Go Back   nV News Forums > Software Forums > Gaming Central > Crysis

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-10-08, 01:02 PM   #13
Technoholic
Registered User
 
Technoholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Under your chair
Posts: 1,729
Send a message via MSN to Technoholic
Default Re: New Cevat Interview

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?
__________________
[MY PC]
-- 3DMarkVantage: H7522
-- Q9450 @ 3.2GHZ 1.15V | THERMALRIGHT TRUE BLACK ULTRA-120 | DFI LANPARTY DK P45-T2RS | 4GB G.SKILL DDR2-1000
-- EVGA 280GTX | SAMSUNG 225BW | X-FI XTREMEGAMER FPS | Z-5300e | Z-2300 | 250GB SEAGATE | RAZER LACHESIS
-- 320GB WESTERNDIGITAL | TAGAN 700W | G15 rev. 2 | NINE HUNDRED | VISTA HOME PREMIUM
-- no longer own this system

[MY LAPTOP]
-- MAC BOOK PRO 13" | DUAL BOOT WITH WINDOWS 7 ULTIMATE 64-BIT | 2.3GHz i5 | 4GB DDR3 |
-- OSX LION | 320GB HDD
-- Stolen :^(

[STUFF]
-- PSN: lqfocus06
-- AEKDB
Technoholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-08, 02:51 PM   #14
SeriTonin
*BANNED*
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,349
Default Re: New Cevat Interview

Quote:
Originally Posted by 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?
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.
SeriTonin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-08, 02:52 PM   #15
fizix
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 168
Default Re: New Cevat Interview

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.
__________________
eVGA 8800GTX@630/1040/e6600@3.3GHz 38C 1.3v w/thermalarmor Big Typhoon cooling/2x800mhzPC6400/eVGA 680i/Modular 650W/ViewSonic '19lcd/3DMark06:12k
fizix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-08, 03:08 PM   #16
JasonPC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,103
Default Re: New Cevat Interview

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.
JasonPC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-08, 05:49 PM   #17
fizix
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 168
Default Re: New Cevat Interview

Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.
Ah yes, dig up some old screenshots.
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
__________________
eVGA 8800GTX@630/1040/e6600@3.3GHz 38C 1.3v w/thermalarmor Big Typhoon cooling/2x800mhzPC6400/eVGA 680i/Modular 650W/ViewSonic '19lcd/3DMark06:12k
fizix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-08, 06:00 PM   #18
JasonPC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,103
Default Re: New Cevat Interview

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

JasonPC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-08, 09:12 PM   #19
Chubz
In the Asylum
 
Chubz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 125
Default Re: New Cevat Interview

The weapon model, vehicles, shadowing, and lighting in that scene look far more realistic than anything seen in the final game.
Chubz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-08, 10:19 PM   #20
Redeemed
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 17,982
Default Re: New Cevat Interview

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 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 01-10-08, 10:20 PM   #21
Redeemed
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 17,982
Default Re: New Cevat Interview

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chubz
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.
Redeemed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-08, 11:08 PM   #22
Ayepecks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 131
Default Re: New Cevat Interview

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.
__________________
Desktop: Intel Core2Quad Q6600 | nVidia GeForce 8800GTS 320MB | 3GB 667MHz DDR2 RAM | Windows Vista Home Premium
Laptop: Intel Core2Duo T7250 | nVidia GeForce 8400GS 64MB | 4GB 667MHz DDR2 RAM | Windows Vista Home Premium
Ayepecks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 01:27 AM   #23
conroejoe
*BANNED*
 
conroejoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 969
Default Re: New Cevat Interview

Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.

Many times we were lead to believe a Quad and GTX would run it fine at high settings.
conroejoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 02:00 AM   #24
balex99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cove, Texas
Posts: 214
Default Re: New Cevat Interview

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.
__________________
"If you show up for a fair fight, you are not prepared!" --U.S. Marine Sniper School Instructor


I7-930@3.8ghz/Swiftech H20-220 Compact(CPU only)/Asus P6T/3x2gb Corsair DDR3 1600/Galaxy 470@stock(for now)/Corsair TX850/Samsung & LiteOn Sata DVDRW /Lian Li V2000B PlusII/Windows 7 64bit/Samsung 24" 245BW
balex99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Interview: Can Big Data Predict the Next Revolution? News Archived News Items 0 06-10-12 12:40 PM
Cold Front: Company Of Heroes Interview, Pt 2 News Archived News Items 0 06-05-12 07:00 AM
Eastern Promises: Company Of Heroes 2 Interview News Archived News Items 0 06-04-12 06:10 AM
Age of Empires Online interview: Tech trees and civ customization News Archived News Items 0 05-21-12 05:00 PM
The Devil's Workshop: An Interview with Diablo III's Jay Wilson News Archived News Items 0 05-15-12 08:10 AM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.