Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Crysis 2 looks like a high-end XBOX 360 game

Tags:
  • PC gaming
  • Games
  • Crysis
  • Xbox 360
  • Graphics
  • Video Games
Last response: in Video Games
Share
March 9, 2011 1:43:20 AM

I've played the Crysis 2 demo, and I have seen tons of PC gameplay footage. I have to admit that the first Crysis had FAR better graphics than the sequel. Crysis 2 looks like a high-end XBOX 360 game.

For some reason, it's even more hardware-intensive than the first game, and has worse graphics.

This is just my opinion...

More about : crysis high end xbox 360 game

Anonymous
March 9, 2011 2:46:23 AM

http://www.high-quality-screenshots.com/crysis-2-demo.h...

Comparing Crysis 2 Demo to Warhead on my screenshots site shows the differences to a great extent. Notice that they dumbed down the controls (how they feel) for the more generalized gamers? Too bad they don't allow more customization for the physics and reactions within the game.
Anonymous
March 9, 2011 2:47:40 AM

I can't agree with hardware intensiveness, Crysis 2 Demo on max settings runs at 45fps on my rig, warhead at about 35fps but it has much more detail within all of the frames, so I expect the difference.
Related resources
March 9, 2011 5:32:03 AM

Anonymous said:
I can't agree with hardware intensiveness, Crysis 2 Demo on max settings runs at 45fps on my rig, warhead at about 35fps but it has much more detail within all of the frames, so I expect the difference.


What hardware is inside your system?
March 9, 2011 11:07:53 AM

Crysis 2 looks like an updated CoD, and yes! far worse than Crysis 1 and Warhead.

On my rig the average fps (according to fraps) are:

min. 42 fps - avg. 51 - max. 60 - This is with V-sync enabled, hence the low max fps.

My rig consists of:

Core 2 Quad 9550 - running stock

8Gb DDR2 HyperX @ 800Mhz 4,4,4,12, 2,1Volt

Gainward Golden Sample Geforce GTX470 @650 core clock

Windows 7 64-bit Ultimate edition

This game is shite - waiting for Battlefield 3, which actually looks like a game from 2011 :) 
March 9, 2011 3:24:55 PM

Based on the released multiplayer Demo, the graphics are very disappointing. You can see this especially with the small waterfall-thing on the skyline map, it looks pathetic. Just before the demo I played through Warhead, on which I had a steady 43fps (50+ in low areas, bottom around 35 during hovercraft sequence), here I'm easily getting 50+ all the time, I haven't given the fps much attention (busy playing the game :p ), but the quality is lower, and it runs a lot faster. And this is after forcing some more AA and AF via the control panel. This isn't even on a beast machine, just 1*GTX580 for the GPU...
Anonymous
March 9, 2011 6:33:03 PM

ambam said:
What hardware is inside your system?

Phenom ii x4 965 @ 3600mhz, 2600mhz NB
12gb ddr3 1600mhz
GTX460 1gb OC

Still, Crysis 2 runs faster at the "same" settings, regardless of the map or whats going on in game.
March 9, 2011 6:52:44 PM

they prob have to make it less intensive to make the port to 360 smoother. I guess they dont have to but they are prob so as to make less work for themselves? Obviously a 360 couldent run at the same graphics as Crysis and Warhead. So maybe making these graphics less intensive to start with it is a simpler process to port it to xbox?
March 9, 2011 6:58:24 PM

I was also very disappionted when I first played the demo. If this was a sequel to any other game it would be fine, but this is the successor to "THE" Crysis, the one that put a hurt on everyone's machine until just recently. I was going to preorder to support Crytek but the obvious port was too much.

But for what ever reason the MP is starting to grow on me. It may not have tons of replay value, but for now its kinda fun. I am still pretty sure I will wait till it goes on steam sale.
March 9, 2011 11:54:58 PM

so you would rather them release another crysis that cant even be played smoothly on the fastest hardware available at the time and you need to wait 3 years before hardware is available that can play it? your a w@nk3r.
March 10, 2011 1:47:46 AM

Anonymous said:
Phenom ii x4 965 @ 3600mhz, 2600mhz NB
12gb ddr3 1600mhz
GTX460 1gb OC

Still, Crysis 2 runs faster at the "same" settings, regardless of the map or whats going on in game.


I get 30-50 fps with Crysis Warhead on 1920x1080 on all "enthusiast" level settings with my Two HD 5870's in CF. I would get more fps if I overclocked my CPU, but for some reason, I cannot select options in the BIOS menu -- the arrow keys don't work.
Anonymous
March 10, 2011 2:21:06 AM

ambam said:
I get 30-50 fps with Crysis Warhead on 1920x1080 on all "enthusiast" level settings with my Two HD 5870's in CF. I would get more fps if I overclocked my CPU, but for some reason, I cannot select options in the BIOS menu -- the arrow keys don't work.


Whats your current motherboard and BIOS version? I've been lucky with my Asrock 890fx, it has worked with the stock BIOS like a champ, wireless usb keyboard and all without a single problem. I suggest a wired keyboard or even an older style PS/2 if it has that for a port :lol: 
March 10, 2011 8:07:57 AM

Anonymous said:
Whats your current motherboard and BIOS version? I've been lucky with my Asrock 890fx, it has worked with the stock BIOS like a champ, wireless usb keyboard and all without a single problem. I suggest a wired keyboard or even an older style PS/2 if it has that for a port :lol: 


I have the MSI Big Bang X-Power X58 motherboard. I'm not sure about the BIOS version.
March 10, 2011 1:00:02 PM

Have you tried typing the values in and pressing enter instead of relying on the arrow keys?
March 10, 2011 5:49:39 PM

Will all you noobs plz shut up?You people are forgetting that Crysis 2 Multiplayer has been done by Crytek UK, formerly Free Radical not Crytek Frankfurt which did the original Crysis and Single Player Crysis 2. Free Radical hadn't developed for the PC before Crytek bought them.

The demo only runs dx9 while the real thing will support dx11 and will make your pc cry.
March 10, 2011 6:06:14 PM

Pc Guru_07 said:
Will all you noobs plz shut up?You people are forgetting that Crysis 2 Multiplayer has been done by Crytek UK, formerly Free Radical not Crytek Frankfurt which did the original Crysis and Single Player Crysis 2. Free Radical hadn't developed for the PC before Crytek bought them.

The demo only runs dx9 while the real thing will support dx11 and will make your pc cry.

I dont think there is anything good about a game "making your PC cry". I think its good for software and hardware to push each other in order for things to keep moving forward. But I think part of the reason Crysis was so hard on systems was the sloppy code I could be wrong. I like the game it looks great but if cleaning up the code could give you the same look and feel with better performance why not take the extra time. What im running now in a Phenom II X4 965 OC to 3.8 6gb DDR3 1333 and a 6950 2GB flashed over to a 6970. I get 40 FPS avg on full setting with 4X AA. So do i have the best CPU out no but its still a quad core running at 3.8. and my GPU is not to shabby wile its not a $500-$700 Nvidia card it still gets good reviews and is a new up to date card. So basically there has to be a way to make a great looking game that can run at 45+ FPS full settings with current tech, not waiting 3-4 years later for those cards to run it smooth.
March 10, 2011 10:01:52 PM

Pc Guru_07 said:
Will all you noobs plz shut up?You people are forgetting that Crysis 2 Multiplayer has been done by Crytek UK, formerly Free Radical not Crytek Frankfurt which did the original Crysis and Single Player Crysis 2. Free Radical hadn't developed for the PC before Crytek bought them.

The demo only runs dx9 while the real thing will support dx11 and will make your pc cry.


Metro 2033 has shown us that tesselation combined with high resolutions will murder your fps. In some games like STALKER Call of Pripyat, DX11 actually improves performance.

Unless you have 2-3 way SLI GTX 580, tesselation and high resolutions will bring your fps to <20. The Fermi cards are the only graphics cards that are actually good a tesselation. ATI cards and any Nvidia card before the Fermi family are absolutely abysmal when it comes to tesselation.
March 10, 2011 10:18:56 PM

ambam said:
Metro 2033 has shown us that tesselation combined with high resolutions will murder your fps. In some games like STALKER Call of Pripyat, DX11 actually improves performance.

Unless you have 2-3 way SLI GTX 580, tesselation and high resolutions will bring your fps to <20. The Fermi cards are the only graphics cards that are actually good a tesselation. ATI cards and any Nvidia card before the Fermi family are absolutely abysmal when it comes to tesselation.

I just downloaded the Metro 2033 demo. And the settings I was running at were very high tessellation on i turned the AF down 1 notch and turned off advanced DOF and i was in full HD. Did a complete run through the demo with a fraps benchmark and it spit out 53 FPS avg. Now the loading screens prob helped that lol but i did a shorter bench just from the first gameplay to when you hit the first loading screen and still got 45 FPS avg. So you dont need SLI or xfire i have ready in alot of places that PPL are finding the DOF hit your FPS the most. At those setting i was getting better framerates than I do in crysis for some reason. After reading all the benchmarks I was expecting my card to be under 25FPS but i had a nice surprise :bounce: 
March 11, 2011 3:05:12 AM

You people are not getting my point.Crysis 2 retail will have much better graphics and high resolution textures.Dev has to delete lots of texture in order to keep the demo size under control.And this is just MP.From when MP version of games started to look good?SP version is where you get best eye candy.
March 12, 2011 4:33:29 AM

Pc Guru_07 said:
You people are not getting my point.Crysis 2 retail will have much better graphics and high resolution textures.Dev has to delete lots of texture in order to keep the demo size under control.And this is just MP.From when MP version of games started to look good?SP version is where you get best eye candy.


The first Crysis still looks better IMHO.

I hope you don't have to have 3-way SLI GTX 580 to play Crysis 2 on it's max settings on DX11 with playable fps. Apparently the Fermi cards are the only GPU's which can handle tesselation at extremely high resolutions. Metro 2033 has shown us this.

The CryEngine 3 would be able to flex it's true muscle if a Crysis 1 custom "jungle" type map was made, instead of an dense urban environment.

3-way SLI OC'ed GTX 580 can run Crysis and Crysis Warhead on very high/enthusiast at 1920x1080 with 8x AA at about 55-75 fps. It can run it on those same settings at 2560x1600 at about 30-50 fps.

Tri-SLI GTX 580 can run ANY game on it's maximum possible settings and resolutions with very smooth framerates. Even Metro 2033! The only problem with that GPU setup is trying to power it. Only the 1500W power supplies will power 3-way enthusiast SLI setups.

I wonder if Crysis 2 will be even more torturous on hardware than the first game on it's maximum possible settings.
March 14, 2011 6:08:01 PM

ambam said:
The first Crysis still looks better IMHO.

I hope you don't have to have 3-way SLI GTX 580 to play Crysis 2 on it's max settings on DX11 with playable fps. Apparently the Fermi cards are the only GPU's which can handle tesselation at extremely high resolutions. Metro 2033 has shown us this.

The CryEngine 3 would be able to flex it's true muscle if a Crysis 1 custom "jungle" type map was made, instead of an dense urban environment.

3-way SLI OC'ed GTX 580 can run Crysis and Crysis Warhead on very high/enthusiast at 1920x1080 with 8x AA at about 55-75 fps. It can run it on those same settings at 2560x1600 at about 30-50 fps.

Tri-SLI GTX 580 can run ANY game on it's maximum possible settings and resolutions with very smooth framerates. Even Metro 2033! The only problem with that GPU setup is trying to power it. Only the 1500W power supplies will power 3-way enthusiast SLI setups.

I wonder if Crysis 2 will be even more torturous on hardware than the first game on it's maximum possible settings.

If by saying

"the Fermi cards are the only GPU's which can handle tesselation at extremely high resolutions. Metro 2033 has shown us this."

you are implying that you need an Nvidia card for tessellation you are wrong. I have a AMD HD 6950 flashed to a 6970 and the settings i run in metro 2033 are 1920x1080 very high settings. The only thing i adjust are I turn advanced DOF off I use AAA not MSAA. My FPS never drop below 35 and I avg around 45. As stated I do have tessellation on. And as reported by toms in the 3way xfire/sli article the new 6900 series card scale better than the Nvidia cards do. So as they report you would need 2 570's to match 2 lower rated 6950's when using 2 cards and they also scale better when using 3. So it seems for now the Nvidia cards are getting better performance with one card setups ( they should they cost more) but when you move over to 2-3 card setups not only will they save you money both in card cost and power cost, they will perform better as well :) 
March 14, 2011 11:42:04 PM

cburke82 said:
If by saying

"the Fermi cards are the only GPU's which can handle tesselation at extremely high resolutions. Metro 2033 has shown us this."

you are implying that you need an Nvidia card for tessellation you are wrong. I have a AMD HD 6950 flashed to a 6970 and the settings i run in metro 2033 are 1920x1080 very high settings. The only thing i adjust are I turn advanced DOF off I use AAA not MSAA. My FPS never drop below 35 and I avg around 45. As stated I do have tessellation on. And as reported by toms in the 3way xfire/sli article the new 6900 series card scale better than the Nvidia cards do. So as they report you would need 2 570's to match 2 lower rated 6950's when using 2 cards and they also scale better when using 3. So it seems for now the Nvidia cards are getting better performance with one card setups ( they should they cost more) but when you move over to 2-3 card setups not only will they save you money both in card cost and power cost, they will perform better as well :) 


Can Crysis 2 be fully maxed out on currently existing hardware? How will it run on my Two HD 5870's in CF?
March 15, 2011 3:55:50 PM

ambam said:
Can Crysis 2 be fully maxed out on currently existing hardware? How will it run on my Two HD 5870's in CF?

Guess we have to see when it comes out I can say that I have one 6950 and its flashed to the 6970 and in the multi player demo I can max out settings just fine but that DX9 so its going to look less impressive and perform better so guess we have to wait and see what the full DX10-DX11 game looks and performs like
March 15, 2011 5:56:46 PM

^ This. The current game IS a "high end Xbox 360" game. They basically ported the Xbox demo over to PC so we're not at all getting the full effect yet. Hell, the demo is only DX9! The full retail game is said to have significantly more customization and of course DX11 and probably higher res textures and all the goodies. So for now just chill.

Also the demo doesn't have CF support. My OCed 5850s ran the same with 1 and 2 cards, ~45FPS on Hardcore settings, 1080p.
March 15, 2011 6:05:04 PM

Xbox 360 reached it's max potential years ago. They also stretch the picture to fit and make it run at a decent FPS, I wouldn't call it "high end".
March 15, 2011 8:03:03 PM

I hope it doesn't take a crazy amount more resources to run the full PC version than Crysis 1 did. With a Phenom II X4 965 OC'ed to 4.0ghz and a HD 6950 flashed to a 6970 I Can olny manage 39 FPS avg with max settings at 1980x1080 with 4xAA. Basicly I hope I can keep it maxed above 35 FPS lol
March 16, 2011 3:49:40 PM

cburke82 said:
I hope it doesn't take a crazy amount more resources to run the full PC version than Crysis 1 did. With a Phenom II X4 965 OC'ed to 4.0ghz and a HD 6950 flashed to a 6970 I Can olny manage 39 FPS avg with max settings at 1980x1080 with 4xAA. Basicly I hope I can keep it maxed above 35 FPS lol


Hardcore setting + 1920x1080 + anti-aliasing = 25 fps on a top-end multi-gpu system?
March 16, 2011 4:25:55 PM

ambam said:
Hardcore setting + 1920x1080 + anti-aliasing = 25 fps on a top-end multi-gpu system?

I dont 100% understand your reply sorry lol. But I was just saying I hope this game can Play above 35FPS on my PC the way it is set up with max settings on :) 
March 16, 2011 8:38:02 PM

I play on Hardcore settings, running a 1680x1050 resolution, and i hardly ever go under 60 fps. Pier 17 i go at a minimum of 60 frames. On the other map, cant remember the name, but i get 70+ fps. I am using, a core i7 920, EVGA GTX 480 Superclocked, and 6GB Corsair Dominator. So far i think the game looks pretty good. But could look a little better. But i also think we all have to agree to the fact that Crysis 2 is much better optimized then Crysis and Warhead. That is a big thing there, if Crysis and Warhead were optimized better, i think we would all get much better FPS in those two games. Im getting an average of 35-45fps in Crysis right now. I dont even want to try warhead.
March 16, 2011 9:09:18 PM

xMyazXtr3me said:
I play on Hardcore settings, running a 1680x1050 resolution, and i hardly ever go under 60 fps. Pier 17 i go at a minimum of 60 frames. On the other map, cant remember the name, but i get 70+ fps. I am using, a core i7 920, EVGA GTX 480 Superclocked, and 6GB Corsair Dominator. So far i think the game looks pretty good. But could look a little better. But i also think we all have to agree to the fact that Crysis 2 is much better optimized then Crysis and Warhead. That is a big thing there, if Crysis and Warhead were optimized better, i think we would all get much better FPS in those two games. Im getting an average of 35-45fps in Crysis right now. I dont even want to try warhead.

Warhead seem to be a bit better (3-5 FPS overall) YMMV
March 17, 2011 3:49:42 PM

I ran the Crysis 2 demo on hardcore settings at 1920x1080 and it was a little choppy, but playable. The demo does not use CF or SLI. The actual game will be optimized for multi-GPU setups as well as DX10 and DX11. So it will run much faster.
!