New Cevat Interview

[delas52]

http://pc.ign.com/articles/843/843858p1.html

Here's the whole interview:

IGN: How do you feel that DX10 worked in Crysis? Were you able to achieve all the effects you hoped for with the new architecture? Do you think that DX10 is just too much for most current DX10 capable systems?

Cevat Yerli: I am happy with the results of Crysis for both DX10 and DX9 systems. The game looks better than we envisioned and we were able to use DX10 to help take the game to a new level, while assuring DX9 players would have an incredible experience as well. We're just scratching the surface of what DX10 will bring in games in the future.

IGN: Do you feel that you were able to strike a good balance between good performance and realistic minimum requirements? How did your engineering and marketing teams arrive at a compromise between good visuals and a solid framerate and how do you respond to the people that are dissatisfied with how the game runs on their high-end systems?

Cevat Yerli: Yes I believe so that we made a good balanced decision. Our "medium" setting should run great on 70 percent of gaming PCs. I think an important distinction that many gamers overlooked was that we designed "medium" settings to look and play great. The tendency of many gamers is to automatically set everything for the highest possible settings, but our "high" settings are truly for high-end systems with "very-high" settings reserved for the most state of the art and upcoming PCs.

If we could have changed one thing, it would have been to use naming conventions similar to what we had in Far Cry. So Crysis "medium" would be renamed to "high", Crysis "high" to "very high" and Crysis "very high" to "ultra." As you'll remember when Far Cry was released, there were similar concerns about specifications and very few people could play the game on very high or ultra, but most gamers with suitable PCs played on medium or high settings.

IGN: Do you think early sales numbers were a little lower than expected (at least according to our North American NPD numbers) because of the requirements? Or was it the amount of games in the market? Or was it that everyone is still playing WoW?

Cevat Yerli: You can never sell enough copies of a game that you've put your blood sweat and tears into. It's probably a bit of all of the above.

IGN: If it does have something to do with the technology requirements, do you think that will change your approach for future tech endeavors?

Cevat Yerli: It's too early to say, but our primary goal is to always make the best possible games, first and foremost.

IGN: One of the complaints with the gameplay has been the departure from the game's very successful free-form aspects in favor of more linear action once the aliens show up. Was it something about the story that required you to change to a more linear and more cutscene driven series of missions or was it just a preference on your part?

Cevat Yerli: Story development and pacing were the main reasons for the shift. We knew we had to change the game's pace and inevitably the game's tone and style to tie up the narrative. You'll never please absolutely everyone, but we've received a lot of great feedback from gamers about the design, and we feel like the overwhelming majority of players had a great time.

IGN: What's been the player reaction to the alien designs and behaviors in Crysis? Better than the Trigens in Far Cry? Similar? Worse? Did you learn anything about their design after release that will help make them more successful enemies in the future?

Cevat Yerli: The overall feedback about the aliens in Crysis is that they are far superior to the Trigens, and yes we learned a lot about our aliens and player preferences from Far Cry and applied them here and we will do the same as always for future projects.

IGN: What was up with that ending? I know that you need to lead into later parts of the story, but it felt just like Halo 2 and it's frustrating as hell. Did you just figure to make these like episodes rather than self-contained stories in a larger picture?

Cevat Yerli: We felt we delivered an ending that is self-contained and conclusive for a first version of a game. We had always designed Crysis a trilogy so it was inevitable from a fiction point of view to not end the fiction. I don't think we communicated this enough, which is why some people might have been disappointed and for that we apologize – hopefully it gives them something to look forward to!

IGN: With the next game expected to focus almost entirely on the alien menace again and fighting plenty more alien enemies, how are you going to approach gameplay design to give players more of what they enjoyed the most?

Cevat Yerli: That's a great question and an answer that our team has been asked a lot. We want what's best for the gamer and what they love us for, but we also want to balance that by pushing ourselves in new directions. So I would say at this stage that you should have no pre-conceptions about future Crytek games, we're excited about where we are heading!

IGN: Will the nano-suit stay pretty much the same in future Crysis games or do you plan on some fiction that grants more powers?

Cevat Yerli: We can't comment on this at this time.

IGN: What do you consider some of your best successes in Crysis?

Cevat Yerli: I would say the nanosuit ended up being a very successful and fun gameplay mechanic. And of course the visual fidelity paired with the interactivity of our large, open-ended worlds.

IGN: How about the biggest failure?

Cevat Yerli: I definitely think that we need to continue to educate gamers about our settings. As we've been saying all along, Crysis looks and runs great on medium and high settings on gaming rigs that are 2-3 years old.

I also think we would re-examine our anti-piracy measurements. We don't know what the answer is, but we're going to look into all of the possibilities in the future.

IGN: Was there anything you were hoping to add to the game that didn't make it? If so, will you be revisiting those in the sequel?

Cevat Yerli: We do have some things we are looking to add and enhance.

IGN: What do you have planned for multiplayer support down the line?

Cevat Yerli: It's too early to say, but certainly community is a focus. We just released a pack of new maps around Christmas and we will launch some content competitions and further improve our multiplayer offerings.

IGN: What were your favorite first-person shooters (other than Crysis) this year? Do you see any as setting any particular trend that will continue?

Cevat Yerli: I enjoyed Bioshock and COD4. I think COD4 will have followers, but I don't feel Bioshock will draw as many imitators because of its art style and setting are so distinct.

IGN: What's your opinion on Far Cry 2 at this point?

Cevat Yerli: I'm still looking forward to Far Cry 2 :) Everything sounds very ambitious. Though of course for me Far Cry 2 is more a new IP that is named Far Cry 2 than it is a sequel to Far Cry.

[Ayepecks]

It's a good interview, but it seems to me Crytek really isn't willing to admit any faults with the game yet... when you say your biggest fault is not telling gamers enough about the graphical settings, you need to step back and better review your work to know how to improve upon your games. Obviously Crytek can, as Crysis was an improvement in many gameplay aspects over Far Cry.

[crainger]

Cevat Yerli: I definitely think that we need to continue to educate gamers about our settings. As we've been saying all along, Crysis looks and runs great on medium and high settings on gaming rigs that are 2-3 years old.

I dunno. Medium looks kinda bad next to games like HL2, COD4 and Airbourne/Bioshock which also run better.

I agree when he said they should have used Far Cry's scheme with Ultra.

Also looks like more people pirated the game than I thought if he is worried about Anti-Piracy measures.

[m3dude]

crysis on medium still looks better than any other game imo

[mumstheword]

Standard lame interview.

[Ayepecks]

I dunno. Medium looks kinda bad next to games like HL2, COD4 and Airbourne/Bioshock which also run better.

I agree when he said they should have used Far Cry's scheme with Ultra.

Also looks like more people pirated the game than I thought if he is worried about Anti-Piracy measures.
Really? I think Crysis on medium looks far better than all those games except for Bioshock; it definitely runs a lot worse, though.

[Crow_Nest]

The game does NOT run well on medium settings. It doesnt perform any different from High settings. Not on my PC at least...

[mythy]

but your PC is crap.. :p

[jolle]

Gotta agree with the thing about Far Cry 2.
Why even call it Far Cry? afaik there is NO relation what so ever, other then that the name will help sales a bit.

[Thingding]

true but crytek would've called crysis far cry 2 if they could..

[SeriTonin]

" we need to continue to educate gamers, our game is very playable at medium and high settings on systems 2-3 years old. "

Educate these nuts. Medium looks like **** and High runs like ass.... on system's 3 MONTHS old, let alone 3 year's old.

They failed to admit the game is a mess and that they chopped off a decent ending to get the game out in 07.

[asd]

" we need to continue to educate gamers, our game is very playable at medium and high settings on systems 2-3 years old. "

Educate these nuts. Medium looks like **** and High runs like ass.... on system's 3 MONTHS old, let alone 3 year's old.

They failed to admit the game is a mess and that they chopped off a decent ending to get the game out in 07.

This is really funny, how could they dare to say MEDIUM is "HIGH" actually!? they could just admit that the game run like crap, nope, it's MAXIMUM CRAP, I can say that, STALKER looks far better than Crysis, and run FAR BETTER than Crysis too!! if I must force myself to play Crysis in MEDIUM setting, then I would prefer, UNINSTALL IT! (nana2) (nana2) (nana2)

[Technoholic]

I run Medium perfectly fine. :| But I think I do get alittle lag in Crysis with HIGH settings. Any ideas why? Maybe I need something. Advice?

[SeriTonin]

I run Medium perfectly fine. :| But I think I do get alittle lag in Crysis with HIGH settings. Any ideas why? Maybe I need something. Advice?

No, you just need a monster of a gpu that can eat through the lazy optimizing. And unfortunately, no, a 8800gtx is not enough for all high @ a reasonable res - thus our bitching.

[fizix]

No, no, no. I don't think you guys get it. As Cevat clearly implied, it's OUR fault. He "told us all along" that we'd be able to play the game great on 2-3 year old machines! Doh! "Great" is 15-45 fps at reasonably high settings! 15FPS is perfectly reasonable! It's our fault Crytek released videos of the game running on settings they haven't even released yet at seemingly 100+fps. Not deceptive at all. Our fault that Cevat assured us consistently that an 8800 would run the game perfectly at high settings. I'm sure if someone wanted to, they could dig up the old interviews/articles and quote him on that.

It's funny how often Cevat contradicts himself, I wonder if Cevat thinks its funny that he lost the trust of his market, the gamers, for his false promises..

I love his double speak and passive voice: no, he doesn't regret being dishonest about how the game will run, he regrets not "educating" us enough in terms of the game settings. Before he said that 8800gtx+crysis+high settings=great performance, now he's claiming that the current medium should've been the current high? and so on? so "top of the line" machines can only run crysis on the current medium (which isn't even true, and crysis' medium settings look like crap)?

It would be nice if Cevat confessed that he exaggerated how well crysis would perform, and that he regrets that. But no. It'd be nice if this patch increased performance by 10-15% or whatever it was advertised as. But no.

/endrant. Sorry, I get bored in Journalism class.

[JasonPC]

I don't know what you're ranting about. An 8800 GTX does just fine with the game on high settings. Some people even use the config tweaks to enable some of the very high effects. Yes you can't play it at 1920x1080 at that setting, but he never said you could.

It seems pretty clear in the interview that he means recent gaming rigs (basically 8800s) can run the game on high, older gaming rigs (equivalent to GeForce 7800) can run the game on medium, and bottom line gaming rigs (equivalent to GeForce 6800) can run the game on low. And Very High is more or less reserved for future cards or SLI.

If you look at the very old videos despite what many people think, the game did not look anywhere near as detailed. I think it's safe to say that the graphics displayed in those videos were about equivalent to the medium setting. So what may have been high then may be medium today. I really recommend people to dig up some very old screenshots and videos. Many of them have low resolution textures, bad draw distances, or just not many objects in the scene.

[fizix]

I don't know what you're ranting about. An 8800 GTX does just fine with the game on high settings. Some people even use the config tweaks to enable some of the very high effects. Yes you can't play it at 1920x1080 at that setting, but he never said you could.

It seems pretty clear in the interview that he means recent gaming rigs (basically 8800s) can run the game on high, older gaming rigs (equivalent to GeForce 7800) can run the game on medium, and bottom line gaming rigs (equivalent to GeForce 6800) can run the game on low. And Very High is more or less reserved for future cards or SLI.

If you look at the very old videos despite what many people think, the game did not look anywhere near as detailed. I think it's safe to say that the graphics displayed in those videos were about equivalent to the medium setting. So what may have been high then may be medium today. I really recommend people to dig up some very old screenshots and videos. Many of them have low resolution textures, bad draw distances, or just not many objects in the scene.

Ah yes, dig up some old screenshots. http://www.incrysis.net/screenshots/070109-2.jpg
just kidding. don't take me seriously, I understand your points but regardless they dont soften the animosity towards being unable to play crysis without a hitch like I anticipated

[JasonPC]

Yeah I guess the screenshots are a bad example because they probably took them with everything maxed out and with the e_screenshot command. But the videos still hold true. Some of the old ones don't look nearly as good as the final product. The GDC 2006 video comes to mind.

Here's one early screenshot that IMO doesn't look all that great

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2006/086/931665_20060328_screen006.jpg

[Chubz]

The weapon model, vehicles, shadowing, and lighting in that scene look far more realistic than anything seen in the final game.

[Redeemed]

Wow. That's all I can say really.

Honestly, most anybody that is upset with Crysis' performance either didn't follow the development of the game all that well- or had seriously unrealistic expectations for the game.

I agree 100% with JasonPC's comments, as his are the only comments in this thread to have any logic within them.

Atleast a year before Crysis' release, Cevat was warning us that playing on "High" settings would not be capable for most computer... WE WERE WARNED AHEAD OF TIME. I mean seriously, can it get any more clear than that? Very few games can match Crysis image quality at "Medium" settings, and non can perfectly match the "High" and "Very High" settings.

Honestly, anybody that complains about this game is either a pessimist, didn't follow the development of the game, or had their expectation *way* too high. Considering all the delays this game saw I'm quite sure not much more could have been done in regards to optimizations.

And Cevat's referance to FarCry is spot-on. Nobody could play it with 100% everything maxed, including AA and AF, at uber-high resolutions, at the time FarCry was released. Niether the 5950U, nor the 9800XT had that kind of power. It was not until the release of SLi were you able to pull that off, and even then it was only with the most powerful of systems (uber-oc'd GTs or Ultras in SLi). Yet nobody complained then. Well, atleast not as many did.

Yet you take Crysis, which even on Medium settings is hard to match visually with any other title (CoD4 *might* be comparable in some cases) and is light years better looking that FarCry- and have it run well (1680x1050, 4xAA, 16xAF, GCAA, MSTAA, all in-game options set to "Medium") on a rig as old as mine and have it never dip below 25fps... that's an accomplishmet as far as I'm concerned. And if I had a better CPU (Core2 at 3Ghz or so) I'm certain my FPS at these setting would never drop below 30. The only part of my current computer that is even remotely "high-end" is the GPU and RAM quantity. Everything else fits into the "mainstream" segment anymore. Yet it plays Crysis just fine. Heck, at 1280x800, no AA or AF of any sort, my rig will play Crysis on "High", never dipping below 25 fps.

If anything, Crysis is going more to the roots of PC gaming than any game recently released. PC Gaming has always been about pushing the envolope in one regard or the next. How many of you have actually dissected the code for Crysis to look for any area that'll offer optimizations? How many of you have check for even just a string of redundant or unnecessary code? I'd wager none.

And I'd also wager that most any member of this site, and any other hardware enthusiast site, can run this game at higher resolutions, with some AA, and at "medium" settings, while only seldomly dipping below 30fps.

Do you guys not realise that just a few years ago 30-45fps was the standard? The target for games? Do you realise how spoiled we've become with our 45-80fps in games? Heck, the average person can't visually notice anything above 60fps anyway.

Complain all you want, but I'm more than pleased at this game. Infact, and maybe my expectations were lower than most, but this game exceeded what I was expecting from it.

Some of you guys need to either drop the PC gaming hobby or just realise that maybe you were wrong for having such high expectations.

No where, and not one of you, can find a single quote where Cevat claims the average enthusiast's rig will be able to run the game at "High" settings, with AA, and at high resolutions. No where. Not one stinkin' quote. You'll instead find plenty where he's warning us that at higher settings it'll only be playable on the best of rigs and only barely playable then.

I agree that if they naming was more like FarCry's, most of you probably wouldn't be complaining.

[Redeemed]

The weapon model, vehicles, shadowing, and lighting in that scene look far more realistic than anything seen in the final game.
I disagree. that tank and even the truck have a very "plastic" look to them.

[Ayepecks]

I still stand by my fact that if you can't find any faults with something you've created, you have problems. He said the only problem was that they didn't explain to users better about the system requirements. I'm sorry, but every developer can find faults with their product.

I'm not talking simply about graphics here. The graphics look amazing and obviously Crysis is ahead of it's time, but what about everything else? The final level was an absolute joke. The VTOL mission before it was one of the worst I've ever played in an FPS game as well.

Overall though, Crysis was amazing. I can't wait for a few years to go by so I can play it to its full graphical potential (and maybe even mainstream laptops will be able to play it by then). But you can't honestly tell me that you can't find a single fault with your game after it's released.

[conroejoe]

Wow. That's all I can say really.

Honestly, most anybody that is upset with Crysis' performance either didn't follow the development of the game all that well- or had seriously unrealistic expectations for the game.

I agree 100% with JasonPC's comments, as his are the only comments in this thread to have any logic within them.

Atleast a year before Crysis' release, Cevat was warning us that playing on "High" settings would not be capable for most computer... WE WERE WARNED AHEAD OF TIME. I mean seriously, can it get any more clear than that? Very few games can match Crysis image quality at "Medium" settings, and non can perfectly match the "High" and "Very High" settings.

Honestly, anybody that complains about this game is either a pessimist, didn't follow the development of the game, or had their expectation *way* too high. Considering all the delays this game saw I'm quite sure not much more could have been done in regards to optimizations.

And Cevat's referance to FarCry is spot-on. Nobody could play it with 100% everything maxed, including AA and AF, at uber-high resolutions, at the time FarCry was released. Niether the 5950U, nor the 9800XT had that kind of power. It was not until the release of SLi were you able to pull that off, and even then it was only with the most powerful of systems (uber-oc'd GTs or Ultras in SLi). Yet nobody complained then. Well, atleast not as many did.

Yet you take Crysis, which even on Medium settings is hard to match visually with any other title (CoD4 *might* be comparable in some cases) and is light years better looking that FarCry- and have it run well (1680x1050, 4xAA, 16xAF, GCAA, MSTAA, all in-game options set to "Medium") on a rig as old as mine and have it never dip below 25fps... that's an accomplishmet as far as I'm concerned. And if I had a better CPU (Core2 at 3Ghz or so) I'm certain my FPS at these setting would never drop below 30. The only part of my current computer that is even remotely "high-end" is the GPU and RAM quantity. Everything else fits into the "mainstream" segment anymore. Yet it plays Crysis just fine. Heck, at 1280x800, no AA or AF of any sort, my rig will play Crysis on "High", never dipping below 25 fps.

If anything, Crysis is going more to the roots of PC gaming than any game recently released. PC Gaming has always been about pushing the envolope in one regard or the next. How many of you have actually dissected the code for Crysis to look for any area that'll offer optimizations? How many of you have check for even just a string of redundant or unnecessary code? I'd wager none.

And I'd also wager that most any member of this site, and any other hardware enthusiast site, can run this game at higher resolutions, with some AA, and at "medium" settings, while only seldomly dipping below 30fps.

Do you guys not realise that just a few years ago 30-45fps was the standard? The target for games? Do you realise how spoiled we've become with our 45-80fps in games? Heck, the average person can't visually notice anything above 60fps anyway.

Complain all you want, but I'm more than pleased at this game. Infact, and maybe my expectations were lower than most, but this game exceeded what I was expecting from it.

Some of you guys need to either drop the PC gaming hobby or just realise that maybe you were wrong for having such high expectations.

No where, and not one of you, can find a single quote where Cevat claims the average enthusiast's rig will be able to run the game at "High" settings, with AA, and at high resolutions. No where. Not one stinkin' quote. You'll instead find plenty where he's warning us that at higher settings it'll only be playable on the best of rigs and only barely playable then.

I agree that if they naming was more like FarCry's, most of you probably wouldn't be complaining.


Many times we were lead to believe a Quad and GTX would run it fine at high settings.

[balex99]

Wasn't it a while after Quake Arena was released that machines were finally able to break the 60fps barrier with all high settings and at 16x12?

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see this game running above 60fps but after the 1.1 patch and installing the 169.28's I am running 19x12 with 2x and most settings on high(postprossessing and motion blur low). Avg fps in the low 20s but the game is suprisingly smooth(FOR ME). I dont want to get a 'what fps is acceptable' debate going, just trying to say that the game runs pretty good for a year old machine.

....waits for backlash from this post.

[Jonelo]

The game looks better actually than in the older videos

http://www.stage6.com/videos/tag:crysis+720p

http://images.stage6.com/video_images/1949374t.jpg (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1949374/Crysis-very-high-720p)Crysis very high 720p (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1949374/Crysis-very-high-720p)
Oritxupolitena (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena)
0:15
http://images.stage6.com/video_images/2009381t.jpg (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/2009381/Crysis-very-high-Third-person-720p)Crysis very high Third person 720p (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/2009381/Crysis-very-high-Third-person-720p)
Oritxupolitena (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena)

0:49
http://images.stage6.com/video_images/1981955t.jpg (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1981955/Crysis-720p---some-tweaks---See-in-fullscreen)Crysis 720p - some tweaks - See in fullscreen (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1981955/Crysis-720p---some-tweaks---See-in-fullscreen)
Oritxupolitena (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena)

0:21
http://images.stage6.com/video_images/1988387t.jpg (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1988387/Crysis-720p-Aliens)Crysis 720p Aliens (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1988387/Crysis-720p-Aliens)
Oritxupolitena (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena)

0:35
http://images.stage6.com/video_images/1866705t.jpg (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1866705/Crysis-720p-Very-High)Crysis 720p Very High (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1866705/Crysis-720p-Very-High)
Oritxupolitena (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena)

1:13
http://images.stage6.com/video_images/1867645t.jpg (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1867645/Crysis-720p-Very-High)Crysis 720p Very High (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1867645/Crysis-720p-Very-High)
Oritxupolitena (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena)

0:32
http://images.stage6.com/video_images/1867640t.jpg (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1867640/Crysis-720p-Very-High)Crysis 720p Very High (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1867640/Crysis-720p-Very-High)
Oritxupolitena (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena)

0:26
http://images.stage6.com/video_images/1866052t.jpg (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1866052/Crysis-720p-DX9-Very-High)Crysis 720p DX9 Very High (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1866052/Crysis-720p-DX9-Very-High)
Oritxupolitena (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena)

0:25
http://images.stage6.com/video_images/1865673t.jpg (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1865673/Crysis-720p-Very-High-Helicopter)Crysis 720p Very High Helicopter (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1865673/Crysis-720p-Very-High-Helicopter)
Oritxupolitena (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena)

0:22
http://images.stage6.com/video_images/1865424t.jpg (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1865424/Crysis-720p-DX9-Very-High-19000-kbps)Crysis 720p DX9 Very High 19000 kbps (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1865424/Crysis-720p-DX9-Very-High-19000-kbps)
Oritxupolitena (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena)

1:53
http://images.stage6.com/video_images/1858305t.jpg (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1858305/Crysis-very-high-720p-19-000-kbps)Crysis very high 720p 19.000 kbps (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1858305/Crysis-very-high-720p-19-000-kbps)
Oritxupolitena (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena)

0:21
http://images.stage6.com/video_images/1853138t.jpg (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1853138/Crysis-720p-DX9-Very-High)Crysis 720p DX9 Very High (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1853138/Crysis-720p-DX9-Very-High)
Oritxupolitena (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena)

0:25
http://images.stage6.com/video_images/1796894t.jpg (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1796894/Crysis)Crysis (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1796894/Crysis)
Oritxupolitena (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena)

1:56
http://images.stage6.com/video_images/1788497t.jpg (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1788497/Crysis-720p-DX9-Very-High)Crysis 720p DX9 Very High (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1788497/Crysis-720p-DX9-Very-High)
Oritxupolitena (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena)

0:11
http://images.stage6.com/video_images/1787797t.jpg (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1787797/Crysis-Face-720p---SEE-AT-FULLSCREEN)Crysis "Face" 720p . SEE AT FULLSCREEN (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1787797/Crysis-Face-720p---SEE-AT-FULLSCREEN)
Oritxupolitena (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena)

0:14
http://images.stage6.com/video_images/1784247t.jpg (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1784247/Crysis-,-The-friend-of-the-Birds-720p-15000-kbps)Crysis , The friend of the Birds 720p 15000 kbps (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1784247/Crysis-,-The-friend-of-the-Birds-720p-15000-kbps)
Oritxupolitena (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena)

0:26
http://images.stage6.com/video_images/2008763t.jpg (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/2008763/Crysis-720p-DX10-versus-DX9-very-high--See-in-fullscreen)Crysis 720p DX10 versus DX9 very high. See in fullscreen (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/2008763/Crysis-720p-DX10-versus-DX9-very-high--See-in-fullscreen)
Oritxupolitena (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena)

0:12
http://images.stage6.com/video_images/1989084t.jpg (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1989084/Crysis-720p-Paralax-oclussion-mapping)Crysis 720p Paralax oclussion mapping (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1989084/Crysis-720p-Paralax-oclussion-mapping)
Oritxupolitena (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena)

0:21
http://images.stage6.com/video_images/1897726t.jpg (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1897726/Crysis-720p-DX9-Very-High)Crysis 720p DX9 Very High (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1897726/Crysis-720p-DX9-Very-High)
Oritxupolitena (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena)

0:13
http://images.stage6.com/video_images/1853140t.jpg (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1853140/Crysis-720p-DX9-Very-High)Crysis 720p DX9 Very High (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena/video/1853140/Crysis-720p-DX9-Very-High)
Oritxupolitena (http://www.stage6.com/user/Oritxupolitena)

And the screens ?? a lot of incredible screens in this forum

http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=101997&page=17
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=101997&page=16
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=101997&page=15
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=101997&page=14
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=101997&page=13