yher ive not had issues with the mouse, a few have complained tho, the only thing is the game purposely makes it hard to aim with a sniper rifle but thats part of thesniping model to make it harder to snipe.

shame you dont like it.

my machine is worse than yours and i manage to run with most of the eye candy as well, it looks like crap till you up the lighting imo then it looks pretty.

BF2 imo does not look as amazing, but it definatly a lot more "real" style wise, maybe thats what turns you on.

/Theo

The mouse movement isn't at all smooth and that alone destroys the game.

I've had no problems with the mouse...

-----------------------------------------------------
Bioshock: "You're soon beset by deranged flappers and dandies, like Jay Gatsby's party guests gone feral."

Considering the demo is only 760~ megs (which is pretty damn small for a demo these days,) I wouldn't really doubt it if the demo only includes a small handful of the 'voice' sounds. I only assume this because audio files can take up a surprising amount of room in a game, and videos seem to suggest there is a lot more variety in the 'voice' audio in the game.

Guess we won't know for sure however until October 2nd.

Oh and I'd have to say that I was worried by the posts on these boards a few days before the demo came out. When it finally hit I wasn't immediately impressed. But the more I learned how the game works, the strengths and weaknesses of various classes, etc, the more I enjoy it. I can't wait for the full game, cause the demo ROCKS.

for the people complaining about the effects i can only assume tbh that your machines arent up to the task of turning on all the bells and whistles, personally i dont think ive seen a better looking game in a while...

I ran it on my C2D @3.32GHz / 8800GTS @ 650:875 and had everything maxed with AA on 2x or 4x with my 22" widescreen monitor and I was thoroughly unimpressed. I thought the graphics looked very messy - I think BF2 and Source, both very much older games, look significantly better and certainly handle better. The mouse movement isn't at all smooth and that alone destroys the game.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Founder of the "I Hate Smiley Fitz" society

Remember: Riley has autism. He has trouble communicating, and in an overstimulating
environment, he can get frightened and run away, leaving his parents frantic. - Auburn

-The gamespeed doesnt match the features. radar, turrets, classes, upgrades, objectives, campaign mode etc.. and strafejumping, bunnyhopping and running at cheetah speeds?
-the vehicle controls are wonky
-the GDF weapons are at a disadvantage compared to the Strogg weps in terms of "what can you see when the shit hits the fan", meaning, the Strogg weapons fire lasers which can be used as a sort of tracer fire.
-the deployables are too tall/visible and take up too much of a footprint.
-the 3rd eye camera's detonation is rather useless
-from all but one of the forward spawn points on both maps, the GDF can take out the correctly-placed Strogg deployables from the safety of their base..because, the deployables stand out, and there are only a few places per map (thus far) where the deployables are best placed so you always know where they are placed.
-air vehicle controls blow
-again, the animations are garbage (Strogg grenade throw looks horrible)
-if I am a Strogg player, defending a Sewer, where are my native interior defenses? no built-in turrets?
-field ops rather useless indoors. (wheres my smaller anti infantry turret?)
-the official videos show a slightly faster than BF, slightly slower than quake game speed with what appears to be coordinated attacks.. the game is nothing like that. ..creative marketing? purposeful deception? whatever..
-no VoIP, despite squads.. which btw, are wholly useless anyhow.

8vs8 (clan gaming preference) is horrible. Too many vehicles, deployables care vs in the fight fray = not going to happen. I ruined games by taking the RL/Strogg equivalent..name escapes me.. and just taking out the deployables. The enemy couldnt repair them/deploy them faster than i could take them out. kicker.. i was taking them out from inside my base, or near the friendly confines.

did you get all that?

what i get from that is someone who wants a bf2142 type game. learn how to play quake wars first before you make inaccurate assumptions.

Time and again Spash Damage has said they don't want to be the Battlefield series, but time and again they keep refering to 'other games' (which is the Battlefield series.

thats your problem with the company not the game. anything they do from that point on will sour your taste for their product. the rest of your problem with the game are trivial and an indication of refusal to learn something new and adapt to different game mechanics.

for the people complaining about the effects i can only assume tbh that your machines arent up to the task of turning on all the bells and whistles, personally i dont think ive seen a better looking game in a while...

the sounds i agree are pretty awfull.

still i enjoy it and they will deffo be getting a purchase out of me.

wish monday would hurry up tho, as i definatly want TF2, ill look at the new crysys game when it arrives but i am one of the few that thought the first was dog crap.

The gamespeed doesnt match the features. radar, turrets, classes, upgrades, objectives, campaign mode etc.. and strafejumping, bunnyhopping and running at cheetah speeds?

And all of the former features maintain their utility even at the fast run speed. You only need to strafe jump and bunny hop if you rush the objective. If a team has it's act together, it won't be rushing the objective until the enemy teams defenses are already down or in disarray. You take down enemy defenses FROM RANGE AND USING THE TOOLS YOU DECRY AS USELESS AT THIS GAMESPEED. Meanwhile, the defending team is using tools such as radar and artillery to fend off your rush. The game only devolves into a deathmatch in one on one very close range encounters. If you say otherwise I'd be very interested to know how often you die in a round and how often your team actually wins.

the vehicle controls are wonky

Air vehicle control still isn't great. They really need to implement joystick control which I was very disappointed to find out wasn't in the demo. That said I've gotten proficient enough at flying that it's not that much of a handicap.

As for ground vehicles I disagree. The Armadillo is a lot of fun to drive; I really like pulling the handbrake and powersliding across a group of Strogg then flooring the accelerator to get out of there before they can respond. I don't care for the Desecrator controls but to be honest I've yet to see a hovertank control well in a video game.

the GDF weapons are at a disadvantage compared to the Strogg weps in terms of "what can you see when the shit hits the fan", meaning, the Strogg weapons fire lasers which can be used as a sort of tracer fire.

Tracer fire goes both ways. It is really, really easy to identify the location of a Strogg player. Less so with GDF. I've played entire rounds as a GDF sniper without getting killed simply because the Strogg don't have tracer fire to follow back to my location.

the deployables are too tall/visible and take up too much of a footprint.

This has never been an issue for me. When I play an engineer I rarely have a problem keeping a WELL POSITIONED turret up and running and earning me tons of XP. Likewise, given the great effectiveness of a WELL POSITIONED turret it's only fair that the attackers be able to see the bloody thing so as to figure out a way around it/to disable it.

the 3rd eye camera's detonation is rather useless

A sticky det pack is useless? To be honest I think the 3rd Eye is a lot more useful than the Strogg Flyer Drone. 3rd Eye gets you short range mobile radar and can be used as a det pack to take out vehicles/deployables. When I play covops and am not sniping, I use the 3rd eye all the time.

from all but one of the forward spawn points on both maps, the GDF can take out the correctly-placed Strogg deployables from the safety of their base..because, the deployables stand out, and there are only a few places per map (thus far) where the deployables are best placed so you always know where they are placed.

Which means GASP the primary job of an engineer is keeping the deployables up. If deployables were impossible to take down wouldn't that make the attackers job even harder? As it is, deployables stay up IF engineers place them well and focus on keeping them repaired. Deployables are easily destroyed IF an attacking soldier hangs back and makes intelligent use of the rocket launcher, in other words deployables are easily destroyed IF A SOLDIER PLAYS HIS ROLE WELL. God forbid a class based game reward players (and their teams) who play their class well. The obvious counter to a good rocket launcher armed soldier is A) a sniper or B) anyone else who can get close to him as the soldiers back up weapon isn't as good as a standard lacerator/assault rifle.

air vehicle controls blow

Agreed. I'm hoping that when joystick support is implemented they will control better but as is they aren't as fun to fly as the BF helicopters.

if I am a Strogg player, defending a Sewer, where are my native interior defenses? no built-in turrets?

There weren't any built in defenses in most Team Fortress maps either. The attacking team is already at a disadvantage on the last stage of sewer, no need to throw an automated defense system at them as well. Besides it means that if the defending wants to win THEY HAVE TO DO THE DEFENDING.

again, the animations are garbage (Strogg grenade throw looks horrible)

I'll keep my eyes open for the Strogg grenade throw. As it is I haven't really noticed the crappy animations that some people are always complaining about. But then again graphics have always been tertiary to a good game for me, probably why I'm not a member of the target market for Fallout 3.

field ops rather useless indoors

Amazing that not all classes are equally useful in all situations huh? It almost like SD wanted different team members to have greater importance at different stages of the map. What a fucked up idea that is, eh?

the official videos show a slightly faster than BF, slightly slower than quake game speed with what appears to be coordinated attacks

I've done plenty of coordinated attacks.

no VoIP, despite squads.. which btw, are wholly useless anyhow.

Lack of VoIP was a major mistake. Apparently that's coming in a patch though.

8vs8 (clan gaming preference) is horrible.

Actually 6v6 is the standard clan match. Have you seen those 12 person stopwatch servers? Those are for clan scrims.

I ruined games by taking the RL/Strogg equivalent..name escapes me.. and just taking out the deployables.

You ruined the game, or you provided a very helpful service to your team that kept the enemy defenses in disarray? It's not like a rocket launcher guy is hard to counter, the soldier back up weapon is only useful if you get the drop on someone. If they get the drop on you, your pretty much screwed. That and you're vulnerable to sniper fire.

This comment was edited on Sep 13, 14:02.

This comment was edited on Sep 13, 13:43.

I remember back in the day when I downloaded a 5 mb file for I think the original Quake II and it took all night on my dial-up modem.

Doesn't sound exactly right. I remember Quake 1 demo being 9mb and yeah it took all night

I'm old enough to remember a world before the internet, then a world with the internet - a world of free game demos, free music and no File Planet, EA wasn't raping the earth and spewing their corporate bile on all of the gamers, when Gamespy was just a game browser......a simpler time.

Then bandwidth became an issue and game companies were no longer able/willing to provide the needed bandwidth to provide gamers with the pipe to get their game demos. I remember back in the day when I downloaded a 5 mb file for I think the original Quake II and it took all night on my dial-up modem.

Someone woke up and saw that games were no longer kids play, and that in fact the video game industry had become a larger money maker then the movie business. There are fewer people watching TV today then ever before.

Now we have a world of paid betas, paid download providers (a la File Planet, etc.), in-game ads, banner ads up the ass on every website and so forth. The only true innovations are coming in the graphics area, since so few developers are afraid to branch out and try something new because publishers want something that is a sure hit. The publishers don't want something that hasn't been done before and developers, passionate about their projects, are willing to bow down to the publisher because they want to get their game out to the public. I always used to hear when I was young, with regards to my occupation "do something that you would do for free, and if the money is there then even better". But my perception today is the developer that would do a game for free for love is longer able to do so - its no longer "I want to make a game that I love, and that I hope other people will love as well". Its now about "making a game that will make a lot of money" because money has become the focal point. The industry is no longer about games for gamers by gamers - it is now being run by executives, who have never played a game, much less held a joystick, staring at their bottomline and their stock options and killing the industry - when money is the only motivator it will not be well taken care of, which is why the game world is filled with sequels, bad movie tie-ins and rushed, broken products that require patches on day 1 - very few companies truly care about the gamer, they don't care about the "out of box experience" and how much the gamer enjoys that experience (from box to cd tray). Look at 2K (BioShock), they were more concerned with making things difficult for the gamer with auth issues and copy protection software that they forgot the gamer. There are a few exceptions, there are some developers that still hold to "it will be done when its done, money or not, we want to deliver the best product possible to our customers". But only companies like Blizzard/id have that kind of clout.

I realize that I'm preaching to the choir here, but honestly it bothers me so much that my beloved hobby is killing itself, we have game company CEOs whose only previous experience was with oil, manufacturing and retail companies.

I'm not sure where the industry is heading - but based on what we've seen so far, and the current trends, I'm not feeling too good about the future of gaming. I'll keep hoping for bigger and better things, more innovations, a Games for Windows initiative with some teeth and customer service people that realize that we the gamers are the ones putting macaroni and cheese on their dinner tables.

8vs8 (clan gaming preference) is horrible.

Clan games are 6v6. Every single tournament, cup, and LAN has been 6v6 to date. I have no ide awhy you would say 8v8.

still to date the game that came outta nowhere, that delivered more actual GAME than anything I had played up till that time and till now.

A Crysis co op mode would be cool tho. At least 2 player co op-ability of the campaigne. Anything is possible, they justa gotta say... "hey? Maybe the players would like a limited co op?". Then just build it.

Yup. We sure as hell would. ;0)

This comment was edited on Sep 13, 09:27.

zirik:

-The gamespeed doesnt match the features. radar, turrets, classes, upgrades, objectives, campaign mode etc.. and strafejumping, bunnyhopping and running at cheetah speeds?
-the vehicle controls are wonky
-the GDF weapons are at a disadvantage compared to the Strogg weps in terms of "what can you see when the shit hits the fan", meaning, the Strogg weapons fire lasers which can be used as a sort of tracer fire.
-the deployables are too tall/visible and take up too much of a footprint.
-the 3rd eye camera's detonation is rather useless
-from all but one of the forward spawn points on both maps, the GDF can take out the correctly-placed Strogg deployables from the safety of their base..because, the deployables stand out, and there are only a few places per map (thus far) where the deployables are best placed so you always know where they are placed.
-air vehicle controls blow
-again, the animations are garbage (Strogg grenade throw looks horrible)
-if I am a Strogg player, defending a Sewer, where are my native interior defenses? no built-in turrets?
-field ops rather useless indoors. (wheres my smaller anti infantry turret?)
-the official videos show a slightly faster than BF, slightly slower than quake game speed with what appears to be coordinated attacks.. the game is nothing like that. ..creative marketing? purposeful deception? whatever..
-no VoIP, despite squads.. which btw, are wholly useless anyhow.

8vs8 (clan gaming preference) is horrible. Too many vehicles, deployables care vs in the fight fray = not going to happen. I ruined games by taking the RL/Strogg equivalent..name escapes me.. and just taking out the deployables. The enemy couldnt repair them/deploy them faster than i could take them out. kicker.. i was taking them out from inside my base, or near the friendly confines.

did you get all that?

Now if they went with the Battlefield 2/2142 engine with Quake Wars Assets

If they went for the BF engine the game would be a piece of shit where you have to lead depending on your ping in order to hit anything, and the infantry feels like you're movements are restricted by superglue.

The BF2(142) engine needs to be brought out back and shot.

Cheers fella

Crysis will be SM2.0 compliant.

Bit of a stupid question from a stupid ATI user, but does anybody know if Crysis be SM3.0 only or SM2.0

Well there was an issue with the Missle Guard Tower Sniper guys, especially in the one mission that was at night with the pontoon bridge, and in several other locations.

And actually patch wise I think Far Cry was nicely supported, especially those with 64 bit processors running Windows XP 64.

I thought the save game system in Far Cry was perfect for the setting. The game could be played as a sneaker or as a balls out shooter.

And when did Crytek ever promish Co-Op in Far Cry?

As for Shader 3.0, if you choose to go with ATI then there is noone else to blame but yourself. But it really surprises me to hear an ATI person bitch about it especially after the Tech Demo that was released last year that had ATI all over it. Including the giant ATI sticker on the side of the Jet Ski.

completely arrogant and asinine position on Save Games (Quick Saves)

Majority of people didn't have a problem with the Auto-Saves and finished the game without a problem. They made a design decision and went with it. Was it the best choice, probably not. But it didnt really effect the game that much, except for the crybabies that need to quick-save every 30 seconds.

I.e. the imbalance in the last third of the game, AI issues of scoping an enemy hundreds of years away, then having his buddy hit you with a 45 pistol from that distance, (should just to get a general direction, not know your exact loc and then hitting you, Functioning Coop and when they abandoned the game around the time, they started working on the shader 3 they left broken many ATI users, iirc.

Boohoo, the enemies were tough. You must suck, cus most people were able to beat the game without too much trouble, and without the whining.

I beat the game before any patch came out. Never once was I shot by a pistol at long distance through heavy foilage. They chased me down, I hid, they lost me, I killed them.

Never really followed Far Cry before it was released, so Co-Op wasnt a missed feature. And honestly, their netcode was about as bad as Serious Sam's...so why waste time on Co-Op when they cant even get multiplayer playing properly.

Shader 3 support...ATI cards havent had it until recent cards. Blame ATI for not supporting it sooner, not Crytek for implementing it for Nvidia users.

They didn't abandon the game, Ubisoft did. It was Ubisofts responsibility to fund the patch development...they withdrew that and stopped supporting the development. If Ubisoft wanted a patch done they didnt even need to have Crytek do it. They could have hired other developers.

Crytek did the best they could considering the crap Ubisoft put them through...why the hell do you think Crytek went with a different publisher for Crysis?


----------------------------------------------------
Day of Defeat Source and S.T.A.L.K.E.R
This comment was edited on Sep 13, 03:52.