royalcrown
Distinguished
- May 31, 2006
- 2,614
- 1
- 20,960
royalcrown
Distinguished
- May 31, 2006
- 2,614
- 1
- 20,960
royalcrown
Distinguished
- May 31, 2006
- 2,614
- 1
- 20,960
Some things do look good, most, but some things in the demo do look like **** close up, not my idea of godlike is all, I think the close up textures in HL@ are better and the distance textures are pretty damn close on average to crysis...at least the demo, now some areas are a lot better in crysis, like the lighting off the weapons and such, but considering all the dev hype, the demo at least falls far short of godlike on SOME visuals.
I agree it does play great at low framerates, but it does have it's nits to pick too.
and maybe not an inch and a half...sure **** looks blurry, but 3 inches I can see lots of detail close up in RL, crysis isn't quite there yet, when a game gets that good, it will deserve the visual hype.
Are you seriosly telling me that none of the textures look bad and the koreans don't look oversaturated, and that close up you can't tell which texture is applied to which large polygon; which chunk moves like 1 big chunk and not it's own branch.
Of course every blade of grass can't be individually rendered or calculated, we'd need IBM's new roadrunner for that, but the way people and crytech especially hyped Crysis, you'd think it was rendered that way and each molecule had it's own thread !
That's why I was so disappointed, not because I couldn't run it, I ran it on very high, and it's not as awesome as I was lead to believe.
ovaltineplease
Distinguished
- May 9, 2008
- 1,198
- 0
- 19,280
You're still doing nothing but nitpicking, it still looks significantly better while in motion than any other game that there is out there. If you want "real-life exact graphics and volumetric lighting" then you need to do nothing but open your eyes the next time you go outside and take in some of nature's beauty.
You said it yourself, you need extremely high end hardware to do what you are suggesting - ever read the article on the quad 9800 GX2 doing tomographic images for bone xrays in CUDA? And it still took them 15 seconds to render a single image frame that was hyper-realistic. Ever see the power of super computers doing CGI for animated movies? Are we all going to jump down Pixar's throat because Finding Nemo just "wasn't true to life enough" and the "characters were cartoony"?
I mean god man, its a computer game designed to run on halfway conceivable hardware - its a first generation game for its engine no less. Dollars to donuts says that Ubisoft's Far Cry 2 (which is the next generation of graphics advancement from everything i've seen, procedural skies, fire, wind, full physics) - is not going to run on anything less than Geforce 9 series/quad core or ATI 4000 series/Quad core, and that will likely be the minimums for passable visuals.
But I bet you would still be here complaining about Far Cry 2's procedural fire, even though it will be at the top of its technological bracket, it still wouldn't look real enough and you would say "pish posh Ubisoft, no soup."
customisbetter
Distinguished
- Apr 13, 2008
- 1,054
- 0
- 19,290
ok, i havn't read the entire thread but i have to comme nt.
GAMES SCALE!!! thats it you idiot! why tailor games to a specific card and have 15 versions of the same game when you can have one game that in the menu you can put everything to medium? your market makes no sense and i truly feel that crysis got under your skin cuz some cheap systems won't run it. sorry but crytek expected that and this was the entire premise of the game. something that challenges manufactures to produce faster stuff! *breath*
P.S. about uber expensive systems, 2000 dollar cpus and stuff, my system cost roughly $350 and plays Crysis just fine. how much is a ps3? and don't you dare mention Bue-Ray!!!<<<*said with the utmost rage*
ok ive taken a break and have one more thing to say.
about the gameplay. i believe crytek took a page from halo here.
REPLAY VALUE. yes, believe it or not, you can play the first level in crysis a thousand times and never play it the same way twice. i personally like the sneak and snipe approach but it is always fun to try to replay the trailer and blow up vehicales as they approach you and jump around smashing roofs and stuff. open gameplay is brilliant and what kept the halo series alive. the only problem was the ending in both crysis and halo 2. ok im done.
GAMES SCALE!!! thats it you idiot! why tailor games to a specific card and have 15 versions of the same game when you can have one game that in the menu you can put everything to medium? your market makes no sense and i truly feel that crysis got under your skin cuz some cheap systems won't run it. sorry but crytek expected that and this was the entire premise of the game. something that challenges manufactures to produce faster stuff! *breath*
P.S. about uber expensive systems, 2000 dollar cpus and stuff, my system cost roughly $350 and plays Crysis just fine. how much is a ps3? and don't you dare mention Bue-Ray!!!<<<*said with the utmost rage*
ok ive taken a break and have one more thing to say.
about the gameplay. i believe crytek took a page from halo here.
REPLAY VALUE. yes, believe it or not, you can play the first level in crysis a thousand times and never play it the same way twice. i personally like the sneak and snipe approach but it is always fun to try to replay the trailer and blow up vehicales as they approach you and jump around smashing roofs and stuff. open gameplay is brilliant and what kept the halo series alive. the only problem was the ending in both crysis and halo 2. ok im done.
I've come to the conclusion that people like to talk about the graphics of Crysis more than they play the game, sorry TGGA a little off topic again.
Crysis graphics are great, but it doesn't do everything better than anything else. The greatest weakness in the game's graphics were the NPCs.
Crysis graphics are great, but it doesn't do everything better than anything else. The greatest weakness in the game's graphics were the NPCs.
mihirkula
Distinguished
- Nov 27, 2007
- 964
- 0
- 18,980
To get back a little bit on topic ... imagine a world where theres no piracy ... and every single gamer buys the original game dvd costing $50..... that would make the game publishers a lot richer eh? ..... considering there are at least a million dudes and dudettes playing just pirated Crysis .... $50 for each adds up to $50 million ... and thats just one game.... damn
TO get back off the topic... enough of Crysis... bring on Project Origin
TO get back off the topic... enough of Crysis... bring on Project Origin
TheGreatGrapeApe
Champion
- Feb 18, 2003
- 20,043
- 0
- 50,960
However the fallacy of that argument, is most of those pirates wouldn't pay fro Crysis.
Pirated player =/= lost paying customers.
Reduce the price to $5 and maybe they would've bought it, but even then I doubt it.
Pirated player =/= lost paying customers.
Reduce the price to $5 and maybe they would've bought it, but even then I doubt it.
darthvaderkenneth
Distinguished
- Feb 28, 2008
- 270
- 0
- 18,780
Your all missing the point. We don't get what we can from our cards because games are not optimized to specific cards.
Consider the idea that games were say optimized to the nvidia 8600 for three years after it's launch. No questions no fiddling every game runs perfect out of the box. This is a simple accessibility issue, a simple issue of consumer accessibility. Yet at the same time fringe gamers "you the tweakers" would still get your cutting edge stuff, there will always be a market for the fringe as long as the larger middle market is running strong.
Let the tweakers tweak and get their small advantages. But let the computer gaming market be accessible to all.
No game on the pc is optimized to any one or two graphics cards, this is plain and simple to see. If they were we could be running specs similar to a 360 and still see fantastic quality.
Frankly Crisis doesn't look better than Metal Gear 4. You can argue it all you want but the gain is very little and only slight. But remember the quality of MGS 4 is consistent among all ps3 machines, it always looks beautiful. Crysis does not. Or even look at gears of war.
No one here has acknowledged that optimized games create better looking and more consistent quality.
From the comments it looks like no one knows what optimizing is.
Consider the solid state hard drive, it could blow away a normal drive but programmers don't program around it's ability to fetch information in large chunks rather than in little bits as with current drives. We haven't optimized the abilities of the drive
Consider the fluid, seamless graphical interface of any low level mac computer with its OS compaired to the chunky laggy interface of nearly any windows comp, and the macs often have half the specs. On the Mac all the neat interface features just work, where as with a pc you have to go pritty high end to do all the fancy Vista 3d stuff.
Consider where optimizing is working. Cuda programing for instance can multiply a normal GPU a Hundred fold. The programing in this case is not directly applicable but again the oprative word is OPTIMIZED!
What if when I bought any pc I could just pay $250 more and be cutting edge game ready for three years?
This is a hybrid idea, not a console, but pc flexibility with console senceability.
And don't argue the MGS 4 thing you know it's true. Go look at the screens, you know it's true
Consider the idea that games were say optimized to the nvidia 8600 for three years after it's launch. No questions no fiddling every game runs perfect out of the box. This is a simple accessibility issue, a simple issue of consumer accessibility. Yet at the same time fringe gamers "you the tweakers" would still get your cutting edge stuff, there will always be a market for the fringe as long as the larger middle market is running strong.
Let the tweakers tweak and get their small advantages. But let the computer gaming market be accessible to all.
No game on the pc is optimized to any one or two graphics cards, this is plain and simple to see. If they were we could be running specs similar to a 360 and still see fantastic quality.
Frankly Crisis doesn't look better than Metal Gear 4. You can argue it all you want but the gain is very little and only slight. But remember the quality of MGS 4 is consistent among all ps3 machines, it always looks beautiful. Crysis does not. Or even look at gears of war.
No one here has acknowledged that optimized games create better looking and more consistent quality.
From the comments it looks like no one knows what optimizing is.
Consider the solid state hard drive, it could blow away a normal drive but programmers don't program around it's ability to fetch information in large chunks rather than in little bits as with current drives. We haven't optimized the abilities of the drive
Consider the fluid, seamless graphical interface of any low level mac computer with its OS compaired to the chunky laggy interface of nearly any windows comp, and the macs often have half the specs. On the Mac all the neat interface features just work, where as with a pc you have to go pritty high end to do all the fancy Vista 3d stuff.
Consider where optimizing is working. Cuda programing for instance can multiply a normal GPU a Hundred fold. The programing in this case is not directly applicable but again the oprative word is OPTIMIZED!
What if when I bought any pc I could just pay $250 more and be cutting edge game ready for three years?
This is a hybrid idea, not a console, but pc flexibility with console senceability.
And don't argue the MGS 4 thing you know it's true. Go look at the screens, you know it's true
JAYDEEJOHN
Champion
- Aug 23, 2006
- 19,840
- 0
- 50,860
jerreece
Splendid
- Sep 7, 2006
- 3,960
- 0
- 23,160
ROFLMAO that's hilarious.
-------------
Dude seriously, this is one the whiniest theads I've ever seen.
Every game has pros and cons. Crysis looks great. But compared to real life, the trees outside my house look better detailed. Why? Because they're real. Lets face it, in a "fast food", cell phone, microwave and HD TV kind of world, we're all getting spoiled.
Graphics will get better, they always do. But for God's sake, stop whining like children because your computer doesn't simulate real life well enough. If you want visually impressive graphics, and want to see dead bodies get blown up by grenades join the Army. Let Bush send you to Iraq so you can get shot and killed in a pointless war. Then write home to your mother about how great the graphics are and how Iraq simulates 120 degree summer days so well that your entire uniform is covered in sweat/salt stains and complain about how you can't "save your game" and quit playing.
Otherwise, shut up and play a different game.
Consoles are great for playing games without the Fuss, Just don't be under the illusion that all Console games play perfect. Consoles still have Hardware limitations no matter how much a given game is optimized. I've played tons of console games that have been anything but optimized and run choppy. Compatibility and Game quality are too separate things.
The whole thrill of PC gaming is the ability to tweak settings and buy newer Graphics hardware, which allows game developers to push new boundaries . Yeah the 360 and PS3 may look great now, but if the developers only had such hardware to work with gaming would become somewhat limited. Yeah PC hardware can be expensive, But look at the price of a Single Console game! complete rip Off!
These people who try to claim other games looks better probably don't have a PC capable to play Crysis probably and have only seen it on low. Metal Gear Solid 4 looks Better? gimme break :lol:
The whole thrill of PC gaming is the ability to tweak settings and buy newer Graphics hardware, which allows game developers to push new boundaries . Yeah the 360 and PS3 may look great now, but if the developers only had such hardware to work with gaming would become somewhat limited. Yeah PC hardware can be expensive, But look at the price of a Single Console game! complete rip Off!
These people who try to claim other games looks better probably don't have a PC capable to play Crysis probably and have only seen it on low. Metal Gear Solid 4 looks Better? gimme break :lol:
No the whole thrill of any gaming from the majority of the market is having a great game that looks great.
Again Tweakers are a small minority. Do you still not admit this?
No MGS 4 looks nearly as good on hardware only 1/10 as powerful, Gears of war looks as good on 1/15 the hardware. This is my complaint.
The bugs and inconsistencies in console releases are there, but they are small in comparison to pc releases. Plus the bugs are relatively uniform and can be fixed with all machines and do not create message boards with thousands of complications for one game release on litterally millions of different pc configurations. Did I mentions millions and millions of different pc configurations? Is it starting to look absurd to you yet?
Again Tweakers are a small minority. Do you still not admit this?
No MGS 4 looks nearly as good on hardware only 1/10 as powerful, Gears of war looks as good on 1/15 the hardware. This is my complaint.
The bugs and inconsistencies in console releases are there, but they are small in comparison to pc releases. Plus the bugs are relatively uniform and can be fixed with all machines and do not create message boards with thousands of complications for one game release on litterally millions of different pc configurations. Did I mentions millions and millions of different pc configurations? Is it starting to look absurd to you yet?
Why we can't now optimize.
15 current nvidia cards circulating in popular use.
8 or more companies creating varieties of the same nvidia cards.
15 or more sound cards in current popular use.
40 or more popular cpu's in use.
15 or more popular motherboards in use.
This list could go on.
I was wrong this constitutes billions of pc configurations.
15 current nvidia cards circulating in popular use.
8 or more companies creating varieties of the same nvidia cards.
15 or more sound cards in current popular use.
40 or more popular cpu's in use.
15 or more popular motherboards in use.
This list could go on.
I was wrong this constitutes billions of pc configurations.
JAYDEEJOHN
Champion
- Aug 23, 2006
- 19,840
- 0
- 50,860
royalcrown
Distinguished
- May 31, 2006
- 2,614
- 1
- 20,960
Really this is my point concisely:
look at the massive hardware increase in power since HL2, ESPECIALLY GPU's...CRYSIS does not look that much better and was touted as being THE s*** even by Crytek...for it to be THE GAME that sets the bar, I would expect it to look significantly better than a game 4 years older than it, but I don't think it is that much better, especially considering the MASSIVE power available now. Yes, I played it on VERY high, YES, it PLAYS beautifully, NO...I don't expect photo realism...
...but there are a few areas that detract from it being everything that was being hyped...is it crap..of course not, is it this holy icon that makes me go "wow" no.
Jaydeejohn- Not communism. This would actually be capitalism with social reform. As in you snip some of the sprall of wasteful mess people don't know to clean themselves and you unify a few small portions of the market with, dear GOD, a few consistencies.
This would be like the European union forcing toy manufactures to not make toxic toys.
But mostly this would be like creating a great product with great longevity, and maximum accessibility. This would be large companies deciding to unify their programming models to actually fit their hardware.
I know what an absurd idea. They owe it to us pc gamers, just as much as the car companies owe us better fuel efficiency. There is already the demand.
But I'm starting to think that the pc market has choked enough that it can't be heard. While the pan heads still soup up their hot rods and get 7 mpg are saying "Hey wut wong wit dat, dis a fre conty, i got du green wy don U?"
You can stop humping your water cooling system now.
This would be like the European union forcing toy manufactures to not make toxic toys.
But mostly this would be like creating a great product with great longevity, and maximum accessibility. This would be large companies deciding to unify their programming models to actually fit their hardware.
I know what an absurd idea. They owe it to us pc gamers, just as much as the car companies owe us better fuel efficiency. There is already the demand.
But I'm starting to think that the pc market has choked enough that it can't be heard. While the pan heads still soup up their hot rods and get 7 mpg are saying "Hey wut wong wit dat, dis a fre conty, i got du green wy don U?"
You can stop humping your water cooling system now.
mihirkula :
To get back a little bit on topic ... imagine a world where theres no piracy ... and every single gamer buys the original game dvd costing $50..... that would make the game publishers a lot richer eh? ..... considering there are at least a million dudes and dudettes playing just pirated Crysis .... $50 for each adds up to $50 million ... and thats just one game.... damn
TO get back off the topic... enough of Crysis... bring on Project Origin
TO get back off the topic... enough of Crysis... bring on Project Origin
most ppl that play a pirated game don't buy games anyway so its not lost revenue but saying that i bought halflife2 through to episode 2 and i would not have if i did not try it first so you could say valve made cash outa a pirated game
royalcrown
Distinguished
- May 31, 2006
- 2,614
- 1
- 20,960
BTW ovaltineplease, I won't be buying crysis because I did not care for the gameplay...I was just pointing out what I thought were specific weak spots of the game, not bitching because it's not real enough.
I don't game 24/7 but when i do...I like to get some wow value, and I expected something that sets the bar not to have those detracting weak spots.
I have been gaming sine the first space invader game came out and honestly with this kind of massive power, games should be somewhat more advanced than what is currently available.
I don't game 24/7 but when i do...I like to get some wow value, and I expected something that sets the bar not to have those detracting weak spots.
I have been gaming sine the first space invader game came out and honestly with this kind of massive power, games should be somewhat more advanced than what is currently available.
JAYDEEJOHN
Champion
- Aug 23, 2006
- 19,840
- 0
- 50,860
I hate socialism too, unless itas absolutely needed, in which case, you havnt proven its needed in gaming. The market isnt socially driven but capitalistic and open, and its working
royalcrown
Distinguished
- May 31, 2006
- 2,614
- 1
- 20,960
TRUFLU...the best console game ever looks like crap compared to a ho hum pc version, no way a console version will ever look as good unless it's a crappy port (all ports are crappy), if the same game was written on a pcv from scratch and not optimized, it would still look better than the optimized console version...
JAYDEEJOHN
Champion
- Aug 23, 2006
- 19,840
- 0
- 50,860
The problem with this idea, and with this thread is... youve somehow graciously removed the enthusiam from gaming, and surrounded by enthusiasts, it just doesnt make any sense
TRENDING THREADS
-
Question Buying a used card, what should I look for before purchase?- Started by MatthewJamess
- Replies: 8
-
Question Download speed is slow on only my PC - please help!- Started by Ograsmium
- Replies: 16
-
-
Question Buying a rtx 3070 for 1080p high settings. Does it make sense?- Started by Ramiro.Giorgi
- Replies: 3
-
Latest posts
-
-
-
Question Issues with USB3 hub chained from Thunderbolt dock ?
- Latest: jauntysquirrel
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram