Crysis 2 only DX9 - DX11 will be "later" with an update

[biohead]

Crysis sold over a million copies... It was a VERY successful game.

I've played through it countless times, as have pretty much everyone I know that plays PC shooters. We all also have legit copies. We went into the game KNOWING we weren't going to be maxing it out off the bat.

i built a cheap gaming rig for a friend way back with a single 3850 in it. ran crysis on low/medium but still looked good, and he loved the game. i cannot imagine people switching to consoles because they can't max out the graphics on their PCs.

[crash5s]

i built a cheap gaming rig for a friend way back with a single 3850 in it. ran crysis on low/medium but still looked good, and he loved the game. i cannot imagine people switching to consoles because they can't max out the graphics on their PCs.

Some PC games are only good maxed out for people, and that's been a recent trend. Doom 3, Crysis, it's a long list.

Back in the day of MP only, running everything at ultra low gave you a massive advantage so max graphics and high res was for noobs that didn't know how to play. Now, to get the "immersion" factor, you have to max it out.

If you can max out a game, buy it on PC, if not buy it on console and hope the stupid devs get the drift, looks like EPIC and CRYTEK got it, who wants to get whacked with the common sense bat next?

As for consoles, there are plenty of great games on them that aren't rubbish. I've been playing a lot of Demon Souls, Hardcorps, and MVC3 lately, all top notch quality games.

PC gaming has move to all about graphics, so I can completely understand moving away from it if you can't max it out.

Hence piracy and steam sales and demos. Test it, if it can be maxed buy it at launch when it counts, if not, buy it when it's two bucks. No need to pay full price for a product you can't really use.

[Chickenfeed]

If you can max out a game, buy it on PC, if not buy it on console and hope the stupid devs get the dri PC gaming has move to all about graphics, so I can completely understand moving away from it if you can't max it out.

Hence piracy and steam sales and demos. Test it, if it can be maxed buy it at launch when it counts, if not, buy it when it's two bucks. No need to pay full price for a product you can't really use.

I don't feel the same way myself. I'll agree shooters in particular are engaged in a visual arms race so to speak but there plenty of reasons that make the pc platform viable. For me immersion isn't merely down to visual quality but more fidelity. I'm much more prone to tone down visuals for the sake of a high frame rate than best possible image quality at a lower performance level. I'll take a solid 120fps over some eye candy any day of the week but I guess I'm old school that way as I grew up plying cs and quake on crts.

I just got halfway through crysis 2 for the second time and I'm enjoying it much more on medium graphics than my first playthrough on max. I've found the difference of 60-120hz to be night and day over any differences in image quality.

I can appreciate wanting to leverage the potential graphical advantages on pc but to think this is the only reason to gravitate towards it is narrow sighted for the industry. Don't just present me with a prettier 30fps console experience, that's nothing special. Valve have the right idea. Innovative accessible games that perform well and look respectable.

[GoldenTiger]

i built a cheap gaming rig for a friend way back with a single 3850 in it. ran crysis on low/medium but still looked good, and he loved the game. i cannot imagine people switching to consoles because they can't max out the graphics on their PCs.

Yet amazingly, people do... they are stuck on the label of "high" even if "medium" looks better than other games' highest settings.