On Crysis Warhead/Crysis Performance

The German PC Games Website has a tidbit from an interview with Crytek boss Cevat Yerli that will appear in an upcoming issue of their print counterpart. The story is in German, but a translation tells us Yerli is offering reassurances to gamers that Crysis Warhead should be able to achieve frame rates of 30-35 FPS in "high" detail mode on a PC that costs around 400 Euros. He also says changes may possibly be retrofitted into Crysis in a future patch to offer similar performance improvements, but that this will be a timely process, as the optimizations involved are complex, so if they revisit Crysis performance, this will be after development of Crysis Warhead is complete.
View : : :
37 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  ] Older
37.
 
Re: I actually wrote PC Gamer about this
Jun 20, 2008, 00:35
37.
Re: I actually wrote PC Gamer about this Jun 20, 2008, 00:35
Jun 20, 2008, 00:35
 
today. They had claimed in their newest episode that a 634 dollar PC could run Crysis Warhead "silky smooth with all bells and whistles turned on."

In essence, it was on an Intel mobo, 2Ghz Dual Core, 2 Gig of cheapo RAM and an 8600 GT. No word on resolution, ofcourse, so it wouldn't surprise me if it was at 320x200.

Since this seemed like a bullshit claim, I emailed them, saying they should stop taking developers' words as truth without testing it themselves.

Dan Stapleton wrote me back saying that that was the exact PC they had played it on at Crytek's offices, and that they'll be sure to test it when the game is released.

In any case, the preview is FULL of claims that Warhead will run far better than the original Crysis. Crytek also admitted that by releasing a game that's almost unplayable on the large majority of today's computer, they made a mistake.

So who knows. To be honest, Warhead looks pretty good, so I'll probably pick it up.

On the other hand, the campaign is said to last 8-10 hours, and I have no doubt that the game will cost 50 bucks.

Yerli also said that the creation of Crysis 2 will depend heavily on the success of Warhead. (in other words, don't count on it, since I doubt even half the people that bought Crysis will buy essentially the same game over again.) and that there's a possibility they'll do ANOTHER game, this time featuring the story of prophet. Yawn.

Creston

Thanks for that info - I can't wait to read that PCG preview, and hopefully they talk about it more on today's podcast that just went up.

For $634 though, I figured you'd be able to put together a computer with something better than an 8600GT though!

36.
 
Re: 400 Euros?
Jun 19, 2008, 23:19
36.
Re: 400 Euros? Jun 19, 2008, 23:19
Jun 19, 2008, 23:19
 
There will still be koreans AND aliens to fight, but the AI for both is being changed, so the Aliens will fight more human like, and the Koreans won't be as stupid this time.

If this is as actually true, I may have to pick up Warhead. My biggest complaint with Crysis was the AI. An open-ended game must have good AI. Crysis did not.

Avatar 20715
35.
 
Re: Over rated
Jun 19, 2008, 23:04
35.
Re: Over rated Jun 19, 2008, 23:04
Jun 19, 2008, 23:04
 
they also really dont allow you any sort of fun using the suit. as the suit has a battery life of around 10-15 seconds when using stealth.

After finishing the game the first time, I modded this myself for a second playthrough, and it's a TON more fun if you give yourself enough energy for minutes worth of stealth and speed.

While I understand their decision to limit stealth to 10 seconds from a balance/difficulty perspective, it really does damper the coolness of the suit. If you can go invisible for minutes on end, you can do some REALLY awesome predator shit to whole groups of baddies.

Creston

Avatar 15604
34.
 
Re: No subject
Jun 19, 2008, 23:01
34.
Re: No subject Jun 19, 2008, 23:01
Jun 19, 2008, 23:01
 
since crysis was supposed to be a three part series it seems the second installment is really just a retelling of the story from a different perspective

That actually was not the original plan, but I believe that Crytek is simply using this "re-release" as 'loss mitigation' (thanks Derek Smart for the explanatioN!)
Basically make another game with the same engine, the same weapons, the same enemies, just some different environments and a slightly different story. It's cheap to do, and allows you to spread dev costs over multiple titles.

Originally Crytek had planned to do 3 new games. They still might, depending on how warhead does, however I doubt it will sell the 1.5 million copies that Crysis sold, so the story of Crysis will never be finished. This is why it's a fucking stupid idea for devs to end games with cliffhangers.

i assume that if they do make the third in the series it would be from the perspective of prophet

There was mention of them perhaps doing that in the future. I guess more loss mitigation. But it was not the original idea.

Creston

Avatar 15604
33.
 
Re: 400 Euros?
Jun 19, 2008, 22:56
33.
Re: 400 Euros? Jun 19, 2008, 22:56
Jun 19, 2008, 22:56
 
and there are some serious pacing and gameplay issues in Crysis that Crytek still has yet to answer

The PC Gamer review addresses that specific issue, and Crytek says that they've taken note of those complaints and are working hard to fix the pacing problems, and make the game more action overall, and at a better and more steady pace.

One thing that I really liked is while there are lots of vehicles in the levels, you are no longer FORCED to use one. If you'd rather walk instead, go right ahead.

There will still be koreans AND aliens to fight, but the AI for both is being changed, so the Aliens will fight more human like, and the Koreans won't be as stupid this time.

Ofcourse, this is all what's promised, so no idea if it's actually true. But at least they seem aware of many of the issues that people have had with Crysis.

Creston

Avatar 15604
32.
 
I actually wrote PC Gamer about this
Jun 19, 2008, 22:54
32.
I actually wrote PC Gamer about this Jun 19, 2008, 22:54
Jun 19, 2008, 22:54
 
today. They had claimed in their newest episode that a 634 dollar PC could run Crysis Warhead "silky smooth with all bells and whistles turned on."

In essence, it was on an Intel mobo, 2Ghz Dual Core, 2 Gig of cheapo RAM and an 8600 GT. No word on resolution, ofcourse, so it wouldn't surprise me if it was at 320x200.

Since this seemed like a bullshit claim, I emailed them, saying they should stop taking developers' words as truth without testing it themselves.

Dan Stapleton wrote me back saying that that was the exact PC they had played it on at Crytek's offices, and that they'll be sure to test it when the game is released.

In any case, the preview is FULL of claims that Warhead will run far better than the original Crysis. Crytek also admitted that by releasing a game that's almost unplayable on the large majority of today's computer, they made a mistake.

So who knows. To be honest, Warhead looks pretty good, so I'll probably pick it up.

On the other hand, the campaign is said to last 8-10 hours, and I have no doubt that the game will cost 50 bucks.

Yerli also said that the creation of Crysis 2 will depend heavily on the success of Warhead. (in other words, don't count on it, since I doubt even half the people that bought Crysis will buy essentially the same game over again.) and that there's a possibility they'll do ANOTHER game, this time featuring the story of prophet. Yawn.

Creston

This comment was edited on Jun 19, 23:07.
Avatar 15604
31.
 
Re: Over rated
Jun 19, 2008, 21:18
31.
Re: Over rated Jun 19, 2008, 21:18
Jun 19, 2008, 21:18
 
I don't consider below 10 fps as being scalable on a min recommended spec machine.
Luckily you won't have to play the game at 10fps :-|

LOL, no I'm not. Try looking back over the last 8 months of Crysis threads on Blues, not to mention the rest of the internet, instead of basing your assumption on one 27 post threa
LOL. Blues is the last place I'd look for opinions that I give a shit about. The only thing I ever see here is people bitching and moaning about shit that doesn't even make sense. I know damn well from both personal experience and all of my friends how well the game runs.

30.
 
Re: Over rated
Jun 19, 2008, 20:19
Prez
 
30.
Re: Over rated Jun 19, 2008, 20:19
Jun 19, 2008, 20:19
 Prez
 
My point is that it's not very meaningful to discuss on which machine a certain game is playable since that definition is very unclear.

Exactly.
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Avatar 17185
29.
 
Re: Over rated
Jun 19, 2008, 17:40
29.
Re: Over rated Jun 19, 2008, 17:40
Jun 19, 2008, 17:40
 
It's the old "it runs fine on my machine" debate.

Some people are happy with 15-20 fps, others get annoyed when a game drops below a synced 60 fps.

One of the games I have anticipated the most was GTA4. Unfortunately it was too choppy both on 360 and PS3 and I sort of just forgot about GTA4, and will continue to do so until the PC version (possibly) arrives where performance can be affected.

Others are perfectly happy with their console versions.

My point is that it's not very meaningful to discuss on which machine a certain game is playable since that definition is very unclear.

I think they should change from "minimum" and "recommended" specs to "20-30 fps" and "60+ fps" or something. Right now it seems some developers count "minimum" as the spec you need to reach the game's main menu.


28.
 
Re: Over rated
Jun 19, 2008, 17:22
28.
Re: Over rated Jun 19, 2008, 17:22
Jun 19, 2008, 17:22
 
Crysis *IS* scalable 2-3 years back.

I don't consider below 10 fps as being scalable on a min recommended spec machine.

You're the only one here with the problems you're describing. Maybe it's you?

LOL, no I'm not. Try looking back over the last 8 months of Crysis threads on Blues, not to mention the rest of the internet, instead of basing your assumption on one 27 post thread.

----------------------------------------------------
Grand Theft Auto IV.....what else is there?

PSN ID= Puscifer73
"Blues News" Steam Community... http://steamcommunity.com/groups/bluesnews/
27.
 
Re: Over rated
Jun 19, 2008, 17:14
27.
Re: Over rated Jun 19, 2008, 17:14
Jun 19, 2008, 17:14
 
Did you miss the part where I said, you shouldn't have to buy a new computer to play a single game?

You realize how much that same computer would have cost to build a year earlier? Or that a system of that price a year earlier would not run Crysis very well at all?

I didn't miss it, I just didn't give a crap about it because you're dead wrong. Crysis *IS* scalable 2-3 years back. It won't look as pretty, and it won't be as smooth, but the game is absolutely playable on a 6800-series card, and even at medium settings on the 7800-series which is approaching 3 years old.


You're the only one here with the problems you're describing. Maybe it's you?
This comment was edited on Jun 19, 17:14.
26.
 
Re: No subject
Jun 19, 2008, 16:38
26.
Re: No subject Jun 19, 2008, 16:38
Jun 19, 2008, 16:38
 
I played it on a 6800GT 256 and while it didn't look that great it was playable.

I find that hard to believe seeing as it ran like shit in the 2nd half of the game on an 8600.

----------------------------------------------------
Grand Theft Auto IV.....what else is there?

PSN ID= Puscifer73
"Blues News" Steam Community... http://steamcommunity.com/groups/bluesnews/
25.
 
Re: Over rated
Jun 19, 2008, 16:36
25.
Re: Over rated Jun 19, 2008, 16:36
Jun 19, 2008, 16:36
 
I created that build on December 4th, merely two weeks after Crysis came out.

Did you miss the part where I said, you shouldn't have to buy a new computer to play a single game?

You realize how much that same computer would have cost to build a year earlier? Or that a system of that price a year earlier would not run Crysis very well at all?

----------------------------------------------------
Grand Theft Auto IV.....what else is there?

PSN ID= Puscifer73
"Blues News" Steam Community... http://steamcommunity.com/groups/bluesnews/
24.
 
Re: Over rated
Jun 19, 2008, 16:29
24.
Re: Over rated Jun 19, 2008, 16:29
Jun 19, 2008, 16:29
 
That event where they "proved" it could run on a machine that only cost $900 was more like 3 months after release. 3 months in computer hardware may as well be a lifetime. But fact is, people shouldn't have to buy a whole new computer just to play a single game. PC Games need to be minimum 2 years (if not more) backwards compatible with hardware. Crysis ran like shit on some PC's that were bought less than a year prior to the release.
I'm not talking about an "event" they held, I'm talking about my own fricken build I put together:

$105 - Windows Vista Home Premium
$55 - Highly-rated 550W Power Supply
$30 - Highly-rated case
$190 - 2.66GHz Core 2 Duo E6750
$95 - Fantastic Gigabyte P35 motherboard
$50 - 2GB Ram (only 800MHz, but highly-rated)
$270 - 8800GT (in and out of stock so often, you'll eventually find one)
$50 - 160GB SATA hard drive
$32 - DVD-RW drive

Total - $877

I created that build on December 4th, merely two weeks after Crysis came out. It's more than capable of running Crysis on High detail and 1680x1050, considering that my much slower computer - an opteron 165 with 2GB of PC2700 ram - could do so throughout the majority of the game.

Crytek themselves did it a month later:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=228249

23.
 
No subject
Jun 19, 2008, 16:18
23.
No subject Jun 19, 2008, 16:18
Jun 19, 2008, 16:18
 
I played it on a 6800GT 256 and while it didn't look that great it was playable.

Avatar 6174
22.
 
Re: No subject
Jun 19, 2008, 16:11
22.
Re: No subject Jun 19, 2008, 16:11
Jun 19, 2008, 16:11
 
You can set crysis level of detail to run just fine on older systems

No you can't. My system was about 14 to 16 months old when Crysis came out. It played decently on Medium settings (1024x768) until I got to the cave, not counting the cut-scenes which ignored video settings and was like watching a slide-show. The cave, the snowy mountain area and the carrier all ran like dog shit even on the Lowest settings at 800x600.

----------------------------------------------------
Grand Theft Auto IV.....what else is there?

PSN ID= Puscifer73
"Blues News" Steam Community... http://steamcommunity.com/groups/bluesnews/
21.
 
No subject
Jun 19, 2008, 15:50
21.
No subject Jun 19, 2008, 15:50
Jun 19, 2008, 15:50
 
You can set crysis level of detail to run just fine on older systems, the problem is people aren't satisfied with a visual quality of "far cry" levels when they know higher settings are available.

It’s Crytek’s fault for allowing people access to higher end graphic settings?

I think it’s great when you can have games that offer more than what current tech can handle, eventually you’ll be able to run the game at the higher settings, I give Crytek high praise for pushing the envelope and as for support they’re still a hell of a lot better than most companies out there.



Avatar 6174
20.
 
Re: Over rated
Jun 19, 2008, 15:37
20.
Re: Over rated Jun 19, 2008, 15:37
Jun 19, 2008, 15:37
 
you could build an entire machine from scratch for under $900 that could run Crysis on High at around 30fps

That event where they "proved" it could run on a machine that only cost $900 was more like 3 months after release. 3 months in computer hardware may as well be a lifetime. But fact is, people shouldn't have to buy a whole new computer just to play a single game. PC Games need to be minimum 2 years (if not more) backwards compatible with hardware. Crysis ran like shit on some PC's that were bought less than a year prior to the release.

----------------------------------------------------
Grand Theft Auto IV.....what else is there?

PSN ID= Puscifer73
"Blues News" Steam Community... http://steamcommunity.com/groups/bluesnews/
19.
 
30-35 FPS in "high" detail mode
Jun 19, 2008, 15:17
19.
30-35 FPS in "high" detail mode Jun 19, 2008, 15:17
Jun 19, 2008, 15:17
 
at 640x480 resolution

Avatar 6174
18.
 
Given...
Jun 19, 2008, 15:12
18.
Given... Jun 19, 2008, 15:12
Jun 19, 2008, 15:12
 
the value of the US dollar, 0 Euros gives about a couple of dollars
37 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  ] Older