So am I not a consumer?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hell Hound
Printable View
So am I not a consumer?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hell Hound
Back to toiling the fields for anyone who disagrees with the principle and attempts to vote with his or her wallet... The company selling your milk doesn't do it because they care that YOU have milk, they do it because they care that YOU have MONEY which THEY WANT. The company selling you medication doesn't do it because they care that you get better, no - quite to the contrary, they'd prefer that you stay sick. As long as you are sick they make money. Unfortunately (and NO, I do NOT agree with capitalism, I'm simply saying it as it is) money is what makes the world go around. To fit in, Nvidia and every other large corporation out there has to have bad ethical principles combined with excellent business principles.
By the way, do you think ATI made your graphics card because they wanted you to have a graphics card or because they wanted to make more money? ;)
@VoodooProphetII
Have you been spit on by them,if so why would you support that.Consumer's are not drug addicts,we want respect and gratitude.Only through this does one become loyal.
I would be OK with select games being exclusive to NVIDIA or exclusive to AMD in the way games have been exclusive when talking about consoles.
No I have not been spit on by them. What you see as them spitting in your face, I see it as them doing something to make the gaming experience better and me ultimately wishing that my company would actually get off their hinds and do something.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hell Hound
I like physx,but sell me a physx card that can work in any system or I won't buy.Just let xfx or somebody sell dedicated physx cards and make some money.
Whats the problem with how it use to be,user base ^money^.:up:
That's how Ageia worked till Nvidia bought them. :down: They should retire their renaming BS and just sell some decent PhysX cards if they can't come up with anything new often enough...Quote:
Originally Posted by Hell Hound
I cannot bring the case at the company that I work for in public because that would compromise my position. However there are several games out there where things like anti-aliasing are made dependent on the device-id. There are also many cases of deliberate code optimization vandalism, which either use device-id's or exploit exotic data formats and even driver features which are out of spec.Quote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
One major reason why drivers sometimes give major performance improvements in some games is because the other IHV-dev deliberately abused their access to code so that a custom layer has to be written for driver calls made by that app in order to improve performance.
Understood. However you seem to be saying that games may have special code paths that take advantage of a given IHV's software or hardware. I don't see the problem with that as long as the competition's performance isn't reduced in the process. Have you seen examples of an optimization for one party hurting the other?
This x100...Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] Oj101
Every single company that makes just about any product is evil. Some do "charity" things to get people off their back. Others keep things ULTRA quiet so no one finds out...
I wouldn't be surprised to see Intel, AMD, and NVidia having a big baby seal clubbing party together some day, all the while laughing at everyone who acts like the other company is any less evil. :rofl:
proof or it didn't happen. i want to see pics of the bags of cash being offloaded by folklifts...Quote:
Originally Posted by Katzenschleuder
R&D was due to GPU cycle AMD used at the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew LB
Also you quoted the quote as "later that year" which implied 2009.
/topic
You know its really tiring to hear Nvida this Nvidia that. Sure, we get it you can smear the competition all you want but it wont change a thing if the company you admire fails to provide.
How bout you ATI fans talk about how great AMD is, how much they have done for you and gaming community. What have they done to advance gaming accept providing a GPU. I really want to hear it.
From what i know Nvidia has supported 100's of games since i play on PC and had major impact on game advancement with new technology's. You can call them a gimmick, proprietary or whatever the point is that they exist and people take advantage of that for better enjoyment of games.
Now how many titles has AMD supported? I get it that AMD gpu's are fast and efficient and a good bang for the buck. That's all fine and dandy but where is the involvement in the games them self's?
ATi brought us tesselation pretty much (first introduced with R200 as truform, later called render to vertex).
There's a start for you, not to mention competition.
it's one thing to have hardware capabilities, it's another to have software that uses them. i believe that is the point of this conversation, i'm not discounting the innovations brought to us by ati/amd, but it seems to me like nvidia is more willing to get the tech out there and support devs who are willing to try it.Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
Hardware should have no influence over the software development.
{
if
nvidia offer moneys exploit their ass;
//This is my project punk
else
keep developing as intended ;
}
:rofl::ROTF::clap:
Real mature don't you think.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hell Hound
Anyways, I belief 570091D has a point. Nvidia is not just a hardware company, they are also and sometimes more so a software company. They make things happen which is why you very rarely have problems running any game with a Nvidia card.
FixedQuote:
Originally Posted by VoodooProphetII
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hell Hound
Whatever floats your boat.
Providing additional funding to developers not only helps drive innovation by adding additional features that wouldn't be there due to set budgets and time constraints, the additional money allows developers some breathing room so games can contain far more levels of detail and content. It costs a lot of money to create a video game that has the ability to not only play well on the average Joe's computer... but to have that additional eye candy that goes well above and beyond what mainstream cards can do, and in many cases... what the fastest cards available can do.
The first Crysis was just one of those games. I don't recall many games in the past 20 years which completely brought even the fastest systems to their knees like Crysis did. And from a video card sales point of view, it's never a bad thing to have games being released with capabilities on the highest settings that require consumers to move up to a newer, more capable card.
Unfair competition, exploitation of loopholes, etc. isn't simply a capitalism problem. It's a human problem, and it happens anywhere they get involved with things. Whether or not "Nvidia" is interested in you having a video card, I can honestly say from experience that the people who work there are excited to see people enjoy and make use of GPUs in ways they wouldn't have first envisioned. I bet the same is true of AMD.
Like I said before, if this sort of polarization continues to the extreme we may actually end up with two types of software for two types of hardware.
sounds like a console to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by cegras
and i 'love' my console so much
If you were a company, and you were investing all of this money into making things happen, would YOU let your competition take advantage of those things? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hell Hound
That's a serious question to anyone out there who still says NVidia should let AMD use all of their features freely.
The issue with AMD isn't ideas... I think we all know that. The problem is they lack the bankroll to help developers USE those ideas. I mean, we didn't see tessellation used even once until DX11 came around which added it to the API, while ATi have had it on their cards since what...2007?Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
This is why every time a new feature is added on an AMD card I don't pay it any mind unless it's a set standard...because they never get used. As many years as ATi had truform, I can only recall it being used once, and that was in a wolfenstein game.
Not only would they do that but they would also write AMD's drivers, implement CUDA for their cards and share all their patents for free too. Hey if you wanna be a charity might as well do it big! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
:down:
If you prefer, we can look at it from the other side...Quote:
Originally Posted by Hell Hound
A company offers your development studio cash, a FULL test lab, on-site assistance, AND extra developers to include features...
Do you take it, or do you say no?
Both companies release features from time to time that's only on their cards, just NVidia puts out the work to make sure their features get used while AMD sit back and hope someone gives it a spin.
There's no mention of anything Cuda specific, right? So there's no reason, why it shouldn't work on AMD hardware to. It just might not run well, for now.
i think the line needs to be drawn at optimization.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
this is starting to sound more like intel vs amd with disabling instructions based on vendor id. and chances are it will only get worse.
cuda is great, i love the idea, i will not disrespect nvidia for being involved in the software side of things. but once a brand gets to reach into the cookie jar, whos stopping them from crushing all the cookies they didnt take?
the HAWX2 tessellation thing is close to this. if nvidia is average at rendering polygons in all methods, and amd is average in one, and sub par in the other, then maybe nvidia could choose to help them optimize code in the way thats sub par for amd, while offer a negligible difference for themselves. at that point they in theory are just helping, while actually sabotaging, and whos going to prevent it?
the other big "if" question, is what would have happened if nvidia didnt buy physx? would we see an implementation in games thats more optimized? since under the old brand they might have cared more about looking incredible vs havok, instead of requiring brute force to do anything decent to sell higher end cards
Indeed but there will always be people who can not see that until its far too late.Quote:
Originally Posted by cegras
At the moment all they are seeing is the one sided exclusive extras they are getting now with not having to go without anything like the people who don't own the hardware.
But if the same was to happen on the other side as well then both sides will be missing out on things & then the reality really sets in as people just cant put there self in other peoples shoes until there upto there neck in it first hand.
And why would AMD be only average in one and not all of them? Who are at fault there?Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
i only recently learned theres multiple ways to do tessellation (i think thats just stupid until i understand why theres different ways). and the reason might be something silly, like the other method is too much of a space and tdp hog for the same performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by VoodooProphetII
and like i said, "negligible difference" could still mean worse. even if its just 5% worse, would still mean its dumb to do it that way, unless their real goal was sabotage.
please keep in mind i use the words IF and COULD alot, meaning its all hypothetical. so whos at fault, right now i wonder if its the dx11 standards for poor implementation and leaving only recommendations
No worries Manicdan, I'm just asking questions as I know that I'll be able to learn more by listening to what other people have to say.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
I'm not sure what language that is, but there seems to be no function for if...Quote:
Originally Posted by Hell Hound
//this is a comment
It should rather be
if (nvidia offers moneys (to?) exploit their ass)
{
print_r("This is my project punk");
}
else
{
keep developing as intended;
}
:up:
:rofl:
(Yes, I'm bringing humour into an otherwise waaay too serious thread)
:up: :ROTF:
It was intended as a joke but I was called immature.
:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] Oj101
very nice man, i think we needed a laugh! :up:
Google "truform". Serious Sam had it, GLDSRC had it, Unreal had it...Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
truform was the first itteration of tessellation, and while boasting an impressive list of games, didn't appear consistantly on ati gpus. it debuted on the 8500, then they stopped including it with x1000. tessellation finally came back with r600, but even that form of tessellation isn't supported with dx11.Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
i think eyefinity is ati's first success at pushing at pushing gaming to the next level. it still has it's problems (only the 5970 can render three screens with playable framerates) but it's been embraced by players, devs, and monitor manufacturers. i'm hoping ati uses this as a model for promoting future innovations.
the main reason i support nvidia is their consistancy on this, once they bring a feature into their hardware, you can count on continuing development and support.
That's exactly what I'm talking about. I personally wish AMD would get more involved with game developers so their features would get used more and not 5 years later. Like i said they are building fine GPU's but really lack involvement with game studios. Sure there were few titles ATI had its hand in but compare that with Nvida and it looks like poultry.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
Personally I'm not so found that Nvidia cuts ATI from the tech it develops and in perfect world everything would be open to anyone but lets get real here. They are running a business first and if they want to offer exclusive features to get customers can you really blame them? And most of the stuff that gets talked about on this forum was developed by them and did not exist prior. How can anyone expect them to hand it out to competition is beyond me. Or you guys forget that AMD is a competitor and Nvidia is truing to have an edge over them with exclusive stuff. From what i see no one forbids AMD to do the same thing and if they wanted to there is plenty of game studios that would like some support.
Would never happen with PC gaming. Look both GPU company's have the same DX API's. It's a standard and all game developers have to do is follow it and it should work on both with no problems. Stuff like proprietary physics and features that were developed exclusively by ether GPU company will probably always stay that... proprietary. To crucify ether for it is just silly.Quote:
Like I said before, if this sort of polarization continues to the extreme we may actually end up with two types of software for two types of hardware.
hummm can we have that on visual basic v90??? :D shows my ageQuote:
Originally Posted by [XC] Oj101
Go back a page: "render to vertex"Quote:
Originally Posted by 570091D
How about in Comal? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by kuroikenshi
that's it, from now on we'll do everything on assembler
:D
i'm all for it! :up::up:Quote:
Originally Posted by kuroikenshi
I'll whip out my ZX Spectrum and relearn BASIC :rofl:
01001110011010010110001101100101 :up:
DirectX doesn't have any implementations. It's an API. It just defines data structures, order, inputs and outputs. Implementations are done by IHVs and ISVs. Getting upset because there is more than one way to implement something seems a bit ummm....misguided.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
You are right... but there's data structures and code optimisations who are defined and offer to be used... there's 2 really important optimisation of the codes who are apply by ALL developper who use Tesselation in a game ( who benefit ALL gpu's ) .... one of this codes is designed for don't apply tesselation on hidden object, and distant object ( LOD apply now on textures, surfaces and "geometry" ( tesselation ) in DX11 ), the second is used for don't apply Tesselation on plane surface ( a "plan" don't need to be tesselated as he don't have any relief ) ..... if you reach a certain amount of tesselation applied on polygon you need thoses optimisations ( but you can and you want use them even if you don't reach this level ) or you will need to reduce the amount of polygon who will be tesselated.. All of this have not be used on Hawx2 . and for reduce the impact, they have just decrease the number of polygon used on certain object ( buildings, AI planes, etc etc )... ( it's a common practice on console games developpement to choose to reduce the numbers of polygon on certain object less visible for optimise the overall performance, not needed in our case ).. For Hawx2 looking on planes and environnement object, they have really need to go far far higher of what they had expected, we looking at AI planes who seems coming from a 1996 PS1 games...Quote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
anyway ..
Reading this thread, this was make me think to Hawx2 ... ( techreport have start a really interessant overview of it in his GTX580 review, i hope some will investigate a little bit further )
A GTX480 in Hawx2 have 105fps, a HD5870 2gb, 45fps ...
GTX460=75fps, GT450 = 60fps and a GT430 is a bit higher of a HD5870.....
(2560x1600 )
I m really curious to know if it was AMD who have put some money on this game, and the HD5870 was run at 105fps and the Nvidia GTX480 at 44fps, and if a HD5650 was faster of the GTX480 ( and surely the GTX580 ) what will say Nvidia users about it.
Now with AMD and his Gaming Evolved progamm, i just hope we will not enter in a new war of the gaming benchmarks... where both companies put a tons of money ( games productors will be happy ), just for try make shine their cards on hardware reviews... We are speaking about Crysis2 .... what will happend if AMD start to do same and you will find Battlefield 3 running at 50fps on a HD5770 and 35fps on a GTX580 ? i believe all of this will finish in a nice disaster for all the gpu's and games industry....
@Lanek
Not really a realistic scenario. AMD cards carry no special features that cripple nvidia cards when optimised towards. The only time building towards ATI crippled nvidia was when nvidia decided to be clever during DX9 era and tried to get developers to use either FP16 or FP32 while ATI stuck with the standard FP24.
FP16 looked ugly but was quick while NV30 really sucked at FP32 but didn't offer anything over FP24 (until SM3.0).
Since then nvidia has made sure not to self own again (they basically offered the standard + something else), but by putting such emphasis on tessellation, I think they've left a door open. It's not really something AMD can't push themselves and nvidia don't have the dx11 market share to force the issue.
But that's basically the difference between them, ATI stays standard while nvidia tries to force new standards and pays developers to follow them. That's why AMD don't bother, they won't get the same fps gains nvidia get from their TWIMTBP. Most optimisations from a AMD program would work on both companies cards and according to the way the game is designed could STILL end up faster on a nvidia card for a game that AMD put money into i.e. Dirt 2. Tessellation has probably been the fairest tactic nvidia have used in years.
right'o let get together and setup camp (lots of brew required) .... those tapes are gonna take quite some time to lad and saveQuote:
Originally Posted by [XC] Oj101
:D
Aaaaaargh there was nothing worse than waiting 20 minutes for something to load only to find that the program's corrupt because the tape has stretched :( :mad:
LMAO.... that takes me back, I still remember my fist pc, it was made by phillips..... say wha???Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] Oj101
whatever they do, tweaks can be made in the .ini file to make things proper. ive been playing warhead with texture mods lately and all this power is a waste without monitors with 200 ppi and up.
590 gtx?? is that bull?
http://pc.ign.com/articles/114/1140767p1.html
will crysis 2 have support for DX11? wonder what kinda of hardware will make it run wellQuote:
" I was playing the PC version of the game with a wired 360 controller, and aside from the raw visual splendor on the screen - and seriously, I'm not one to to fellate the original Crysis's graphics, since I found them a little boring, but DAMN is Crysis 2 looking amazing on PC - it played very smoothly. Crytek has thrown in some snap-to targeting on the left trigger and a bit of aim assist to boot, and configurations are customizable, a major change from the last game. Switching between powers might actually be easier on the 360 pad than on the PC; pulling off manuevers like taking aim, quickly uncloaking and firing, then cloaking again are pulled off quickly using the bumper to phase in and out. "
Probably 580 GTX SLI ;). Although i must say Crysis did feel smooth with low fps anyway. So 'smooth' would not correlate with FPS very well. I reckon at 1920 a 580 GTX/5970/570/6970 would all be reasonable.
:shakes:Quote:
Crytek has thrown in some snap-to targeting on the left trigger and a bit of aim assist to boot, and configurations are customizable, a major change from the last game. Switching between powers might actually be easier on the 360 pad than on the PC; pulling off manuevers like taking aim, quickly uncloaking and firing, then cloaking again are pulled off quickly using the bumper to phase in and out. "
Yep just like I thought, another great pc game jumps the console bandwagon and bites the dust...
*now patiently awaiting Half Life 3....
auto aim can usually be disabled. It's built in because consoles need it since analogue directional pads arn't as precise as a mouse. It'll probably be similar to the first with weapon inertia to make it harder for PCQuote:
Originally Posted by BababooeyHTJ
The gameplay looks amazing. Alot more potential than the first one. Really seems to make the character look superhuman.
I'll be playing this with a mouse and a PS3 navigation controller. http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/clipart/rock-on.gif
http://www.abload.de/img/dx11_tessellation2r721.gif
http://www.abload.de/img/dx11_tessellation3b7vz.gif
http://www.abload.de/img/dx11_tessellation1n7md.gif
http://www.abload.de/img/ssr1d784.gif
http://www.abload.de/img/ao1_ssdo97ab.gif
http://www.abload.de/img/dx11_pom2i7e0.gif
http://www.mycrysis.com/dx11
So they finally let the engine show its fangs...
Wouldn't have been better to do this on time for March's launch? Or at least not being douches with people criticizing them about how they purposely made Crysis 2 not use even half of their engine's capabilities in order to get all three versions looking and working the same.
With this and Battlefield 3, 2011 may finally see a game that dethrones the original Crysis. It only took 4 years :rolleyes:
QFEQuote:
Originally Posted by Pontos
When ever this gets released noone cares about this anymore and its a shame that they show off effects that where enabled by default in crysis 1 (POM, SSAO), and they still are missing stuff like interactive vegetation, destructible environment....
I'm hoping it'll be released before I can buy it for $20 on steam
Wait......so are they calling increased depth in bump mapping, DX11 tessellation???? Woooooow.....lame. -_-
Sweet, time to do another replay :yepp:
So what's the deal? Their links don't work! Reminds me of the last couple dates I had.
I can't click on the download button?
I might be crazy but I also see a High res texture pack for download as well. has this been there for a while and I never bothered to look or is that something that has come out with the new upgrade pack? both of these are welcome sights
it's a good thing I decided to wait for the DX11 patch before playing more than 10mins... I want the best they can offer me the FIRST time I play the game. to bad it took this long
I can't click on it either. Does nothing. Doesn't work in IE either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrono Detector
The download buttons take you right back to that page.
Never going to happen, Crysis 2 was removed from Steam.Quote:
Originally Posted by defect9
As far as the DL links not working, it's because they aren't finished yet. They probably put that up thinking that no one would type in /dx11, and will link the DL links whenever it is released. Whenever we see an official announcement on the subject, we should expect to be able to download.
lol at the brick wall
it looks even more unrealistic with tesselation on; no brick wall looks like that...
the container in the last pic is floating above ground instead of sinking into the mud and the metal-worm thing looks better in DX9
Eh? I don't see anything unrealistic about the brick wall :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by generics_user
It looks as though the bricks could be protruding out a bit much, but I think thats only because the view point is so close. If you look at the bricks on the left of the screen shot, they look much more natural.
I agree, bricks on the right of the window frame are "bubbled" out way too far.
Full description of the upcoming DX11 patch:
Hi guys,
Below are the patch notes for Patch 1.9, this is also the patch that will enable DX11 Support (available via a separate download). We're aiming to have this patch live and available to you all next week. As always we're interested to hear your comments/thoughts on these changes so please post them below.
Crysis 2 Patch 1.9
• Added Contact Shadows
• Added DX11 benchmark level
• Added DX11 support for Crysis 2 (the following features only work when downloading the optional DX11 package here):
• - Tessellation + Displacement Mapping
• - High Quality HDR Motion Blur
• - Realistic Shadows with Variable Penumbra
• - Sprite Based Bokeh Depth of Field
• - Parallax Occlusion Mapping
• - Particles Motion Blur, Shadows and Art Updates
• - Water Rendering improvements and using Tessellation + Displacement Mapping
• Added Realtime Local Reflections
• Added support for Higher Res Textures Package
• Added various new console variables to whitelist
• Fixed bullet penetration, which had been broken by a bug introduced with the DLC 2 patch
• Fixed issue in MP where player stats weren't always saved at the end of a game
• Fixed issue in MP where player stats would sometimes randomly reset
• Fixed issue with MP time played statistic, which would sometimes be too low on leaderboards and in stats
• Fixed issue with JAW rocket not firing through window's containing broken glass
• Fixed rare issue where a user could not access MP with a valid CD key if they had previously used an invalid CD key
• Improved advanced graphics options menu
• Improved anti-cheat measurements: fixed exploit which could prevent vote kicking working against a user
• Improved multi-GPU support
• Improved Tone Mapping
• Re-added possibility to enable r_StereoSupportAMD via config file (unsupported)
https://secure.mycrysis.com/forums/v...p?f=40&t=32220
Really need to get myself DX11 capability one of these days. Anyways, hopefully this will finally put the whole graphics debacle to rest in a positive manner. Shame it's so late, really would have saved themselves a lot of pain if its development wasn't so behind schedule.
Next week huh? Well at least Crytek set a release date for this long awaited DX11 patch, looking forward seeing how much improvement there is and the FPS it is running on my setup.
So in a nutsheel we'll get a heavily overused tessellation with zero visual benefits. When i tried Aliens vs Predator with all the DX11 goodies enabled, it looked pretty bad as far as poly count goes. Stair rails and guard rails were still horribly blocky (not round at all even at like 20 ingame centimeters distance), rocks were low poly as well with no sign of high poly count etc etc.
There is no point in churning 5000 polygons on a flat surface that will be just as flat with just 4 polygons as it will be with 5000. But now it's important to brag about how much raw power can you put into some useless feature that has no benefit to the gamer. Gee, that's what i have been waiting for ever since we got first pixel shaders with DX8. Not.
They are ALL using tessellation in a completelly wrong way. The whole point of tessellation is to have great graphics with minimal performance hit. What they are doing is having just as awful graphics with crappy performance. Fail much? Tessellation was meant to replace LOD models because its realtime and much more flexible since you don't have to make different LOD models for every distance but you leave that to the game engine.
download works now for highres DirectX 9&11 (64-bitOS and 768 MB of memory are required) and dx11ultra patch.
http://www.mycrysis.com/dx11
Yeah it really is pathetic the kind of crap they're shoveling at us. With all the geometry processing available give us higher poly models, not just bumpier bricks.
great! more important than dx11 patch to meQuote:
Originally Posted by n!Cola
dx11 patch is also available omg!
546mb
I'm getting an error page not found
same here. Where did you guys find the update?
they removed it again but i still can download.. i think someone may upload files to torrents or etc.
apparently we have to wait 1.9 patch
http://www.abload.de/img/c2dx11yu6j.jpg
try these
http://www.mycrysis.com/download/Crysis_2_DX11_Pack.exe
http://www.mycrysis.com/download/Cry...xture_Pack.exe
also
http://www.techpowerup.com/downloads...ture_Pack.html
http://www.techpowerup.com/downloads...rade_Pack.html
Great, we still have to wait until next week for the 1.9 patch before we can use it. Go figure, hopefully it gets leaked too.
Crysis 2 PC patch 1.9 AND the DX11 and High Res Texture packages will be made available on MyCrysis.com on Monday April 27th!
http://www.mycrysis.com/news/crysis_...extures-update
They changed it to June already. :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by kaktus1907
maybe 2012?Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
loooool .. yes just have seen they have speak about year for the date ..
Anyway i will maybe ( a big maybe ) buy the game if i find it cheap on Steam or whatever . just for see this DX11 patch .
Thanks kaktus :DQuote:
Originally Posted by kaktus1907
over 10gb for both, dx11 and highres, packages rofl :D
downloading right now. too bad patch 1.9 is needed. well, i really hope it's worth it.
*edit*
ok. i stand corrected. tpu shows the wrong file size. actually its around 2,2gb.
It's nice to see a DX11 and high res texture pack. If it was for EA we would have never seen this, I'm sure. Glad to see that albeit very late it's still done by Crytek.
im just glad that they didnt put this in their new retaliation pack or w/e the new dlc is called, and charge us $15 for it
Crysis 2 is not available on steam. Only on Origin. :rolleyes:
If you ask me, a big part of the reason why Crysis 2 was consolized and pushed out before these features could make it in the game is because EA is running the show and they demand scheduled releases, rather than follow quality game designer's "when it's done" policy. Such a shame. That said, once my 6990 rolls in I'll be buying a retail copy of this, preferably used and adding it to steam manually. Take that EA!
Edit: woops responding to post number 392
Waiting for the 27th....Quote:
Crysis 2 DX11 and High Res Textures Update
As a number of users were able to download the DX11 and High res texture packages from our test environment we would like to take this opportunity to explain how these files will work and our future plans via a short FAQ;
Where can I download these files?
We have removed the files from our websites until the full release date.
How do I install these packs?
Both the DX11 and High Res texture packages require Crysis 2 PC Patch 1.9 to work. Without this patch they cannot be installed.
When will patch 1.9 be available?
Crysis 2 PC patch 1.9 AND the DX11 and High Res Texture packages will be made available on MyCrysis.com on Monday June 27th!
Please note that the files will not work without the PC patch scheduled for release on Monday, more information about this including all download links will be made available to you via MyCrysis.com and our social network pages. If you would like to see a list of changes made in patch 1.9 you can view them HERE.
- MyCrysis Team
Quote:
Originally Posted by RejZoR
yup, hence why i wont be upgrading my 295's for a long while. DX11 while in theory sounds good, the reality is not very enticing at all.
Here are a few more comparison shots.. disappointment once again
http://www.abload.de/gallery.php?key=70SZifeK