Printable View
Agreed. Though I had a harder time beating Kyong on Hard than on Delta for some reason. Come to think of it, it took me a lot longer to beat the entire game on Hard than on Delta. Could be that the learning curve isn't as significant going from Hard to Delta as from Medium to Hard. Kinda like on Rock Band, its tougher to go from Medium to Hard than Hard to Expert.Quote:
Originally Posted by Papu
I think the entire game needs a replay with 4870x2, this time with all eye candy on and no tweaks or configs whatsoever.
I don't know man, first time I played, I did it on Hard, second time Delta, was like piece of cake, actually.Quote:
Originally Posted by YMAA
Defeating Kyong is so easy, just Maximum-Strength-Punch him 5,6 times; the aliens in the core level and the blue little ones on the snow are also easy to defeat: grab'em then throw'em away. Cloak helps a lot doing this ;)
Anyway, I am sad omega1alpha thinks ports are viable to PC Gaming. :shakes:
And I even more regret he actually wants Warhead to fail and see such a good developer as Crytek abandon PC Gaming exclusivity, maybe you want Valve and Blizzard to leave PCs too, don't you? You want to see PS3 rulling the gaming world, don't you? If so, you suck :)
Oh, annihilat0r, we all already know you are having wet dreams about HD4870X2, you don't need to mention it in your every single post :ROTF:
If Valve and Blizzard stop making PC titles, I'll punch a baby. Hard. In the chest. And if there isn't a baby within a 10 foot radius I will fly to China and make a baby with a prostitute just to have a baby to punch.
Single GTX 280 beats HD4870 CF... so we'll see how that "booms" :pQuote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
and pigs can fly , back up your statement or your just pissing into the wind..Quote:
Originally Posted by jmke
not really....Quote:
Originally Posted by jmke
http://techreport.com/r.x/radeon-hd-...0-veryhigh.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by Papu
Yeah, you got it kinda backwards, most cases 4870CF wins. But if your the kinda person who factors in microstutter (I am) and understand the average frame rate thrown into our faces from review sites on CF/SLI are not really representative of the actual fps, then, I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by jmke
ya reallyQuote:
Originally Posted by Swatrecon_
http://img261.imageshack.us/img261/5...152f86dxd9.png
Crysis is one of the sole games where CF doesn't win :)
and I bet Nvidia sitting aloongside Crytek for the creation of that game has nothing to do with that...
I don't care for the reasons.
that's beside the point. Somebody claiming that HD4870X2 will be "da bomb" might be surprised and disappointed in a thread about one of the games were CF doesn't stand out against single GTX 280.Quote:
Originally Posted by Decami
:cool:
carry on!
what I like the most is the DX10 bubble being burst by those companies first creating it.
:up:Quote:
- Won't require DX10 for maximum details and full effects.
not really, not DX10.Quote:
Originally Posted by jmke
<20 FPS is not what I call playable. so Very High at 1920x1200 is not feasible at this point in time
When did we start talking about playability? We were talking about 2 HD 4870's having a higher framerate. And since the last 3 generations of cards from both companies have used DX10, I think it's time we start looking at it. DX9 performance shouldn't even be considered for these cards.Quote:
Originally Posted by jmke
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmke
o rly?
http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/55419/cry1920.gif
http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/55419/17136.png
and again
Doesnt even need crossfire
ya win some ya loose some , but from most of the crossfire reviews the 4870's are ahead , and even dx10 with AA the 4870 ALONE beasts a 280.
:clap: that's why max IQ with Crysis Warhead will be possible with DX9, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Swatrecon_
:rofl: what good is a CF setup if it beats GTX 280 only at resolution/settings which make the game unplayable. it makes it irrelevant ;)Quote:
When did we start talking about playability?
@Papu: anandtech & firingsquad use the canned fly-over build in benchmark; techreport does the FRAPS in-game thing,
I don't know how TT does it's test, but I think it's the fly-over also.
http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/2...1d8cd6acv2.png
CF fails completely :'(
setup fail tbh
You're not even looking at the other reviews.
You probably want to stick to XP for the next 10 years too, huh? I mean, since it can do anything, we should just keep it forever.
think I've looked through more HD48 reviews then the average HW nut ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Swatrecon_
nope got ya beat, I've read them all :ROTF:
new trailer
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/38396.html
:up:
"t is no surprise that Crysis has emerged as the acid test for testing new GPUs and has found itself a home in the benchmark protfolios of most websites.
Later on Crytek released the 1.1 patch which offered performance gains but the significant of those gains was on Multi-GPU configurations. As it stands today, Crysis is still a very resource (GPU) intensive game with people resorting to either lowering the quality of shaders or resolution (or both) in order to achieve playable frame-rates."
"Crysis:Warhead arriving this fall promises to fix most of these performance related issues with the CEO Cevat Yerli saying that a $650 PC will run Warhead with playable frame-rates. If we expect that Warhead runs 20% more efficiently over Crysis, that gets us close to the 50fps mark at 1920×1200 (24" LCD) with the 4870X2. Factor in some more gain by the CrossFireX team by the time 4870X2 hits retail and we're close to the magical 60fps mark. This could mean that the days of editing .cfg files for attaining playable frame-rates at the 24" LCD resolution could finally be over, ofcourse you would have to own a 4870X2 first!"
source; GPU Cafe
Cevat Yerli indicated that they could rename quality presets in crysis warhead. If thats the case than they cant be compared like this. I know they are working on several optimizations and some new features but further confirmation is needed.
"We are upset at ourselves actually, because we miscommunicated some of the things. We labeled certain things wrong inside the game, like configuration for example. We could have labeled it more efficiently, saying that very high [detail] should have been ultra high, and high should have been very high, because our high compared to other games' high was a generational difference. But the perception from the gamer was that if he qualified for medium, he said, "Hey, I'm playing other games at high. Why don't I play Crysis at high, too?" And it's a fair enough question.
It was just a naming convention issue, because our medium could easily compete with any high, and very high should have been ultra high as a means of futurizing. Then we might have received less critiquing about configuration issues, and this created the feeling of, "I will not play this game until I have the right PC because I don't want to spoil my experience." This kind of excuse happened even between my friends. I said, "Guys, play the game now. Don't wait for it like three months, six months, because it's out now."
I think we are fixing a lot of this with Warhead."
http://pc.ign.com/articles/884/884757p1.html
The trailer might be out but gametrailers is SO DAMN SLOW. Been waiting for it to buffer on an 8mb connection and i've given up after 20 MINUTES.