Checked the crytek web site and it says that Cryengine 3 is a DX9 and DX10 engine no mention of DX11. That being said its still a piece of crap console port :down:
Printable View
Checked the crytek web site and it says that Cryengine 3 is a DX9 and DX10 engine no mention of DX11. That being said its still a piece of crap console port :down:
That's the best video I've seen in a VERY long time, soo funny!! Aaaand true!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by kazuyakun
That is amazingly brilliant! So true! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by kazuyakun
Double thumbs up! :up: :up:
Ah, which nobody has done yet with a retail copy of the game:DQuote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
There is a demo of a retail game. It's not an alpha or a beta. It's the same, just less content.Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] Oj101
Oh look at that a reason to not get the game yet. Many other things out there right now, and I was looking forward to this game, I think this will go on the back burner. Wow... can't believe it a game I won't buy upon release that I want to play, thats a first.
I'll wait til DX11 is implemented and if its good.
any word from crytek on this ?
I doubt the patched DX11/10 will be any good.Quote:
Originally Posted by deathman20
Just look at previous games where they did that. Barely any real difference what so ever.
Except they can't really do tessellation (or any similar techniques) because then the game would not be backwards-compatible to DX9 (just like BF3), and since this is a cross-platform title, DX9 compatibility is all-important. There's also a fair amount of people who still use Windows XP.Quote:
Originally Posted by SabreWulf69
Besides, with their texture streaming tech, tessellation doesn't seem needed, especially for PC's monster graphics memory of (typically) 1gb and over.
Actually, consoles, with their 256mb of graphics memory, would benefit the most from tessellation (or similar data amplification techniques), but sadly they have DX9 GPUs, and therefore it's not possible.
Similarly, RAGE (another cross-platform title) makes no use of tessellation either [does OpenGL even accelerate tessellation? It's not a DirectX engine..]. And why would they bother? Sure, it's a nice trick to get some more data out there, but the id Tech 5 engine has an even better trick (similar to Cry Engine 3's texture streaming, I'm sure) to get you an enormous amount of data. In fact, the amount of data you can put out there is so enormous that they are not repeating any textures or geometry at all, every art asset in every level is uniquely hand-crafted.
Essentially, I guess my point is that doing DX11-exclusive features in a cross-platform title is completely unfeasible. Anyone who expected to see them is foolish. Besides, they probably aren't even needed.
I guess, uh, be patient? Wait 4-5 years, by the time DX13 is out we'll be seeing DX11 features used in every game and cry ceaselessly that developers aren't implemented DX12 and 13 yet because of stupid Playstation 4 and Xbox 720.
Wow thats really poor on Cryteks part, TBH i thought the demo was pretty awful anyway when i played it.
I certainly wont be buying this game, But i will play through the single player anyway :D
Tesslation is not a DX11 exclusive or better you don't need Dx11 to do tesslation. If a gpu vendor has a tesslation solution in its hardware you can use it without dx11. Dx11 just unified it and made it mandatory to have hardware tesslation unit.Quote:
Originally Posted by iddqd
You can do tessleation even in software, just look at atis turform, only the 8500 had a hardware tesslator (DX8 and OGL), but you still could enable turform on 9xxx series in software. Plus jfyi the xbox 360 gpu already has a tesslation unti, so if they wanted they could have coded it.
how is that possible?Quote:
Originally Posted by Scubar
/sarcasm off
lol seriously tho, they proly figure the game will sell a lot better on 360 along. thats way all the demo/trailers have been on 360(most), press xyab button ... jeez
but i am shocked at how much they dumb down this demo.... like they couldnt even bother spending 10 more sec to change the "press start to continue" screen? and 6v6 on PC? i hope this game fails miserably, sales wise
Even if you or me don't have a DX11 capable card, DX11 render path is fully compatible with DX10 hardware. You will only be missing specific stuff like tessellation.Quote:
Originally Posted by StAndrew
Running a native DX11 engine in Vista/7 is better than running a DX9 one.
Running a DX9 engine with a DX11 render path slapped on it as an afterthought can be worse than running it on DX9, due to literally "missing the point" (DX10 was a start-from-scratch attempt that got rid of legacy code. DX11 is built upon it).
I am not saying this is true or not but...
We have 5 pages of ranting because some website saw a slide which may or may not have said that Crysis 2 will be patched with DX11 features at a later date?
Seriously?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
No. We are ranting because Crytek said this game would not be a console port and it is indeed.
We rant because this game that was meant to blow our rigs with new gen graphics uses nine years old DX9.
Etc.
AFAIK, Crytek hasn't denied said claim, and both the demo and the leaked beta build confirm it.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
So we are complaining about broken promises and an overall lackluster job.
Why buy it when you've already pirated the leaked beta and will more than likely pirate the finished product?Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeBar
edit:
(i'm not advocating piracy. Just being sarcastic due to the countless comments in the Crysis 2 leak thread from people claiming game sales are not effected (or only slightly) by piracy.)
I wonder if nVidia got the memo about it being a DX9 game after spending $2 million to ensure it will be DX11 and "push the limits of graphics processing".
http://www6.incrysis.com/images/crys...x11_nvidia.png
read the original source, it was on a NV own presentation where they mentioned that DX11 support will not come with the inital game launch.
Wrong. Stalker SoC has Global Illumination in DX9, its just disabled by default and you have to edit the user.ltx file.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chumbucket843
At the end of the day, I can understand why everybody is pissed. Regardless of consoles, DX11 is out there to help make games run better and devs aren't using or taking advantage of that. They should all have their balls roasted for that.
I never claimed it was. Developers, however, are lazy, and usually will just end up using whatever's in the API and not think too hard about what they might be able do if they wrote some clever code. And if you're going to use software as an arugment, here's the counterpoint: you can do any calculation whatsoever in software. That's why it's software.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
Here's something different: I'm going to actually WAIT until the full game is released, before launching accusations of consolization.
Who knows, DX9-only-at-launch may be a myth.
/Optimist.
I think that the consolisation of both this game and Dragon Age 2 is very obvious and easy to spot from the demos.Quote:
Originally Posted by AmTGMan
Also, what is the point in making a demo this bad when the point of it is to sell the game?
I feel like EA is trolling the PC gaming community with these demos and their upcoming releases.
But the level of tessellation found in Civ V would run like crap without a dedicated geometry engine. Earlier cards may have been able to do tessellation, but hardly anywhere near as efficiently as DX11 can.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
I suspect what happened is they never planned to do a PC demo at all, until they saw a bunch of people complaining that the demo is xbox 360-only. Then they put like one guy on it and gave him 2 days to come up with the demo.
This is quite possible, I will also wait for the full release (while I Return my disappointing UD7) and then see what the full version brings to the table, if DX11 is not present I am sure the PC community will be disappointed on the lack of dedication.... actually crysis was mainly supported by the community, not the devs.Quote:
Originally Posted by iddqd
Pc is dying and pc game is dead. Why spcend millions to make a pc game when you can spend thousands to make farmville for much higher profit
You guys are funny and are making my day. I understand the general whining about Crysis 2 (being a console port, controls etc etc) but this DX11 whining is just funny.
You would think that Crysis 1 ACTUALLY NEEDED DX10 to look as good as it did... and it wasn't laughably easy to hack it with a text file to bring 99% of its "DX10" features to DX9...
DX10? DX11? Who cares? How many super looking games are there that take advantage of DX10 or 11? Metro 2033? Yeah, right.
Pardon me if I am wrong but since DX9, there has been nothing in the gaming scene that actually used DX10 or 11-exclusive features to really make a difference and make your jaw drop, save some tech demos and benchmarks. That being as it is, it is wildly funny that people are crying over the lack of DX11. As if you don't know that the addition of DX11 will absolutely not bring any significant (read: noticeable) differences.
As far as I can remember, no one from the Crytek team ever said that the game would smash the graphics bar once again like Crysis 1 had done. Instead, all of them pointed towards a game that wouldn't look any better or worse than Crysis 1, AND CRYSIS 1 WAS DX9, and both of those facts have been well known for a long time, especially by you guys at Xtremesystems. What are all of you ranting about now?
There are so many stupid things about ranting because Crysis 2 won't initially have DX11 that my mind = blown. You are the GPU-savvy guys who saw the release of DX10 and DX11 and should know better than anybody else that games with new DX features tacked on them have no noticeable differences... especially games that are not exclusive to the PC (read: EVERY DAMN GAME) gosh, I can't continue. I am overwhelmed. /endRant1
Also I played Crysis 2 demo and hated the controls (an area in which the first game excelled), the game will definitely suck on PC but will be a good one for the consoles, and all the reviews about it including the PC review will praise the game (Gamespot rating: 8.5) because EA is just big and apparently the reviews are made by 13 year old kids who can't notice if the controls are tight or not since they use 219391 mouse sensitivity for the PC. God, how much all those console ports suck at controls (GO TO HELL BIOSHOCK 1 AND 2) and none of the big-name reviewing sites even mention this. /endRant2
All I know is I was looking forward to seeing a Crytek version of actual rounded objects with the use of Tessellation. Like in the Unigine demo, with tessellation turned off the ropes looked basic and flat, with it turned on it was incredible, and the ropes looked and 'felt' real and fully rounded. Then there is the DX11 Endless City demo from NVIDIA themselves which also showed some pretty kwl stuff that I was looking forward to especially in Crysis 2. I'll never raise my expectations that high again I guess. Cross platform needs DX9 support therefore we will be forever held back from technological advancement, and PC graphics would be developed a lot more if it weren't for these stupid consoles. Screw multi-platform releases. Look at WOW, you don't need multi-platform releases to make oodles of money, just good, addictive ideas.
Because of the :banana::banana::banana::banana:ty console ports like this.Quote:
Originally Posted by hurrdurr
Tessellation to start with. Performance, also.Quote:
Originally Posted by hurrdurr
Benefits from the newer APIs are not always meant to affect end-users in a straight manner. Don't forget the developer's side of the story. Advancing technologies present better ways for them to create and manage the content -- spending less valuable time on trivial and rudimentary tasks, and focusing more on actual gameplay development and richer environments. In the end, it all comes down to us, as better overall experience.
You need at least DX10 for AA in games using deferred rendering. Who cares about AA though, right? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by hurrdurr
Next PC games will be getting held back to DX8.1 to support cross-platform capabilities with smart-phones, and people will still be saying, far out they're even smarter. When in fact, if someone like Crytek did work with DX11 fully it could clearly be graphically superior if they invested the time into it :explode:
didnt see it posted:
Crysis 2 demo, SLi profile update for 267.24 beta
http://www.nvidia.com/object/nvidia-...v7-driver.html
and yes it actually works lol
:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by fellix_bg
DX10/11 does provide a few advantages, but if Crytek has pulled off real time GI and good postprocessing in DX9 that makes them extra commendable. They're one of the better technical guys around.
Nerds with so little brain capacity to not realize their hypocrisy of buying $4-500 graphics cards and refusing to get a $35 game won't care though. They'll just look at the DX numbars!
http://uk.pc.ign.com/articles/115/1153248p1.html
Have you downloaded the Crysis 2 multiplayer demo and tried to adjust the visuals? We asked Crytek about the scaled back graphical options in its upco...
They didnt get much of reply though... :(
Traditional hardware MSAA isn't possible in DX9 on a deferred engine but there are other options like Crytek has proven. Their AA combination of post-processing and temporal jittering looks really good in DX9.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vardant
In general DX10/11 don't make things "possible", just faster and more efficient. There are certain things that become practical in DX9 simply because of the raw horsepower available and obviously through very clever tricks from developers too. The progression of graphics quality on the PS3 is evidence of how much progress you can make just by coming up with new tricks and optimizations.
Complaints solely about the API are silly. There are DX11 games that look much worse than Crysis 2. The things that really matter, like gameplay or map sizes are fair game though.
Article source lost to me a long time ago from TechSpot -
"Crytek believes that because developers are focusing on the PS3 and the 360, the game quality on the PC is being held back. This is happening despite the company saying that the PC is already "a generation ahead" of Sony's and Microsoft's consoles.
Crytek is currently working on Crysis 2 for all three platforms. The original Crysis was an exclusive for the PC. That being said, Crytek has already stated that Crysis 2 will be graphically superior on the PC.
http://static.techspot.com/images/teaser/crytek.jpg
"As long as the current console generation exists and as long as we keep pushing the PC as well, the more difficult it will be to really get the benefit of both," Cevat Yerli, founder, CEO, and President of Crytek, told the latest issue of Edge, according to CVG. "PC is easily a generation ahead right now. With 360 and PS3, we believe the quality of the games beyond Crysis 2 and other CryEngine developments will be pretty much limited to what their creative expressions is, what the content is. You won't be able to squeeze more juice from these rocks."
Developers have very low sales expectations for the PC, compared to consoles. It's a vicious cycle: the PC market doesn't give the same revenue as the console market, so companies don't spend much on the PC version of a game. This is certainly true for games like Unreal Tournament 3: it would have been much better had it been released as a PC exclusive."
http://www.techspot.com/news/41323-c...g-it-back.html
Funny isn't it.. in the mean time we have news that PC-Gaming market is constantly growing...
But on the other hand... when a sale of 2million untis is considered "medicore" you know why they are all :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana:ing pc gaming is dying.
Seems no matter their excuse, company's are making more and more money on PC gaming each year. All the while taking it easy and NOT developing as much advanced tech for the PC games as possible like they should, as they can just dip into all the extra sales made on consoles. Greed at it's finest.
Crysis 2 PC vs 360.
pics here
http://www.incrysis.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=32681
originally from here:
http://www.gamesaktuell.de/Crysis-2-...gleich-814323/
unfortunately comparing absolutely nothing useful.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip_J_Fry
It all just depends whether you believe that the multiplayer with maybe scaled back options, maybe incomplete engine is going to be in the final game which we don't even know if it has gone gold yet.
Everyone's dramatic cancel preordering is based on <90 degree FOV, "start" instead of "any key" and some rumors which might come down to Crysis 2 not having tesselation to begin with (but might have DX11 fully implemented otherwise). (seriously try and find an actual source for this DX9 thing which isn't a single swedish website)
Course that is giving much benefit of the doubt to crytek (maybe more accurately EA).
If they ran out of time cause EA pushed them to release. Well that's no one's fault except the business division.
Oh dear god!Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip_J_Fry
The 360 version actually looks better to me. More crisp and clear and none of that crappy dust/blurring going on.
The only thing the pc shots have that's nice is a good background in the distance and some AA.
well according to nvidia:
http://www.geforce.com/#/Optimize/Gu...s-2-benchmarks
and the option screen looks exactly like the demo. this is an outrage. Crytek might as well just say "screw all you PC gamers!" in an official statement/press conferenceQuote:
For our benchmark we ran through Crysis 2's "Battery Park" single-player level on a near-finished build of the game, using in-game scripting to keep the benchmark uniform and repeatable.
Hey, wait till somebody claims to have tagged the "PC" and "XSux" in the wrong screenshot...:D J.K..Quote:
Originally Posted by N19h7m4r3
Seems like some kind of "Bloom" enabled in there...:confused:
...Oh wait, that was HDR vs. Bloom settings in TES4:Oblivion.
This is just lame, not what I expected compared to the original Crysis.
I hope Crytek/EA are watching the preorder sales plummet following the announcement of no Tessellation and as peole all slowly realise the PC version of Crysis 2 looks WORSE than Warhead. Should paint a clear enough picture for them one would hope.
Oh, come on. It doesn't look worse than Warhead. That's like the overreaction about the "starting screen". Batman AA had it too, but it was still a great PC game.
The Console looks far worse, take a closer look at the textures and ofc like mentioned AA.
The crisper look is a bit weird though, but probably can be tweaked with brightness and contrast on your screen.
Edit: Wait a minute, the crisper look is probably just because the 360 version has depth of field disabled.
TV you mean :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kallenator
PC X360 Comparison
http://www.abload.de/thumb/crysis_2_..._360_v6jjt.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/crysis_2_..._360_voj8h.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/crysis_2_..._360_vojgw.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/crysis_2_..._360_v6jps.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/crysis_2_..._360_v9k27.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/crysis_2_..._360_vs8bv.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/crysis_2_..._360_vajqg.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/crysis_2_..._360_vh8j4.jpg
http://www.gamesaktuell.de/Crysis-2-...gleich-814323/
QFT! :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by killerxp100
To me, Warhead was a bit of a downward slope in terms of gameplay(or it could just be me).
But, some would have it "better than Crysis w/ respect to hardware" - surely an upside atleast.
Now this!!! :hitself: IDK, but i'm an optimist.;)
You guys try playing EA's sports titles, its the Mecca of ports, right Diltech?. LOL. But, even 2K at times sucks at porting too.
Sadly I love those sports games, enough to administer 2 shots of consolitis vaccine to myself.:ROTF:
If they used DX11, they could in theory pack in higher quality textures more efficiently and effectively, which people have been modding into DX9 title's for quite some time now. Basic 3D models would look a lot more advanced through tessellation. The chance for less graphics jittering would be improved via superior multithreaded support. PhysX effects could, in theory, run smoother on a wider variety of hardware. Better resource management and multithreading improvements would also be made on lesser hardware. Basically, you get more on everything.
Given the time frame, and the impact of the original Crysis graphics, is it not fair to be expecting more from the second instalment? Obviously this game company would have you think otherwise.
the first thing i notice is that the gamma or contrast or something is vastly different. blacks are too black on the xbox, and whites are too shiny. although im not sure which one is correct per the recommendation of the developers.Quote:
Originally Posted by kaktus1907
Absolutely :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by SabreWulf69
Seeing as back in 2007 Crytek were able to produce a very pretty DirectX 10 game when DirectX10 was in it's infancy. Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't Crysis perhaps the first game to utilise DirectX 10 properly?
It was not until the conception of the GTX295 that people were able to play Crysis at an acceptable frame rate with very high details and even then you were limited to 1920x1200 and FSAA was not really an option. (Sadly every Forceware from 195.62 has broken GTX295 support in Crysis)..
HOWEVER
The point I was making is it took nearly 2 years for hardware to be able to pretty much max out Crysis (excluding FSAA and 30" display enthusiasts).
I do agree that some posters here have made some valid points about DirectX 9, if utilised correctly can look good.
But that is not the point...
The point is IF Crysis 2 was conceived as another showpiece for PC gaming and graphical capabilities. It would be built with DirectX11 in mind from the ground up. The game would not work on that Legacy Operating System known as Windows XP and would only support DirectX10+ Hardware.
Performance wise it would make sense and visually it would be unrivalled for perhaps another year at least.
My worry is what we will see here is a fairly good looking DirectX 9 game, with a patch perhaps 1-3 months down the line which will add a BOLT on of DirectX11. new features being tessellated models (low amount of it and not impressive either), some sort of FSAA mode, and perhaps use of compute for Physics.
It will not be as great as it should have been....
EA, I blame you. Yes Crytek were to blame too, but part of me is wondering whether EA's ethos of constant console driven money cows has pushed Crysis to be released too soon and not PC ready.
John
If you asked me the Xbox 360 version looks like crap compared to the PC version. Lack of AA and horrible textures doesn't cut it.
I am so tired of DX9, it's ancient tech now. Give us solid, DX11 from the ground up graphics!
BF3 for you then... they have no Dx9 path hence why the dont support windows xp anymore. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparky
And they're using two DX10 cards. So....I guess that settles it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip_J_Fry
If its a console port does that mean it will be playable? I mean the first one came out a while back and it's still expensive to max that thing out.
i dunno what ur talking about, but that link shows that the "near-finished build" has the exact same video options as the MP demo: gamer, advance and hardcore. which is a major dumbed downQuote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
im fairly sure there will be cfg files that can be tweaked, but this shows how much they care about the pc version, along with the "press start".
directx9... ahh... good old days... i still remember my radeon 9500np@9700pro... with a silent arctic cooling dual slot heatsinks that exhausts air from the case...
the first vga retail heatsinks that did this...
im starting to think that somebody within or close to crytek shared our feeling over this directx9 nonsense and basically screwing over pc users...
and thats why the pc version was leaked...
if you go over to IGN they have an article on what they thought of the PS3 demo of the game. Lets just say its not a warm glowing review. :D
Something tells me that sales of this arent going to be as great as EA hoped
i had a 9800pro@9800xt with an arctic silencer.Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
and iīm starting to believe that this really was the reason for the leak. crytek had to do something they didnīt want to do, they had to produce a console game and not something that farcry or crysis was. so they gave us the game for free.
screw EA
anyone been nailed over the leak yet? Kind of makes sense.
well I've nailed lots of people, but it possibly aint what you're referring to ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
http://www.myfacewhen.com/thumbs/tn_14.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by kuroikenshi
http://www.gametrailers.com/video/gd...11208?type=flv
This is what Crysis 2 should look like
Best regards :toast:
I hope the final build will come with an option to enable AA. If not I'm going to be pissed, seriously Crytek, WTF, designing this game for consoles and porting it to PC and now rumours stating that it doesn't come with DX11.
*enters bedroom and looks at gf* that's it, your getting nailed for this...Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
Gf: what? What'd I do???
Me: crisis2 was leaked!
Gf: who? Wha? ...hey! Get off of me! Wtf?
.
.
.
*looks at stevil* well, that was fun :D
How did that help though?
just called the asylum. they'll send someone. stay where you are, you'll get help soon :rofl::p:Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
Replying with that picture is fing signature worthy, great stuff! :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
I'll end my paticipation in this thread with I hope Crysis 2 is the worst selling game of the year - on any platform. Both EA and Crytek deserve that. I've always been dubious of Crysis 2 saying there should of been some proper PC videos for it and always got shouted down with "Crytek have promised a PC version though!". I knew better :down:
right in your face pc-gamersQuote:
Originally Posted by DTU_XaVier
Attachment 112649
I saw that too. It is really looking like Crytek got lazy and skimped on the PS3 and PC versions in order to push the XBox 360 version out the door.Quote:
Originally Posted by phantomferrari
mfw ps3 gets capture the flag mode with other map...
Not quite sure if that was directed at me? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
No it was directed at crytek...
Gimping pc version and taunting off with a cinematic sandbox.. :p:
Here is a better version. Higher quality. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHNWj8HmWwQQuote:
Originally Posted by DTU_XaVier
It literally makes me want to cry after seeing that tech demo. Electronic Arts F***s up everything it gets its hands on....
What are you on about?! The PS3 has a weaker graphics card than the 360... The PC version was skimped on (I'm reserving judgement until full release) because of both the PS3 and X360 version.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
:ROTF::ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
"MAXIMUM MARKETING"
Crytek: Crysis will take full advantage of DirectX11 Graphics cards, be built for PC's from the ground up and support the latest processors and 64Bit operating systems.
"MAXIMUM TROLLING"
Crytek: We want money, lets drain the console cash cow and then port to PC and patch some DirectX11 features later on.
PC FORUMS AROUND THE WORLD HIT A FRENZY
Crytek: :shocked: :shocked:
"CLOAK ENGAGED"
.....
Very disappointing if this turns out to be true. I think I'll hold off on buying it initially (I was planning to stop by Best Buy on the release day to pick it up) and then wait for some reviews on this topic to see. If DX11 is indeed delayed, I'll be sure to delay the green stuff coming out of my wallet for it.
:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnZS
I agree
I have a gtx 570, i wanna use as much as possible
Quite upsetting to see a AAA studio basically bringing out a console game, and don't even try and hide it. I didn't expect this from Crytek. This should be DX11 by default and should be the graphic benchmark for years to come. DX11 patch shouldn't even have been on their mind.
Remember the SM3.0 patch for Farcry? That dissapeared, and I really hope the DX11 patch won't go the same way.
Haha course it won't it's 2011! Community is too big for things like that to happen anymore...Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim
WTF is this? That looks sick! It's like another engine compared to what we got in the demo for Crysis 2.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew LB
What the heck just happened? They develop an engine from outer space only to get it castrated to showcase it in their own game?
Is this really EA's fault for putting pressure on Crytek or something?
Apparently, the girl walking in the demo is real-time, so it can certainly be done... But with all the other factors in a real game, I'm sure you have to cut some corners... But this shows it could be so much more than what we've seen in the demo so far...Quote:
Originally Posted by Pontos
Best Regards :toast:
It's 2011 and we are still stuck with DX9. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by eXceeded
Community was already big back then.
I'm not saying it will dissapear, but I wouldn't be surprised if they cancel the patch, together with some EA+Crytek marketing babble of how the circumstances are not right enough, plus a pinch of piracy and sales thrown into the mix etc.
no patch will "fix" a console port. is over. its gone. buy this crap or wait for crysis 3.
I agree, something does not add up with this at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pontos
Could it be we are all getting ourselves (me included here), rabid over something which is not as sinister as we first thought?
What if (and yes it is a big IF) Crytek are awaiting true DirectX11 Multithreaded drivers from both ATi and nVidia?
What IF the game in DirectX11 mode is that demanding it would give the GTX 590 and ATi Radeon 6990 a hard time, so they are waiting on those GPU's to be out and about before releasing the patch?
What if the shipping game does ship with DirectX11 artwork, content and mapping, just we are awaiting for a patch to add the DirectX11 .exe purely because Crytek want to iron out bugs, and optimise it fully?
Ahh I guess this is wishful thinking...
But that video just looks amazing:eek: Such a shame if EA did rush Crytek into releasing a defeatured, consolised and badly ported game for the PC.
John
First post updated
What kind of convoluted, round-about answer is that? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
To me, it means that they may not want to say anything at this point since it may reflect negatively upon pre-orders, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by DTU_XaVier
im glad well get some clarification soon enough but personally after i played the multiplayer demo i canceled my preorder. silence and peoples speculation have fueled others canceling their preorders as wellQuote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
lol qft. ill still play sp, but i wont enjoy it ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by D4rkn3ss
hah nice :DQuote:
Originally Posted by JohnZS
true... that's really it... its over...the crysis2 we were all waiting for is dead... gone... canceled...Quote:
Originally Posted by D4rkn3ss
What the are offering now is a port of the console game...
I am incredibly disappointed in Crysis 2. Not the gameplay, but just the simple lack of options that are incredibly easy to add.
For one thing look at these images. One is gamer, one is hardcore. Can you tell me the difference? (I recommend opening them in new tabs then clicking back and forth)
http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/55...419D75D0734BC/
and
http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/55...27EF56DBC0E7E/
Hint: The one with low power is hardcore (top image), the one with high power (bottom image) is gamer.
Huge :banana::banana::banana::banana:in difference right?
I only really care if a game is fun.
:S
Difference between hardcore/gamer is mostly lighting and shadows.. texture are the same on all settings.
WTFQuote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
SOMEBODY SHOULD DIE FOR THIS(Joke).;)