Truth about Crysis. Let all consolities know this!

There will be dips under 30fps if playing at very high or even high. But then Uncharted, Halo3, MGS4, Motorstorm, Lair, GTA4 etc etc have not solid 30fps framerate. Many of those actually are more often under 30fps then at 30fps!

2 9800GX2s cant get constant 30 fps and you're saying you get constant 30fps with your 8800GTS 640MB?

AnxietyDisorder

What is it don't you believe my screenshots despite them showing the frames per second in the top right corner? I admit I haven't played the game all the way through checking my FPS but its been playable no less than any console game. Whenever I have checked my fps its always been around 30fps.

[QUOTE="Meu2k7"]

That screenshot is ancient ...

Sorry but I can with a 8800 GTS .. with no AA 1680 x 1050, Very High Shaders/textures and it looks exactly like that ( bar some more distant jaggies ) at 25-30 FPS (Playable).

Stevo_the_gamer

I have an 8800 GTS 512 and I get a fairly stable 30 FPS at 1680x1050, Very High.

[QUOTE="com2006"]

Just taken these two now (I usually get a constant 30FPS, even when I'm blowing something up its still playable), my setup is a Q6600, 8800GTS 640MB, 2GB RAM:

AnxietyDisorder

2 9800GX2s cant get constant 30 fps and you're saying you get constant 30fps with your 8800GTS 640MB?

cause you have to create the fun unlike scripted crap like cod4blackice1983

50-60FPS in crysis MAXED

First and last levels.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUXvuL7jgQM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twMuJScZCFo

Dynafrom

Damn, check the mouse size, is he running on 800x600 or somehow 640x480?

You don't need to max Crysis to beat console graphics. My 9800GX2 can play Crysis on High settings at 1680x1050 and runs smooth. Crysis graphics on my PC laugh at Gears of War graphics on the 360. However, CryEngine 2 was designed to be future-proof to increase its lifespan, so there is no shame in not being able to max Crysis using todays hardware :)

And I'll say it again: You don't need to max Crysis to beat console graphics. CryEngine 2 was designed to be future-proof.

That screenshot is ancient ...

Sorry but I can with a 8800 GTS .. with no AA 1680 x 1050, Very High Shaders/textures and it looks exactly like that ( bar some more distant jaggies ) at 25-30 FPS (Playable).

Meu2k7

That's the question.

30 fps is playable, but i don't think 25 fps is...

that's something i like about console games, stable fps.

[QUOTE="Meu2k7"]

That screenshot is ancient ...

Sorry but I can with a 8800 GTS .. with no AA 1680 x 1050, Very High Shaders/textures and it looks exactly like that ( bar some more distant jaggies ) at 25-30 FPS (Playable).

SambaLele

That's the question.

30 fps is playable, but i don't think 25 fps is...

that's something i like about console games, stable fps.

Lol. The only reason why console games have stable FPS is because the devs downgrade the graphics to achieve it. Ever wonder why Haze is only 576p upscaled to 720p? Why Halo 3 is 640p upscaled to 1080p? Oh, and some console games DON'T have stable FPS, such as Mass Effect. You can get more stable FPS from PC, you can just set the graphics lower (still better graphics than consoles). With PC gaming, you can choose if you want to sacrifice framerate for resolution and graphics, etc.

[QUOTE="Meu2k7"]

That screenshot is ancient ...

Sorry but I can with a 8800 GTS .. with no AA 1680 x 1050, Very High Shaders/textures and it looks exactly like that ( bar some more distant jaggies ) at 25-30 FPS (Playable).

SambaLele

That's the question.

30 fps is playable, but i don't think 25 fps is...

that's something i like about console games, stable fps.

Alot of console games run below 30fps especially when blowing things up and stuff.

[QUOTE="SambaLele"][QUOTE="Meu2k7"]

That screenshot is ancient ...

Sorry but I can with a 8800 GTS .. with no AA 1680 x 1050, Very High Shaders/textures and it looks exactly like that ( bar some more distant jaggies ) at 25-30 FPS (Playable).

com2006

That's the question.

30 fps is playable, but i don't think 25 fps is...

that's something i like about console games, stable fps.

Alot of console games run below 30fps especially when blowing things up and stuff.

Solution: Before release, advertise the game as full 1080p running at 60fps, but then release the game running 600p upscaled to 720p. that should allow the game to run 60fps even when there is a lot of action going on screen ;)

[QUOTE="Meu2k7"]

That screenshot is ancient ...

Sorry but I can with a 8800 GTS .. with no AA 1680 x 1050, Very High Shaders/textures and it looks exactly like that ( bar some more distant jaggies ) at 25-30 FPS (Playable).

SambaLele

That's the question.

30 fps is playable, but i don't think 25 fps is...

that's something i like about console games, stable fps.

Crysis at 20 FPS is nearly playable...

25 FPS is definitely playable.

The motion blur does wonders for it in terms of playability at lower FPS. It costs about 4 FPS for the motion blur but it makes everything look 10-15 FPS smoother unless you are down below 20.

Man I get what all the computer people are taking about and trust I agree. But what most computer people fail to realise is that with the computer you have to put move money into a computer than a console. With a console everything is already there, while this is a good thing it is also bad because you can upgrade it.

Now with a computer it is upgradable but you can end up spending quite a bit of money one it. I mean lets be serious

1) You will always need now a min of 1 GB worth of space to install a game.

2) You always have to constantly chech just to make sure your computer makes the min requirements.

3) Your probaly going to want a better sound card so all the nice explosions and gun fire sound nice.

I mean lets be serious Graphics card and harddrives aren't cheap.

I mean lets be serious Graphics card and harddrives aren't cheap.360ru13r

Lol. The only reason why console games have stable FPS is because the devs downgrade the graphics to achieve it.

With PC gaming, you can choose if you want to sacrifice framerate for resolution and graphics, etc.

PandaBear86

I'm not seeing the downside here.

[QUOTE="PandaBear86"]

Lol. The only reason why console games have stable FPS is because the devs downgrade the graphics to achieve it.

With PC gaming, you can choose if you want to sacrifice framerate for resolution and graphics, etc.

lowe0

I'm not seeing the downside here.

The downside is why can't the PS3 run full 1080p games as Sony promised so many times? Why does Haze need to be downscaled to 576p if Sony said that the PS3 can run all games at 1080p @120 frames per second (they said this before release)? Only a PC can give you that oppurtunity.

Heres Crysis on my PC.

[QUOTE="AnxietyDisorder"]

Crysis on the highest settings isnt playable so why post screenshots of it? Even 2 9800GX2's cant play the game on 1680x1050 with 2xaa. I laugh my ass off when they say pc gaming is cheap and an 8800GT can play the game on very high.

This is how Crysis looks like on playable settings on a 9800GTX let alone 8800GT

So please stop posting screenshots of Crysis that are not playable and if you dont just admit PC gaming isnt cheap 2 98800GX2= $1200

Phazevariance

I have an E8400 cpu with 2gb corsair ram, and a single 9800gtx OCX by BFG, and I can run it on every setting on VERY HIGH at 1280x1024 and it plays smooth as butter with minimal frame rate drops, as in doesnt drop below 25fps.

When you ahve it that high, who needs AA. Oh, and i build my own computers, and it was under $1000 and runs everythign on the market, plus i can upgrade to sli anytime for added performance in the future. My computer will out perform ANY ps3 or 360 title for their entire existance, as computer games get more complex and graphically beautiful, the consoles will continue to stay bottlenecked by their hardware.

:lol:

Keep telling yourself that. I'll enjoy not having to spend thousands of dollars just to keep up with the latest games.

Man I get what all the computer people are taking about and trust I agree. But what most computer people fail to realise is that with the computer you have to put move money into a computer than a console. With a console everything is already there, while this is a good thing it is also bad because you can upgrade it.

Now with a computer it is upgradable but you can end up spending quite a bit of money one it. I mean lets be serious

1) You will always need now a min of 1 GB worth of space to install a game.

2) You always have to constantly chech just to make sure your computer makes the min requirements.

3) Your probaly going to want a better sound card so all the nice explosions and gun fire sound nice.

I mean lets be serious Graphics card and harddrives aren't cheap.

360ru13r

Oh comon, PC has way more option then gaming when you buy it.

HDD are pretty much cheap theses days. Graphic cards have a wide variety of products that can meet requierement for cheap.

The downside is why can't the PS3 run full 1080p games as Sony promised so many times? Why does Haze need to be downscaled to 576p if Sony said that the PS3 can run all games at 1080p @120 frames per second (they said this before release)? Only a PC can give you that oppurtunity.

PandaBear86

Look, there's a fundamental disconnect here. You insist that you have to have the ability to tradeoff effects vs. resolution as you see fit. I'm saying, what value does that choice add? Why not just let the people who made the game figure it out, so that by the time it reaches your doorstep, all you have to do is drop the disc in and play?

[QUOTE="Phazevariance"][QUOTE="AnxietyDisorder"]

Crysis on the highest settings isnt playable so why post screenshots of it? Even 2 9800GX2's cant play the game on 1680x1050 with 2xaa. I laugh my ass off when they say pc gaming is cheap and an 8800GT can play the game on very high.

This is how Crysis looks like on playable settings on a 9800GTX let alone 8800GT

So please stop posting screenshots of Crysis that are not playable and if you dont just admit PC gaming isnt cheap 2 98800GX2= $1200

CMPunk13

I have an E8400 cpu with 2gb corsair ram, and a single 9800gtx OCX by BFG, and I can run it on every setting on VERY HIGH at 1280x1024 and it plays smooth as butter with minimal frame rate drops, as in doesnt drop below 25fps.

When you ahve it that high, who needs AA. Oh, and i build my own computers, and it was under $1000 and runs everythign on the market, plus i can upgrade to sli anytime for added performance in the future. My computer will out perform ANY ps3 or 360 title for their entire existance, as computer games get more complex and graphically beautiful, the consoles will continue to stay bottlenecked by their hardware.

:lol:

Keep telling yourself that. I'll enjoy not having to spend thousands of dollars just to keep up with the latest games.

Crysis is the only PC game with crazy requirements if you want to play at max.

With my 300$card, I can play high 1680x1050 with no AA(haven;t tryed with AA yet)... wich is pretty nice.

[QUOTE="waynehead895"]Even that looks better than Console games. And the physics are top notch. I didn't find the game enjoyable however.blackice1983

cause you have to create the fun unlike scripted crap like cod4

well said

50-60FPS in crysis MAXED

First and last levels.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUXvuL7jgQM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twMuJScZCFo

Dynafrom

wow that looks good, i run it on high (xp) / v high on my vista boot and get between 30 - 50 fps. its great goin back to it havin not played it for a few weeks, you forget just how far ahead of everything else it is

[QUOTE="PandaBear86"]

The downside is why can't the PS3 run full 1080p games as Sony promised so many times? Why does Haze need to be downscaled to 576p if Sony said that the PS3 can run all games at 1080p @120 frames per second (they said this before release)? Only a PC can give you that oppurtunity.

lowe0

Look, there's a fundamental disconnect here. You insist that you have to have the ability to tradeoff effects vs. resolution as you see fit. I'm saying, what value does that choice add? Why not just let the people who made the game figure it out, so that by the time it reaches your doorstep, all you have to do is drop the disc in and play?

Why not have some freedom of chosing how you want to play the game?

[QUOTE="PandaBear86"]

The downside is why can't the PS3 run full 1080p games as Sony promised so many times? Why does Haze need to be downscaled to 576p if Sony said that the PS3 can run all games at 1080p @120 frames per second (they said this before release)? Only a PC can give you that oppurtunity.

lowe0

Look, there's a fundamental disconnect here. You insist that you have to have the ability to tradeoff effects vs. resolution as you see fit. I'm saying, what value does that choice add? Why not just let the people who made the game figure it out, so that by the time it reaches your doorstep, all you have to do is drop the disc in and play?

They do its called the optimise for my PC button nearly all games have it.

[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"][QUOTE="Meu2k7"]

That screenshot is ancient ...

Sorry but I can with a 8800 GTS .. with no AA 1680 x 1050, Very High Shaders/textures and it looks exactly like that ( bar some more distant jaggies ) at 25-30 FPS (Playable).

Einhanderkiller

I have an 8800 GTS 512 and I get a fairly stable 30 FPS at 1680x1050, Very High.

Now, that's only on "HIGH" - I can get 30FPS when no action is going on and I'm standing completely still. :P

When I'm not playing at that high resolution... I get well over 30fps. (until a bunch of action shows up... I'll encounter some slow downs.)

Why not have some freedom of chosing how you want to play the game?

Bebi_vegeta

They do its called the optimise for my PC button nearly all games have it.

com2006

This is med/high with no AA

[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]

lowe0

I smell poo.

[QUOTE="lowe0"][QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]

Kez1984

I smell poo.

[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]

Why not have some freedom of chosing how you want to play the game?

lowe0

It takes me a few minutes... ouch.

I guess that's why PC games are generally cheaper...

Sure why not, post your system specs as well.Kez1984

This is on an E6750, 4 GB, 8800 GT, Vista Business (MS sent it to me for free) x64 SP1. On that hardware, I don't think the detail is Very High - I think the guy who programmed the autodetect was.

(Sorry about the window border - I was getting black screen caps until I alt-Entered the window.)

PC > Console Gaming

Why not pay a little extra to get the best hardware?

one 8800GT.... most settings on high (some on medium) 1440x900. Looks good to me.

(dipped down to 21fps for 1 second before jumping back up here.)

Very playable. Mostly 30-40fps average. 25-30 with lots of action.

[QUOTE="Kez1984"]Sure why not, post your system specs as well.lowe0

This is on an E6750, 4 GB, 8800 GT, Vista Business (MS sent it to me for free) x64 SP1. On that hardware, I don't think the detail is Very High - I think the guy who programmed the autodetect was.

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b27/kevinlowe0/crysis_autodetect_sucks.png

(Sorry about the window border - I was getting black screen caps until I alt-Entered the window.)

That's weird, barring vista and 3.5 gb, my system is pretty much similar as yours and the system config set's it too "high", there's not even the option in custom setting's to set it to very high.

What's your fps at these settings?

What the hell are you talking about? It doesn't even take 1 9800GX2 to run it on high. My 8800GTS runs it fine on high settings. After that you're just bottlenecked until new hardware comes out.Lazy_Boy88

Who are you addressing?

That's weird, barring vista and 3.5 gb, my system is pretty much similar as yours and the system config set's it too "high", there's not even the option in custom setting's to set it to very high.

What's your fps at these settings?

Kez1984

one 8800GT.... most settings on high (some on medium) 1440x900. Looks good to me.

(dipped down to 21fps for 1 second before jumping back up here.)

Very playable. Mostly 30-40fps average. 25-30 with lots of action.

FamiBox

[QUOTE="FamiBox"]

one 8800GT.... most settings on high (some on medium) 1440x900. Looks good to me.

(dipped down to 21fps for 1 second before jumping back up here.)

Very playable. Mostly 30-40fps average. 25-30 with lots of action.

AnxietyDisorder

Looks more like 500x313, judging from the pic sizes. :P

I get 54 FPS on crysis, i dont need to prove them anything specially the cows.MojondeVACA

We know:roll:

[QUOTE="AnxietyDisorder"][QUOTE="FamiBox"]

one 8800GT.... most settings on high (some on medium) 1440x900. Looks good to me.

(dipped down to 21fps for 1 second before jumping back up here.)

Very playable. Mostly 30-40fps average. 25-30 with lots of action.

dgsag

Looks more like 500x313, judging from the pic sizes. :P

yeah.. it is 1440x900. I re-sized them in photoshop to make them upload quick and fit the screen. The point was to show the FPS anyway.