This is only possible with supersampling or D3D10.Quote:
Originally Posted by XS2K
Printable View
This is only possible with supersampling or D3D10.Quote:
Originally Posted by XS2K
i'm about 2 hours into the game.
the 9800gx2 and the e8600 play it great! :)
would you say the engine is more optimised or is that just marketing crytek used?
:/
the settings are all different. i play on "gamer" which is where the old "high" used to be and it runs around ~50 fps.
what resolution you playing at?Quote:
Originally Posted by ChinStrap
His sig would indicate 1680x1050.Quote:
Originally Posted by villa1n
1680 x 1050Quote:
Originally Posted by villa1n
screenies please!
No, I think he's legit. I'm downloading now @ 62% done. STEAM says its available. I should know less than an hour.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kai Robinson
Crysis Warhead
1. I add the 4870 profile to the amd.txt file as I saw none (0x1002, 0x9440, 4 // AMD Radeon HD 4870)
2. I changed the FSAAPrifiles.txt to incorporate ATI's CFAA
3. Installed Cat 8.9
4. Start Crysis then go to the options screen and click on the optimize button.
photo1
photo2
photo3
photo4
photo5
photo6
marketing. it performs virtually the same as crysis for me on equal settings. And no crossfire scaling whatsoever.Quote:
Originally Posted by AliG
That's what happens when you use a profile based multi-GPU approach like NV and ATI use now. Try 8.9 but don't expect any scaling till 8.10 or an intermediate hotfix.Quote:
Originally Posted by 003
so is about same performance as crysis 1 right???Quote:
Originally Posted by ChinStrap
few SS when i tested the 9800GX2 few months ago in Crysis
also 1680x150
High settings ( same as Gamer seting in warhead)
DX10 (warhead is just dx9)
http://aycu04.webshots.com/image/455...9313281_rs.jpg
http://aycu06.webshots.com/image/481...5323735_rs.jpg
http://aycu33.webshots.com/image/468...3435720_rs.jpg
http://aycu31.webshots.com/image/483...9540474_rs.jpg
http://aycu28.webshots.com/image/483...6397371_rs.jpg
http://aycu06.webshots.com/image/471...4728980_rs.jpg
http://aycu06.webshots.com/image/471...5806734_rs.jpg
http://aycu40.webshots.com/image/493...2025896_rs.jpg
http://aycu11.webshots.com/image/487...1256283_rs.jpg
and 9800GX2 Crysis bench with same settings >> http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/1...ybenchsut6.jpg
:up:
sounds like a waste of money like the original crysis, I wonder what the pirated numbers will be on this one compared to the original crysis
Sweet stuff! I hope it is not as buggy as the first.
It's worse. I paused the game to go to the bathroom, and when I came back, my PC was at the welcome screen. When I logged in, it had a message saying the system has recovered from a serious error.Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie27
Maybe because many reviews state that they can run the same settings with somewhat acceptable frame rates (30-45) with a single GTX 260 while I have a significantly larger amount of GPU power?Quote:
Originally Posted by Katzenschleuder
Kai> I live in America. I woke up at 3pm EST on september 17th (the release date) and downloaded it off steam.
Running well for me so far. DX9 Gamer (high) settings with the CVARs tweaked for some of the Enthusiast (very high) features, 1680x1050.
25-30 FPS and I'm about 2 hours in. Certainly not bad considering my old G80 card still being in use! I would like 60 FPS, but 25-30 has been perfectly playable so far, so I'll take the eye candy.
The game isn't drastically better optimized than the first IMO, but it is nevertheless noticeable. For $30 I'm satisfied, the multiplayer is said to be good too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AliG
Crysis 1 is an awesome game. I've been playing it every day with new maps (sp) since it came out. :2cents: Oh yea PIRATES SUCK !
Crap!:mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by 003
Can someone use Fraps or whatever to measure FPS instead of saying 'hey it feels better than Crysis 1' so we can compare? :D
No need for Fraps.
r_displayinfo 1
Put it in console, gives you FPS and some other information.
Not a bad price on Newegg's Crysis Warhead special's 9800gt for $109.00.
NewEgg
I know, but that's not what I'm saying.
Compare Crysis vs Crysis Warhead in terms of perfomance and IQ (of course you need the same map/timedemo with both).
not really, I enjoyed the beginning of it a lot, gfx especially, the part where there's zero gravity was cool, but after that it just got boring, kinda like a movie that you control the movement. The gameplay is too linear, that's why games like WoW are so successful, the user can control the entire gameQuote:
Originally Posted by dengyong
I didn't like parts of the original, but I really like a lot of the user created maps.Quote:
Originally Posted by AliG
It's almost like a new game every time, it's just the same type.
steam version still has securom
http://dl-client.getdropbox.com/u/49917/SecuRom.jpg
I wont buy it now.
Yeah I'm pissed to but EA doesn't give a flying :banana::banana::banana::banana: what we think. I'm not going to miss out on a ton of games because I don't support DRM.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stukov
8.9 Betas seem to scale. I dunno, guys at Rage3D get 30FPS on an X2 with a GTX280 getting 15 on 1920...Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
First time that I've seen Crossfire eclipse SLi. On a TWIMTBP game I might add.
Any maps you'd recommend?Quote:
Originally Posted by dengyong
While the X2 numbers may be real... 15 with a GTX280 at 1920? Something strange there. Link please.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
BTW who has tagged this thread with multithreaded haha. Remids me of that thread where Gothrek got banned :ROTF:
What I said in the other thread, driver problems FTW. Wait till the 'magic' new beta drivers from NV and you'll see at least the single GTX280 at least on pra with the 4870. That being conservative, the 280 will beat it no doubts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
Funny how NV has this problems considering the Crytek - NV - TWIMTBP combination :rofl:
Tri-Sli GTX 280 love here.
If this game didnt have stupid aliens it would be an awesome game, those ice levels and dumb looking aliens kill it, this game would have been better as a realistic military shooter
Well the Ice levels were a lot of fun for me,even just for the WOW!!! factor though the aliens were quite stupid.
Cryengine has military applications too,I wouldn't be surprised if some modders would look deeper into them...
Just installed the game
multi GPU (4870X2) not very good , at least in 1st level
4870X2
1680x1050
Enthusiast
http://img295.imageshack.us/my.php?image=w11pv2.jpg
http://img388.imageshack.us/my.php?image=w12lx2.jpg
http://img295.imageshack.us/my.php?image=w13pf0.jpg
http://img388.imageshack.us/my.php?image=w14bt9.jpg
http://img517.imageshack.us/my.php?image=w15vd1.jpg
http://img229.imageshack.us/my.php?image=w16mx9.jpg
i will test more levels and then i report !
regards
4850-Enthusiast
http://img60.imageshack.us/img60/2264/crysis2cd9.th.jpg
edit:
after the begining of first level the game is a little better
E8400
4870X2
1680x1050
Enthusiast
http://img299.imageshack.us/my.php?image=wn1du6.jpg
http://img440.imageshack.us/my.php?image=wn2zh6.jpg
http://img521.imageshack.us/my.php?image=wn3gq2.jpg
http://img299.imageshack.us/my.php?image=wn4mv6.jpg
http://img440.imageshack.us/my.php?image=wn5wr5.jpg
http://img299.imageshack.us/my.php?image=wn6ul4.jpg
but i dont think is much better optimised then crysis 1 like they said (at least with 4870X2)
regards
Crysis = Diakatana.
After being burned on Farcry and Crysis I flat at refuse to put any money towards another Crytek product.
Mascaras how about using DX9 instead of DX10 :doh:
Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
im using windows Vista !
regards
if its steam ad -dx9 to the launch options when you right click the gameQuote:
Originally Posted by mascaras
if its retail version , open the vista games folder ...Start > games , right click the crysis warhead icon , then play in Dx9 mode
:up:
Does Warhead support 64-bit? I can't see why it wouldn't, but I just installed it and as I was going to delete the annoying intro videos I noticed there is no Bin64 folder this time, just a Bin32. Anyone know what the deal is w/that? I'm running Vista x64.
Doesn't matter, add -DX9 to the shortcut. When I had Crossfire DX9 scaling was A LOT better than DX10. Well and for single card DX9 just destroys DX10.Quote:
Originally Posted by mascaras
There is no point in using DX10 with Crysis, all is the same (except perfomance)
its a games for windows game , therefore it should support 64bit , just like the last crysis gameQuote:
Originally Posted by kryptobs2000
Damn r_texturestreaming 0 doesen't work :(
The game really runs nice,with the shadows and Blur set to medium and the rest to enthusiasth - the r_usepom which disables the 16XAF @ 1400x900,better than the original Crysis anyway.
Hope tomorrow I will have more time to tweak it.
Also set the game budget to your system so you don't encounter swap.
http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/9...sis3uu7.th.jpg
http://load.imageshack.us/
Also the game looks better when you play it,much more details than in the prntscrns and a BMP/PNG is to big.
whats the system specsQuote:
Originally Posted by XS2K
E2160@2.9Ghz,4GB RAM,4850 @ default for now and Giigabyte P35 DS3 and Windows XP basicaly a ~600$ system :)
actully no , it doesnt support 64bit , this is in light of Punkbuster and its infinity :banana::banana::banana::banana:iness of not supporting 64bit anything , its rumoured to come in a patch..Quote:
Originally Posted by Papu
???Quote:
Also set the game budget to your system so you don't encounter swap.
I hit 95% ram use (with 4gb) towards the end of the second level and swapping was painfully noticeable :(
with new catalyst 8.9
windows vista DX10
1920x1200
Enthusiast mode (very high)
http://img369.imageshack.us/my.php?image=10920mn2.jpg
http://img369.imageshack.us/my.php?image=1920vg7.jpg
http://img261.imageshack.us/my.php?image=19202fr8.jpg
Ok i added the -DX9 = +7Fps :)
windows Vista 64bit
DX9 Mode
1920x1200
Enthusiast Mode
4870X2
DX10 >> http://img261.imageshack.us/my.php?image=19202fr8.jpg
DX9 >> http://img161.imageshack.us/my.php?image=novoab0.jpg
another SS in DX9 Mode
http://img509.imageshack.us/my.php?image=novo1wp4.jpg
http://img179.imageshack.us/my.php?image=novo3qa1.jpg
http://img520.imageshack.us/my.php?image=novo4et9.jpg
http://img230.imageshack.us/my.php?image=novo6ru2.jpg
http://img521.imageshack.us/my.php?image=novo7uo6.jpg
http://img232.imageshack.us/my.php?image=novo8im2.jpg
http://img515.imageshack.us/my.php?image=h1hs3.jpg
http://img515.imageshack.us/my.php?image=h2it6.jpg
http://img186.imageshack.us/my.php?image=h3xg6.jpg
http://img515.imageshack.us/my.php?image=h4ur3.jpg
http://img84.imageshack.us/my.php?image=h5ob4.jpg
http://img186.imageshack.us/my.php?image=h6qn3.jpg
http://img186.imageshack.us/my.php?image=h7sn2.jpg
http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/2218/h1ft1.th.jpghttp://img172.imageshack.us/img172/4...osaoqu4.th.jpghttp://img294.imageshack.us/img294/2...sao2bf5.th.jpg
:up:
well i just installed it and from what i have seen it does run better but the biggest thing i noticed was it is WAY more multi-threaded than before. i had all 4 core with almost equal usage going. and as far as settings go i was able to play at 1680x1050 in DX10 with Every thing on Enthusiast (except water, shadows, shadders and textures) without it going below 20 on a 8800gtx. so if i am seeing this right then you can use Enthusiast settings with DX9? even in XP? i hope this is true! i will test once my defrag is done as i noticed lots of strange HD activity going on.
edit: just tested and yes DX9 with Enthusiast is a go. say hello to extra FPS!
I barely see any differences between Dx9 and 10 so I should give it a try in DX9 then, plus +7fps is a no brainer. :D Would be great if mascaras tested with HD4870 CF but I guess I can expect the same performance by looking at the HD4870X2.
Well THERE IS NO DIFFRENCE between DX9 and DX10!
Is it only me who has problems with the texturestreaming 0 command?
So mr mascaras are you saying that cat 8.9 official gives better performance? Will save me a lot of time later to know this - cheersQuote:
Originally Posted by mascaras
Crysis had 64-bit support and it installed punkbuster. Why would they have removed it? There's always much more pop-in with 32-bit, I want 64-bit support back!Quote:
Originally Posted by Papu
You could resolve the pop-in with the r_texturestreaming 0 command but since it crashes the game I guess you can't anymore...
From what I remember you are suppose to place that last in your command lists.Quote:
Originally Posted by XS2K
e_detail_materials_view_dist_xy = 2048
e_terrain_normal_map = 0
r_texturestreaming = 0
Can also improve IQ. Once you make those changes I think you have to restart that map (it's been a while). Anyone else experiencing save point crashes?
yep , with 4870X2 the catalyst 8.9 = same performance as the "old" & very good catalyst Sample4800X2 Beta :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mumid
btw: i finished the game today , not very long game , about 4 hours !
DX10 mode not very good performance , DX9 runs better but not perfect , more FPS in DX9 but also has a few breaks sometimes !
another thing i noticed is that in Crysis1 with 20/25 fps we already can play the game , while in crysis warhead with 20 fps is not so playable as crysis1 (at least with my System config)
In my opinion the game definitely need new patch/s and maybe also new Drivers for graphic cards !
Also the game only support 32bit , we need to test in 64bit to see if the game run better !
regards
I agree, 64bit is needed. 64bit doesn't have a performance decrease over running 32bit like DX10 does over DX9. I am running DX9 mode on Warhead and I really don't find it that much more optimized than the original Crysis. Sure, at some points I hit early 40's instead of mid 30's, but at graphically intensive parts like explosions etc it still dips into the early 20's just like the original Crysis did. Like Mascaras noted, 25fps was very playable in the first Crysis. In Warhead, the same fps doesn't nearly feel as smooth. you need at least 28-30fps+ to feel like the first one. So far the game starts out pretty action packed. I enjoy it, but wouldn't recommend it on these so called performance increases alone.
I too am hoping for a new driver, but with the original Crysis already being out for almost a full year now, how much more can they squeeze from this engine that hasn't been done already? With Warhead being nearly identical, I'm not expecting miracles from either video card camp.
i used rivatuner to measure my system (watch sig) tasking...
Res: 1280x1024, no AA
8800GT @ 760/1900/1900
2GB memory, windows XP SP3
All settings set to Enthusiast
http://img217.imageshack.us/my.php?image=vramru5.jpg
At 1280x1024, it nearly consumes 512MB, if you bump the resolution up to 1680x1050 and add 4xAA, 512MB is clearly not enough.
It is also tasking my e8400 @ 4050mhz almost at max, and using almost all my ram and almost all my vram.
Seems pretty optimized to me...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luka_Aveiro
when I talk about optimized I mean Gameplay/Smooth/FPS !
Quote:
Originally Posted by cantankerous
yep , the game has a lot more action & Fun then Crysis1 , however in windows Vista @ DX10 the game dont run so good/smooth , and even in windows Vista but DX9 mode the game has a few breaks (i only tested with 4870X2 , dont know about single GPu) ,especially in last levels (i already finished the game)
regards
When I talk about optimized, I mean the ability that the software has in order to push the hardware in an efficient way... I think Crysis does it very well, some think otherwise, I don't care...Quote:
Originally Posted by mascaras
About dual-gpu concerns, its very clear that CryEngine2 is not friend of scalability... If you come to think of it, dual GPU is only here about 3 years, that's about the same time Cryengine2 took off... Rewriting such an engine in order to make it more multi gpu friendly should be costly, and for 30 bucks, I guess we are getting a very good game. At least I am enjoying it :)
yep , i understand what you mean with VRAM , and CPU usage optimization but for me thats not optimizations if the gameplay is not good ! :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Luka_Aveiro
for me game optimization is the ability that the software has in order to push the hardware in an efficient way AND the gameplay is good !
regards
If one can't play at Very High, then play at High or get new hardware, just as simples as that :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by mascaras
GRRR!!!! Amazon's pre-order is CRAP. I got an email from them saying it'll be available in NOVEMBER. Play.com also is out of stock. Where the fsck can i get it from thats NOT steam?
Well I can see why it was priced as less. That was unbelievably short and well, almost dull. The whole game was less fun than Crysis's Assault map and was an utter waste of the potential of a game with Psycho in it.
Spent more time looking at cut scenes and driving past action than shooting stuff up, the whole game was one massive tease with no "happy ending" as the airport did not satisfy as the damn cut scene takes over and you don't get to punch the lights out yourself.
Hope the MP crysis wars is better as it felt like I was playing leftover maps from the first one. Rates a MEH++
Also this will probably be the last game I get from steam as 180kb/s on a 20meg line is crap, tried switching content servers and that was the fastest I could get from them. It took from 10am to 7pm to get the damn thing down, not a good way to make your customers happy...
So yeah, not happy with the game, not happy with the steam service, and after that not even fussed if there is any more from Crytek again.
/rant
What's the problem with Steam?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kai Robinson
BTW, people complaining about Warhead value, haven't certainly played it on Delta... I am, and I know it is very Hard, yet, very pleasant.
If you play it on Delta, believe me it will look like a totally different game.
Because i want a PHYSICAL copy.
Playing Crysis in delta is a joke, the koreans are still retarded :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Luka_Aveiro
yes i agree that 20-25FPS was playable in Crysis but in warhead is not. however i noticed on my 8800gtx i was able to turn up way more details (used mixed Gamer and Enthusiast settings at 1680X1050) and it was very playable so i would say they did a pretty good job and they use the CPu way better as i noticed all 4 cores kicking. however i did not notice ANY random breaks that you speak of after i set my settings to get the best quality for frame rates. maybe some microstuddering? on a gameplay side absolutely fantastic. i just wish it was way longer and the soundtrack was amazing. worth every penny.Quote:
Originally Posted by mascaras
:shrug:
I think 20-25FPS is perfectly playable in Warhead. Infact, I didn't notice any performance difference, as for what comes to playing experience, compared to the original. And it seems CryTek paid attention to the 3rd party eye-candy tweaks as Warhead is even prettier... Anyways, while playing I kept noticing how incredibly stable the frame rate is and how fluid the game is even at such low frame rates. It was completely enjoyable on my G92GTS (846/2214/1044) @ 1680x1050 + 8xAF.
Anyways, I found Warhead to be quite entertaining. There's less pointless wandering in it than in the original.
I'm using the suit allot more than the original!
Great game so far!
Have you tried Game? They not only have it in stock but it's only £17.99.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kai Robinson
Hmmm, well, i'm torrenting it now, i'll pick up a real copy when amazon have it in stock.
So after updating to official Cat 8.9, my 4870x2 is tearing apart Warhead now. I'm getting 30-40 fps consistenly (never below 25 it seems) even in heavy action at 1920 x 1200, all settings on Enthusiast, and 4xAA. Ridiculous.
I can even play 2560 x 1600 with 25+ fps most of the time and all settings at Enthusiast, though I turn a few to gamer just to keep it at 25+ all the time. I love it.
why not get it off steam?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kai Robinson
Quote:
What's the problem with Steam?
BTW, people complaining about Warhead value, haven't certainly played it on Delta... I am, and I know it is very Hard, yet, very pleasant.
If you play it on Delta, believe me it will look like a totally different game.
I basically only buy games from a store, not that I hate Steam. I love it. However its nice having the actual copy of the game if your Steam ID gets stolen, or any crap like that. Another reason is because some Mods require certain patches to work and since Steam auto updates it can cause issues.Quote:
why not get it off steam?
-yonton228/timmy
Dx9, all Enthusiast settings, no AA, x16 AF @1920x1200. I get about 20-25fps with HD4870CF but I experiene no lag as I can play it very smoothly even when engage in battle, seem to me that this game is more well-optimized than Crysis.
O_o I got this game yesterday. And i can only play in ''mainstream'' on dx10 :(
In large battles it laggs on ''gamer'' and i cant stand lagg :O Got a e8500 @ 4,2ghz and 3870x2 :O
Guess that 3870x2 isnt good enough :cool:
You are wasting your time using DX10 mode there is no benefit. Just place the -DX9 in the command line and play the game on Enthusiast mode.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMacke
Thx for the tip ;) will do that when i get home from work :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle
yea I was looking at the DX10 to DX9 differences and basically the leaves look a bit cooler and thats about it lol
wtf I was just at our loca wally world. They had War head at 59.99
Why was I at wal mart past midnight..I have no idea..my gf wanted some lotion lol.. I thnk..to mucgh beerrr
Just got the game today, and it rocks! I can play smoothly on high settings with my 8800GTS 512. Multiplayer is kicking ass :):up:
a lot of people are liking multi-player. I may give that a try. I really don't understand why MP is on a separate disc though.
Multiplayer (crysis wars) is a stand alone and you don't need to install the singleplayer to play it. Each installation is it's own.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle
I understand that but IMO you should be able to do that with just 1 disc.Quote:
Originally Posted by CarpeDiem
Doesn't require the disc to play so it's all good :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle
Hi
crysis warhead benchmark >>> http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=202263
dont know if this already posted :
regardsQuote:
Easiest way of increasing your Crysis Warhead performance on enthusiast mode by 20%.
I finished the game on enthusiast mode, changing to gamer when performance was not pleasing and as I always do, on games that is possible, it was the time to make some tweaking to Cvars and see how much performance I could squeeze out of the game. Many Cvars increase performance a bit, but the result with two of them was shocking. I found an easy way to increase framerate by as much as 20% (or 5-10 fps depending actual framerate of 25-50fps, good scaling up to 100 fps) changing only two values that have a little inpact on image quality. This is subjective, so test it yourselves. You know how to do it:
- Create an autoexec file on the game directory.
- Write this into the file:
con_restricted=0 - Enables you to change many values in the console. I don't actually know if it is required, but won't hurt if you write it.
r_displayinfo=1 - Will show many info on the screen, fps included.
- Save.
Once you made that, you can try changing any cvar on the console. To enter the console press "~" key (the one below Esc).
The two values in question are the next:
- r_DepthOfField [0,1,2] - You have to put it to 1. Default is 2 when on enthusiast, 0 on lowest setting and 1 on others. It does impact the quality of depht of field in outdoor scenes, but it's not too noticeable when you are actually playing. Indoor you will not see the difference in the image, but the impact in performance is notorious.
- r_colorgrading [0,1] - 1 only on enthusiast mode. Put it to 0 to dissable it. Ok, there's a big difference in the color of the image, but the image still looks great without it. Better than gamer mode and performance is close to gamer once you dissable this and DOF.
This is intended for those who can play the game on enthusiast mode, but they need some extra fps on some places and don't want to lower the graphics to gamer settings. Those who cannot just play it at enthusiast mode by a few fps can give this a try too, but performce will be compromised on many places, it will be up to them if they can stand playing at below fluent framerates.
EDIT: Of course I can't assure this will work for every system or operating system. Send some feedback so we can help as many people as we can.
http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=72030
Played it. Finished it. Sux.
I'm one of the people who actually liked Crysis. The whole setup, not just the graphics. I find the nanosuit to be much more plausible for a guy to go around killing hundreds of soldiers without a scratch on him than just one dude in a Hawaian shirt.
The story was also pretty good, going from a seemingly routine mission to "All hell broke loose!". And while you were going through difficult situations, it always seemed plausible enough that you could get out of them (well, except for the last part of course).
Warhead on the other hand... seems like a 12-year old got hold of the Crysis project and messed it up.
1) The menu was just fine the way it was in Crysis. One of the best menus I've seen in a game. In Warhead they decided to screw the colors up. It looks horrible now.
2) The graphics were really nice in Crysis. Beaches, green grass and all that. In Warhead you see a lot more "ugly" textures on walls and such. Next to no beaches.... the whole setup is ugly.
3) The story is weak. It's shorter and you don't really get to do anything amazing... basically the whole story is a "train ride" (pun intended) killing hundreds of soldiers and aliens. The cutscenes are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too long and worst of all.... they don't even give you the missions where you help Nomad out. Why? WHY?
And it's actually worse than I described it if you play it.
But MP is now great. I didn't even finish 1s SP level. TIA is really fun on moded server. Warhead was all about MP and now its done right. If you want you can download hundreds maps for Crysis and play SP all you want.
Am I the only one miffed by the whole ditching of Crysis to make more $? Was I the only one who bought an SLI board and 2 8800GT's to get nothing but stuttering? I feel I'm owed this game for free as was everyone else ala Fear combat. (loved that game) Grrr...
Oh I hear ya on FEAR Combat. I loved that game too. Too bad my Logitech G9 doesn't agree with it and causes frames to tank into the early teens whenever I try and play. Only reason I don't play it at all anymore. If a real solid fix was out to this problem, I would certainly start playing it again. Sorry for the OTP.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jodiuh
Hi
im testing ASUS HD4870X2 TOP Quad-crossfire
Crysis warhead , 1920x1200 , AA 4x , DX10 , Enthusiast
Avalanche level = Average 56.5 Fps
http://br.youtube.com/watch?v=EVP_yq8Gtu4
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...7&postcount=41
Quad-crossfire scaling in crysis warhead is very good >> 80%
In Crysis1 No !
:up:
How about just REGULAR two card crossfire?
And still no one answer me why I have just 22 fps average with my HD4870CF @ 1920x1200, DX9, no AA, Enthusiast settings. :(
hint: lowers shadows to medium gets 30-35 fps. You wont see much difference in IQQuote:
Originally Posted by iTravis