Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Crysis Demo: Impressions and Optimization

Last response: in Video Games
Share
October 31, 2007 3:14:49 PM

Article written by Travis Meacham.

The release of Crysis is dangerously close and computers the world over cower and hide as gamers prepare. We take the single-player demo for a spin on an Alienware with some benchmarks and tips for optimization.

http://www.tomsgames.com/us/2007/10/31/crysis_demo_impressions_optimization/
October 31, 2007 3:46:48 PM

The game is certainly a beast, i'm hoping the retail game has better optimization for multi-core processors (i've seen screenshots of it using dual cores properly and others not so much, I haven't checked with my own q6600).

I see you were using a quad (q6700?), did you check to see how it's making use of the 4 cores?

PS made a quote (in my sig) from what you said, it's so true..
October 31, 2007 4:58:47 PM

I've run through the demo twice now and had much the same impression. First time through I treated it like another 2142/tf2 map and it was not any more fun than those games when treated like that. The second time I treated it like I was in predator mode and used the suit abilities and I must say it was AWESOME. On the settings front I have not even went after it yet I just played at what the game wanted to load and I must say it is the best looking game I have ever laid eays upon.
For Me the real question is what will the MP gane be like since I don't really play SP games anymore? Will it be just 12x12 in the jungle or will there be MP team objectives...???
Anyway thats my 2cents for now.

Cheers
Related resources
October 31, 2007 5:13:12 PM

fletch420 said:
For Me the real question is what will the MP gane be like since I don't really play SP games anymore? Will it be just 12x12 in the jungle or will there be MP team objectives...???
Anyway thats my 2cents for now.

Cheers


There's a deathmatch (called Action I think) and the Power Struggle mode (there will be more with mods I assume), I haven't played the multiplayer beta, but the Power Struggle map seems to be pretty big, I think you can also open it with the Sandbox editor (I think the map is called Shore if you want to take a look). Take a look at the Power Struggle vid on gametrailers or other places.
October 31, 2007 5:27:17 PM

Pros: Best look and fill to any game. The boats were great and getting to sink one of the enemy boats well I just loved. Driving the vehicle's was great and simply beats anything HL2 has produce.

Cons: Lack of persistent body and thus no rag doll affects after killing enemy's. HL2 has crysis beat here by a good length. Maybe this will be used in multi player modes.

Other thoughts: Like all games crysis will see a good number of hacks and match this with the ability to be invisible could cause some major headaches in multi player modes. Crytek will have to work hard to stay ahead of hackers and keep the game from being hated.
October 31, 2007 5:58:32 PM

So I guess I'll need to upgrade my x850xt.
October 31, 2007 6:25:38 PM

Quote:
* Intel Core 2 Quad 2.66 GHz
* Windows Vista 32 bit
* 4 GB of RAM (only registers as 2814 GB, thanks Vista!)
* 768 MB NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTX
*
o Core clock speed - 576 MHz
o Shader clock speed - 1350 MHz
o Memory clock speed - 900 MHz
o ForceWare 169.01

Is the issue it registers as 2814GB or 2814MB?
If its MB then that seems to be normal considering the 32-bit OS choice.
Why someone would build a 32-bit vista ready machine is beyond me.
October 31, 2007 6:33:34 PM

_Morphine_ said:
Is the issue it registers as 2814GB or 2814MB?


Oops! That should be MB. It's corrected. Thanks!
October 31, 2007 7:05:50 PM

Can we get benchmarks with 64-bit Vista?
October 31, 2007 7:13:19 PM

Best thing to do when playing in Vista is to use the well known .cfg trick to set all of the exclusive DX10 Very High graphic settings to high in the .cfg files. I moved all of the preset graphic options one lower so Very High is the new High, High is the new Medium, and Low has Medium settings. Then right click the shortcut, and load the game under DX9. You get the visuals of DX10 with the smooth performance of DX9. I have a E6750, 8800GTS 320 MB, and 2 GB RAM. Running the game at 1024 x 768 with AA off, I average about 15-20 FPS with all settings Very High in DX9, and about 5-10 FPS in Vista. If I set everything to High, I get about 25 FPS on average in DX9, and about 15 FPS in DX10 but with lots of stuttering and slow downs that I don't get in DX9. Especially cutscenes, they play very slow in DX10, but are nice and smooth in DX9. I haven't noticed a visual difference between DX9 with Very High forced and DX10 set to Very High. I took a couple screenshots and compared but didn't notice anything, and the two Shader and Postprocessing effects I noticed in Very High both work in DX9. So basically DirectX 10 sucks and if you're running Vista, your best bet is to run in DX9.

That's the most important optimization advice people need to know. I don't know if just playing in XP gives an additional performance boost or if running Crysis in DX9 is the equivalent of running it in XP. Either way, running in DX10 is a bad idea.

So far, I think the game is good. I don't see how you can call it your average shooter. Everyone praises something like Halo 3 or Half-Life 2. If you ever played Far Cry, you know what to expect. And that is sort of one of the big disappointments of this game. It's basically an upgraded Far Cry, but I liked Far Cry and thought it was better than HL2, so it's not a bad thing for me. And one of the best things about Far Cry was shooting dead bodies and admiring your Jackson Pollock blood spatters. One of the most impressive things was getting a dead body into the water, and seeing the cool graphic effect as they bled in the water. I thought the AI didn't seem very smart at first either, but I think the AI actually is pretty good now. No AI is perfect, but the Crysis AI is definitely well down.
October 31, 2007 7:15:13 PM

Impressions: I've run through the demo three times now. The first time I went through I took my time trying to go stealth and found it a little more challenging with the energy dropping so quickly. And in the end just went full bore. I do like the fact that though the story is obviously linear, you can take many many routes to get there. And in fact do other secondary objectives before going back to the primary objective.

Cons: Yeah the play so far is fairly mundane. The only difference Far Cry and Crysis, play-wise, was the nanosuit, which certainly adds another dimension and adds to the fun of playing. But unless, like the reviewer mentioned, this game gets some twists it will be extremely mundane... as most of us know already... there are definitely twists ahead! :) 

Graphics: I'm running an 8800 Ultra and I was able to turn everything to high and 16x anti-aliasing at 1920x1200 and the game was comfortable (I estimate 30-40 fps). I did not see the option to turn anything to "very high." I understand now that this is a tweak. Where do I find this tweak? Anyways, the only setting I could not do was the 16Q. It was playable but not comfortable at all.
October 31, 2007 7:37:36 PM

To get Very High quality graphics with just a High setting in DX9, go to \Program Files\Electronic Arts\Crytek\Crysis SP Demo\Game\Config\CVarGroups and open and edit all of the .cfg files (except sys_spec_full.cfg). Might want to backup the CVarGroups folder first. Each .cfg file represents a category in the advanced graphics screen in the game. So one config file deals with Shaders and another deals with Post Processing. Within the .cfg files, each group of numbers represents a graphic setting, [4] being Very High and [1] being Low. So to make Very High graphics available, you want to copy and paste everything under group [4] and replace anything under group [3]. The best thing to do is copy and paste and move all of the settings down one group and completely erase Low settings, unless you absolutely need them, in which case you shouldn't even bother with this trick. So move 2 to 1, 3 to 2, and 4 to 3. So within the game, High will have Very High graphics, Medium will give you High graphics, and Low will give you Medium graphics.

If you're running in DX9 with Very High quality settings and you want to be sure it's working, just look at the sun shine through trees or under water and you should see rays coming from it. That's supposed to only be a feature under DX10 with Post Processing set to Very High, but it you get the effect if you edit the settings like I described. There might be some Shader options that don't work since if you edit Shaders, it will show up as Custom in-game, but it still looks good.
October 31, 2007 8:34:06 PM

Quoting myself incase missunderstandings will appear, somehow I believe they most certainly will
Quote:
Using Quad cores are no use with the demo, I think they limited it to 2 cores like in the Multiplayer Beta i play.

Btw, the game runs on 25fps on Medium with my 6800XT, but with Very High and 8800GTX it runs with 22fps average? One word: drivers :) 

After the second beta release I got a 6 fps boost with my graphics card, and another 2fps boost after the newest beta drivers.

The game is gold, but Crytek is allready working on a patch, so hopes up folks!

Quote:
There is no such things as direct x 10 elements or graphics, just the fact that DX10 uses unified processing which gives the opportunity to create effects like Global Illumination without stressing the card that much. It is mostly just an efficiency of the graphics processing.

DX10 utilizes unified architecture and geometry shading which allows more instances at one time and faster working, not that a DX9 card can NOT handle it, it will just demand more of it.
October 31, 2007 8:35:38 PM

Yeah do what Maxor127 says - even if you have Vista, since XP adds about 15 more frames (seriosuly)

Vista is absolute **** atm lol...

My PC runs it about 25 FPS all maxed out with DX10 h4x.

hawhaw, turn off shadows and you get it real smooth.
October 31, 2007 9:56:53 PM

I think i'm gonna pick up XP 64 bit real soon..
October 31, 2007 11:42:49 PM

_Morphine_ said:
Quote:
* Intel Core 2 Quad 2.66 GHz
* Windows Vista 32 bit
* 4 GB of RAM (only registers as 2814 GB, thanks Vista!)
* 768 MB NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTX
*
o Core clock speed - 576 MHz
o Shader clock speed - 1350 MHz
o Memory clock speed - 900 MHz
o ForceWare 169.01

Is the issue it registers as 2814GB or 2814MB?
If its MB then that seems to be normal considering the 32-bit OS choice.
Why someone would build a 32-bit vista ready machine is beyond me.

I agree with you. Why Vista 32??? I have 64 with 4GB and work fine.
November 1, 2007 3:28:57 AM

I've played the demo a couple times and must say that it is great! I completely agree with the review. Having settings higher than your current system can handle is a good thing. The game is a lot like FarCry which is also a good thing. The suit's special features are going to be totally fun to play with. The vegetation is similar to FarCry except it is more dense, moves when you brush it, and falls over when you shoot it! This adds a lot to the game. The environment is much more destructable.

Played the first time on easy and I'm thinking how am I ever going to get past that camp of NKs on higher difficulty?? This is the beauty of Crysis! It makes you think! Lets see I could just walk up here like last time and get my fanny shot off or.....hmmmmmm.....I could go stealth, sneak up and steal a truck with a mounted gun! Oh yeah! Come get some you @^@$%#s!! Eat lead! Nearly died the first time on easy, didn't get a scratch the next time on with harder settings.....

Played it once with a 8800GTS and again with a HD2600XT. Of course it had to be turned down a notch or two in order to run on the 2600. I'd say people would have a gripe if the game did not offer lower quality settings and you HAD to have expensive hardware. I say stop worrying about your hardware and have fun blasting!
November 1, 2007 3:35:42 AM

where is the ageia physx card when you need it? :( 
November 1, 2007 4:15:23 AM

Hey how about some benchmark results on the charts for single cards and sli. I'm seriously interested whether a second card has any impact on this monster. GREAT ARTICLE!
November 1, 2007 5:58:28 AM

Dear Travis Meacham,

The article is missing a lot of information such as more comparative benchmarks with various ATI and Nvidia cards, single videocards vs SLI, vista 32-bit vs 64-bit, and last but not least, RECOMMENDATIONS.

It would have been great to test the game on an Intel Xtreme Quad processor with 8800Ultra SLI and look at benchmarks. Should I buy another 8800 or should I wait for the next GPU model (most likely).

I don't mean to critic because I read Tomshardare article often and you guys do a pretty good job but given the hype prior to the release, it would have been appreciated to have legitamate information as oppose to certain people posting false representation in forums.

Nota: I will be forgiving. I totally understand that the game is not even released yet and I also understand the given time for you guys to come up with results on a "demo version" of a game...

Thanks for the article anyways!

Alex
November 1, 2007 7:23:28 AM

Alex,

I would actually get pretty upset if Tom's was going to put that much effort in just testing a demo. I hope they will address it with the released game code but doing all that on a demo is waste of time, and most likely not representative for the full game.

Tthanks for the update Travis, and could you please answer that question from Stemnin whether you've seen the demo actually using all 4 cores?
November 1, 2007 10:35:40 AM

The demo isn't complete, no SLi (I don't have an SLi equipped PC, but i've read about alot of problems and really low framerates on various crysis fan forums), no multicore use (it was only using 1 of 4 cores when I tested it, and only ran it until I got to Jester, i'll haft to try at more intense spots.) Right now it seems hard to find out the best rig possible.
November 1, 2007 12:44:28 PM

I noticed that the driver version the reviewer is using is only 169.01, I have been running the demo with version 169.04 with the same system bar a few changes. A Q6600, 2GB’s of memory & Vista X64 Ultimate. I am able to make the game playable at 1680X1050 with everything set to ‘very high’ bar the shading setting that has been reduced to ‘high’. I don’t have AA enabled at that resolution though, and the demo I am running is the 32Bit version.

Apparently I have heard that revision 1 of the demo works in 64Bit mode and that version 169.02 works the best for that revision giving much greater results than Revision 2 and the latest drivers. I will need to test this out, I will also post benchmarks of what I have achieved once I get home tonight.
November 1, 2007 1:02:36 PM

I don't mean to imply that anyone has stated otherwise, I truly think that it is up to each individual to decide what is acceptable as far as frame rates go. Higher frames are nice but it's pointless to shoot for 80+ FPS if you're monitor's refresh rate is 60 Hz. 20+ of the rendered frames you'll never see. I figure for a game like Crysis, start out with max settings and then shoot for half your refresh rate. That way, on average what you see will appear more smoothly.

Just food for thought:
November 1, 2007 2:43:28 PM

Yeah, I was a bit concerned when it was said that Crysis was like a standard FPS... if you're playing Crysis like any other FPS, you're doing it wrong.

Crysis isn't just about running and gunning. It's not just about picking people off from the bushes. It's not about sneaking by undetected or going non-lethal. You can do any and all of these things of course, but Crysis exists for the following reasons:

Shooting a tree down on top of a cluster of troops.

Cloaking, grabbing somebody, using them as a human shield and retreating into the bushes.

Sniping the gas tank on a jeep while people are in or around it, using the ensuing chaos to get by.

Cloaking while driving a vehicle, plowing it into some troops, and jumping out at the last moment... still cloaked, so you can make your way to cover and pick off any survivors.

Using max speed and sprinting up to somebody, popping him in the face with a shotgun.

Cloaking to hide and line up a shot, uncloaking just long enough to fire off a tranq dart, re-cloaking, and moving in for an easy kill when it's convenient.

Throwing a drill press at somebody from several stories up.

Running around cloaked while carrying a live chicken.

THAT, my friends, is the purpose of Crysis... awesome gameplay resulting from a decent level of realism and a creative player. I know this because, in addition to playing the demo several times through myself, I watched a friend play it for 4 hours straight on my computer, experimenting with all the ways to stalk and harass the AI, usually involving large drops, heavy objects, and vehicles.
November 1, 2007 3:11:07 PM

Alex:

We wanted to get the article up sooner rather than later so we just did some quick tests on a single system. In order to run all the usual tests you mentioned we wouldn't get the article up until late next week sometime. When we get the full game we'll put it through the gauntlet and see how it comes out.

Stemnin and Jorge40:

It looks to me like the demo is using all four cores. Here are the graphs I pulled. Let me know what you guys think. The perfmon one is a tad busy but I wanted to run it for several minutes and also log some idle time. The one from task manager isn't as long a capture time and it only shows the tail end of the entire graph so the two don't represent the same time scale. You might have to click them twice to get the full res.



November 1, 2007 3:46:13 PM

tmeacham said:
Alex:

We wanted to get the article up sooner rather than later so we just did some quick tests on a single system. In order to run all the usual tests you mentioned we wouldn't get the article up until late next week sometime. When we get the full game we'll put it through the gauntlet and see how it comes out.


Thanks Travis. I'm looking foward to read the full article!
November 1, 2007 3:53:18 PM

tmeacham said:
Alex:

We wanted to get the article up sooner rather than later so we just did some quick tests on a single system. In order to run all the usual tests you mentioned we wouldn't get the article up until late next week sometime. When we get the full game we'll put it through the gauntlet and see how it comes out.

Stemnin and Jorge40:

It looks to me like the demo is using all four cores. Here are the graphs I pulled. Let me know what you guys think. The perfmon one is a tad busy but I wanted to run it for several minutes and also log some idle time. The one from task manager isn't as much of a capture time and is only shows the tail end of the entire graph so the two don't represent the same time scale. You might have to click them twice to get the full res.

http://images.tomshardware.com/2007/11/01/crysis4xtm.jpg

http://images.tomshardware.com/2007/11/01/crysis4xperf.jpg


That's what one 1 of my cores looks like, the other 3 not so much. When I get home i'll do more testing, maybe I'm just reading the graphs wrong.
November 1, 2007 4:16:04 PM

I'm also eagerly awaiting the flood of benchmarks when it hits... Vista vs XP, 32 vs 64 bit OSes, 1 vs 2 vs 3 vs 4 graphics cards at various price points, dual vs quad core for processors of the same price, 2 vs 3 vs 4 vs 4+ gigs of RAM, and so on... building a new computer in about 2 months or so, and I want it to get the most out of Crysis that I can on a budget =D

Gotta love the "Vista sucks, ima stick with XP 4ever" people. Can't live with them, can't shoot them. Give it a rest, guys. Like it or not, Vista's here, and Microsoft isn't back-pedaling and giving up on it. It might not be -quite- as fast as XP but that's the price you pay for all of its extra features and GUI sweetness... you know, things you enjoy when you're not playing a game. Just deal with it... don't upgrade if you're paranoid or a cheapskate, but leave the rest of us alone :p 
November 1, 2007 4:19:54 PM

A lot of people have been saying it only uses the main core of the quad core CPU range. Results are normally about 80% on the main core with the others showing 12% utilization. The conclusion from a lot of people was that it was using the cores but the demo was not fully utilizing them as it should.

But to tell you the truth I think that more performance will be gained from a driver update than a game code update. But then we will have to wait for the full game to be released to see full results wont we.
November 1, 2007 5:10:51 PM

Finished the demo and I gotta say I was impressed visually. As for game play... it's no HL2: Ep2. It's basically FarCry on roids. Amazing environment, cool use of vehicles and not much else. I didn't find the suit controls to really do that much. The hand to hand interaction is pretty crappy. With the super strength you should be able to pick up small trees and club people or send bad guys FLYING. Instead I could just rifle butt them a little faster. Weee!. And how is it you can pick up massive oil drums and not bodies? You can cloak but you can't hide a body from being seen? Not that the AI is smart enough to even recognize a body. They more or less stand around until you shoot at them. Stealth kills would be great, especially in that environment but I was pretty disappointed mainly because you can't manipulate objects or enemies physically at all. Just toss stuff. I did like being able to super jump up to places for better firing angles but it was still WAY underutilized. This game tries to be everything to all people and it's a little thin on everything but the graphics/environment/vehicle support. But anyway, it has potential and this is just a demo so we'll see.

Now on to my question...

I have a P4 3.2Ghz, an ATI Radeon 1950 Pro 512MB, 2GB Ram and Windows XP. Before you say my system will never be able to run this game let me tell you I was AMAZED that the game was playable at 1280x1024 with all settings on High (with AA turned off)! It looked incredible and I was able to finish the demo. Of course the frame rate wasn't optimal but it was playable. Then I tried all settings to medium. WAY more fluid but the graphics went back to looking more like FarCry.

So... which settings do you guys think are CPU related and which are GPU? It seems to me that my 1950 Pro 512MB is capable of high settings for the GPU/Video Ram intensive sliders and my 2GB of system Ram is decent, but my 3.2Ghz Single Core P4 is probably dragging me down. I'm theorizing I can probably leave most GPU, Video Ram and System Ram dependent settings on High but should be turning down the CPU related settings to medium for a nice blend of medium and high. Medium was 100% smooth but not so great visually, High looked amazing but was too choppy (tho still playable!). There should be a happy middle group but there's a lot of variables without knowing which slider is dependent one what.

Obviously this is DX9 since it's XP and a Radeon 1950 Pro. I'm sure DX10 Very High settings will be another realm of coolness up but for now, DX9 High settings at 1280x1024 is very impressive. I was amazed it could be done with my setup. Anyway, I'm not really up on what is CPU and what is GPU. I figure textures are GPU, physics and sound CPU, etc. but I was hoping someone more knowledgeable than I would know for sure offhand.

Thanks for your time!

Justarius

November 1, 2007 5:27:28 PM

Hey, where's that QX9650 you guys just got in :love: 

I can't wait to see the top of the line benchies :na: 
November 1, 2007 6:15:37 PM

shrug. I dont know. It runs awesome on my system. 8600GTS, 2.9GHz quad. cpu usage never goes over 30%.

1280x720, windowed mode. (windowed mode is an absolute requirement for me.) All settings medium, textures on high.

I'm curious to see how it might look on all max settings, but it's not worth $200 more just to find that out!
November 1, 2007 7:09:21 PM

Has anyone tried this yet? This is from
http://www.tech2.com/india/news/pc-games/enable-crysis-...

If you tweak the configuration files in CVarGroups by copying and pasting the "very high" settings (1st paragraph) IN PLACE of the "high" settings (last paragraph) the game will load the highest possible settings even though the drop-down menus display "high."

November 1, 2007 7:52:07 PM

I tried it. I mentioned it above already. It works. That way you can get the speed benefits of DX9 with the graphic quality of DX10. I don't notice a graphical difference between DX9 forced very high and DX10 very high but the game runs about 10 FPS faster and is a LOT smoother.
November 1, 2007 7:54:53 PM

Justarius said:
The hand to hand interaction is pretty crappy. With the super strength you should be able to pick up small trees and club people or send bad guys FLYING.


You know I thought that, too. If I've got "super" strength I want to be able to throw a guy 70 yards and pick up a car.
November 1, 2007 8:11:17 PM

strength basically do nothing but the jump and one hit kill
November 1, 2007 8:51:56 PM

itotallybelieveyou said:
strength basically do nothing but the jump and one hit kill


...and destroy buildings :D 
November 1, 2007 8:58:10 PM

Strenght gets you to places easily (like skipping through to play the level at night) or I go on the beach side up to that antenna post and blast the barrel with guns using the super jump, kills most of the soldiers up there if they know you're around there.
November 1, 2007 9:02:42 PM

Has anyone compared how Crysis looks on CRT vs LCD monitor in regards to color accuracy and color range? I know that it depends to some extent on the model and technical specs of the LCD monitor but in general you can usually notice the difference right away if you have used a CRT monitor for a long time for gaming and working with graphics and then you've switched to LCD.

I guess only a few people will understand what I am getting at, so I'll provide a crude example. If you look at the following screenshot from Crysis (link below), you will most likely see greater detail on the trunk of the palm tree and the areas on the stones which are reflecting the light (this might also apply to other areas such as the side of the boat or foam in the water) if you're using a CRT monitor compared with an LCD monitor. I don't know if it will show in this particular case, but this is the kind of difference that I kept noticing all the time in games and images right after I switched from CRT to LCD a year ago (that's on Viewsonic VP930, which is supposed to be one of the better LCD displays in regards to color range). Especially all of the "glossy" and "reflective" objects used in modern games look a bit more realistic on a CRT display because the hundreds of thousands or even millions of colors that are used in those areas get substituted on an LCD with approximated/nearest colors and the quality of those details suffers. Basically, LCD monitors do the same thing as when you work in a graphics program on a CRT monitor and reduce the amount of different colors used in an image from, say, 700k different colors to 100k colors (you can notice the very slight differences/color "approximations" quite clearly if you've worked with 3D and graphics programs). All in all, I'm wondering if it's possible to get from "Very High" to a kind of "Ultra High" level of graphics or mainly image quality in Crysis by switching back from an LCD to a CRT monitor. :whistle: 


http://img515.imageshack.us/my.php?image=crysis2kg5.jpg
November 2, 2007 6:59:46 AM

I found the physics in the game very blocky and generic. Trees hit an invisible obstacle and pause movement for a fraction of a second when they fall. Plus, when a grenade explodes next to a tree, the tree should blast to pieces, not just fall over the same way every time (hence why I said generic). Of course, that will require even more horsepower to render every new object (the splinters of wood and stuff), but an extra option for that kind of realism would be cool. I am more interested in physics than visuals.

Now the other objects you can break... ugh, terrible. How can throwing a barrel at a building bring the whole thing down? Why can't a punch a hole in a wall rather than have it just fall over? Everything has pre-made "break points" that just split there all the time when they get hit, and they simply fall to pieces rather than break off small parts first. And how can the entire roof of a building be held up by a single wooden pole in one corner? :lol: 
November 2, 2007 8:04:16 AM

Agreed. Advanced physics and environment interaction are the coolest new additions to "next gen" games and they are rather ho hum in Crysis. Although one could argue the buildings are all cheap tin shacks that could be shoved over by an angry goat let alone a barrel, but yeah I take your point. One time I drove a truck full blast into a shack and the car bounced off of some unseen indestructible point and didn't give me the desired effects of ramming right thru the shack and out the other side in a hail of destructibles and objects. Other times I've been able to punch one to pieces.
November 2, 2007 8:48:13 AM

a Total HEAVYWEIGHT games.

I have Q6600@3.2GHz, 8800GTS 320MB 670/1000 and 2GB RAM, set all High on DX9, average 26 fps on 1280x1024, AA 2x.

Set all High on DX10, average 19 fps, same resolution and no AA.
Set all very high on DX10, average 11 fps, same resolution and no AA.
Set high or very high on DX10 with 2x AA, it's a slideshow.

Games aren't utilizing all cores, in quadcores rig, only 2 cores are mostly showing activity and they barely hit 50% each on loading games. On playing, cores activity are around 10%-15%, sometimes 20% but that's only one core work.

GPU rules on this games, overclocked GPU or higher end GPU such those ultras or SLI will give more fps, but i think even with SLI Ultras you'll barely touch 60 fps on Very High settings 16x12 res, 4X AA.


- AI can stuck inside a car or trees
- on easy mode, AI doesn't make lots of movement compared in delta mode.
- When AI are dead, their body position are unimaginable.
- When you shoot trees or rocks, sometimes doesn't make any holes even on high settings or very high settings.
-Throw a grenade on water (water area where you just disable GPS jammer), sometimes it won't blow, or it blows but water action are less amusing than when you shoot on water.
-Shooting on cars will need 2 rounds to make the cars blows but with 4 times hit, it blows.
-on DX9, high settings, sometimes the sky become solid color, mostly solid blue or brown.
-Shooting on bananas leaves will leave black dot than holes.
-1 round of shooting on building make the building collapsed. Throwing 1 grenade on building will make the roof fly but the building aren't collapsed.
-Shooting coconut trees sometimes doesn't make fall or it's fall but like there's something hold it or when it touch the ground, it can fly again and looping for 3 or 4 times.

Maybe there's other...but for a moment that's it.
conclusion : It's awesome games, but unfortunately you need high-end rig to play it, some glitch still occurs and some event on AI aren't to be compared in real life.
November 2, 2007 9:46:26 AM

I guess if two cores use 50% each SAME AS 100% for one core. So not really multi-threaded.
November 2, 2007 9:59:24 AM

Except that if you try alt-tabbing on a single core vs a dual core...
November 2, 2007 10:09:02 AM

randomizer said:
I found the physics in the game very blocky and generic. Trees hit an invisible obstacle and pause movement for a fraction of a second when they fall. Plus, when a grenade explodes next to a tree, the tree should blast to pieces, not just fall over the same way every time (hence why I said generic). Of course, that will require even more horsepower to render every new object (the splinters of wood and stuff), but an extra option for that kind of realism would be cool. I am more interested in physics than visuals.

Now the other objects you can break... ugh, terrible. How can throwing a barrel at a building bring the whole thing down? Why can't a punch a hole in a wall rather than have it just fall over? Everything has pre-made "break points" that just split there all the time when they get hit, and they simply fall to pieces rather than break off small parts first. And how can the entire roof of a building be held up by a single wooden pole in one corner? :lol: 
it is fun to kick things around and stuff
November 2, 2007 11:55:11 AM

November 2, 2007 2:26:02 PM

I LOVED the demo, though granted it is a bit run of the mill until you start playing with the environment, like others have said. I think that the suit's abilities make you very powerful in the game, but the length of time they are available doesn't make you overly super human... The energy runs out too fast. One trick I found with the cloaking is to crouch and move slow. You won't use the energy quite as fast.

One thing I noted, when I was swimming in to the shore at the beginning of the game, I went to the bottom just to see what was there. I noticed my shadow did not follow what my "body" was doing, like it was a swim stroke behind. I didn't see it again, so maybe my experience was just one in a million. If it was truly being rendered at the time of game play, the shadow would follow my body's movements, no matter what. At anyrate, that is my two bits on the shadows.

I will end up buying the game, even if I cannot get other friends to play it. (they tend to not like special abilities in their games...) I will enjoy this one immensely. :D 
November 3, 2007 12:56:46 AM

gomerpile said:
it is fun to kick things around and stuff

It gets old though. Repetition always gets old.
November 4, 2007 5:24:00 PM

the physics arent that great agreed.. its very half pie done I feel ..
Seems they have concentrated on things like oil filled barrells which empty out as they should.. but then you have like mentioned the shacks which always fall down with a barrel , not even bullet holes show up properly as they should!..
Great game , but not all the trees can be blown up .. only plams and the like !..
I guess what I expected from this game was not what I expected..
IE all vegatation would be destructable not just some..
!