I googled "far cry x64" and got this: http://www.filecloud.com/file/1625/F...Upgrade+Patch/Quote:
Originally Posted by Think
Exactly what you need. :)
Printable View
I googled "far cry x64" and got this: http://www.filecloud.com/file/1625/F...Upgrade+Patch/Quote:
Originally Posted by Think
Exactly what you need. :)
so are these options available in the full version of the game?
i.e. is it possible to just turn these options on in the options menu without having to "hack" anything? (i don't have the game)
I'm confused.
Would this mean this is something we could expect to see implemented into Crysis in the future, perhaps through updates?
More likely Crysis 2 since they want to up the graphics even more. So probably modify the engine a little more and crank up the settings within the current system more and wahla... new graphics system to trump the cards of the next 2 years ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by tcG
I have to disagree. Programmers are getting lazy when it comes to optimization. The Source engine is the best IMO... everything else, it seems that the programmers are just like "Well, everyones going to have Penryn and SLI 8800Ultras with 4GB of RAM, so we can get lazy and just write awful code."Quote:
Originally Posted by mike8913
asside from the fact that the source engine is glitchy as heck and has comparatively poor shader effects and...Quote:
Originally Posted by Polizei
And I have to disagree with you on that one, as I've done with several people who call Crysis "badly optimized"...Quote:
Originally Posted by Polizei
There simply are limitations to computing-power (yes, even in these days of half a Tera-flop GFXs), and with a game like Crysis, those limitations are encountered... Just look at the game... It's the first game in a very long time to actually push the envelope as far as graphics, physics and interactable enviroments go... It's like nothing we've ever seen before, it looks breathtaking, it gives you a 50-75% destrucable world to play in, and for the first 2/3's of the game, you can generally play any way you want...
Yet some people call it badly optimised because their 2-year old systems can't run it at highest settings...
Come on guys, this game is in its own league, naturally nobody can play it on full settings...
And even at settings which are playable on 1-2 year old hardware, the game still looks incredible...
I would call Crysis the best optimised game of newer time :cool:
Best Regards :toast:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Polizei
I agree. I mean HL2 was released way back in 2004, and still looks great. It runs like a charm. I think Crytek has done a horrible job on Crysis. Nothing i've seen suggests that it needs more than a GTX/GT SLI to get smooth framerates in res as low as 1280. Esp with the fact that the DX 10 features are merely DX 9, where is the slowness coming from- crap code.
and you know the code is crap, because.....?
Exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
Sure HL2 runs good... it runs good on todays systems because well its older engine that has been updated over time. Valve did a great job expanding the engine over the years don't get me wrong its great but it does look good but defiantly not as good as Crysis.
Source engine doesn't even use dynamic lighting, it has very small levels, low poly count etc, obviously it wont take much to run it. It is very scaleable though, a DX 7 gfx card can run it.
Because of the "DX 9 hacks". I think you'd agree that DX 10 cards at the moment aren't the best. Fair enough. Change some settings and you see that the DX 10 effects are merely DX 9. So if the slowness (and i say this cause even a GTX SLI + QUAD doesn't get 'decent' fps on res as LOW as 1280) isn't down to the DX 10 what is it down too? Don't get me wrong the source engine is old, but how would you explain the UT 3 engine, or even WIC (which looks incredible and in DX 10 is playable on a GT at 1920)?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
Don't get me wrong Crysis looks incredible, it's easily the prettiest game out there. But again i'll say that even so a GTX/GT SLi and a Quad should be playing it at a higher framerate than they currently do.
Oh and the last thing- what about the patch that improves performance coming out from Crytek ;) What else is that improving?
Again i'm not claiming that it should be running at 60fps at 1920 res. Merely that the performance shouldn't be that bad. I mean i tried it on 'low' on my soon to be replace 7800GT, and the game looks as good as HL 1 (!). So if i compared Crysis on my card and HL 2, they're worlds apart. I think i time patches will improve the code.
Say what you will about good or bad code, but games with very high hardware requirments like this one are imo helping to kill pc gaming. If this and other trends in pc gaming continue the console's will rule the gaming market!
I'm not a gamer myself, so i don't really care, but it might be something you should care about.
Nah i think pushing the boundaries is exactly why Pc gaming won't die and why i'm now a PC gamer (after playing only on consoles). You know what to expect with PC gaming. I'll be able to buy a mid end card in a year or so and it will run it. In the meantime i can enjoy it on very high at 1280, and play the truckload of games that are out and very playable (sorry to harp on but WIC is awesome).
You are on XS which means you are a hardware enthuisiast like it or not:DQuote:
Originally Posted by takamishanoku
The rest of the worlds gaming population eg around 85% of it does not like spending a lot on hw every 2 years. Yes there will always be people willing to spend money, but the potential revenues and margins for game designers will become better for consoles and worse for pc's.
That has been the philosophy which Console-idiots have been using for years to justify why we as PC-gamers have to swallow crappy ports...Quote:
Originally Posted by Tokolosh
If you look back over the last year, how many of the games which have come out have been cross-platform? ANd how many of them have truly pushed the boundaries of graphics and gameplay? Almost zilch...
PC-gaming is what pushes the industry forward, because we're able to purchase better and better hardware, where consoles are stagnant the day they're released... Sure the devs will get better at controlling and programming for the hardware in the consoles, but they will be limited by the fact that it will not improve in the console's lifetime...
Games the likes of Crysis are what the PC-gaming need! Something so truly amazing that a console cannot run it... World in Conflict, Dawn of War etc., RTS-games belong on a PC, EA are the only ones who try to convince us otherwise... StarCraft II is coming up, a game which will keep PC-gaming alive completely on its own for the next 10 years :D...
PC-gaming will never die, it's a completely different vein of gaming compared to consoles... The fact that ports exist (bad ports specifically) is because some developers can't make the money they want (need?) from the console-market/PC-market alone...
Best Regards :toast:
I am not a gamer, so dont ask about or me give facts about specifics games! I just look at the fincial part of the equation and the facts are irreputable console industry has more potential.
But agree or disagree, its fine by me. I have no stake in this console fanboy vs pc fanboy war.
I just voice my opinion and respectfully disagree.
EDIT: i see i used kill to describe pc gaming, it is the wrong word............. Making it less financialy intresting to devlop games for......... is more accurate.........
I wasn't asking you to take sides, I just don't like it when people say "PC-gaming is dying", 'cause it isn't ;)
It might not be leading the game anymore, but it sure isn't dying...
Best Regards :toast:
Have to say that thw Wii is pushing boundaries for consoles. Mario Galaxy looks unlreal.
That's very impressive graphics, rivaling animated films couple years ago!!
But in terms of gameplay, it's the same old boring junk. Pretty graphics helps but PC gaming has been stagnant on the gameplay innovation front. Not much is going on for FPS as a genre, and RTS for that matter.
PC is still where innovation happens though. It's just that despite everyone whinging about it, when it actually gets delivered, no one pays for the end product (perimeter/darwinia etc).Quote:
Originally Posted by vitaminc
Not sure about Darwinia, but I Perimeter (or Starcraft 2 for that matter) would be more of an incremental improvement to the RTS genre (like Warcraft 3) but not a breakthrough such as Ultima Online, Dune, Super Mario 64 or Wii Sports.Quote:
Originally Posted by horn_
R u kidding? Have you played World In Conflict or even a company of heros? OR the Total war series? They are all innovations in the RTS genre. As for FPS, i'll agree that since HL 2 nothing has really pushed the gameplay stakes.Quote:
Originally Posted by vitaminc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaHS-y_mapQ
I don't think this has been posted yet.
Crysis ISN'T a bad optimized game stop saying that withour any proof,it's like a trend now everyone blames crysis for it's bad optimisation gameplay and story....
First of all have you ever looked at a Cryengine2 PDF?
The Source engine doesen't even come close to it so it's normal that it runs better when HL2 will have 3D clouds,parallax occlusion mapping,3D Ocean,Subsurface scattering,Breakable Buildings (and I mean all buildings in HL2 EP2 there were only 5 breakable buildings and not by you) Vegetation which is bendable reacting to wind,rain and character's movement,sunshafts ,battle dust (the particles which are created from let's say dropping a grenade on some dusty terrain and then blowing it creates dust particles which react to wind like the first picture shows)breakable trees,a view distance up to 16km,Parametric Skeletal Animation System,Component Vehicle Damage,Time of Day Lighting and fully distructable levels then we may talk about engine optimisation until then it's like comparing tetris to Doom....
Anyway on my 8800GT,E2160 @ 3Ghz and 2 gigs of ram the game is running at 44FPS 1280x1024 with all settings high and ~40FPS when I enable the cheap version of the DX10 light and sunshfats+parralax occlusion mapping + 3D ocean and my PC si worth ~1000 euros not like the beasts of 5000$ which most reviewers say that you need for this game @ high settings.
As for story and gamplay well it's a FPS and it's limited by it's own genre you can't make from a FPS which is (mindless shooting even in Half life because those are the roots of the genre) a RPG or a RTS etc...
http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/768...7bb7sv5.th.jpg
http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/187...61rsxn2.th.jpg
http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/8160/1245ua6.th.jpg
http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/9817/crysisxk5.th.jpg
3D Ocean