Official Crysis Demo thread

willhub · 27 Oct 2007 at 22:19

NightSt@lk3r said:
he said screenshot not render

Look UNDER :rolleyes:

Ass I said thats what the guy looks like in the game aswell.

Amnesia · 27 Oct 2007 at 22:21

helmutcheese said:
Its near same as FarCry with a facelift. IMO, they need major tweak it as its too resource hungry right now.

only in vista.

it runs much smoother in xp with the same settings...i just reinstalled vista to try this game out. i shouldnt have bothered as graphically there isnt much difference from what ive seen.

NightSt@lk3r · 27 Oct 2007 at 22:27

willhub said:
Look UNDER

Ass I said thats what the guy looks like in the game aswell.

lovely and low res :rolleyes:

Energize · 27 Oct 2007 at 22:29

Just started playing, avg 60fps and only using 718MB of ram on low settings @ 1152x864. And judging by all the problems people have been having all I can say is, thank god I'm using xp.

willhub · 27 Oct 2007 at 22:29

NightSt@lk3r said:
lovely and low res

Ye errrm when I'm in game they look better than that crap!.

NightSt@lk3r · 27 Oct 2007 at 22:31

willhub said:
Ye errrm when I'm in game they look better than that crap!.

they all do untill you get right up in there faces, then they look all low res.

Amnesia · 27 Oct 2007 at 22:32

i think the faces in both games look pretty good but when you take a look at the whole models(including body) then crysis clearly is more detailed.

RavenXXX2 · 27 Oct 2007 at 22:36

Fresh from EP2, could you say, no contest.

keogh · 27 Oct 2007 at 22:37

Don;t run it at 2560x1600, damn I've not seen a game run as slow and laggy as that for a lonnnng time! The game looks good, but not good enough for it to run that poorly... My rig isnt that bad... is it? I suppose it just that high res, at 1920x1200 its not nearly as bad.

Dunno if its just me though, but the water on that games looks terrible! HL2 has better looking water than that... hell Ultimate Doom had better looking water than that, unimpressive that was. The rest of the environment was impressive though... love the flashlight!

willhub · 27 Oct 2007 at 22:37

Something up with yer PC, mine looks better than that at max quality.

Jasebta · 27 Oct 2007 at 22:44

willhub said:
Something up with yer PC, mine looks better than that at max quality.

Go and play both and take screenshots from them, then. Crysis definitely has more face detail than HL2.

dbmzk1 · 27 Oct 2007 at 22:46

willhub said:
Something up with yer PC, mine looks better than that at max quality.

No, it doesn't.

I don't even know how you can start to compare the two. Have you seen what Crysis looks like on high/very high. The faces are almost photorealistic. The ONLY time HL2 EVER even comes close with the the Fakefactory mod and even then it is quite far off Crysis.

RavenXXX2 · 27 Oct 2007 at 22:48

Once Will gets his GT and plays crysis, he will then see the error of his ways.

XysteR · 27 Oct 2007 at 22:51

Honestly guys, Crysis spanks arse on the texture front, as good as HL2 was its not a patch on Crysis for textures and sheer world detail. Simple as, end of.

AdladUK · 27 Oct 2007 at 22:54

XysteR: Please post more pictures!!! They look awesome

bakes0310 · 27 Oct 2007 at 22:55

After uninstalling and reinstalling it again so it gave me the option of dl this windows update. It really did help its still stuttery but quite playable though on high. Im gonna buy myself a copie of this game and pray its just a bad demo and the performance is improved to playble standards. If not itll go on the shelf for a couple years until i get a pc that will play it.

I find it unacceptable that this game runs like a dog on high spec machines, its down a poor engine. So the producer said that you wont able to run it very high on todays machine. Thats stupid i just bought my £300 graphics card to specially play this game and it still aint good enough, dont anyone feel cheated.

shep_no_platinum · 27 Oct 2007 at 23:00

i go to play 64bit and it locks at the disclaimer about it being a demo etc.

yet i run the 32bit and it runs fine.

And yes im running Vista x64 with latest drivers etc.

anyone had this problem?

Kmodo · 27 Oct 2007 at 23:03

bakes0310 said:
I find it unacceptable that this game runs like a dog on high spec machines, its down a poor engine. So the producer said that you wont able to run it very high on todays machine. Thats stupid i just bought my £300 graphics card to specially play this game and it still aint good enough, dont anyone feel cheated.

After playing Vanguard, in a word, no

It is not like this is an unoptimized poorly coded early released game or a shoddy port with mediocre graphics

IMO the game really does look that good and justifies its performance.

PixelChef · 27 Oct 2007 at 23:05

i go to play 64bit and it locks at the disclaimer about it being a demo etc.

yet i run the 32bit and it runs fine.

And yes im running Vista x64 with latest drivers etc.

anyone had this problem?

Yeah same here, a lot of people with the same problem I think.

dbmzk1 · 27 Oct 2007 at 23:05

bakes0310 said:
After uninstalling and reinstalling it again so it gave me the option of dl this windows update. It really did help its still stuttery but quite playable though on high. Im gonna buy myself a copie of this game and pray its just a bad demo and the performance is improved to playble standards. If not itll go on the shelf for a couple years until i get a pc that will play it.

I find it unacceptable that this game runs like a dog on high spec machines, its down a poor engine. So the producer said that you wont able to run it very high on todays machine. Thats stupid i just bought my £300 graphics card to specially play this game and it still aint good enough, dont anyone feel cheated.

Don't run it on very high then, maybe?