Is Crysis a reason to upgrade?

Darkwave · 29 Feb 2008 at 18:17

BassPunk said:
I'm making my judgement from the minimum FPS and don't tolerate slowdown.

I do a double blind test before I even think of putting an FPS counter near it or I just get picky.

If I choose settings I want and it looks smooth, then I will run one and see. Somehow Crysis, probably because of the motion blur, looks smooth even at low framerates and it passed my test easily on all high.

easyrider · 29 Feb 2008 at 20:38

Still gets laggy when things get hot though.

HeX · 29 Feb 2008 at 20:39

easyrider said:
Still gets laggy when things get hot though.

Only part of Crysis I ever felt was 'laggy' was the fight on the deck of the carrier.

Everything else I never had a problem with.

Darkwave · 29 Feb 2008 at 20:44

easyrider said:
Still gets laggy when things get hot though.

Not for me as I play on all high, no settings on very high.

mattyrigby00 · 2 Mar 2008 at 15:21

crysis runs fine on less than max settings and still has alright graphics, imo crysis is an over-hyped/over-rated game anyway.

Bizarre · 2 Mar 2008 at 15:52

If there was actually hardware that we could buy and run Crysis maxed at 60+ fps, then yes, I would upgrade, not for the sake of Crysis though, but becouse it'll meen I'd have a future proof system that would play all the latest games maxed out for the next few years.

jaykay · 2 Mar 2008 at 16:45

You have 2 choices
1) Turn down the settings and play it at your prefered FPS
2) Get a 3870 X2 or 9800GX2 (when it comes out) and play it at near very high settings.

But i wouldn't upgrade for one game.

3t3P · 2 Mar 2008 at 22:38

I don't understand you crysis haters, I think the game is coded WELL if anything.

What other games look ANYTHING like crysis? There's so much going on at so much detail that suddenly 30fps @1680x1050 seems normal again. also as we all know crytek can unleash a lot more potential from the engine so I am glad they are pushing technology to the limits and am humbled that my oc'd 640 8800GTS can't 'properly' run it.

Sure unreal 3 engine based games can look very nice and run at 60fps on my/your system but common look at crysis, it can't be THAT badly coded to perform the way it does.

Its a fun game but rarely one game should not cause you to upgrade, more global power perhaps for a multitude of games but never a single title...
I'd say it would be reasonable however to upgrade when a single card solution comes out that can rinse the game

craptakular · 2 Mar 2008 at 22:44

I would say no. The game looks good but it is far to short and quite boring.

GingerNinja1989 · 3 Mar 2008 at 00:14

Why all the arguing? Its only a game. OK, I happen to own it, but I just knock the settings down a notch to get it smooth on my GT.

willhub · 3 Mar 2008 at 00:18

GingerNinja1989 said:
Why all the arguing? Its only a game. OK, I happen to own it, but I just knock the settings down a notch to get it smooth on my GT.

What res you game at?

I found that at 1280x1024 its playable with everything on very high in DX10 apart from shadows on medium, post process on medium and shaders on high, everything on high and its abit smoother, not by much.

Skeeter · 3 Mar 2008 at 01:28

Crysis is a reason to upgrade if you want to benchmark and have better FPS scores than your mates....

If you want a decent and enjoyable game.... save your pennies....

lay-z-boy · 3 Mar 2008 at 01:35

In my eyes, no.
If you're desperate though, then sure.

I used to have a 680i (then a 780i) and sli with 2 gtx's, sure my fps was great and I could pile on the aa and have high fps but 99.9% of the time I actually didn't care or could do it anyway with a single card.

Sold it for the same price that I bought it for and went back to old faithful. I have a feeling I will be keeping this rig for a long time to come.

Instead I've become addicted to buying hard drives, raid controllers and building server arrays with a couple of terrabytes to spare for meh filez.

uvarvu · 3 Mar 2008 at 07:33

I used to have a 30" which I sold for a 3008. The 3008's were delayed so I carried on playing crysis on an old 19 inch CRT at 1280x1024.
I could only have the settings on medium before with the shaders set to low. But with the CRT everything was set to high and it made a lot of difference.

So I found that the answer is to downgrade your monitors!

J.D · 3 Mar 2008 at 07:55

Nahema said:
I used to have a 30" which I sold for a 3008. The 3008's were delayed so I carried on playing crysis on an old 19 inch CRT at 1280x1024.
I could only have the settings on medium before with the shaders set to low. But with the CRT everything was set to high and it made a lot of difference.

So I found that the answer is to downgrade your monitors!

Or just put the resolution to 1280x1024

.

uvarvu · 3 Mar 2008 at 07:59

J.D said:
Or just put the resolution to 1280x1024 .

LOL true but then you'd get scaling problems unless you turn it off. Then you'd get the black borders and that doesn't look so good on large monitors.

J.D · 3 Mar 2008 at 08:01

Nahema said:
LOL true but then you'd get scaling problems unless you turn it off. Then you'd get the black borders and that doesn't look so good on large monitors.

Aye true also, plus a lot of LCD's are only great at the native resolution

. I use a 21" CRT with 2k x 1.5k resolution so I don't get affected by that. I got rid of my LCD as it was too slow.

MystaEB · 3 Mar 2008 at 08:46

3t3P said:
I don't understand you crysis haters, I think the game is coded WELL if anything.

What other games look ANYTHING like crysis? There's so much going on at so much detail that suddenly 30fps @1680x1050 seems normal again. also as we all know crytek can unleash a lot more potential from the engine so I am glad they are pushing technology to the limits and am humbled that my oc'd 640 8800GTS can't 'properly' run it.

Sure unreal 3 engine based games can look very nice and run at 60fps on my/your system but common look at crysis, it can't be THAT badly coded to perform the way it does.

Its a fun game but rarely one game should not cause you to upgrade, more global power perhaps for a multitude of games but never a single title...
I'd say it would be reasonable however to upgrade when a single card solution comes out that can rinse the game

I agree with you 100%. I don't understand the contempt for Crysis either. The game looks absolutely phenomenal and it's no surprise that it performs how it does, if anything, a consistent 40 FPS on medium/high settings is great considering the visuals. Everything is high res, the amount of detail is staggering not to mention soft shadows cast by and received by absolutely every single object in the game. It's not unreasonable to expect that a game that looks this good is going to crush even the most powerful systems. It's not like games haven't done this in the past either. Doom 3 anyone?

As for the topic at hand, I'm going to go ahead and say that if there has ever been a reason to upgrade, Crysis is it. Possibly not at this moment in time, but as soon as the new cards from ATI and nVidia are available I know I'll be upgrading. It's a fantastic game, but I guess it depends how you play it. You can play it from start to finish in a straight line, becoming aggravated by the performance, or you can suck it up, drop some settings and just have fun.

V3g3tto · 3 Mar 2008 at 10:14

I was upgrading my PC and obviously wanted it to be able to play the best games at high settings. I found EVGA do a great deal. Not only do they offer a step-up program, where you can upgrade your card for a newer version within a few months of purchase, but they bundled Crysis.

Anything above 30fps i don't notice a shred of difference in playability. I dunno how people see the difference between 40 and 60 fps except when online maybe.

Bonjour · 3 Mar 2008 at 10:41

I used to be able to tell the difference between 60fps and 30fps in older games, particularly Quake 3.

In newer games, though, with all the fantasmagorical imagery pokery it's less clear cut.