy to not use AA, but if you want the absolute best image quality, you'd have to go SLI at that resolution.
 
name89 said:
Yeah, lets face it, it may max out current console hardware, but probably wont be taxing on a mid range pc system.

Just another console port with a few fancy graphical options.
Click to expand...

Yeah if its console ported rubbish then most ps's work even break into a sweat when running it,
 
Calin Banc said:
Not sure if you're sarcastic or not. Anyway, the difference in smoothness for me is huge between a hard locked constant frametime of ~60FPS/16,7ms and 40FPS or so. Darn, I'm getting too picky for my own good. :D
Click to expand...

If u have sli or xfire then yea. But single gpu doesnt suffer froicrostutter
 
I'm getting another 680 for Crysis 3 coming out because if Crysis 2 is anything to go by at 1440p it's gonna be needed for max settings.
 
rysis 3 will return at least a bit of control to PC gamers when it hits next year, the developers tell Polygon.

Crysis 3 will return at least a bit of control to PC gamers when it hits next year, the developers tell Polygon.

The original Crysis was the sort of punishing, resource-hungry computer game that set a new, very high bar for PC gaming rigs when it hit in 2007. But when Crysis 2 hit in 2011 it initially took much of the user options away from PC gamers.

Crysis 3 will return to a system that can, if a gamer want it to, push a gaming rig to its limits, Carl Jones, director of business development at Crytek, told Polygon.






"What we did in Crysis 2 ... was a massive amount of optimization because we were aiming at the consoles as target platforms, we didn't dumb the game down ... actually what we did was take those high end features and optimize them so they'd run on a console," he said. "So, having got to that point, now we're back into the phase where we can add more stuff in. So for the high end PC it really is going to be a benchmarking setting game. There is no other game that is going to be pushing hardware as hard early next year."

That said, people will still be able to run Crysis 3 on the same spec computer that ran its predecessor, but if you want to see the game running on max settings you'll likely need a super high end system.

The game's New York City jungle setting is augmented by those improved graphics. In particular, I found the game's ability to present live reflects impressive. Thanks to a bit of tech trickery, pools of water can now reflect an enemy standing near by, a great tactical feature for the game.

Other improvements I noticed was the decision to broaden the "action bubbles" found in Crysis 2. In that game, the traditional linear progression of a most shooters was broken up by small sandbox areas that allowed a player to decide how they wanted to work their way through the area.

In Crysis 3, Crytek is pushing the sandbox further because, Jones said, that's where everyone was having fun in Crysis 2.

And since the game takes place in a city so overrun with nature that you sometimes forget you're not in a jungle, using stealth to turn the table on the bad guys and hunt them down is much easier. The game's inclusion of a bow also makes playing through areas quietly much easier. Players pull up the futuristic bow by tapping on the direction pad. Firing the bow, which has a number of special heads, doesn't pop Prophet out of stealth mode if he is cloaked at the time. This means players can, if they keep an eye on their suit's power, clear an entire area by sneaking around popping off shots with the bow. While I found ammo for the bow fairly limited, you can retrieve your arrows from a dead body if you can get to it.
Click to expand...

http://www.polygon.com/gaming/2012/8/14/3241542/crysis-3-will-punish-your-pc-but-only-if-you-want-to

Some info from the devs.
 
Expect blur and AA that chops your frames in half.To be honest thats all they have ever been is fancy effects that are extremely badly coded and GPU heavy.

A big con to sell cards for Nvidia/AMD IMO.Source with extremely HQ textures would give it a run for its money anyday and probably triple the frame rates.Hell look at BF3 and how bad it looks apart from the explosions and the particle effects.Take away the particles explosions and you have pretty half asses physics and a blurry low texture count MP shooter that takes over £1100 of kit to run :O

I recently ran dishonored at max settings forcing 16x AF 4xMSAA 4xSGSAA and SweetFX and it was simply night and day from the original.Simply looked stunning and was as sharp as a surgeons blade.The artwork and performance i got simply blew me away compared to BF3.

Although the Hunted MP trailer blew me away too i dont think it will be running with SGSSAA @ 60fps :)
 
Last edited:
I used to have 2x 6970's it gave more fps as i do now with my 7970.

But because its NOT xfire the single cards lower fps is much smoother and feel so much faster.

i wont be going Xfire again if i can help it
 
Rofflay said:
Expect blur and AA that chops your frames in half.To be honest thats all they have ever been is fancy effects that are extremely badly coded and GPU heavy.

A big con to sell cards for Nvidia/AMD IMO.Source with extremely HQ textures would give it a run for its money anyday and probably triple the frame rates.Hell look at BF3 and how bad it looks apart from the explosions and the particle effects.Take away the particles explosions and you have pretty half asses physics and a blurry low texture count MP shooter that takes over £1100 of kit to run :O

I recently ran dishonored at max settings forcing 16x AF 4xMSAA 4xSGSAA and SweetFX and it was simply night and day from the original.Simply looked stunning and was as sharp as a surgeons blade.The artwork and performance i got simply blew me away compared to BF3.

Although the Hunted MP trailer blew me away too i dont think it will be running with SGSSAA @ 60fps :)
Click to expand...

Sigh...read until you said something along the lines of how bad BF3 looks. You need glasses matey (imo).
 
Rofflay said:
Expect blur and AA that chops your frames in half.To be honest thats all they have ever been is fancy effects that are extremely badly coded and GPU heavy.

A big con to sell cards for Nvidia/AMD IMO.Source with extremely HQ textures would give it a run for its money anyday and probably triple the frame rates.Hell look at BF3 and how bad it looks apart from the explosions and the particle effects.Take away the particles explosions and you have pretty half asses physics and a blurry low texture count MP shooter that takes over £1100 of kit to run :O

I recently ran dishonored at max settings forcing 16x AF 4xMSAA 4xSGSAA and SweetFX and it was simply night and day from the original.Simply looked stunning and was as sharp as a surgeons blade.The artwork and performance i got simply blew me away compared to BF3.

Although the Hunted MP trailer blew me away too i dont think it will be running with SGSSAA @ 60fps :)
Click to expand...

There are many flaws in BF3, but the way it looks and plays is not one of them, it has the most true to life looking scenery to date, surface textures, illumination and light reflections are second to none.
Have you also noticed how little repetition there is? not one tree, leaf or blade of grass is the same in any field of view, and everything moves independently.

Use FAXX injector to get the full benefit of it, it not only corrects the colour from the washed out gray that DICE for some strange reason made it after BETA, but it also sharpens up those textures, then you can see just how much detail and work is in it.
then you can see 'why so much GPU grunt'

But i do agree with you on the Physx, they are not perfect, yet they are not bad either. And not everything crumbles as they originally promised, yet again on large urban maps an awful lot can be torn up.
There is still no game that can match it for the amount of map Physx built into the wireframe, again if you get two or three buildings crumbling around you your GPU and CPU will know about it.

BF3 was the first attempt at anything like this, certainly on this scale.

I'm looking forward to what they have learned from it, i'm looking forward to BF4. :)
 
Last edited:
Red Faction did a much better job although, the scale was smaller. BF 3 might be a good looking game, but it's not even close to perfect:
- on ultra it's unplayable on certain cards even at 40-45FPS due to lag/stutter;
- FXAA adds a lot of blur to the final image and if you add the stupid suppression effect (who on God's green Earth came with the idea of more blur), I feel like I'm using a terribly wrong pair of glasses;
- HBAO adds lag;
- collision is awful: the player can enter through environment leading to funny situations in which you shoot a guy dead just because he's legs were sticking out of a wall, but also you can get stuck with a auto vehicle on top of a rock, car, can hit the ground with a plane, chopper or even another vehicle and just the screen gets a little shaken; nades can get you even you're not in their blast area, an enemy can shoot at you even though only the top of his head is visible, but the gun and his hands are in the wall/ground/environment and so on.
- sound is broken and laggy;
-netcode is awful.

etc.

Crysis 2 was not perfect either. The performance and smoothness would just plummet if I look at a tessellated wall, a lot of action and particles means a lot less FPS than rendering Ultra settings meaningless (thanks for the idiotic tessellation Crytek) etc.

In the end BF 3 is more frustrating because it's a multiplayer game and every bit of a bug or uninspired gameplay idea pops right up and in Crysis 3 MP would probably be the same. It should be fun to see what features of DX are used and how well are they implemented into the game/gameplay.
 
BF3 is an awsome looking game and Calin saying "It is unplayable on certain cards" is why people upgraded. I am sick of BF3 now but in the 800+ hours I played, I loved it and look forward to BF4.

I used the FXAA injector with a 560TI because it wasn't powerful enough and VRAM limited to play with full ultra settings but no way does it look better than the ultra settings. I guess if my card wasn't powerful enough, I would be happy with FXAA though.
 
gregster said:
BF3 is an awsome looking game and Calin saying "It is unplayable on certain cards" is why people upgraded. I am sick of BF3 now but in the 800+ hours I played, I loved it and look forward to BF4.

I used the FXAA injector with a 560TI because it wasn't powerful enough and VRAM limited to play with full ultra settings but no way does it look better than the ultra settings. I guess if my card wasn't powerful enough, I would be happy with FXAA though.
Click to expand...


When i first started playing it it was on a 5770, it was really a great little GPU in its day but was utterly out of its depth with BF3, even on medium setting i used to get horrendous lag....

My K/D was unmentionable and i played it a lot like that, even now averaging a K/D of 1.5 / 2.0 i'm still playing catchup with my overall K/D because of the laaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaag my poor old 5770 had with it.

Ironic that i used to get 100+ FPS on BF2 with it, thought it would be fine and all that. year right...lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom