PDA

View Full Version : Crysis low, med, high, very high screen compare here


Pages : 1 2 [3]

agentkay
10-11-07, 11:56 AM
I never had any problems with Vista and I'm looking forward to play it in DX10. I do think some of the "bonus" DX10 effects will probably make it to DX9 through .cfg file tweaks but I do expect them to have a lower performance inpact in DX10.

The engine is clearly aimed towards the future hardware, enabling for instance 4096x4096 soft shadow maps will bring even a GTX to its knees (beta2 - low teens to single digit fps at 1080p) and the raytracing/light reflection effects (that are still in the engine, r_sun something command) are possibly too taxing as well.

Luminal
10-11-07, 05:08 PM
People will never get satisfied, even if games looks ultra hyper exteme warp realistic they always pick about something...compare crysis and quake1! lol

Maybe we get SUPER quality textures when games with bluray comes out, but today its not possible or we would need to have 10-20dvd´s :rolleyes:

stncttr908
10-11-07, 05:20 PM
My gripe is my software for Vista is still not up to the task, like all of NVIDIA's software like nView, etc. Everything is either dumbed down or doesn't exist.

nightmare beta
10-11-07, 05:32 PM
I never had any problems with Vista and I'm looking forward to play it in DX10. I do think some of the "bonus" DX10 effects will probably make it to DX9 through .cfg file tweaks but I do expect them to have a lower performance inpact in DX10.

The engine is clearly aimed towards the future hardware, enabling for instance 4096x4096 soft shadow maps will bring even a GTX to its knees (beta2 - low teens to single digit fps at 1080p) and the raytracing/light reflection effects (that are still in the engine, r_sun something command) are possibly too taxing as well.

with the exceptions of a few games (doom3, for example) i've always thought that shadows have been overrated. i can happily just turn shadows off and max everything else out, except the resolution, would be playing at 16.8x10.5

agentkay
10-11-07, 05:57 PM
with the exceptions of a few games (doom3, for example) i've always thought that shadows have been overrated. i can happily just turn shadows off and max everything else out, except the resolution, would be playing at 16.8x10.5

I think shadows are essencial for a game that wants to archieve realistic and impressive visuals and they are as important as texture quality and good lighting. The only games that don't need shadows as badly are the ones that try to archieve a cartoony look (IMO).

I would rather disable motion blur, DoF or even some AA/AF before shadows but yes I guess 4096x4096 shadows are indeed a little bit of an overkill if they are too expansive (performance-wise), 2k shadows are good enough. I still think its a great idea that they are there, that you can enable them with a next-gen card and play the game again with even more impressive visuals, with full AF, with better AA, with TRAA-SS, higher resolution, higher viewdistance, etc.

giverz
10-12-07, 12:41 AM
i can imagine those leaves shimmering in motion.

is it 4x aa max and no trss, so it won't make the x360 look bad to people who can't tell that it looks like ****?

also, i'm concerned about the very high textures being blurrier than the high. i've come to a theory. there's no difference in dx10 between ati's af and nvidia's or so i've been told. in an af tester they look very different. i wonder if microsoft has made dx10 force filtering optimisations? I wouldn't be surprised.

i expect the highest quality af on the 8series to be removed from the 9 series.

damn, i wouldn't even have the transistors for anything but the highest quality mode.

but that's just me.

yes THEY DO shimmer. its very ugly and annoying. leaves and almost all tree tops have this annoying shimmering, which of course does not appear in any of the official videos crytek released. reminds me of oblivion. why oh why. :(