Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Guru3D News, Mar 24, 2011.
LMFAO, going to talk about Dx11 for Crysis 2 in the future, its gona be a long wait then
I don't understand the backwards step. Silly consoles, Pc Games are for PC! ...my hardware is sad.
come on guys we will play Crysis 3 at DX12 or it still will be DX9?
Just you wait, they are cooking some awesome DX12 bits for us.
My complaints with the game are minimal.
The FOV when modded is wack. It works fine, but when you do animations like pressing 'x' ( I'm using a gamepad on the PC version; blasphemy I know but it plays awesome just like bulletstorm with a gamepad ) on the spiral tower things so Alcatraz can 'Fist' them his arm aappears to be cut off...as though his entire arm is not actually being rendered in game, or for the animations and so the extra part of his arm you should be able to see as a result of the FOV...is glitched.
It's still worth it for the extra FOV, not having a migraine >>>>>>>>> minor glitch.
My other complaint is the graphics settings and sepcifically that MSAA is forced on the highest mode which is actually used in post processing...so it's basically MLAA and makes the game look blurry as hell
Open in separate tabs on flick between in full size, the textures look like they are triple the res with MSAA off
MSAA forced on
MSAA forced off
So with motion blur and MSAA ( See: MLAA )forced off as well as a modded FOV turned off the game actually looks like a PC game. It also runs at 60 frames constant maxed out.
DX11 is irrelevant. Bulletstorm has amazing lighting and it is DX9, Crysis 2 does not have AS good lighting, but it's not a deal breaker.
Crysis 2 has better AA with just Lapace Edge AA than Mass Effect 2 does with 32CSAA forced on so it's not that bad either.
I'm just sick of games having friggin 4:3 aspect ratios on my 16:9 display.
Crytek have no word. They are liars and only interested in money. Put ten million dollars and they will automatically recover their memory about the DirectX 11 patch. They are crap that does not deserve even a glance!
The game is very good till one reaches the boring bosses, the old-fashioned manner to finish a game. I vanquished the first one in the National Station or something (I don't remember the name)... that building which collapsed in the end. It is all about to find the heavy weaponry scattered over the area. The second boss I met later on (another boring robot) still deactivating my armor by electromagnetic pulses and forcing me to look around in search of more heavy weaponry scattered in the area made me yawn. Yes, I found that weaponry, but "as always", some other minions bothered me in order for me not to hit the target, such as I have seen in many other old games in the past. I tested several times till I quit.
I erased the game from my disk and problem resolved. Really, when a developer resorts to "almost" invincible bosses to challenge you (which amounts to many boring reloads), it is because he is out of ideas. Bosses worked in the past but it is already a tedious way to challenge a gamer. BFBC 2 and Black Ops have better and more modern ways to challenge the gamers without taking him into boredom or frustration. Yes, someone will always say that "You are not good at it", but it is not about being good but about dying/reloading till after half an hour or so one finally is able to kill the boss. Absolutely retarded, specially considering the hype this game had! To play for more than 7 hours just to find boring bosses in the end is just extremely disappointing.
The first Crysis couldn't be comfortably played with the hardware at that time. The second one was just mediocre. The present one is a fraud, graphically speaking, and the gameplay still resorts to old formulas such as boring bosses and weaponry scattered. There will be no Crysis 3 for me, rest assured.
On top of that, this is, graphically speaking, a miserable DirectX 9 game yet in spite of its predecessor being DirectX 10. So much money invested in my hardware for another game with dated graphics. Quite a cheat indeed! This thread about the bitchy Crytek and their lies has been very long uselessly, because that company will keep cheating us. With all the hype I was expecting at lest absence of boring bosses and better ideas to deal with the finale, but I was wrong. Time to close the thread, I suppose.
Wow, that was alot, but whether i agree or not, still have to respect your opinion, as its written very well, and not a one line troll post.
Not sure i agree with the Black Ops, or BC2 single player being better, well i don't as those two games rank as some of the poorest single player games i've played and of no value to anyone but MP gamers, but we all have our likes and dislikes.
I personally aint a fan of boss battles in games, but i wouldn't say this game had much in the way of tough bosses anyway, felt Bulletstorm had tougher bosses, well one in particular anyway.
You may not like it, but i think the game is a far better game that the original, and while not as good visually, is damn close consider how much better it performs, i used to think the claims of Crysis being unoptomized were nonsense, but considering 2x6990 can't run the game without framerate drops to 40fps at times, i've now reconsidered.
The first game looks good, but nowhere near good enough to justify the power it demands, not even close.
i think crysis 2 is Ok not that great
He never said the single players in BFBC2 or BLOPS were better. He just said they had progressed from bosses of old on to different ways to challenge gamers.
And this game is likely no better optimised, if the first was ever badly optimised at all. The link I posted earlier proves that some of the textures in C2 are reused from C1, only with half the resolution.
Whatever the case, C1 still puts out more polygons than any other game I have seen. It may also be badly coded, but you can't deny the fact that C2 is not 3 and a half years better looking than C1. Not even nearly.
To be honest, it isn't a bad game. I am actually enjoying it for the most part. I was expecting more from the graphics, but they don't exactly suck when maxed with the tweak utility. I may even boot up Crysis to see how it compares now. My main gripe is the save system being checkpoints. WTF is this ****?!
So yeh, it isn't a bad game. Hell, I might even stretch to say it is a good game. But it is not a great game, and it is a poor Crysis.
Well gameplay wise its a great Crysis, the first one failed on that part, and while some enjoyed it, the majority didn't.
Many people still like bosses in games, im not one of them, but BC2 and BLOPS are anything but challenging, as i said im not a fan of bosses myself, but i think people are confusing frustrating with bad, which is why we have so many piss easy games these days.
Never said it was better looking than the original, nevermind over 3 years better looking, but if 4 of AMD's top GPU's in 2011 still can't hold a stable framerate in the 2007 game, would people really want the 2011 game to be running at 10-30fps on most peoples systems, and visually i put Metro above Crysis anyway, as Crysis was too inconsistent visually, and i never found a decent mod.
Checkpoints don't bother me as im not a fan of quick save in anything but open world of RPG games, but my neighbour played this on the 360 and was ranting about it to me, well not the checkpoints as such, but the placement of them.
TBH, I liked the gameplay of the first one more than the second one. I can tell that they tried a lot harder this time around to make a compelling story and setting, but I'm just not a fan. I liked having the option of just punching my way through a level for teh lolz in the first one.
I'd never say that it is a bad game. It is not either what Half-Life 2 was at the time, of course. Anyway, I already had to "swallow" the absence of DirectX 11 from the start, despite Crytek publicly announced DirectX 11 would be implemented. This was my first disappointment.
Well, let's play and see what Crysis 2 is made of, I thought. It was an interesting ride for more than 7 hours. I liked how the devs challenged my skills when I had to fight my way through in order to activate those two missile stations and shoot down the dropships. It was a good battle.
Anyway, when I found the first old-styled boss, I thought there would be a sophisticated manner to knock him down because mere C4 wasn't enough. I was about 15 minutes till I realized that the devs had implemented the old formula of search for scattered weaponry, kill his minions and throw all that at the boss. I remember that I defeated Eidolon in Hexen 2 (1997) in the same way: searching weapons, killing minions and throwing all that at the boss. At that time it was acceptable and cool. Now, it is boring and wasted time/energy.
I had to spend other 30 minutes or so trying out till the bitch finally died. I thought to myself, "well, only one boss like that is acceptable, seeing that the previous missions were good", but I was wrong because soon after that mission, I found another boss needing the same strategy to kill him. In the times of Hexen 2, I could tolerate even 5 bosses, but as time passed by I started to use cheats to bypass those sequences in a game, because it is just a matter of trying and trying till one is successful. No big brain or high skills involved in all that.
In this case, and considering that Crysis 2 was going to be the "PC game" par excellence, I decided to quit lest I had to fight a third boss after that one. Stupid decisions made by the devs, really. To make the things worse, I came here and learnt that Crytek "forgot" what they announced about DirectX 11. Not only they didn't develop the game from DirectX 11, but also they won't even release a patch adding DirectX 11 support. At least if they had said the truth: "Look, PC gamers, we went for consoles because we want to make more money. Sorry", but no, they lied directly and now they use the well-known "amnesia" trick to avoid releasing a DirectX 11 patch, which is costly to them, I suppose. No word, no honor, lies and on top of all that: old-fashioned bosses. No thanks.
I don't think they are avoiding releasing a DX11 patch at all, im pretty sure there will be one, i just don't think its ready.
It might be costly for them to release the patch, but they have already been paid $2million by Nvidia, where the hell did that go, no way did Nvidia pay Crytek money just to get a head start on AMD driver wise.
They could of done the same thing with the standard TWIMTBP program for alot less money.
Plus you have to remember it was an Nvidia source that originally leaked the DX9 on release story, and its them who keep adding and removing DX11 support for it on the website.
That one post by Cry-Tom is all that has been said though, and all that denied was that Crytek never confirmed it, no-one denied the existense of it.
Some may say im being overly optimistic, but how many of you honestly believe Nvidia thought Crysis 2 was DX11 up until nearly release day, even though they were paying EA money 6-7months ago.
If Nvidia paid that money, they would of been working on the game since then, you think they just failed to spot it was DX9 only for over 6months.
Secretly, the game is DX11 already, with most programs reporting it as DX9. It's a trick.