Crysis Beta Info - Updated

inCrysis offers an update from Crytek about the Crysis multiplayer beta, clarifying why the first round of testing was not announced, and that when testing is opened up further, no paid subscriptions will be required (see update). Update: It has been pointed out that the way this is worded makes it possible that paid subscriptions may still be required for subsequent rounds of testing:
Missing public announcement

As many of you may have recognized, there was no public announcement from either EA or Crytek regarding the Crysis MP Beta. The reason for this was that this batch 1 of the Beta is an internal test only and is not the actual start. The official Beta for Fileplanet subscribers is almost ready and there will be a huge global announcement with lots of information included. Additionally this announcement is just the beginning of an upcoming community focus – so expect a lot more information in form of screenshots, videos, reports, events and much more to be ready for you!

Batch 1 - Friends & Family internal test

Quite a few of you wonder why you haven’t had any chance to sign-up for the first batch of the Beta. This was due to this first batch being available for a pre-selected group only. The members of this group are people who have been invited by EA and/or Crytek to join the Beta program of Crysis. There has been a very limited number of available keys for them. Additionally Fileplanet gave a few of their Founder’s Club Members the chance to sign-up for this event as well.

This is our final test to verify the stability before the initial Beta begins. It is an important test for EA and Crytek since we can see how everything works under real life conditions. This internal test is not directly related to the rest of the Beta. Therefore we did not plan to official announce it.

Payment required to access the Beta? No!

We have read a lot of posts about people who mentioned that you need to pay additional money to be able to join the Beta. Just let me get this straight – this is definitely not the case. When you have a subscriber account you will be able to sign-up for one of the upcoming batches.

The payment many of you have been discussing about was related to the Founder’s Club membership of Fileplanet which was needed to get one of the very few places in the first batch. Founder’s Club membership is not necessary to take part in the upcoming batches.
View : : :
32 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Older [  1  2  ] Newer
1.
 
No subject
Sep 12, 2007, 22:54
1.
No subject Sep 12, 2007, 22:54
Sep 12, 2007, 22:54
 
thank science for that i almost added fileplanet paid betas into my signature lol

this one is looking to be like game of the year!

_________________________________________________
NO COOP = NO PURCHASE
NO MULTICORE SUPPORT = NO BUY
CRITICAL PATCH released within 2 weeks = RETURN TO STORE
What ever happened to 64 bit?
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
"Money doesn't exist in the 24th century, the acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives. We work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity." - Jean-Luc Picard
2.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 13, 2007, 00:06
2.
Re: No subject Sep 13, 2007, 00:06
Sep 13, 2007, 00:06
 
WTF is up with this 'you wanna beta-test our game? Pay us!' bullshit we are seeing lately? We are doing THEM a favor by mass testing their product.

The whole 'your not paying us, your paying fileplanet' is bullsh*t, cause fileplanet is then turning around and paying you for hosting your beta exclusively with them. They must think were all friggin stupid or something.

This comment was edited on Sep 13, 00:09.
Avatar 17499
3.
 
not really free
Sep 13, 2007, 00:34
3.
not really free Sep 13, 2007, 00:34
Sep 13, 2007, 00:34
 
crytek is smart enough to avoid what id software did for quake wars. having an exclusive beta with whinny elite gamers resulted in bad reviews even before people tried the final version. even i was affected by the complaints by the beta testers. but the demo proved them wrong.

EDIT: i take it back... crytek doesnt seem to understand what a "subscriber account" means. what a bunch of morons.

This comment was edited on Sep 13, 00:39.
4.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 13, 2007, 01:20
4.
Re: No subject Sep 13, 2007, 01:20
Sep 13, 2007, 01:20
 
WTF is up with this 'you wanna beta-test our game? Pay us!' bullshit we are seeing lately? We are doing THEM a favor by mass testing their product.

The whole 'your not paying us, your paying fileplanet' is bullsh*t, cause fileplanet is then turning around and paying you for hosting your beta exclusively with them. They must think were all friggin stupid or something.

You're not doing them any favors. They've got QA working MUCH more than some open beta testers. They know people will pay for them.

5.
 
Re: not really free
Sep 13, 2007, 01:21
5.
Re: not really free Sep 13, 2007, 01:21
Sep 13, 2007, 01:21
 
Actually what Quake Wars becomes has NOTHING to do with an exclusive Beta.

And the review scores will proove the problems with Quake Wars, not some 'whinny elite gamers'.

Avatar 12670
6.
 
Re: not really free
Sep 13, 2007, 02:00
6.
Re: not really free Sep 13, 2007, 02:00
Sep 13, 2007, 02:00
 
And the review scores will proove the problems with Quake Wars

why dont you enlighten us oh knowledgeable one. all the whining i have read on forums were exaggerations. people who complained simply gave up learning the mechanics of the game or they dont have a system that can handle the graphics.

7.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 13, 2007, 02:03
7.
Re: No subject Sep 13, 2007, 02:03
Sep 13, 2007, 02:03
 
You're not doing them any favors. They've got QA working MUCH more than some open beta testers. They know people will pay for them.

one of the objectives of the beta is to stress test the servers with huge numbers of players. but you say beta testers will not be doing them a favor? i doubt if they actually hire several thousand QA to test the game. more like a handful.

8.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 13, 2007, 02:51
8.
Re: No subject Sep 13, 2007, 02:51
Sep 13, 2007, 02:51
 
You get to play the game, when you normally would have had wait and purchase it or play a demo. So don't think you are entitled to betas.

It's their product, they have every right to decide who gets to beta test. If that means Fileplanet subscribers, or Gamespot, or whomever else, so be it. It's not your "right" to test their game.

----------------------------------------------------
Day of Defeat Source and S.T.A.L.K.E.R
9.
 
mistake in blurb
Sep 13, 2007, 02:59
Dev
9.
mistake in blurb Sep 13, 2007, 02:59
Sep 13, 2007, 02:59
Dev
 
Blue: Founders club is the more expensive fileplanet subscription. They have multiple tiers

He didn't say there was no paid subscription required. He said you didn't have to "pay additional"
He specifically said you need a "subscriber account" which means PAID.
Which means you DO have the have paid subscription to fileplanet.

http://www.fileplanet.com/subscribe/subscribe_tt.shtml
$7 a month for normal subscription, $10 a month for founders.

Please correct your blurb, thanks.

10.
 
Re: mistake in blurb
Sep 13, 2007, 03:07
10.
Re: mistake in blurb Sep 13, 2007, 03:07
Sep 13, 2007, 03:07
 
Dev, there will be beta keys available to non-subscribing members too, in a certain phase of the beta. So Blues "blurb" is accurate.

----------------------------------------------------
Day of Defeat Source and S.T.A.L.K.E.R
11.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 13, 2007, 03:16
11.
Re: No subject Sep 13, 2007, 03:16
Sep 13, 2007, 03:16
 
Crytek really get on my nerves, it started with their completely arrogant and asinine position on Save Games (Quick Saves), abandoning Far Cry's major problems.

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.

It doesn’t surprise me they are willing to shaft the fan/customers again they are teaming up with ea, so were talking in game advertising shitty server support and shitty patching along with some favorite shitty compatibilities with anti cheat for multiplayer and shitty copy protections.
They certainly seem to have no respect for their fans willing to gouge them at every turn, so good luck to anyone trying this.


Trust me, most of the names I have been called you can't translate in any language...they're not even real words as much as a succesion of violent images.
Scorpio Slasher: ... What about you boy, what do hate?
Marcus: ... Bullies. Tiny d*ck egotists who hurt people for no reason, make people lock their doors at night. People who make general existence worse, people like you.
Avatar 1858
12.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 13, 2007, 03:20
12.
Re: No subject Sep 13, 2007, 03:20
Sep 13, 2007, 03:20
 
Well zirik if you really want me to point them out I will.

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.

Overall Quake Wars trys to be Quake meets Battlefield, and fails horribly. Vehicles are horrible, Animations are bad, the FX and sounds are incredibly shallow. Maps are small, objectives are 1 way only. Stats I think should be an all or nothing thing. Either get rid of them, or do what Battlefield 2/2142 did and have a server to keep track of them.

Now if they went with the Battlefield 2/2142 engine with Quake Wars Assets I would be perfectly happy and be looking forward to the game, but as it stands, it's not Quake and it's not ET, it's a train wreck of both and in the end that will be it's failing.

Don't get me wrong I'm not a fanboi of anything except good solid fun gameplay, and while the Quake Wars Demo was cetrainly better then the beta's it still need a few more months to cook, IF not longer.

Avatar 12670
13.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 13, 2007, 03:52
13.
Re: No subject Sep 13, 2007, 03:52
Sep 13, 2007, 03:52
 
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.
14.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 13, 2007, 06:09
14.
Re: No subject Sep 13, 2007, 06:09
Sep 13, 2007, 06:09
 
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.

Avatar 12670
15.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 13, 2007, 08:04
15.
Re: No subject Sep 13, 2007, 08:04
Sep 13, 2007, 08:04
 
Bit of a stupid question from a stupid ATI user, but does anybody know if Crysis be SM3.0 only or SM2.0

16.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 13, 2007, 08:26
F7
16.
Re: No subject Sep 13, 2007, 08:26
Sep 13, 2007, 08:26
F7
 
Crysis will be SM2.0 compliant.

17.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 13, 2007, 08:47
17.
Re: No subject Sep 13, 2007, 08:47
Sep 13, 2007, 08:47
 
Cheers fella

18.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 13, 2007, 09:04
18.
Re: No subject Sep 13, 2007, 09:04
Sep 13, 2007, 09:04
 
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.

19.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 13, 2007, 09:09
19.
Re: No subject Sep 13, 2007, 09:09
Sep 13, 2007, 09:09
 
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?

20.
 
Far Cry....
Sep 13, 2007, 09:26
20.
Far Cry.... Sep 13, 2007, 09:26
Sep 13, 2007, 09:26
 
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.
32 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Older [  1  2  ] Newer