Well, then crytek will take my money after in a unknown future date.
Printable View
Well, then crytek will take my money after in a unknown future date.
Just another Ponzi scheme from overrated game devs and gfx card vendors. I wonder how much M$ also payed for the DX9?
This crap is why I dont own console's, tired of their copy and paste development of current games, nice job Crytek looks just MW2 imo.
Maybe an app for Crysis will be out soon so I can just play on my iPad.
Just my:2cents: worth for sellouts.
I wasn't gonna buy it anyways *wink wink wink wink*....
BF3 engine is DX11 from the ground up, it uses DX10 codepath through DX11 but runs slower in DX10. They have announced no DX9/Windows XP. So no worries.Quote:
Originally Posted by phantomferrari
this just make me so sad, BF3 seems to be our last hope...
if BF3 somehow catches the bug, then we might as well commit mass suicide.
Just what I thought by the date of the leak, the game is being scrabbled together to be rushed out the door and is crap.
Epic fail Crytek, epic fail. Gonna pick it up from the bargain bin, if at all.
If I point the blame at anyone, it's going to be EA...This engine was slated to be one of the most advanced ever seen, but if I really had to guess it's not actually finished.
Now, anyone who's ever followed EA for even a second know EA's motto... They don't care if it's done, if something doesn't work then strip it off and put it out the door NOW. Chances are the DX11 path is still too buggy to release it, and as such EA are just having crytek remove it until it's finished so they can start selling it in march. Isn't the first time EA has done such things, they're practically slave laborers. They did the same things to DICE with the battlefield games, and were even sued by a few dice members due to unfair work requirements during the development of battlefield 2.
I'd almost bet NVidia's "payment" was to EA to try and wait on releasing the title until DX11 was ready, which gave crytek another 3 months..when crytek still wasn't finished in that time, EA told them it's releasing regardless.
You know whats funny... with EA in the back you can taste the DX11 DLC... 15$ and you get DX11 + a few maps...
:(
10char
pretty sure it'd be 2005..06 dx10 was coming outQuote:
Originally Posted by alucasa
medal of honor looks waay better than this lol
http://www.incrysis.com/forums/viewt...508089#p508089 :shocked:
This is incredible, I'm totally speechless at how Crytek completely dropped the ball with this game.
If you can't open that link, here's what it contains more or less:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/14208311/Untitled.jpg
the the sad thing is that the only other choice is activison which IMO is even worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
I honestly can't believe this all happened... like the demo is total trash.... and things keep going from bad to worse.... I won't pay money for this game anytime soon thats for sure.
It doesn't seem that they're doing tessellation (or tessellation-like data amplification techniques), and besides that DX10-11 offers no major new features over DX9, other than performance optimizations. And with the former, you really ought to design an engine + assets around those features from the very start, and it will not be backwards compatible.
Adding DX11 support later seems remarkably useless to me, as I'm fairly sure nobody's going to redo all the art assets to take advantage of the new features.
The engine actually is rather impressive, for how much it can do with so very little (eg: DX9 on an xbox360). I think it's as finished as it's going to be for now; updating it post-release is just going to be a mostly academic exercise (much like the SM3.0 FarCry patch - sure it's nice, but the game is really still built around 2.0, it's just using a couple 3.0 features (and badly).Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
MAJOR BULL****
sources: http://www.incrysis.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=32659
"What a kick in the danglies. Before today I really was ready to believe that the PC verson would be more than a port, but after seeing the demo ("press start"), and now reading this, it really does look like it is."
"This should be in news & info, because its big news.
Graphic presets with no options, only dx9 on launch..."
"Well for one thing there arent any custom graphics settings, what about autoaim people complain about, the horrible motion blur etc... ? and the biggest fail is go to brightness settings it says tv there.. is that not a sign of a console port?"
This is just sad. It looks like Crysis 2 is going to be another COD:BO clone. What bull**** is this Crytek?
Will somebody please kick EA in the nads? They're ruining an awesome title by rushing it out the door. Will it never end?
Smells like the Ubisoft / Assassin's Creed / DX10 debacle again... I hope I am totally wrong here... but the source was from a Nvidia conference which strikes me as odd or self serving interests at the expense of the REAL pay customers : PC gamers...
Vote with your wallets my friends.
well have they?Quote:
Originally Posted by gosh
from what ive seen they are doing a good job getting nice graphics on a console.. coding effieicntly and in a way it works on all platforms...
i think its a mabnagement problem...
they decided that they can make more money by going consoles, and then told their programmers to stop doing awesome graphics and try to make the best out of crappy old platforms instead...
i dont play console games so i have no idea if crysis3 looks better than other console titles... from what ive seen id say it looks about the same as other ps3 xbox360 titles? so... guess their programmers arent good at getting the best out of old hardware...
or they did leave?
where to?
Yep, the very same Crytek that claimed that Crysis would be enhanced for 64bit OS. It took ages for them to enable a functionality that was announced on the very game box.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanek
I don't trust Crytek, and I don't trust EA either. I'll buy this game when Steam sales it for Christmas and only if it's less than 10€.
Will they also release a HD texture patchs? I'm very afraid that the DX11 patch will only have minor improvements.
Umm.... Kai.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kai Robinson
Please tell me you intended to say "Crytek can jam it up their back door (backside)".
...
...
...
:confused:
Same. First i found the multiplayer way too console like and now DX9.... no thank you. Its DA2, P2, BF3, BRINK and W2 for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by lowfat
EDIT:
And for the "Press Start" Screen they can go feck them selfs!!!!
What's the commotion about? Crysis looked amazing and that was a polished DX9 game. There is nothing in any game right now that can't be done in DX9, albeit maybe not as efficiently. The game will look good, I know it.
I also find it funny how everyone went bats**t crazy about how good the graphics were in the video but now that it has been revealed that it is using DX9 it's suddenly a big problem? What, do you have virtual beer goggles that have now been removed by reading that spot of info? :rolleyes:
For the first time I actually see people whining because this time game is supposed to run smooth on most PCs :rolleyes:
The game will look good, or better than on consoles. As long as that is the fact and the game runs smooth, I don't care if it is written dx11, dx9, or dx fcuking 5.1
This.Quote:
Originally Posted by Syn.
Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk
lol! Thats cant be true :(....I wanted buy this game :(....