Crysis patch delayed until jan!!!!

[dxx]

Any other cynics here guessing that the delay is deliberate, and intended so that the patch comes out at roughly the same time as the new line of nVidia cards, biasing comparisons between the old and the new line of cards?

[agentkay]

No it's a lot simpler:

Smaller development team + holidays + two patches + SDK + Linux server = Delay

Sure it sucks and Alex shouldn't have mentioned something like "it will be two weeks until the patch" but least they are not like Valve where delays equal a year or 3Drealms ten years.

[ASUSEN7900GTX]

Originally Posted by crainger

Does anyone still play Crysis?

*Runs away!*

come back ya little wabbit i gotta wabbit to spank...*chases*

well nothing now days seems to be coming out on time so guess game devs. can´t the clock or they fart and jerk off too much instead of doing what tey´re supposed to lay of pron and candy and do patches and games instead.

Crytek is whiony lameass devs. that can´t keep dates deadlines or promises i´m supprised they aren´t out of buisness yet as they can´t do much right. That goes for the most Devs. That can´t keep deadlines such as a certain hard ass guy that is been delayed for ever..*hint*

[Bokishi]

I'm not touching Crysis anymore until the patch comes out

[dxx]

Originally Posted by agentkay

No it's a lot simpler:

Smaller development team + holidays + two patches + SDK + Linux server = Delay

Sure it sucks and Alex shouldn't have mentioned something like "it will be two weeks until the patch" but least they are not like Valve where delays equal a year or 3Drealms ten years.

Also + huge wads of cash from Intel and nVidia, companies that both advertise within the game and use Crysis to sell their hardware in online adverts. Are they going to be happy with Crytek boosting performance on their old lines of hardware, when that same boost could be applied to the new hardware to make it seem that bit faster than before? Take note especially of the fact that Crysis is seen by The Industry as being the current Game Of The Future, meaning that any hardware capable of running Crysis smoothly is, effectively, future-proof.

[$n][pErMan]

Originally Posted by dxx

Take note especially of the fact that Crysis is seen by The Industry as being the current Game Of The Future, meaning that any hardware capable of running Crysis smoothly is, effectively, future-proof.

Agreed.... when the next line of GPU's come out one of the first things I will be looking at before I buy is benchmarks in Crysis If it can't run it on the highest settings smooth I will simply pass.

[agentkay]

Originally Posted by dxx

Also + huge wads of cash from Intel and nVidia, companies that both advertise within the game and use Crysis to sell their hardware in online adverts. Are they going to be happy with Crytek boosting performance on their old lines of hardware, when that same boost could be applied to the new hardware to make it seem that bit faster than before? Take note especially of the fact that Crysis is seen by The Industry as being the current Game Of The Future, meaning that any hardware capable of running Crysis smoothly is, effectively, future-proof.

In general I don't believe into conspiracy theories but your point isn't a bad one because the (computer) industry always took bigger jumps forward once a game or engine has been released that was "ahead of its time". The results were always faster hardware and a cheaper price and we already saw that with the release of cards like the 8800GT, 3850, 3870 etc., all excellent cards with impressive price/performance ratios.

At the same time you have to remember what Crytek did with FarCry for instance with the HDR engine upgrade (the first "high precision" HDR game IIRC) and they have promised to give Crysis a similar visual upgrade with more advanced shaders and higher settings ("Ultra High" settings).

These "Ultra High" settings could very well be reserved for the "next generation" of video cards (Nvidia D9E etc.) and if they do it this way there actually speaks nothing against boosting performance on current hardware ("Very High" or lower settings) because the new cards would get their "exclusive" visual upgrade just like current cards would get their performance enhancements at lower settings.

The real question to me is actually "how" they want to increase performance because in general you need to decrease image quality IF there isn't enough "untouched" performance left in the engine. I do think there is room for improvement left with multi-card solutions (10-20% gain w/o image quality decrease should be possible) but when it comes to single cards I'm not that optimistic other than lowering quality of certain effects or move some to other settings. Although a visual decrease would speak against what Crytek is about (pushing visuals to the limit even if it hurts) so I would be disappointed by that move.

[ASUSEN7900GTX]

i think Crytek can boost single card performance W/O image loss aas they could tweak the shaders and other stuff and still maintain the IQ and get out some FPS even on very high (XP) and DX10 there´s gotta be something for DX10 to boost for single cards

or am i totally wrong here i feel there is something in Crysis and it´s engine with a major performance increase

[v3rninater]

Well, I think there's no stupid conspiracy. I just want people to know that Far Cry (crytek's previous game) took FOREVER to get patches out. Just FYI, don't expect the same company to be any different.

[noko]

I wonder if Crytek is waiting for vista SP1 to come out before patch is released? Isn't DX10.1 surpose to come with SP1 also?

[|JuiceZ|]

After the first two weeks passed after the retail release, the delay was pretty obvious, glad they finally admitted it though.

[jAkUp]

There is no conspiracy when it comes to SLI and DX10, the game definitely has issues with DX10 and SLI, the patch should improve this.

Also yes DX10.1 will come with SP1 but I doubt Crysis will take any advantage of it considering that NV's current lineup do not support DX10.1.