• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Crysis 2 |OT| This is what happens Larry...

LiquidMetal14

hide your water-based mammals
weedlewalker said:
Played about 45-60 mins of the PC version and I can absolutely see how videos are going show all three looking very similar.
These are console textures. I would say crysis 1 had better textures on average. This is no doubt a console priority #1 game.
Textures are not everything and the game looks amazing and so far is alot of fun. I do not regret the purchase.
I am running at 2650x1440 w/o AA though and I could NEVER do that with 1 or warhead.

I do hate the stereotypically tough guy marine chatter but I can live with it.
This is what Crysis 2 has felt like for a while. We need that supposed DX11 fix now.

Also glad to see the fixes users are already doing on PC.
 

sleepykyo

Member
Afrikan said:
what if the second half of the game the PS3 version would've "performed" better? He wouldn't know, would he?

is this not lazy journalism. Not professorial at all. And the Editors *let him* get away with it.

-The demo didn't go up until a week before launch. The servers were shut down after 2 days.
-The producer couldn't deny the differences choosing instead to use the qualifier signficant.
-Daniel Phillips mentioned that they switched from using the 360 to using the PS3 as the low end benchmark.
-EA intentionally withholding the PS3 version until the night before (effectively too late for street date).
-He played through half the PS3 version.

And the perfomance issues are still being questioned?
 

Peterthumpa

Member
LiquidMetal14 said:
This is what Crysis 2 has felt like for a while. We need that supposed DX11 fix now.

Also glad to see the fixes users are already doing on PC.
The original Crysis wasn't well know for good texturing. That belongs to Metro 2003.
 

DaBuddaDa

Member
03sho said:
Hearing the signle player campaign is 10 hours long is music to my ears. Love it.
Agreed. I was worried about that. It seems like modern FPS spend so much time on the multiplayer that the single player gets about half the love it deserves.

4-6 hour campaigns are shite. 12-15 would wear out its welcome. 8-10 is perfect.
 
Afrikan said:
so IGN based its review after playing at the event? or something else.
People do this all the time, companies bring press out to review the game on their perfect setup, I remember reading about it during Halo specifically.
 

poppabk

Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
TheExodu5 said:
I played through Crysis yesterday and the aircraft carrier chapter really sucks.
The entire alien section sucks in my opinion, or at least it sucks relative to the rest of the game.
 

LowParry

Member
Hey guys, this game is fucking amazing. And with a good sound system, it's even more amazing. Maximum awesome! Fuck the haters. And I have the 360 version.
 

Afrikan

Member
futnownarcade said:
People do this all the time, companies bring press out to review the game on their perfect setup, I remember reading about it during Halo specifically.

no, I know what you mean....its just that in this case, it wasn't clear how he played both versions......

either way more info came out and the reviewer played both versions on completely different settings....as well as a drastically different amount of time.

360 version- home theater setup, played for a couple of days finished it 2 times.

PS3 version- played in the office with god knows what kind of T.V or calibration....played "about" half of the game.
 

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Anyone else impressed by the feeling of moving and looking around in this game? It is, without a doubt, the smoothest implementation of this I've ever seen. The way the camera works, the movement of the player, and the animation of the gun and other motions is really in a class of its own. Crysis was already solid in this area, but they've really outdone themselves this time. Simply walking around FEELS fun, which is something a lot of developers seem to miss.

Played about 45-60 mins of the PC version and I can absolutely see how videos are going show all three looking very similar.
These are console textures. I would say crysis 1 had better textures on average. This is no doubt a console priority #1 game.
Was just replaying Crysis before this and, on the whole, Crysis 2 looks better, but I kind of agree that the textures aren't quite as good. That's not to say Crysis 1 is significantly better in that regard as there are plenty of lower resolution textures throughout, but some of the core environment textures aren't quite on par.

The lighting, though, is so far beyond the original it's not even funny. The global illumination makes a huge difference in overall picture quality as even the indoor scenes have a very dynamic, rich appearance. There is a lot of lighting in play here.

Crysis 2 is definitely more consistent. Crysis 1 looked great a lot of the time, but there were also plenty of situations where things felt a bit off. Image quality was always an issue too. The high framerate, great animation, and amazing lighting really sell the visuals in Crysis 2.

Can I also say that this is the smoothest PC experience I've ever had? No tweaking, no dicking around with configs, just jump in and play with perfect image quality and an unwavering 60 fps. It looks incredible and runs flawlessly. For such an impressive looking piece of software, that's really wonderful to see.

Also, for console players, are those FMV briefing sequences between missions used as loading screens? The way they are placed makes me think that they are intended to be used in that way, but on the PC, there is a separate, nearly static and silent loading screen that appears just after all of these scenes. I had noticed that the console demos featured music and animation during loading in the demo as well while the PC version was silent and static. If that is how loading is handled on consoles, I'm disappointed that this seamlessness is lost on PC when even Call of Duty is doing it just fine. Could they seriously not play a video while loading? At least the loading is very short. :\

r_UsePOM = 1

well i'll be... that isn't actually going to work is it?
Is the console restricted like Crysis by default? I always used con_restricted 0 in Crysis, but that's not available here and I'm not seeing many console options at the moment. Not that I need to get into it now, but I definitely am curious.
 

styl3s

Member
Installing on 360, got my pack of sugar free red bulls and i am ready to dive into this SP and layeth the smacketh down on some candy asses
 

DaBuddaDa

Member
PC players: anyone have any experience with or benchmarks concerning performance on newer, mid-to-high range cards on the highest graphics setting? GTX 460, 6870, 6950, GTX 570, etc.?
 
dark10x said:
Anyone else impressed by the feeling of moving and looking around in this game? It is, without a doubt, the smoothest implementation of this I've ever seen. The way the camera works, the movement of the player, and the animation of the gun and other motions is really in a class of its own. Crysis was already solid in this area, but they've really outdone themselves this time. Simply walking around FEELS fun, which is something a lot of developers seem to miss.


Was just replaying Crysis before this and, on the whole, Crysis 2 looks better, but I kind of agree that the textures aren't quite as good. That's not to say Crysis 1 is significantly better in that regard as there are plenty of lower resolution textures throughout, but some of the core environment textures aren't quite on par.

The lighting, though, is so far beyond the original it's not even funny. The global illumination makes a huge difference in overall picture quality as even the indoor scenes have a very dynamic, rich appearance. There is a lot of lighting in play here.

Crysis 2 is definitely more consistent. Crysis 1 looked great a lot of the time, but there were also plenty of situations where things felt a bit off. Image quality was always an issue too. The high framerate, great animation, and amazing lighting really sell the visuals in Crysis 2.

Can I also say that this is the smoothest PC experience I've ever had? No tweaking, no dicking around with configs, just jump in and play with perfect image quality and an unwavering 60 fps. It looks incredible and runs flawlessly. For such an impressive looking piece of software, that's really wonderful to see.

Also, for console players, are those FMV briefing sequences between missions used as loading screens? The way they are placed makes me think that they are intended to be used in that way, but on the PC, there is a separate, nearly static and silent loading screen that appears just after all of these scenes. I had noticed that the console demos featured music and animation during loading in the demo as well while the PC version was silent and static. If that is how loading is handled on consoles, I'm disappointed that this seamlessness is lost on PC when even Call of Duty is doing it just fine. Could they seriously not play a video while loading? At least the loading is very short. :\


Is the console restricted like Crysis by default? I always used con_restricted 0 in Crysis, but that's not available here and I'm not seeing many console options at the moment. Not that I need to get into it now, but I definitely am curious.
what is your hard drive speed? it's plausible that it is loading during that cutscene but that it isn't getting the whole level loaded before the end of the video.

thanks for the impressions. you were top of my list of people who i could trust on this one :)
 

Talafas

Neo Member
Wow, this is quite the bummer

err.jpg
 
Heavy said:
Fuck. You're killing me dude... T-minus ~1 hour for UPS man.
i'm killing myself. i have to finish work (less than two and a half hours!) drive home, go for a run while there's still light, drive to the nearest city to get the game and write a thousand or so words of my next novel before i can sit down and enjoy it without distractions or regrets.

it will hopefully be worth it. sounds like it.
 

pix

Member
DaBuddaDa said:
PC players: anyone have any experience with or benchmarks concerning performance on newer, mid-to-high range cards on the highest graphics setting? GTX 460, 6870, 6950, GTX 570, etc.?

Was posted earlier.
Crysis2%20gamer%201680.png
 

Mr_Brit

Banned
plagiarize said:
what is your hard drive speed? it's plausible that it is loading during that cutscene but that it isn't getting the whole level loaded before the end of the video.

thanks for the impressions. you were top of my list of people who i could trust on this one :)
Nope, at least in the multiplayer demo the console versions have movies in the background while the PC version is just a static screen.
 

pix

Member
DaBuddaDa said:
Amazing, thank you.

What is "Gamer" setting called now? There's High, Very High, and Extreme, right?

To be honest I am not sure. I wish it was easier to tell as well.
 

eso76

Member
dark10x said:
Also, for console players, are those FMV briefing sequences between missions used as loading screens? The way they are placed makes me think that they are intended to be used in that way

yup, i have the game installed on x360 and i'm prompted to press "A to continue" before (long before) fmv's are finished, and the game starts right away.
 

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
plagiarize said:
what is your hard drive speed? it's plausible that it is loading during that cutscene but that it isn't getting the whole level loaded before the end of the video.

thanks for the impressions. you were top of my list of people who i could trust on this one :)
Nah, you can skip the movies and go straight to loading screens. Takes the same amount of time.
 
Has anyone else's download reset? One indicator is telling me I've download 5000mb another is telling me I've downloaded 2000mb and roughly 20% of the game. ignore Steam's download indicators?
 
any 3d impressions from the PC crowd yet? i want to confirm that it's doing true stereoscopic 3d on PC rather than the pseudo 3d stuff it's doing on consoles.
 

pix

Member
DaBuddaDa said:
The GTX 560 Ti is a beast in this game according to that benchmark. Almost as good as a 6950 and costs about $50 less.

Yep I just bought one on a limb the other day. :) Quite happy and it was pretty cheap.

1080p resolution.
Crysis2%20gamer%201920.png


Crysis2%20hrdcre%201920.png
 

DSN2K

Member
pix said:
Yep I just bought one on a limb the other day. :) Quite happy and it was pretty cheap.

1080p resolution.


I have ATI 5770 and I got twice the frame rate they are saying in those graphs at 1080p
 

pix

Member
DSN2K said:
pix said:
Yep I just bought one on a limb the other day. :) Quite happy and it was pretty cheap.

1080p resolution.


I have ATI 5770 and I got twice the frame rate they are saying in those graphs at 1080p

Your computer setup may not be the same as theirs either.
 

bee

Member
plagiarize said:
any 3d impressions from the PC crowd yet? i want to confirm that it's doing true stereoscopic 3d on PC rather than the pseudo 3d stuff it's doing on consoles.

the demo did proper driver 3D, so yeah it will
 
Top Bottom