I can play this on max with my dads computer and it is beautiful.
His specs are like
Quad Core CPU
Radeon HD 2900 XT (2x in SLI)
4 gig ram 1066 mhz
1000 watt PSU
direct x10 and Vista ultiamte
(Dont remember the exact specs)
It's sex i love Crysis, i'll take some sceens later though.
On my PC i just get it to run smoothly on low only though.
I can play this on max with my dads computer and it is beautiful.
His specs are like
Quad Core CPU
Radeon HD 2900 XT (2x in SLI)
4 gig ram 1066 mhz
1000 watt PSU
direct x10 and Vista ultiamte
(Dont remember the exact specs)
It's sex i love Crysis, i'll take some sceens later though.
On my PC i just get it to run smoothly on low only though.
At what 10FPS? No current range PC can play this at true 'Max' at anything above 15fps atm, even dual 8800 Ultras and the new QX.
Runs nicely on my Q6600, 8800Gt though.
Now now, no need to snap at the guy.I can play this on max with my dads computer and it is beautiful.
His specs are like
Quad Core CPU
Radeon HD 2900 XT (2x in SLI)
4 gig ram 1066 mhz
1000 watt PSU
direct x10 and Vista ultiamte
(Dont remember the exact specs)
It's sex i love Crysis, i'll take some sceens later though.
On my PC i just get it to run smoothly on low only though.
At what 10FPS? No current range PC can play this at true 'Max' at anything above 15fps atm, even dual 8800 Ultras and the new QX.
Runs nicely on my Q6600, 8800Gt though.
1. Shut the fuck up
2. Read my post in the other stupid ass thread http://gbatemp.net/index.php?showtopic=66405&st=15
If he says 15fps to "true max" he has no idea what it means
Half Life 2 on the xbox was abysmal
It would take a lot of work to get the engine working on a console, it's brand new
A bunch of technical obstacles come in the way of such a port. RAM limitations, for example.graphics > gameplay for this game. cause it's not any different than other fpses. oh yeah, u have different armour boosts, but all they do is mimic what Warcraft 3 mod did for Counter Strike years ago... very fun.
I thought it was a step above most FPSes in terms of gameplay, with level design that allowed for different approaches to getting past map obstacles and completing objectives. This makes the flow of the game seem more natural, compared to most linear FPSes in which you feel more like you're attempting to figure out the mindset of the guy who designed the level rather than completing whatever objective you may have at hand.
QUOTEI seriously don't see why they can't just port this game to a console.
VVoltz said:I seriously don't see why they can't just port this game to a console.
A bunch of technical obstacles come in the way of such a port. RAM limitations, for example.
The Far Cry Xbox port would be a good example of what a Crysis port would turn out like. Scaled down and no longer remarkable from a technical perspective.
I guess you didn't get at all the segment of my post you quoted. "Technical" doesn't just encompass graphics, but all technical aspects of the game. Physics, AI, you name it. It's possible you'd see even more scaling back in those areas as they do not lend themselves as much to the kind of RISC architectures you see in game consoles.VVoltz said:I seriously don't see why they can't just port this game to a console.
A bunch of technical obstacles come in the way of such a port. RAM limitations, for example.
The Far Cry Xbox port would be a good example of what a Crysis port would turn out like. Scaled down and no longer remarkable from a technical perspective.
So this game is all about the graphics?
Probably not, I'm guessing the engine has some pretty decent stuff on top of that, like physics and AI.
My point is, that if they make the game a lot uglier, it should play the same, kinda like Max Payne on the PS2, terrible port graphic wise, but the gameplay was the same, I enjoyed it very much.
What I realized just now is that it is published by EA, so be very sure will be seeing this baby on a console no later than next year.
I guess you didn't get at all the segment of my post you quoted. "Technical" doesn't just encompass graphics, but all technical aspects of the game. Physics, AI, you name it.VVoltz said:I seriously don't see why they can't just port this game to a console.
A bunch of technical obstacles come in the way of such a port. RAM limitations, for example.
The Far Cry Xbox port would be a good example of what a Crysis port would turn out like. Scaled down and no longer remarkable from a technical perspective.
So this game is all about the graphics?
Probably not, I'm guessing the engine has some pretty decent stuff on top of that, like physics and AI.
My point is, that if they make the game a lot uglier, it should play the same, kinda like Max Payne on the PS2, terrible port graphic wise, but the gameplay was the same, I enjoyed it very much.
What I realized just now is that it is published by EA, so be very sure will be seeing this baby on a console no later than next year.
True, but questionable.
No machine can run Crysis at 100% right now... graphically.
So, if the lesser machines can handle "the rest" with lower resolutions and less detail on the textures, why a 360 or a PS3 not?
All I'm saying is that the statement "This cannot be ported to a console" is not only a lie, but a mean to sell more copies, at least right now.
lulz.*wipes jiz off screen* wow those are amazing.
But Crysis has a lot of objects - it's easy to adjust everything, but on medium settings it still uses over 1GB of ram
And if "100%" = all settings "Very High" than yes, there are. I'm forcing some of the DX10 effects and have high water/textures/models/particles medium shadows/PP and it runs great