the game also has a pretty decent multiplayer part.
Printable View
I enjoy the single player, its far more than a four hour game and the reason why we're 'obsessed' with it, is the fact that its a good benchmark due to its enormous system requirements.
yeah, i know a lot of people don't care for it. i personally really enjoyed it. after playing it once through on my 3870x2, i'd like to go bak and try it again turning some stuff up. i thought it was a great looking game as well and look forward to warhead. just my rare and humble positive take on it. :)
Crysis scales for me, running 2 x 4850, 8.6 Hotfix, Vista x64 Ultimate, running 32bit exe (don't ask), 1.21 patch.
I'm on P35 atm (X38 on its way), so the 2nd card is bottlenecked, but I still get performance boost from enabling the 2nd card in Crysis.
1280 x 1024, ALL HIGH, NO AA :
Single Card = 44.55 FPS
Crossfire = 50.35 FPS
1280 x 1024, ALL HIGH, 4x AA :
Single Card = 34.9 FPS
Crossfire = 41.06 FPS
1680 x 1050, ALL HIGH, NO AA :
Single Card = 35.03 FPS
Crossfire = 41.35 FPS
1680 x 1050, ALL HIGH, 4x AA :
Doesn't Scale - Same result from 1 or 2 cards, possibly limited due to 4x PCI-E slot.
Ah, then you've never actually sat through the CPU test in 3DMark06. Last I checked an average of 4 frames per second is "choked," and it was about two years since 3DMark06 was released. Don't hear anyone complaining about that though.
I agree, Crysis could have been better optimized, no doubting that. But to say the game sucks because it doesn't run well is only looking at it from one side. It's just a lousy implementation of a good engine. UT3 is an example of a good implementation. If it was a lousy implementation of a lousy engine it would have been a lot worse.