Crysis 2

[era81]

The new setting is New York and it is on the pc,ps3 and the 360. Would anyone else who didn't get a chance to play the original prefer the original be released before the sequel on the consoles? Or am I the only one who didn't play it yet?

 

[Contextualizer]

I'm a huge fan of the multiplayer in Crysis; I can't wait to see it in massive sprawling urban environments.

 

[Korten12]

The new setting is New York and it is on the pc,ps3 and the 360. Would anyone else who didn't get a chance to play the original prefer the original be released before the sequel on the consoles? Or am I the only one who didn't play it yet?

wait what? since when did they announce the new setting. link.

 

[era81]

http://kotaku.com/5453079/crysis-2-welcomes-you-to-a-new-jungle-new-york-city
Sorry about that I forgot the link. And the reply button too.

 

[Contextualizer]

The weird thing is, it doesn't seem to look as good as Crysis 1. Ah well, worth a look.

You never know, Crytek might actually manage to not fuck up the last 3rd of one of their games.

Wait, what? What have you seen that no one else has seen?

 

[JoGribbs]

Crytek UK (formerly Free Radical Design) are working on this, so I'm cautiously looking forward to it. I'm also hoping that going bankrupt, losing most of their key development staff, being bought out by a larger studio and having to work on a franchise that isn't theirs hasn't negatively effected their output.

Considering their last release was Haze, it's gonna be hard for them to do any worse.

 

[Razvelius]

I'm probably gonna pick up a console version.My pc exploded in my face when I tried to run the first part,so I'm definately not gonna do that again.

 

[Arbitrary Cidin]

They couldn't put it on consoles if they wanted to. The kind of power-house PC you need for Crysis and Crysis Warhead goes beyond even the PS3. At best, you'd get a dumbed down version, or have to wait until next gen, same as with Half-Life 2.

 

[shadow skill]

Well scaling back is good, they don't need to make a PC version that needs a computer from a year and a half in the future in order to play without bringing your computer to it's knees. I wonder how the console version will fair, I hope the controls are fully mappable like on the PC. (In all likelyhood I will just get the PC version since I have a machine that can run Crysis without dying with everything set just below maximum.)

 

[era81]

They couldn't put it on consoles if they wanted to. The kind of power-house PC you need for Crysis and Crysis Warhead goes beyond even the PS3. At best, you'd get a dumbed down version, or have to wait until next gen, same as with Half-Life 2.

Wasn't Half-Life 2 released like a few months after the original pc release on the xbox? I remember reading a review that called it "very faithful to what the pc had done with it" but even so I understand it is a huge difference from what Crysis is compared to what consoles can do. But if it is as good as the small portion I have played I wouldn't mind playing it with Killzone or Gears of War's framerates.

 

[braincore02]

They're gonna make it cross platform eh? Maybe they'll have to improve the code so it doesn't require a graphics card made 10 years in the future to run it at highest options with a good framerate. I have 2 gtx260's and it still only runs at an acceptable framerate, and never uses more than one core on my proc. Crap programming (and no I couldn't do better). Pretty tho.

 

[Plurralbles]

so they have an excuse to only have brown shit blooming all over? Lame.

 

[RanD00M]

I'll probably try it out.

 

[Contextualizer]

They're gonna make it cross platform eh? Maybe they'll have to improve the code so it doesn't require a graphics card made 10 years in the future to run it at highest options with a good framerate. I have 2 gtx260's and it still only runs at an acceptable framerate, and never uses more than one core on my proc. Crap programming (and no I couldn't do better). Pretty tho.

Your GTX 260 came out 10 years before Crysis did?

 

[Arbitrary Cidin]

They couldn't put it on consoles if they wanted to. The kind of power-house PC you need for Crysis and Crysis Warhead goes beyond even the PS3. At best, you'd get a dumbed down version, or have to wait until next gen, same as with Half-Life 2.

Wasn't Half-Life 2 released like a few months after the original pc release on the xbox? I remember reading a review that called it "very faithful to what the pc had done with it" but even so I understand it is a huge difference from what Crysis is compared to what consoles can do. But if it is as good as the small portion I have played I wouldn't mind playing it with Killzone or Gears of War's framerates.

Yes, Half Life 2 came out on the Xbox Original, but the graphics were nearly at minimum settings. There was zero anti-aliasing, and the textures were very low resolution compared to the PC version.
If you look at what kind of PC you need for even 40fps on Crysis (assuming you want it on Maximum or even Ultra High settings), consoles simply don't have enough RAM and processing speed needed. Crytek has even said that they are weighing down the graphics in Crysis 2 specifically to make the games possible on current gen games. Lower quality graphic setting in Crysis 1 console ports may be the sort of initiative Valve would make, but Crytek is a bit more "prestigious" with their games, and likely doesn't want their powerhouses on consoles until they can be better supported.

 

[braincore02]

They're gonna make it cross platform eh? Maybe they'll have to improve the code so it doesn't require a graphics card made 10 years in the future to run it at highest options with a good framerate. I have 2 gtx260's and it still only runs at an acceptable framerate, and never uses more than one core on my proc. Crap programming (and no I couldn't do better). Pretty tho.

Your GTX 260 came out 10 years before Crysis did?

I think you misread me. I said it requires a card made 10 years in the future- ie. AFTER the release of the game, not before. Obviously I was exaggerating, but I found the performance with 2 GTX260's SLI'd to be unimpressive, and I got them at least a year after the release of Crysis, probably more than a year later, don't remember. They provided serviceable performance, frames never dropped below 20fps and usually averaged out to 32-35ish, but the code could certainly make far better use of the resources at hand, as everyone who cares already knows. Given that the game doesn't look THAT much better than the UT3 engine, with which I can routinely get far above 60fps, I expected better.

 

[Contextualizer]

I think you misread me. I said it requires a card made 10 years in the future- ie. AFTER the release of the game, not before. Obviously I was exaggerating, but I found the performance with 2 GTX260's SLI'd to be unimpressive, and I got them at least a year after the release of Crysis, probably more than a year later, don't remember. They provided serviceable performance, frames never dropped below 20fps and usually averaged out to 32-35ish, but the code could certainly make far better use of the resources at hand, as everyone who cares already knows.

crysis warhead did optimize though

and it did a great job

Given that the game doesn't look THAT much better than the UT3 engine, with which I can routinely get far above 60fps, I expected better.

maybe it was the settings you were playing it at, but unreal 3 looks *terrible* next to crysis warhead

and the supported size and complexity of the environments cannot at all be compared

 

[ChromeAlchemist]

The weird thing is, it doesn't seem to look as good as Crysis 1. Ah well, worth a look.

You never know, Crytek might actually manage to not fuck up the last 3rd of one of their games.

Wait, what? What have you seen that no one else has seen?

I thought he meant visually. Which would be true.

Crytek UK (formerly Free Radical Design) are working on this, so I'm cautiously looking forward to it. I'm also hoping that going bankrupt, losing most of their key development staff, being bought out by a larger studio and having to work on a franchise that isn't theirs hasn't negatively effected their output.

Considering their last release was Haze, it's gonna be hard for them to do any worse.

Dr Doak himself (former Rare deity) jumped ship with the buy out. Abandon all hope.

They couldn't put it on consoles if they wanted to. The kind of power-house PC you need for Crysis and Crysis Warhead goes beyond even the PS3. At best, you'd get a dumbed down version, or have to wait until next gen, same as with Half-Life 2.

Wasn't Half-Life 2 released like a few months after the original pc release on the xbox? I remember reading a review that called it "very faithful to what the pc had done with it" but even so I understand it is a huge difference from what Crysis is compared to what consoles can do. But if it is as good as the small portion I have played I wouldn't mind playing it with Killzone or Gears of War's framerates.

I don't consider Crysis to be a 30fps game, so I don't think it would work, but I'm sure others would contest that thought.

The weird thing is, it doesn't seem to look as good as Crysis 1. Ah well, worth a look.

They had to scale it back slightly for the consoles, but on PC I do not think there is much change. But I have not seen a new screen/video on a while.

OT: I have hopes for this. It looks like it might be good

I'm personally a bit confused/skeptical. The tech demo looked cool on it's own, but the comparison to CryEngine 2 showed some corners being cut.

 

[Contextualizer]

I thought he meant visually. Which would be true.

There are screens, and more importantly, HD video, of Crysis 2 out?

Or just the engine demo?

I don't consider Crysis to be a 30fps game, so I don't think it would work, but I'm sure others would contest that thought.

It's definitely a 30fps game; the motion blur helps out a lot in sub-60FPS performance.

I'm personally a bit confused/skeptical. The tech demo looked cool on it's own, but the comparison to CryEngine 2 showed some corners being cut.

The video you posted showed old-engine PC vs old-engine console.

 

[braincore02]

I think you misread me. I said it requires a card made 10 years in the future- ie. AFTER the release of the game, not before. Obviously I was exaggerating, but I found the performance with 2 GTX260's SLI'd to be unimpressive, and I got them at least a year after the release of Crysis, probably more than a year later, don't remember. They provided serviceable performance, frames never dropped below 20fps and usually averaged out to 32-35ish, but the code could certainly make far better use of the resources at hand, as everyone who cares already knows.

crysis warhead did optimize though

and it did a great job

Given that the game doesn't look THAT much better than the UT3 engine, with which I can routinely get far above 60fps, I expected better.

maybe it was the settings you were playing it at, but unreal 3 looks *terrible* next to crysis warhead

and the supported size and complexity of the environments cannot at all be compared

Ok, maybe I need to revisit UT3. Certainly Crysis had a lot more foliage onscreen at anytime and the environments were no doubt bigger. Still it was only using one processor core ever, leaving me feeling it could have made better use of the processor to get me some higher frames. And I was playing on the highest settings except maybe AA.

Warhead may have had steadier framerates (ie they hovered in the 30fps range more consistently, rather than jumping between 20 and 50 all the time), but actually averaged worse framerates than the original Crysis on my system by a handful of frames. Not impressed with that "optimization" at all.