New CryEngine 3 Trailer Shows How the Next Generation Could Look
- Thread starter John Funk
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Interesting. Call me back in fifteen years when it doesn't take more money than I have to my name and the blood of a virgin to get a computer that can run it, or a console for that matter.
Underlying under the graphics, people tend to forget the amazing physics engine, wich is the main reason Crysis was hard to run in the first place. It was more of a physics problem then a graphical one. Crysis 2 demo looks fantastically amazing in 1080p, BUT, because we have to cater to console babies, they dumbed it down, and it shows. It also shows they could, and maybe still can, push Crysis 2 to the upper levels of graphical performance(for PC, doubt they can for consoles now, too old).
I really want you to be right, and yet the Crysis 2 Demo is DX9. The beta leak is DX9 (or so says Wikipedia) the Steam Storepage lists it as a DX9 title, and the Crysis 2 forums are saying that DX11 support will possibly be patched in sometime after launch.murphy7801 said:
Leaked beta is an incomplete game. Steam Store page lists MINIMUM requiremnts. The patch is for the demo.Void(null) said:
Again, I really hope you are right. I would like nothing more than to have DX11 support for Crysis 2 out of the box.draythefingerless said:
This is the single most powerful engine in gaming history, and this is the only franchise to this day who advocates itself as the unholy benchmark for computers and games alike. It has DX11. Crytek has always been a PC developer. Also they said it would have so...Void(null) said:
One problem I have always had with tech demos is that they show off awe inspiring features that no studio ever bothers to implement into their games. We have the computer power for realtime fluid dynamics but you never see it implemented into games beyond tech demos.
I'm in no way shape or form arguing about the muscle behind the engine... However all signs for Crysis 2 currently point to "2nd rate PC Game stripped down for the consoles."draythefingerless said:
Again I hope you are right and I am wrong. I would like nothing more than to see Crysis 2 put my GTX 580 through the ringer, but right at this very moment it looks like the alleged 2 million nVidia paid Crytek to optimize for the GTX 580 was a huge waste.
I want to be wrong, yet I can't shake the feeling that I am going to be disappointed.
Like i care when someone flames me. I usually laugh along if its a good flame. But right now, no console player can defend the limitations of the machines they have. We are in the phase of the never ending console cycle, where they have gone past their peak in capabilities, and are now dragging down the PC gaming, wich is flourishing with high end power. The only thing making games look crappy right now, are the consoles. Even the PS3 is starting to lag behind.Adzma said:
I just feel sad that devs like BioWare and Crytek, two huge power houses with strong rooting in PC, have to just comply to console limitation designs most of the time....I KNOW BioWare can make BEAUTIFUL games, they showed it in Mass Effect.
Dem graphics...
Having a pc that could run that would be a dream come true. I felt a rustle in my jimmies watching that vid. The characters and animation werent spectacular but the textures...oh baby
Having a pc that could run that would be a dream come true. I felt a rustle in my jimmies watching that vid. The characters and animation werent spectacular but the textures...oh baby
There! I'm drawing the line right there! We get to those a graphics, and we're done. No more caring about how a game looks. Back to focusing on gameplay and lasting longer than the hot water in my shower.
It's called the Cry engine for a reason guys, because you cry when you see how much money you have to dish out to actually build a PC that can run it.
In all seriousness though, that was very pretty, and as others have wondered, why aren't there more Cry Engine based games? I'm not that tech savvy, but does the engine really determine the minimum requirements? Or is Unreal just dirt cheap to license?
In all seriousness though, that was very pretty, and as others have wondered, why aren't there more Cry Engine based games? I'm not that tech savvy, but does the engine really determine the minimum requirements? Or is Unreal just dirt cheap to license?
This makes me wonder where games will go after we finally do have photorealistic graphics that run smoothly on your average system. What will be the big selling point for PC games when "has the best graphics" just doesn't matter anymore? Hopefully we'll see some serious improvments to enemy AI or maybe even that promised filter that keeps 12-year olds from using headsets.
