Yea but I don't think buying all the right parts to handle ultra is worth it, just for graphics. Crysis tries to look real and I'm sure it succeeds at that but I don't think it gives you the feeling of the environment which I consider more important. Killzone 3 has that, you feel the environment for what it is, whether it's snowing, sunny or cloud with grenades flying by. Killzone 2 had that, even Killzone 1 did as well. No game made you feel part of the action like Killzone, even in multiplayer it does this. Crysis doesn't.Xzi said:
Crysis 2 graphics
- Thread starter Schreck157
- Start date
Recommended Videos
my laptop runs crysis high performance with a 20-35 frame rate and i use a 2010 Toshiba satellite it runs perfectly on normal oh and the game is great but it sucks that you cant use split powers like anything with armour would be nice and the nanosuit has to little power to make use of most of it especialy invisible i love the game and im only twenty minutes in so take my word its going to be sweet
Schreck157 said:
http://www.systemrequirementslab.com/cyri/
This site I use to test out my rig to see if I can run a game before i pick it up.They just added Crysis 2.
8GB of RAM is insanely high. I said high-end, not top of the range.starfox444 said:
And about my computer, I can run most of my games at native reso or just under with medium graphics. :/
Its to pretty. :/
I hate how we've become obsessed with graphics looking realistic.
When i saw that BlackOps had accually taken sort of a step back, i squee'd like a little girl.
I like to feel like im playing a videogame. Infact, i play them to get AWAY from realistic things. Like when i rented Medal of Honor.
It was fun, but do you know the reason i didnt buy it? All the dust. The floating crap in the air. It ruins the game for me. I dont need a cloud of dirt hanging in my line of sight for 5 minutes.
I hate how we've become obsessed with graphics looking realistic.
When i saw that BlackOps had accually taken sort of a step back, i squee'd like a little girl.
I like to feel like im playing a videogame. Infact, i play them to get AWAY from realistic things. Like when i rented Medal of Honor.
It was fun, but do you know the reason i didnt buy it? All the dust. The floating crap in the air. It ruins the game for me. I dont need a cloud of dirt hanging in my line of sight for 5 minutes.
If you think those are high, you really don't want to see what it takes to run the original Crysis. Also, those are the minimum requirements. Running it on them would work, but not very well.Schreck157 said:
I'm all for the "Graphics don't make a game!" mentality (I am currently playing Minecraft, and Deus Ex, circa 2001)............but if every game that wanted to be realistic looked that good and everyone had hardware capable of running it (Consoles included).........would it really be a bad thing?
No! says the man! (but the games still ahve to have an immersive world, good story, and (preferentially) good Characters.
Also, do i need to play Crysis one to play 2? Is the story pick-up-able? My PC might be able to run Crysis.
No! says the man! (but the games still ahve to have an immersive world, good story, and (preferentially) good Characters.
Also, do i need to play Crysis one to play 2? Is the story pick-up-able? My PC might be able to run Crysis.
In the first set of pictures, would someone like to explain to me how Crysis looks BETTER than real life?Xzi said:Depends on your preferred graphical style, to be sure. But if you're looking for realistic graphics without the boring realistic gameplay, Crysis is the way to go.ultrachicken said:
Even if you aim for hyperrealism, though, there are still stylistic choices you can make to make something visually more interesting. Even things such as framing of distant objects from the viewpoint of various level areas. An example of a game that does this really well in a city is Halo 3: ODST; in the nighttime city streets areas, you have the close-by high buildings that of course look different as you move about, but in one direction a little ways off, you are ALWAYS being stared down by a triangular cluster of ominous buildings. It manages to evoke this oppressive all-seeing eye effect while remaining realistic (insofar as Halo's cities are "realistic", anyway). No violation of hyperrealism is necessary to do things like that.Xzi said:
But the Crysis 2 trailer doesn't seem to have much such artistic flair. Granted, it's hard to tell given the editing and whatnot, but it certainly wasn't emphasized at all.
Admitedly, working such considerations in can probably be difficult when you have an extremely large area that can be poked at by the player, since it throws many methods of framing out the window. I can't fault Crysis 2 for it if they did run into such issues, though I'd still argue that, if the game generally has the aesthetic feel as seen in the trailer, I probably wouldn't personally wind up valuing it all that highly from an aesthetic standpoint.
It's all about art style and the game didn't' really wow me graphics wise.kouriichi said:
It's not like a huge jump or anything.
Then again, I think that the more vertical landscape of a city will provide a lot more interesting gameplay than Crysis 1's jungle. I think that's a more than worthy trade-off.Xzi said:
Anyway, I reckon that Crysis 2 won't be nearly a ***** to run as Crysis 2. The fact that it's on consoles now should help and I hope that they've optimised the engine a lot better than in Crysis 1.
That said, I can run Crysis 1 on maxed settings on my native reso with ease. Just bought a new 800-ish euros machine, should last me quite a while. Crysis 2 doesn't worry me that much, though I'd like a demo.
I have an i7 950 and two gts 25o's....i will cry if i cant play this game...completed the first one on my old rig (2*8800GT and a quadcore)...crysis war was too samey, but htis looks like the bomb.
No crysis 2 on pre-order on steam...WTF??!!
No crysis 2 on pre-order on steam...WTF??!!