Pc is dying and pc game is dead. Why spcend millions to make a pc game when you can spend thousands to make farmville for much higher profit
Printable View
Pc is dying and pc game is dead. Why spcend millions to make a pc game when you can spend thousands to make farmville for much higher profit
You guys are funny and are making my day. I understand the general whining about Crysis 2 (being a console port, controls etc etc) but this DX11 whining is just funny.
You would think that Crysis 1 ACTUALLY NEEDED DX10 to look as good as it did... and it wasn't laughably easy to hack it with a text file to bring 99% of its "DX10" features to DX9...
DX10? DX11? Who cares? How many super looking games are there that take advantage of DX10 or 11? Metro 2033? Yeah, right.
Pardon me if I am wrong but since DX9, there has been nothing in the gaming scene that actually used DX10 or 11-exclusive features to really make a difference and make your jaw drop, save some tech demos and benchmarks. That being as it is, it is wildly funny that people are crying over the lack of DX11. As if you don't know that the addition of DX11 will absolutely not bring any significant (read: noticeable) differences.
As far as I can remember, no one from the Crytek team ever said that the game would smash the graphics bar once again like Crysis 1 had done. Instead, all of them pointed towards a game that wouldn't look any better or worse than Crysis 1, AND CRYSIS 1 WAS DX9, and both of those facts have been well known for a long time, especially by you guys at Xtremesystems. What are all of you ranting about now?
There are so many stupid things about ranting because Crysis 2 won't initially have DX11 that my mind = blown. You are the GPU-savvy guys who saw the release of DX10 and DX11 and should know better than anybody else that games with new DX features tacked on them have no noticeable differences... especially games that are not exclusive to the PC (read: EVERY DAMN GAME) gosh, I can't continue. I am overwhelmed. /endRant1
Also I played Crysis 2 demo and hated the controls (an area in which the first game excelled), the game will definitely suck on PC but will be a good one for the consoles, and all the reviews about it including the PC review will praise the game (Gamespot rating: 8.5) because EA is just big and apparently the reviews are made by 13 year old kids who can't notice if the controls are tight or not since they use 219391 mouse sensitivity for the PC. God, how much all those console ports suck at controls (GO TO HELL BIOSHOCK 1 AND 2) and none of the big-name reviewing sites even mention this. /endRant2
All I know is I was looking forward to seeing a Crytek version of actual rounded objects with the use of Tessellation. Like in the Unigine demo, with tessellation turned off the ropes looked basic and flat, with it turned on it was incredible, and the ropes looked and 'felt' real and fully rounded. Then there is the DX11 Endless City demo from NVIDIA themselves which also showed some pretty kwl stuff that I was looking forward to especially in Crysis 2. I'll never raise my expectations that high again I guess. Cross platform needs DX9 support therefore we will be forever held back from technological advancement, and PC graphics would be developed a lot more if it weren't for these stupid consoles. Screw multi-platform releases. Look at WOW, you don't need multi-platform releases to make oodles of money, just good, addictive ideas.
Because of the :banana::banana::banana::banana:ty console ports like this.Quote:
Originally Posted by hurrdurr
Tessellation to start with. Performance, also.Quote:
Originally Posted by hurrdurr
Benefits from the newer APIs are not always meant to affect end-users in a straight manner. Don't forget the developer's side of the story. Advancing technologies present better ways for them to create and manage the content -- spending less valuable time on trivial and rudimentary tasks, and focusing more on actual gameplay development and richer environments. In the end, it all comes down to us, as better overall experience.
You need at least DX10 for AA in games using deferred rendering. Who cares about AA though, right? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by hurrdurr
Next PC games will be getting held back to DX8.1 to support cross-platform capabilities with smart-phones, and people will still be saying, far out they're even smarter. When in fact, if someone like Crytek did work with DX11 fully it could clearly be graphically superior if they invested the time into it :explode:
didnt see it posted:
Crysis 2 demo, SLi profile update for 267.24 beta
http://www.nvidia.com/object/nvidia-...v7-driver.html
and yes it actually works lol
:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by fellix_bg
DX10/11 does provide a few advantages, but if Crytek has pulled off real time GI and good postprocessing in DX9 that makes them extra commendable. They're one of the better technical guys around.
Nerds with so little brain capacity to not realize their hypocrisy of buying $4-500 graphics cards and refusing to get a $35 game won't care though. They'll just look at the DX numbars!
http://uk.pc.ign.com/articles/115/1153248p1.html
Have you downloaded the Crysis 2 multiplayer demo and tried to adjust the visuals? We asked Crytek about the scaled back graphical options in its upco...
They didnt get much of reply though... :(
Traditional hardware MSAA isn't possible in DX9 on a deferred engine but there are other options like Crytek has proven. Their AA combination of post-processing and temporal jittering looks really good in DX9.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vardant
In general DX10/11 don't make things "possible", just faster and more efficient. There are certain things that become practical in DX9 simply because of the raw horsepower available and obviously through very clever tricks from developers too. The progression of graphics quality on the PS3 is evidence of how much progress you can make just by coming up with new tricks and optimizations.
Complaints solely about the API are silly. There are DX11 games that look much worse than Crysis 2. The things that really matter, like gameplay or map sizes are fair game though.
Article source lost to me a long time ago from TechSpot -
"Crytek believes that because developers are focusing on the PS3 and the 360, the game quality on the PC is being held back. This is happening despite the company saying that the PC is already "a generation ahead" of Sony's and Microsoft's consoles.
Crytek is currently working on Crysis 2 for all three platforms. The original Crysis was an exclusive for the PC. That being said, Crytek has already stated that Crysis 2 will be graphically superior on the PC.
http://static.techspot.com/images/teaser/crytek.jpg
"As long as the current console generation exists and as long as we keep pushing the PC as well, the more difficult it will be to really get the benefit of both," Cevat Yerli, founder, CEO, and President of Crytek, told the latest issue of Edge, according to CVG. "PC is easily a generation ahead right now. With 360 and PS3, we believe the quality of the games beyond Crysis 2 and other CryEngine developments will be pretty much limited to what their creative expressions is, what the content is. You won't be able to squeeze more juice from these rocks."
Developers have very low sales expectations for the PC, compared to consoles. It's a vicious cycle: the PC market doesn't give the same revenue as the console market, so companies don't spend much on the PC version of a game. This is certainly true for games like Unreal Tournament 3: it would have been much better had it been released as a PC exclusive."
http://www.techspot.com/news/41323-c...g-it-back.html
Funny isn't it.. in the mean time we have news that PC-Gaming market is constantly growing...
But on the other hand... when a sale of 2million untis is considered "medicore" you know why they are all :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana:ing pc gaming is dying.
Seems no matter their excuse, company's are making more and more money on PC gaming each year. All the while taking it easy and NOT developing as much advanced tech for the PC games as possible like they should, as they can just dip into all the extra sales made on consoles. Greed at it's finest.
Crysis 2 PC vs 360.
pics here
http://www.incrysis.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=32681
originally from here:
http://www.gamesaktuell.de/Crysis-2-...gleich-814323/
unfortunately comparing absolutely nothing useful.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip_J_Fry
It all just depends whether you believe that the multiplayer with maybe scaled back options, maybe incomplete engine is going to be in the final game which we don't even know if it has gone gold yet.
Everyone's dramatic cancel preordering is based on <90 degree FOV, "start" instead of "any key" and some rumors which might come down to Crysis 2 not having tesselation to begin with (but might have DX11 fully implemented otherwise). (seriously try and find an actual source for this DX9 thing which isn't a single swedish website)
Course that is giving much benefit of the doubt to crytek (maybe more accurately EA).
If they ran out of time cause EA pushed them to release. Well that's no one's fault except the business division.
Oh dear god!Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip_J_Fry
The 360 version actually looks better to me. More crisp and clear and none of that crappy dust/blurring going on.
The only thing the pc shots have that's nice is a good background in the distance and some AA.
well according to nvidia:
http://www.geforce.com/#/Optimize/Gu...s-2-benchmarks
and the option screen looks exactly like the demo. this is an outrage. Crytek might as well just say "screw all you PC gamers!" in an official statement/press conferenceQuote:
For our benchmark we ran through Crysis 2's "Battery Park" single-player level on a near-finished build of the game, using in-game scripting to keep the benchmark uniform and repeatable.
Hey, wait till somebody claims to have tagged the "PC" and "XSux" in the wrong screenshot...:D J.K..Quote:
Originally Posted by N19h7m4r3
Seems like some kind of "Bloom" enabled in there...:confused:
...Oh wait, that was HDR vs. Bloom settings in TES4:Oblivion.
This is just lame, not what I expected compared to the original Crysis.
I hope Crytek/EA are watching the preorder sales plummet following the announcement of no Tessellation and as peole all slowly realise the PC version of Crysis 2 looks WORSE than Warhead. Should paint a clear enough picture for them one would hope.
Oh, come on. It doesn't look worse than Warhead. That's like the overreaction about the "starting screen". Batman AA had it too, but it was still a great PC game.
The Console looks far worse, take a closer look at the textures and ofc like mentioned AA.
The crisper look is a bit weird though, but probably can be tweaked with brightness and contrast on your screen.
Edit: Wait a minute, the crisper look is probably just because the 360 version has depth of field disabled.
TV you mean :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kallenator
PC X360 Comparison
http://www.abload.de/thumb/crysis_2_..._360_v6jjt.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/crysis_2_..._360_voj8h.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/crysis_2_..._360_vojgw.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/crysis_2_..._360_v6jps.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/crysis_2_..._360_v9k27.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/crysis_2_..._360_vs8bv.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/crysis_2_..._360_vajqg.jpg http://www.abload.de/thumb/crysis_2_..._360_vh8j4.jpg
http://www.gamesaktuell.de/Crysis-2-...gleich-814323/