Crysis Warhead dropping exclusively on PC this Fall

[nsidious]

fact is that nvidia cards are faster, i don't know how they cheAted with their drivers...

fact is that nvidia pays publishers in this case crytek to optimize their games for the nvidia engine no question you will get the best possible performance in crysis with Nv gpu's

[.Tret]

fact is that nvidia pays publishers in this case crytek to optimize their games for the nvidia engine no question you will get the best possible performance in crysis with Nv gpu's

Could you provide proof for that "fact"?

[RAW-Raptor22]

Could you provide proof for that "fact"?

The fact that so many games have the nVidia "The way its meant to be played" right on the box. Meaning that nVidia had the game designed to their architecture.

[Donnie27]

fact is that nvidia pays publishers in this case crytek to optimize their games for the nvidia engine no question you will get the best possible performance in crysis with Nv gpu's

Hehehe, then nVidia should ask them for their money back LOL!j/k

Of course they pay and AMD can't while struggling for money. It amazes me that Fans futile attempts in the CPU markets to influence folks. Then in the Discrete Video card market where they can influence the market they accept the inedible when it comes to nVidia. I never say never but it will be desparate times before I buy anything from nVidia. IMHO they are the biggest scumbags of all.

[Starscream]

the way its meant to be played means that a game is developed to use the Nvidia architekture to its fullest. To use its features etc.

Due to that those games usualy run great on Nvidia hardware when released and poorly on the competitors hardware.

The competition can however close that gap with drivers but they usually need a month or 2 to close that gap.

SHortly after release of the game the game gets tested on Nvidia and GPUs and AMD GPUs and the game then usualy shows the best scores on Nvidia afterwich tons of people buy Nvidia hardware for the game.

1 or 2 months later AMD closes the gap but by that time Nvidia has already sold their extra hardware and the game sales have also slowed down.


TWIMTBP is simply to have a short increase in hardware sales. and sometimes to push a new feature that only your product has (like SM3.0)

[n!Cola]

New details about Crytek's PC shooter follow-up Crysis Warhead have surfaced in monthly gaming magazine PC Gamer . According to the preview, the possibility of a Crysis 2 relies heavily on Crysis Warhead's performance at the market. While the title isn't necessarily a true sequel, the developers stressed that Warhead is a completely stand-alone, full title. Here's a summary:

- Begins when the original game's Nomad character parts ways with Warhead's new hero, Psycho, and follows him all the way until the two are to reunite again on board the aircraft carrier.
- Mostly located on the other side of the island.
- Less linear approach and more sandbox type of gameplay, as opposed to the original.
- Same nanosuit and the same functions, with more likely to be revealed later (definitely a "surprise" in that matter is promised).
- Singleplayer campaign to last 8-10 hours.
- At least two new weapons, the granade launcher and double SMG.
- Improved enemy AI, betterily able to organize itself and follow tactics.
- New vehicles incl. Armored Scout Recon (about the size of a jeep with a mounted gun) and a hovercraft, both playable in multiplayer as well.
- New team-based MP mode and less complex than the original two.
- Betterily optimized to run faster than the original game on the same hardware.
- Won't require DX10 for maximum details and full effects.
- Dialogues done by Bioshock's Susanna O'Connor.
- Completely stand-alone and as noted by developers, not an add-on but a full title.
- The possibility of Crysis 2 to rely heavily on Warhead's sales.

source + gallery
http://games.tiscali.cz/news/news.asp?id=28147

[Donnie27]

New details about Crytek's PC shooter follow-up Crysis Warhead have surfaced in monthly gaming magazine PC Gamer . According to the preview, the possibility of a Crysis 2 relies heavily on Crysis Warhead's performance at the market. While the title isn't necessarily a true sequel, the developers stressed that Warhead is a completely stand-alone, full title. Here's a summary:

- Begins when the original game's Nomad character parts ways with Warhead's new hero, Psycho, and follows him all the way until the two are to reunite again on board the aircraft carrier.
- Mostly located on the other side of the island.
- Less linear approach and more sandbox type of gameplay, as opposed to the original.
- Same nanosuit and the same functions, with more likely to be revealed later (definitely a "surprise" in that matter is promised).
- Singleplayer campaign to last 8-10 hours.
- At least two new weapons, the granade launcher and double SMG.
- Improved enemy AI, betterily able to organize itself and follow tactics.
- New vehicles incl. Armored Scout Recon (about the size of a jeep with a mounted gun) and a hovercraft, both playable in multiplayer as well.
- New team-based MP mode and less complex than the original two.
- Betterily optimized to run faster than the original game on the same hardware.
- Won't require DX10 for maximum details and full effects.
- Dialogues done by Bioshock's Susanna O'Connor.
- Completely stand-alone and as noted by developers, not an add-on but a full title.
- The possibility of Crysis 2 to rely heavily on Warhead's sales.

source + gallery
http://games.tiscali.cz/news/news.asp?id=28147

Sounds GREAT!

[kryptobs2000]

I'm disappointing to hear it won't require DX10 for full effects. What this tells me is it doesn't take advantage of DX10 at all more than likely. You can already do the above with Crysis, just not through the menu. Make some real DX10(.1) games guys, cmon! And only 8-10 hours of gameplay? I somehow doubt they're being modest too lol. Oh well, I'll buy it either way, I hope there's a Crysis 2.

[mikeyakame]

Warhead HD 40sec In-Game Teaser

http://www.gamershell.com/download_28274.shtml

Edit:

It's looking nice, that snow-ski/hydroplane type vehicle might be interesting!

[STaRGaZeR]

So this is not Crysis 2? They want me to pay for Crysis, Crysis Warhead, Crysis 2, Crysis xxxx, Crysis yyyy and Crysis 3?

[Kai Robinson]

I wonder if they'll ever backport the engine to Crysis....if its really improved that is.

[DilTech]

So this is not Crysis 2? They want me to pay for Crysis, Crysis Warhead, Crysis 2, Crysis xxxx, Crysis yyyy and Crysis 3?

This is more or less a test run... If sales are poor, it's the end of crytek PC exclusives.

Literally, this is more-or-less telling people pirate this and you lose one of the last PC only developers.

[Luka_Aveiro]

This is more or less a test run... If sales are poor, it's the end of crytek PC exclusives.

Literally, this is more-or-less telling people pirate this and you lose one of the last PC only developers.

I will be buying it, i bought Crysis and i will buy Crysis Warhead.

[Kai Robinson]

I bought Crysis, so i'll be purchasing this.

[Knight]

What type of practice is it to drop support on Crysis and move onto a new game? How big of a factor was EA in all of this?

At least EA and DICE didn't drop support right away for BF2 when its expansion packs and 2142 came out. (A new BF2 patch is going to come out soon.)

Well time will tell if Crytec will make good on this release. (I liked Crysis, but dropping patch support early on is a big bummer.)

[Krushnburnz]

Well i was just building my rig to play crysis when i noticed this thread lol. Guess i've wasted money on some hardware :|. Prepare to buy Nehalem 2000$ cpu's and quad-sli gtx 280s to be able to at least run this game on high I remember when crysis came out there was no hardware to play it maxxed out, i doubt they've learned anything from that. U're saying they've only sold 3 million copies ? Well i'm somehow doubting there are 3 million computers right now worldwide able to play crysis at highest res+ very high details. I'm not spending money on a game that i will probably never be able to play smoothly @max res +max details without selling a kidney to buy hardware. I somehow consider they should start developing 3d benchmarks instead of games, i guess they would be better at that, or at least start taking some coding lessons from valve...

[DilTech]

Well i was just building my rig to play crysis when i noticed this thread lol. Guess i've wasted money on some hardware :|. Prepare to buy Nehalem 2000$ cpu's and quad-sli gtx 280s to be able to at least run this game on high I remember when crysis came out there was no hardware to play it maxxed out, i doubt they've learned anything from that. U're saying they've only sold 3 million copies ? Well i'm somehow doubting there are 3 million computers right now worldwide able to play crysis at highest res+ very high details. I'm not spending money on a game that i will probably never be able to play smoothly @max res +max details without selling a kidney to buy hardware. I somehow consider they should start developing 3d benchmarks instead of games, i guess they would be better at that, or at least start taking some coding lessons from valve...

I'm not sure where your spiel comes from... Coding lessons from valve? It's 2008, and valve still hasn't even figured out what real time unified per-pixel lighting and shadows is, which we've seen done since doom 3!

When HL2 finally came out, it was a generation behind the heavy hitters known as Far Cry and Doom 3 technologically and visually. Some may argue with that, if that wasn't the case then why was it when people imported HL2 maps into the doom 3 engine it looked 10 times better? Meanwhile, they tried Doom 3 and Far cry maps on source, and it looked like crap...

Simple, because HL2 worked so well for older comps because it was in the making for 6+ years! Obviously, it was optimized for older hardware for that reason.

Would you rather crysis look better as time goes on, or would you rather have had the maximum settings in crysis have been medium/high just so you could feel better because you could max it out? Seriously, when doom 3 came out in 2005, you couldn't run Very high without stuttering unless you had a 512mb card, which wasn't a normal thing until the 7800GTX 512mb or X1800XT 512mb, but no one raised nearly the stink people have about crysis...

Personally, I'm glad the game is as hard to max as it is, means I'll have a reason to go back to it next time I upgrade, unlike anything by valve which I haven't played since I beat them in the 5-8 hours each of their titles take.

Also, incase you didn't know...Most gamers play at 1280x1024, and really don't mind if they can't max out a title. They're happy just to be able to play it, and crysis does scale well as you lower the settings.

[DevilMayCry]

Well i was just building my rig to play crysis when i noticed this thread lol. Guess i've wasted money on some hardware :|. Prepare to buy Nehalem 2000$ cpu's and quad-sli gtx 280s to be able to at least run this game on high I remember when crysis came out there was no hardware to play it maxxed out, i doubt they've learned anything from that. U're saying they've only sold 3 million copies ? Well i'm somehow doubting there are 3 million computers right now worldwide able to play crysis at highest res+ very high details. I'm not spending money on a game that i will probably never be able to play smoothly @max res +max details without selling a kidney to buy hardware. I somehow consider they should start developing 3d benchmarks instead of games, i guess they would be better at that, or at least start taking some coding lessons from valve...

Maybe they should have released a castrated version of Crysis called "Crysis - Krushnburnz Edition (We've removed the very high settings so now you can say 'I can play crysis maxed')"

And as for all this Valve love, when Half life 2 was released, steam was a total mess and the game had serious stuttering issues for lots of users who had spent $$$ on their leet machines, the infamous stuttering bug.

[RAW-Raptor22]

I'm not sure where your spiel comes from... Coding lessons from valve? It's 2008, and valve still hasn't even figured out what real time unified per-pixel lighting and shadows is, which we've seen done since doom 3!

When HL2 finally came out, it was a generation behind the heavy hitters known as Far Cry and Doom 3 technologically and visually. Some may argue with that, if that wasn't the case then why was it when people imported HL2 maps into the doom 3 engine it looked 10 times better? Meanwhile, they tried Doom 3 and Far cry maps on source, and it looked like crap...

Simple, because HL2 worked so well for older comps because it was in the making for 6+ years! Obviously, it was optimized for older hardware for that reason.

Would you rather crysis look better as time goes on, or would you rather have had the maximum settings in crysis have been medium/high just so you could feel better because you could max it out? Seriously, when doom 3 came out in 2005, you couldn't run Very high without stuttering unless you had a 512mb card, which wasn't a normal thing until the 7800GTX 512mb or X1800XT 512mb, but no one raised nearly the stink people have about crysis...

Personally, I'm glad the game is as hard to max as it is, means I'll have a reason to go back to it next time I upgrade, unlike anything by valve which I haven't played since I beat them in the 5-8 hours each of their titles take.

Also, incase you didn't know...Most gamers play at 1280x1024, and really don't mind if they can't max out a title. They're happy just to be able to play it, and crysis does scale well as you lower the settings.

I remember beating FarCry with my 6600GT with Ultra settings 1280x1024 2xAA. 45FPS... 587/1168... that was an awesome little beast.

</reminiscing>

[Krushnburnz]

Ok i appologize if my post upset anyone. What i was trying to say was that when HL2 appeared it set a new standard in graphics, just like HL1 did. It had incredible graphics and was scaling very well with older/budget rigs. I remember i played HL2 when it showed up on a sempron 2400+/fx5500 256 mb 128 bit/1gb ddr pc3200 in 1280x1024 all high 4x aa and it was smooth. I didn't even think i would have been able to play it but i installed it anyway and i was shocked how well it was running. I would rather have a crysis once every few years scaling well with older/low budget rigs and an incredibly well built story, then a crysis every 1 year with almost no story, bad scaling, hardware killer. I'm the type that either playes the game for its story disregarding graphics, or play the game for the graphics if story sux. Buying a game that lacks story-wise + i can't play it maxed out on actual hardware unless i have a nuclear reactor in my rig to hold quad sli gpu and xxxx$ cpu doesn't sound like a good investment. Ofc i'm saying this because i'm not swimming in money. I know there are some ppl that will afford buying a rig each time a crysis appears, but then when you consider the price for a game it should be game price+rig price, so you actually pay 50$+xxxx$.
Again though i appologize if my post has upset anyone, i'm not a valve fanboy and i don't have anything with EA or their games. I actually loved alot of their games, i just think crysis is better as a benchmark then a game.

[Decami]

Ok i appologize if my post upset anyone. What i was trying to say was that when HL2 appeared it set a new standard in graphics, just like HL1 did. It had incredible graphics and was scaling very well with older/budget rigs. I remember i played HL2 when it showed up on a sempron 2400+/fx5500 256 mb 128 bit/1gb ddr pc3200 in 1280x1024 all high 4x aa and it was smooth. I didn't even think i would have been able to play it but i installed it anyway and i was shocked how well it was running. I would rather have a crysis once every few years scaling well with older/low budget rigs and an incredibly well built story, then a crysis every 1 year with almost no story, bad scaling, hardware killer. I'm the type that either playes the game for its story disregarding graphics, or play the game for the graphics if story sux. Buying a game that lacks story-wise + i can't play it maxed out on actual hardware unless i have a nuclear reactor in my rig to hold quad sli gpu and xxxx$ cpu doesn't sound like a good investment. Ofc i'm saying this because i'm not swimming in money. I know there are some ppl that will afford buying a rig each time a crysis appears, but then when you consider the price for a game it should be game price+rig price, so you actually pay 50$+xxxx$.
Again though i appologize if my post has upset anyone, i'm not a valve fanboy and i don't have anything with EA or their games. I actually loved alot of their games, i just think crysis is better as a benchmark then a game.

The best way to explain this is Crysis is built on CryEngine2 engine, taht is what is demanding on hardware is the game engine, that isnt going to change unless they change it, which is not happening anytime soon. Meaning everytime a sequel releases it doesn't get any more demanding on hardware than the last game, but hardware does get stronger by the month.

The game is not gonna choke hardware everytime they release a game, they released this engine ahead of time for hype and coverage and to push hardware boundaries. But they are not gonna release a new CryEngine every year that chokes hardware, that would idiotic. You have got the complete wrong idea, your not gonna have to buy a new rig everytime a Crysis releases, the engine doesnt get anymore demanding just by adding a number after the name Crysis. By the way, CryEngine2 is not that bad at scaling, its just ahead of its time.

The problem (for some) is not how CryEngine2 was released, it is when it was released. If CryEngine2 was released 1-2 years from now, people praising valve and source engine would be praising CryEngine2, and there would be no debate. Someone wanted to push the envelope and got smacked for it. The game was not all that great though, it was...ok. HL2 was great, but a little too.....linear, but that was gaming back then, so cant blame them.

[bowman]

I'm buying it. Crysis was fun up until the alien mothership bit. That bit was too long. Then there was the whole 'use alien gun' bit which was a bit annoying, and then VTOL which was about as much use as a mosquito in a tornado.

There won't be any motherships in this one and the rest, let's just hope they've taken some feedback.

[Decami]

I'm buying it. Crysis was fun up until the alien mothership bit. That bit was too long. Then there was the whole 'use alien gun' bit which was a bit annoying, and then VTOL which was about as much use as a mosquito in a tornado.

There won't be any motherships in this one and the rest, let's just hope they've taken some feedback.

I liked the mothership part, floating in Zero-G, could have been done better though, gameplay wise. It reminded me of that movie Fire in the Sky, if anyone has seen that, which was really neat. The mothership part needed more physics in play, taht would have made it a bit more fun.

[bowman]

I liked the mothership part, floating in Zero-G, could have been done better though, gameplay wise. It reminded me of that movie Fire in the Sky, if anyone has seen that, which was really neat. The mothership part needed more physics in play, taht would have made it a bit more fun.

It was neat the first minutes, but they drew it out too long and the alien enemies were just plain annoying. Running out of ammo and having to battle fast wishy aliens with your fists was quite annoying too.

[Hornet331]

It was neat the first minutes, but they drew it out too long and the alien enemies were just plain annoying. Running out of ammo and having to battle fast wishy aliens with your fists was quite annoying too.

lol?

i have come out with more ammo from the mothership then i entered with.