Support NeoGAF

[OneFiftyOne]

I really don't understand why some are so impressed by this game/engine. If it requires hardware that's outside of 99.9% of the market in order to get good performance then it's a badly designed engine.

QFT. Half-life 2 and Doom 3 ran well on mid-budget systems when they came out, 3 years ago. PC gamers (like me) upgraded their systems to play these games, but they didn't have to spend thousands of dollars.

 

[HokieJoe]

:lol

The XP launch was a fucking disaster in the eyes of the same groups that are calling Vista a bomb. There were driver issues up the ass, aplication incompatibilities, severe performance drops in gaming, etc.... Everyone was saying go back to 98se. (ME never existed)

I didn't have any performance problems with XP pre-SP1. I did have to go into recovery console several times though because it crashed. Once that was accomplished, everything was back to normal.

 

[GoldenEye 007]

I exceed all of the recommended specs except RAM, where it is equal. But, considering I'll be running the game and all others at only 1920x1080, I don't know how it will perform. The multiplayer Crysis demo runs.... ok at high settings and no AA. This is with an e6600 OCd to 3.4GHz, an 8800GTX, and 2GB RAM at 1100MHz in WinXP. Oh well, if I buy Crysis, we'll see.

 

[nataku]

Hmm. I meet or exceed all the recommended but the video card. I do have an 8800GTS, but only 320MB.

I don't have vista though, so DX9 for me.

 

[FLEABttn]

Th UE3 engine scales better. Running Fury at 1280x800 with low render at 20-30 fps with a 9700 mobility for gods sake.

I can appreciate what they're trying to do but not enough people are going to be able to play that to make a good RoI. A friend of mine suggested that the money will be in licensing the engine out, but who's going to license this engine if not many people can play your game? Especially when there are other engine out there that scale better (UE3) or engines that are very scaleable with new features being added semi-regularly, where you can use art style to make up for technical limitations (Source).

Before someone tells me I'm perhaps in the wrong hobby, I think they ought to ask Blizzard or Valve their opinion on the matter. Part of WoW's success was that it was able to run on rather archaic hardware. Starcraft 2 will likely be able to run on higher end GeForce 3's when it eventually hits.

 

[Kabouter]

Crysis is BOHICA to PC gaming. I remember the people going around claiming it would run just as good as the videos on a sub-$1000 system. Right.

The recommended system is no more than $1000.

 

[MickeyKnox]

I love Crysis threads, they're like a microcosm of all the PC gaming hate that Gaf has.

One thing I notice that's interesting about the whole mentality behind the PC gaming memes is this:

The main arguments behind it are that it's too expensive and that it's impractical right? And while there's a small contingent of people here who try and prove why those are misconceptions, it never catches. But why? Let's assume for a minute that those points were in fact true, why is it that every time there's a PC thread there's this compulsory need to attack it and make sure to remind everyone that PC gaming is in fact, a pile of shit?

I mean for example, every red blooded male in this place can appreciate something like a Bugatti Veyron or an Enzo or any other super car, even though there's almost no chance that anyone of them will ever get to own one. But are these things not both truly expensive and completely impractical? Yes, they are. And when you know you can never own one, you can then appreciate them for what they are, be in awe when you see one in person, (especially on the road) But when you know you could actually have something but for whatever reason you don't want it, you begin to try and rationalize the decision by building all these negatives and getting people to help make you feel better by agreeing with these points.

I know this is the core of fanboyism (to some extent) but it's just something I can't help noticing, especially in PC threads since there's always the same exact points brought up. A thread will either escape the trolling and never make it past the first page or the digital slap fight will ensue and then it can actually stay on the front page of gaf for more than a minute.

 

[laesperanzapaz]

I love Crysis threads, they're like a microcosm of all the PC gaming hate that Gaf has.

One thing I notice that's interesting about the whole mentality behind the PC gaming memes is this:

The main arguments behind it are that it's too expensive and that it's impractical right? And while there's a small contingent of people here who try and prove why those are misconceptions, it never catches. But why? Let's assume for a minute that those points were in fact true, why is it that every time there's a PC thread there's this compulsory need to attack it and make sure to remind everyone that PC gaming is in fact, a pile of shit?

I mean for example, every red blooded male in this place can appreciate something like a Bugatti Veyron or an Enzo or any other super car, even though there's almost no chance that anyone of them will ever get to own one. But are these things not both truly expensive and completely impractical? Yes, they are. And when you know you can never own one, you can then appreciate them for what they are, be in awe when you see one in person, (especially on the road) But when you know you could actually have something but for whatever reason you don't want it, you begin to try and rationalize the decision by building all these negatives and getting people to help make you feel better by agreeing with these points.

I know this is the core of fanboyism (to some extent) but it's just something I can't help noticing, especially in PC threads since there's always the same exact points brought up. A thread will either escape the trolling and never make it past the first page or the digital slap fight will ensue and then it can actually stay on the front page of gaf for more than a minute.

You are answering your own complaints. PC gaming - by which i mean buying the latest and greatest, unlike playing the same game online over and over - is much more costly and time consuming and requiring certain knowledge that the mainstream/average gamer doesn't have/care for.

I disagree that PC gaming is dying. I disagree PC gaming 'sucks' or is 'bad.' But to not acknowledge the reasons why PC gaming is small share of the market, or to not acknowledge the rationality of those reasons, is just as much PC fanboyism.

to summarize: to each his own. Period.

Period.

 

[mentho]

i hope they spend some time optimizing this for sli. it's sad when new games perform worse with two video cards than they do with one.

 

[MickeyKnox]

You are answering your own complaints. PC gaming - by which i mean buying the latest and greatest, unlike playing the same game online over and over - is much more costly and time consuming and requiring certain knowledge that the mainstream/average gamer doesn't have/care for.

I disagree that PC gaming is dying. I disagree PC gaming 'sucks' or is 'bad.' But to not acknowledge the reasons why PC gaming is small share of the market, or to not acknowledge the rationality of those reasons, is just as much PC fanboyism.

to summarize: to each his own. Period.

Period.

:lol

PC gaming is it's own thing, always has always will be. The "rationality" you talk about is anything but. Is Pc gaming less idiot proof than console gaming? Yes. Is it as impossible to grasp as everyone who isn't a PC gamer loves to pollute those topics with? No. What I object to isn't even the notion that people perceive it as such, but rather this attitude that every time some PC thread comes up that contains some cool stuff, the GAF collective assaults it with the same copy&paste responses at the ready.

 

[laesperanzapaz]

:lol

PC gaming is it's own thing, always has always will be. The "rationality" you talk about is anything but. Is Pc gaming less idiot proof than console gaming? Yes. Is it as impossible to grasp as everyone who isn't a PC gamer loves to pollute those topics with? No. What I object to isn't even the notion that people perceive it as such, but rather this attitude that every time some PC thread comes up that contains some cool stuff, the GAF collective assaults it with the same copy&paste responses at the ready.

This i totally understand.

BUt you posting :lol doesn't really help your cause.

 

[Xenon]

No. What I object to isn't even the notion that people perceive it as such, but rather this attitude that every time some PC thread comes up that contains some cool stuff, the GAF collective assaults it with the same copy&paste responses at the ready.

Sounds fare now all we need is to get the PC gamers with the KB/M is best proclamations out of console FPS threads..... :lol riiiiiiiiight


This is a thread about the game's required specs, this is the perfect place to bitch about the cost of entry. Crysis is not breaking any ground with its high specs. And anyone who has ever put serious time into PC gaming knows that games run anywhere from Shitty to OMFG depending how cash you spend on your rig. Some people see the value in the cost others dont.

 

[FORD]

I play the Crysis BETA.

-E6600 @ 3GHz
-8800GTS 640MB OC
-2GB RAM

I play at 1920x1200 with medium settings and get 30-40FPS. Low settings look utter crap, high settings are sick but I get 15-20FPS...

Ultra High settings are locked, but Crytek say that an 8800 ULTA will be able to run on Ultra High. But people in the BETA have trouble running high with a GTX...

I dunno, this is why instead of paying $3,000 for a PC I purchased a $2,000 PC and a PS3, can't afford upgrading anymore.

 

[Hammer24]

I do net get this.
Crysis is the graphical/technical showpiece. What sense does it make to play this on "medium settings"?
GAF is an enthusiasts forum. Now how many here can actually play the game on its highest settings, aka the way the devs meant it to be played? Bonus question: how much did they pay for their rig?

 

[EviLore]

You are answering your own complaints. PC gaming - by which i mean buying the latest and greatest, unlike playing the same game online over and over - is much more costly and time consuming and requiring certain knowledge that the mainstream/average gamer doesn't have/care for.

I disagree that PC gaming is dying. I disagree PC gaming 'sucks' or is 'bad.' But to not acknowledge the reasons why PC gaming is small share of the market, or to not acknowledge the rationality of those reasons, is just as much PC fanboyism.

to summarize: to each his own. Period.

Period.

HYPHEN.

EXCLAMATION POINT.

 

[KingJ2002]

2.4ghz dual core
4GB of ram
Geforce 8800 GTS (640MB)
windows vista 64 bit


if my computer chugs... **** pc gaming altogether... ill stick with console gaming.

 

[FORD]

Crysis is the graphical/technical showpiece. What sense does it make to play this on "medium settings"?

Do you think I'm happy spending $500 AU on a graphics card to play on medium settings? Medium settings for me are just playable, with no AA. The game looks meh for me, but like the classic saying;

Gameplay> Graphics

I'm selling my GPU to my mate to get some wasted cash back and buy some great PS3 titles, sorry PC.

 

[Sharp]

I do net get this.
Crysis is the graphical/technical showpiece. What sense does it make to play this on "medium settings"?
GAF is an enthusiasts forum. Now how many here can actually play the game on its highest settings, aka the way the devs meant it to be played? Bonus question: how much did they pay for their rig?

GAF is a console enthusiasts forum. The number of actual PC enthusiasts here is vanishingly small. Personally, I'm hardly going to condemn PC gaming because my processor or graphics card isn't currently up to par. In a few years' time, it will all be the same anyway.

 

[CrushDance]

HYPHEN.

EXCLAMATION POINT.

:lol

Mickey has a point though as well as the other guy. PC gaming for the average person can be hard to get into and they think they need the most bleeding edge parts. That's how I got into the PC world but I've changed a lot since then.

Really buying your own PC and building it does a lot for you and your knowledge base, yeah it's intimidating at first since all the parts are so small(lol dx10 cards) yet cost so much. But when it turns on you'll feel good.

Seriously though, for the price of a HDTV 26" and a PS3 or 360. You can build a stupidly powerful computer that will last you a long time, just don't get caught up in all the new things. If you didn't need it before you don't need it now.

As for PC gaming? many games do autopatches and sch these days, if you have a problem there's usually forums or tech support to contact. It's not as "idiot proof" as Mickey said. But it's a hell lot more rewarding.

 

[k79]

f*ck.
ill wait for ps3 version
i only got E6600 at stock speed, GF 7900GTO, 2 gigs ram, Vista..... goddamn it i dont want to upgrade so ill skip.

Make a dualboot with XP and wait for the huge tweakguide for Crysis that is no doubt coming, and i think you'll do fine on tweaked medium-high settings.

Your specs arent bad at all :/

 

[CrushDance]

Well I was holding off buying a new video card to the next round come out, I am using onboard video intel® Graphics Media Accelerator X3000 (Intel® GMA X3000) and I gotta say for an onboard system this thing kicks ass, but I have got 384mb of ram dedicated to it out of 4gb, I bet it would run on medium settings.

0__________0

:lol

Oh wait...are you being serious?

:lol :lol :lol

L.M.F.A.O:lol The shaders, they do nothing.

Dude I have Intel graphics teh "extreme" as well. And it does nothing! even on old games I can run @720 without like 20FPS and no shaders at all. Just no.

It can have a gajilion MB of ram but with no shaders and sucking CPU power? Just no.

 

[Ronok]

Only my 7900 gs lets me down. Hopefully I'll be able to play it on medium? Lol

 

[test_account]

GeForce 9 is out in November (if not delayed), so if anyone is going to upgrade for Crysis i would wait untill GF9 is out. GF9 cards will be damn expencive indeed, but the GF8 cards will drop in price

 

[broony]

Sorry for changing the subject slightly, but what happened to the demo that was supposed to be released around the 25th last month? Did it get delayed or cancelled?

I'm going to base my purchase on a demo, I think I should be fine running it but want to be sure.

 

[deepbrown]

Are these specs higher than for Bioshock?

 

[Borys]

Amazing, people want Crysis to push every envelope there is (GFX, physics etc.) without requiring some major hardware.

Non-sense.

You want amazing experience, you buy GeForce 9XXX for Crysis.

I think it's that simple, as it was with PC games during 3 decades.

 

[Marko_Baomoro]

I have an e6600 @ 2.4GHz and 2GB Ram DDR2
Video: Ati Radeon x1950xt with 512MB ram

i hope to enjoy

 

[Gizmo_Monkey]

How will it run on mine?

i have a quad proc q6600
2gb ram
win xp (direct x9)
ati 256mb radeon hd 2600 xt

using a resolution of 1360x768 on my big tv.

 

[A-Button]

high specs, but, well... as long as most console FPS offer no mouse/keyboard support, anyone who wants to have a decent FPS experience must play on the pc (only my oppinion of course..)

 

[Doc Evils]

Are these specs higher than for Bioshock?

Bioshock wasn't high spec. Vista says it's recommened spec is 2. Crysis will most likely be 5.

 

[Rexaur]

2.4ghz dual core
4GB of ram
Geforce 8800 GTS (640MB)
windows vista 64 bit


if my computer chugs... **** pc gaming altogether... ill stick with console gaming.

I almost have your set up and can let you know a bit of my experience:

2.6ghz dual core
4GB RAM (just got 2GB yesterday)
GeForce 8800 GTX
Vista 64-bit
1280x1024 resolution

I tried running the game on High settings yesterday when I got my new RAM in. It used up about 75% while playing the game, and it ran decently with 8x anti-aliasing. Of course a bit choppy at times, but I heard in the chat during the game that a new BETA driver came out for the nVidia cards which supposedly helps. Can't remember my FPS or if choppiness was due to lag, but did the game look ever so sweet.

 

[JCBossman]

I exceed all of the recommended specs except RAM, where it is equal. But, considering I'll be running the game and all others at only 1920x1080, I don't know how it will perform. The multiplayer Crysis demo runs.... ok at high settings and no AA. This is with an e6600 OCd to 3.4GHz, an 8800GTX, and 2GB RAM at 1100MHz in WinXP. Oh well, if I buy Crysis, we'll see.

Thats it Ron? Only 1920x1080? I hate to see you run it at a SERIOUS rez.

 

[Steroyd]

My PC is so old it can't play a HD video of someone playing Crysis without chugging at 1 FPS. :lol

Screw HD my PC can't play a SD video without crawling on it's knees.

 

[JCBossman]

My PC is so old it can't play a HD video of someone playing Crysis without chugging at 1 FPS. :lol

Screw HD my PC can't play a SD video without crawling on it's knees.

Don't feel bad...I was there not long ago,kinda liked it, it just focused me on console games.

 

[TheDarkKnight774]

dang i just hit the min specs. I hope there's a demo so i can see how it actually runs on my machine

 

[Dave Long]

I almost have your set up and can let you know a bit of my experience:

2.6ghz dual core
4GB RAM (just got 2GB yesterday)
GeForce 8800 GTX
Vista 64-bit
1280x1024 resolution

I tried running the game on High settings yesterday when I got my new RAM in. It used up about 75% while playing the game, and it ran decently with 8x anti-aliasing. Of course a bit choppy at times, but I heard in the chat during the game that a new BETA driver came out for the nVidia cards which supposedly helps. Can't remember my FPS or if choppiness was due to lag, but did the game look ever so sweet.

Dude... I think you can ratchet that back a little bit.

I'm constantly amazed by how PC gamers will push their settings to the maximum while sacrificing smooth framerates when the difference between something like 8x and 2x anti-aliasing is almost indetectable to normal humans.

 

[Flambe]

Just upgraded comp a bit. Got an Asus P5N32-E sli mobo, E6750 processor overclocked to 3.3ghz and 2gb of ram (had 174 pin, had to get 240 pin DDR2 rar)

I can go high settings 2x AA and it's perfectly smooth. Needs to be pushed further to see where I have to stop =P

Anyway yeah

E6750 dual core
2GB ram
8800 GTS 640mb

smooth as silk

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

so we're all gonna wait for the cut back 360 or PS3 port?

 

[AltogetherAndrews]

I have an 8800 coming, so I suddenly don't feel so bad about this.

 

[Broadbandito]

Core 2 duo 2.0 ghz
2 gb DD2 667
ATI X1800 XT 512 mb



Should i be decentlywell off?

 

[MickeyKnox]

I have an 8800 coming, so I suddenly don't feel so bad about this.

Which one?

 

[AltogetherAndrews]

Which one?

Eh, 320 model, from evga. Cheapest one I think, but it's a step up from the 8600 that I'm retiring. And my monitor runs at a max resolution of 1280x1024, so it should be fine. Although hell, this looks so cinematic that it might be worth hooking it up to the TV instead.

 

[Lobster]

Will an X1950 run this game at good settings?

I surpass the Minimum requirements but hardly make it into Recommended. As long as it looks better then HL2 on my PC.

 

[FrequentlyNasty]

P4 2.0GHZ
Mobility Radeon 7500 32MB
256MB RAM
XP

would i make it to the loading screen at least?

 

[Lobster]

P4 2.0GHZ
Mobility Radeon 7500 32MB
256MB RAM
XP

would i make it to the loading screen at least?

The game would be Frequently Nasty for you.

 

[MickeyKnox]

Eh, 320 model, from evga. Cheapest one I think, but it's a step up from the 8600 that I'm retiring. And my monitor runs at a max resolution of 1280x1024, so it should be fine. Although hell, this looks so cinematic that it might be worth hooking it up to the TV instead.

Good for you, at that rez I think you'll be completely fine.

In other news, I'm even more fucking pumped for this now that native 64bit support is confirmed by the man himself, along with at least a 10% boost in performance per core over the 32bit version.

 

[Darkman M]

I feel angry for the guy with an 8800 and can only run the game on medium? Wow.

 

[FrequentlyNasty]

I feel angry for the guy with an 8800 and can only run the game on medium? Wow.

that'd be batshit insane, if true
i'm glad to have put my money into a 55'' sony 1080p dlp + a ps3 instead of jumping on the pc-upgrade-crazy-train again
duh, maybe next year...if should decide against getting an apple as a replacement for my 2003 notebook, though

 

[FunkyMunkey]

Wow. My laptop could run this decent but I'd rather not melt it.

 

[godhandiscen]

I play the Crysis BETA.

-E6600 @ 3GHz
-8800GTS 640MB OC
-2GB RAM

I play at 1920x1200 with medium settings and get 30-40FPS. Low settings look utter crap, high settings are sick but I get 15-20FPS...

Ultra High settings are locked, but Crytek say that an 8800 ULTA will be able to run on Ultra High. But people in the BETA have trouble running high with a GTX...

I dunno, this is why instead of paying $3,000 for a PC I purchased a $2,000 PC and a PS3, can't afford upgrading anymore.

WTF? Are you using Vista? If you can only get 30-40fps at medium settings then I better give up, and dont even plan to upgrade for this game right now.