Crysis 1080p Waterfall Video

[Windows7even]

So i have been looking around for a descent dreamscene video for my new 24" 1920x1200 setup and ran across the crysis dreamscene waterfall over at wincustomize Link. That video is pretty awesome in its own right but it was only recorded at 1280x800. im looking for a version that is 1080p wmv to use as a dreamscene. now what i do know is that it would take a gaming rig made od $$$ to make a video like this but i do know that there is hardware out there that can pull this off. If someone knows of a link to a 1080p version or a 1920x1200 version or if someone could make a video like this that would be awesome. Please post if you can help out!

[+InsaneNutter MVC]

Aparently the guy who made that video says:

All recording programs suck, I used the built in recording console commands, so even though the game rendered at 4 FPS realtime, I got a 30 FPS video.

capture_frames 1

sys_physics_CPU 0

fixed_time_step 0.033333

It sounds like you could make your own video at that resolution.

[JimmyT]

Here you can find some 1080p wmv videos.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsme...ntshowcase.aspx

[Windows7even]

So i have been looking around for a descent dreamscene video for my new 24" 1920x1200 setup and ran across the crysis dreamscene waterfall over at wincustomize Link. That video is pretty awesome in its own right but it was only recorded at 1280x800. im looking for a version that is 1080p wmv to use as a dreamscene. now what i do know is that it would take a gaming rig made od $$$ to make a video like this but i do know that there is hardware out there that can pull this off. If someone knows of a link to a 1080p version or a 1920x1200 version or if someone could make a video like this that would be awesome. Please post if you can help out!

i was reading somewheres about being able to render videos in sandbox using frame by frame which sounds like it would be more feasable because of the computational power it would take to encode a 1080p plus running crysis at the resolution is a feat in itself. The only consumer rig out there that could even come close to doing it in realtime do it that i imagine would be a skulltraill rig, dual xenons or q's with dual nvidia 9800x2's. even then it might be iffy. we all know that crytek and ea have the hardware to accomplish a feat like this but of course they would never honor a request like that. if anyone could shed some light on the rendering in sanbox that would be awesome

here Digg they talk about how these high res images are rendered one frame at a time and have achieved a ridicously high rez. so say we wanted to make a 30second video. for video to look good we would need it at 30 fps video. so 30x30 is 900 frames if my math is correct. so if we rendered the scene in sandbox frame by frame and output those to images. then combine the images into video and then envode that in the format shouldnt that work? or is my logic all fooked up

high rez render examples here Link

Edited March 26, 2008 by Crysis Addict

[EnzoFX]

Skulltrail? Overkill.

The only thing holding the cheapest c2d from doing this is a good gpu. Graphics is where Crysis excels. No game requires more 2 cores to be maxed out at even the relatively small 1080p res.

[Windows7even]

Skulltrail? Overkill.

The only thing holding the cheapest c2d from doing this is a good gpu. Graphics is where Crysis excels. No game requires more 2 cores to be maxed out at even the relatively small 1080p res.

yea but were talking about real time encoding of hd video also...add this to playing crysis at the same time and u need some serious hardware dont you think

[EnzoFX]

I'd imagine the built in record command would make it less so. And I still think a C2D can do it, also given the fact, that it'll record properly, not necessarily play properly. Which is not a big setback.

[Windows7even]

I'd imagine the built in record command would make it less so. And I still think a C2D can do it, also given the fact, that it'll record properly, not necessarily play properly. Which is not a big setback.

from the digg article though the guys says that he couldnt get descent framerates from the built in capture and we all know hows fraps kills framerates. thats why i think the sandbox frame render would be a better solution.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

You'll always get better results doing it non-interactively, You don't want something unforeseen happening which screws up your encode.

[Windows7even]

You'll always get better results doing it non-interactively, You don't want something unforeseen happening which screws up your encode.

next question is what is the best program to use to combine all those renders into one video file?

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

VirtualDub is nice, It will load normal images or videos, and can load .wav files as audio tracks (and export using lots of different codecs and such)

I've been exporting my stuff as DivX with MP3 audio, But I want to move over to H.264 and AAC (I've already got all the stuff to do that, I just haven't bothered doing it yet)

[Windows7even]

VirtualDub is nice, It will load normal images or videos, and can load .wav files as audio tracks (and export using lots of different codecs and such)

I've been exporting my stuff as DivX with MP3 audio, But I want to move over to H.264 and AAC (I've already got all the stuff to do that, I just haven't bothered doing it yet)

so if im gonna be dealing with 1080p stuff here what which would you recommend. im not going to be doing audio so that wont be a issue. and which compression method (divx hd, or h.264 is gonna give me the best compression to quality ratio??

another ? i am wondering is which video format can say a 8800gt decode on the gpu, instead of the cpu, using the purevideo tech

thanks,

loop

Edited March 26, 2008 by Crysis Addict

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

From the looks of it, It will decode both formats on hardware (Would make sense since i see barely any CPU usage on 720p video, regardless of the codec)

Both formats are MPEG4, DivX being a "simpler" profile and H.264 being a more advanced profile, both provide really good quality, but H.264 can provide better quality at a similar bitrate as DivX, with a increase in decoding "costs" (time spent decoding each frame). Input source also matters, the higher quality of the source, the larger the file size will be (hence why you can fit a MPEG2 DVD onto a 700MB CD using DivX, because it's re-compressing a compressed source)

So if Crysis is outputting uncompressed frames (i assume it would, an older engine like Source will output TGA images of each frame), and you're keeping it at full res (1080p) and you have the hardware to decode it (so CPU usage doesn't metter), Then i'd go with H.264, best quality/space/speed

[CY:G]

Multi GPU wont help at all in Crysis, the game isnt even fully optimized for 2 GPUs, lets alone 4 GPUs with 2 * 9800 GX2 in SLI.