Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

36 posts in this topic

Posted

Apparently, the reasons to kvetch over the recently-released Crysis 3 for PC have returned to the SAME reason folks kvetched over the original Crysis.

I've been seeing a lot of either "It pushes my hardware too hard!" or "WAAAH - I have to upgrade my DX10 fancy-schmancy GPUs to run it at all!"

Geeze - wasn't Crysis 2 (again, for PC) the reverse of that? Wasn't the refrain then "It doesn't push my hardware hard enough?"

I'm beginning to wonder if folks aren't happy UNLESS they can kvetch over something when it comes to a Crysis game.

What makes this all the more surprising is that I'm not complaining; maybe it's because I'm merely looking to play the game - not show off?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

what the hell does kvetch mean?

7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Come on, this is the internet. People bitch about everything they can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

crysis 2 did push the envelope with dx 11 and ultra res texture update i think

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

crysis 2 did push the envelope with dx 11 and ultra res texture update i think

True - however, the complaint even THEN was that it didn't push hard enough.

Crytek was even accused of releasing a half-baked patch set.

On the SAME hardware I have now (which I had then) I couldn't take advantage of the entire set of patches (not enough GPU memory) - however, I COULD take advantage of everything else - including the tessellation part of the DX11 patch series.

Segue to Crysis 3 - I have the same GPU; however, I can (in fact, I have to) use AA (SMAA to be precise), as SMAA has better performance AND better graphics than no AA. Better graphics I can understand - however better performance doesn't fit. Every form of AA I have heard anything about is typically a drag on performance - not a boost; and the lower-end your GPU is, the greater the bogdown effect. Is there something lower than the Frankencard configuration that is typical of the discrete AMD HD5450? If not, how is it that it is making a mockery of SMAA? If I turn AA off (ala Crysis 2) performance drops AND graphics look worse. However, merely turning on SMAA enables higher resolution AND higher framerates than Crysis 2 (same hardware).

So no, I'm not angry at all - just boggled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The people who complained it was too demanding, they were gamers. Naturally they were annoyed they couldn't enjoy the game without forking out some serious cash. The people who complained it wasn't demanding enough, they were elitist douchebags who only care about comparing e-penis lengths.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

what the hell does kvetch mean?
It's a Yiddish word.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The people who complained it was too demanding, they were gamers. Naturally they were annoyed they couldn't enjoy the game without forking out some serious cash. The people who complained it wasn't demanding enough, they were elitist douchebags who only care about comparing e-penis lengths.

So people are either cheap or elitist douchebags? It seems people can't win with you unless they have exactly the same amount of money as you.

The DX11 features for Crysis 2 should have been developed for release with the game. As it was they were released in a patch afterwards and there were significant issues, like some areas of excessive tessellation and there was invisible water under the level that was tessellated - it significantly reduced performance without any visual gains.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It's a Yiddish word.

And it means the same as those other words which tend to get bleeped or otherwise censored on Internet forums, chat sites, Twitter, etc. Due to its LACK of negative freighting (despite that it means the same) I use it instead of the censorable and often CENSORED phraseology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I will never understand why people seem to think of an entire community as a single-minded individual.

Seriously, it doesn't take much brainpower to figure out that developing to the high-end will "alienate" those with crappy PCs, and developing to the low-end will pee off the people that splashed out the $$$ for high-end components. You can only make one side happy, pick one.

And let's be honest, a big part was due to the blatant console pandering in Crysis 2 because Cevat Yerli got his panties in a twist over "PC" piracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

So people are either cheap or elitist douchebags? It seems people can't win with you unless they have exactly the same amount of money as you.

The DX11 features for Crysis 2 should have been developed for release with the game. As it was they were released in a patch afterwards and there were significant issues, like some areas of excessive tessellation and there was invisible water under the level that was tessellated - it significantly reduced performance without any visual gains.

theyarecomingforyou - when it comes to gaming and game development, you had it right the first time - the complainants are either one OR the other.

And you are also right about the tessellation in Crysis 2 - which some of the SAME folks kvetching about Crysis 3's lack of over-tessellation are actually DEFENDING.

But when it comes to users, if you satisfy the cheapskates, the elitists get horked off - if you satisfy the elitists, you risk the game being nearly unplayable by anyone else (which was, in fact, an issue with the original Crysis). (The consolistas, are, in fact, kvetching about a bias in favor of the PC with Crysis 3.)

It's not unique to Crysis titles - the complaints about Crysis 3 (and the original Crysis) mirror what I heard about Civilization V (the original - not any of the patches, DLCs, or compilations) because it actually dared to use features in DX11.

Still, I kinda expected SOME sort of "Crysis crisis", as it seems NO Crysis title is a Crysis title without one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I will never understand why people seem to think of an entire community as a single-minded individual.

Seriously, it doesn't take much brainpower to figure out that developing to the high-end will "alienate" those with crappy PCs, and developing to the low-end will pee off the people that splashed out the $$$ for high-end components. You can only make one side happy, pick one.

And let's be honest, a big part was due to the blatant console pandering in Crysis 2 because Cevat Yerli got his panties in a twist over "PC" piracy.

Cevat Yerli is a developer - and he's not the only one to get horked about piracy (PC or any other platform). The issue is, in fact, a valid one; CASUAL piracy is far easier on the PC than any other platform. (Not piracy as a whole - the issue is more the casual sort - it affects, games, operating systems, applications, etc.) Stopping ALL piracy may be an eventual goal - however, Cevat Yerli is quite aware that THAT goal may well be wishful thinking. However, ALL developers want to put a major dent in casual piracy. However, that wasn't the ONLY reason that Crysis 2 pandered to consoles - what those of us with PCs seems to forget is that very reason why most of us choose PCs over consoles (upgradability) makes DEVELOPING for PCs like threading a needle while driving in the Rolex 24 at Daytona - at night. With consoles you have a SINGLE set of standards to target - it is the equivalent of old-school writing to the hardware. Far easier for developers.

Between Crysis 2 and Crysis 3, PC hardware improved; console hardware (naturally) didn't. (I'm not talking just the high end - look at the overall uptake in just DX11 support in desktop AND portable hardware between Crysis 2 and Crysis 3 via the various Steam surveys. This is publicly-available data, as Valve itself publishes them; Neowin itself posts the results on a monthly basis. Do you think that developers outside of Valve can't - or don't - follow those published surveys?) While Cevat may have won the PR battle, he was risking losing the PR war by sticking to the far-easier and largely-unchanged console-hardware target a second time around. He moved the base target north - not completely OUTSIDE what consoles can do, but north far enough that their arbitrary "standards" get stressed. In doing that, he also chopped off anything below DX11 on PCs; however, PC owners (except portable PC owners) can upgrade far easier - console owners are stuck. However, the new target is also friendlier to single-GPU settings this time, albeit single DX11 GPUs - both sorts of multi-GPU setups (Crossfire and SLI) are, to a large extent, underutilized. So the elitists are horked off, and the console fans are ALSO horked off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If you're basing how good a game is based solely on how demanding it is on your system, you aren't a gamer, Crysis seems to be held up in such high regard based on its ludicrous system requirements and graphics. This dad not disguise the fact it was a mediocre game in almost every regard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Cevat Yerli is a developer - and he's not the only one to get horked about piracy (PC or any other platform). The issue is, in fact, a valid one; CASUAL piracy is far easier on the PC than any other platform. (Not piracy as a whole - the issue is more the casual sort - it affects, games, operating systems, applications, etc.) Stopping ALL piracy may be an eventual goal - however, Cevat Yerli is quite aware that THAT goal may well be wishful thinking. However, ALL developers want to put a major dent in casual piracy. However, that wasn't the ONLY reason that Crysis 2 pandered to consoles - what those of us with PCs seems to forget is that very reason why most of us choose PCs over consoles (upgradability) makes DEVELOPING for PCs like threading a needle while driving in the Rolex 24 at Daytona - at night. With consoles you have a SINGLE set of standards to target - it is the equivalent of old-school writing to the hardware. Far easier for developers.

It's got nothing to do with casual piracy at all. The original Crysis was a benchmark pretending to be a game - and selling a benchmark (At triple-A prices) isn't a particularly viable business model.

Those big piracy margins were the hoards of benchmarkers wanting on the latest bandwagon, they didn't want any of that silly game nonsense, just their average FPS on max settings at 1920x1080.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It's just a shame Crytek can't make a quality game. CryEngine3 has so much potential, but we're going to have to wait until a third party company purchases a license for the engine and develops a game that properly utilizes the engine.

Crysis 3 exists for the sole reason the original Crysis existed -- to benchmark your system to see how future proof it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It's just a shame Crytek can't make a quality game. CryEngine3 has so much potential, but we're going to have to wait until a third party company purchases a license for the engine and develops a game that properly utilizes the engine.

Crysis 3 exists for the sole reason the original Crysis existed -- to benchmark your system to see how future proof it is.

Except for quite a few things I've uncovered in Crysis 3, you're so far WRONG that such a statement could apply more to the original Crysis than Crysis 3

I have as more toward the floor of the acceptable hardware minimum as is practical, and I'm not complaining; in fact, the complaints largely aren't coming from the middle - the complaints are coming from the ends (low-end, including consoles, and those high-end elitists - the middle is quite happy, as they were with Crysis 2).

Multi-GPU (a feature common on the high-end) is NOT seeing the performance gains that single-GPU setups are over Crysis 2; if anything, multi-GPU is seeing performance losses compared to Crysis 2. (That is, in fact, why the high-end elitists are kvetching so hard.)

Single-GPU is mostly seeing either identical or IMPROVED performance compared to Crysis 2; in fact, performance of my HD5450 is ALSO up compared to Crysis 2 - which is, in fact, why I'm not among those complaining.

So, in my opinion (so far) Crysis 3 is, if anything, closer to the general middle of modern PC hardware than Crysis 2 was when it launched - and it's definitely skewed more toward the middle than a fully-patched Crysis 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

And it means the same as those other words which tend to get bleeped or otherwise censored on Internet forums, chat sites, Twitter, etc. Due to its LACK of negative freighting (despite that it means the same) I use it instead of the censorable and often CENSORED phraseology.

Off topic I know, but I didn't realise the words whine or complain were censored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If you're basing how good a game is based solely on how demanding it is on your system, you aren't a gamer, Crysis seems to be held up in such high regard based on its ludicrous system requirements and graphics. This dad not disguise the fact it was a mediocre game in almost every regard.

aint that the truth! Crysis 2 was pretty lame after a while of play. all fancy looking but a typical Crytek game, Farcrys are the same. Ill pick up Crysis 3 in a month or two in the bargain bucket when its

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If you're basing how good a game is based solely on how demanding it is on your system, you aren't a gamer, Crysis seems to be held up in such high regard based on its ludicrous system requirements and graphics. This dad not disguise the fact it was a mediocre game in almost every regard.

Unfortunately for a lot of gamers it did. They got caught up in the hype and there are still many to this day who defend it, when the gameplay was weak and the engine very poorly optimised. It certainly had some impressive graphics but it wasn't a good engine or game. Crysis 2 was a much better game, even though it's generally not regarded as highly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If you're basing how good a game is based solely on how demanding it is on your system, you aren't a gamer, Crysis seems to be held up in such high regard based on its ludicrous system requirements and graphics. This dad not disguise the fact it was a mediocre game in almost every regard.

A lot of the high-end elists are more benchmark racers than gamers (IMHO), McKay - and they HATE and DESPISE being called out on it.

Athernar - I was not even referring to Crysis in particular. Casual piracy in general is an issue for ALL developers of paid content (it's why I also referred to operating systems and applications - two areas where Crytek and EA have zero software being effected.) Casual piracy affects publishers more than developers, but it DOES affect developers - developer contracts with publishers - all of which include a share of sales revenues - suffer when revenues drop for ANY reason - including piracy, casual or not. Again, the pirated material itself is irrelevant.

The original Crysis was indeed a high-end benchmark disguised as a game - and I was one of those that called it out as such. Surprisingly, Crysis 2 was a LOT more fun to play than the original, and Crysis 3 is far more fun (so far) than even Crysis 2. (One thing Crysis 3 has is some recreations of moments from earlier shooters - one of those is in the train yards, when you're looking for the nanosuit jammer; at one point when you're practically right on top of it (it's on a position that had been overrun by feral Ceph); right as you're about to land on that position (there's also ammo crates there - it's the AMMO I was after) those same feral Ceph that apparently ate the local CELL garrison are looking to snack on you. It reminded me of a stage from the original DOOM when you're about to walk through one of those hidden doors - only to find yourself up PAST your ears in demons - cacodemons to be precise. From "I'm okay." to "WTF!!!" in less than a second. I'll likely have a few NIGHTMARES about that tonight - despite my NOT dying there; definitely a major "BRRRRR" moment.)

And that is the real difference going from the original Crysis to Crysis 2, and now Crysis 3. Crysis 2 hewed more toward the center on PCs than the original did, and Crysis 3 skews more toward the center of PCs today. As the playability of the core game skewed more toward the middle, the game itself became much more fun to play.

Lastly, Crysis 3 for PC is much less a "rails" shooter than Crysis 2 - even, if not especially, in the rail yard and vicinity - if it were, that pack of feral Ceph would have been far more avoidable. One thing I am doing a LOT of is exploring - using my visor to look for everything from extra/additional ammo/weapon caches, to more stuff to hack. (However, what the heck is it with the CELL subcommanders? They sound like they all came out of the same mold as that despicable and despised Lockhart that Alcatraz put down like a rabid animal in Crysis 2. Due to the LACK of time pressure so far - I don't rush through anything. I take my time discombobulating their ambush attempts, raiding ammo caches, popping in and out of cloak, shooting them in ignominious areas - basically general toying - FAR more so than in Crysis 2. Yes - just as in Crysis 2, posterior perforation is a personal favorite.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

funny, I'm the only that actually enjoyed Crysis? Yeah i just played in 2011 when i had my new puter (before i had only laptops for quite some time and they were more work oriented than game oriented) and with all the gfx in max quality the game looks suberb; although i must agree that the engine was poorly developed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Athernar - I was not even referring to Crysis in particular. Casual piracy in general is an issue for ALL developers of paid content (it's why I also referred to operating systems and applications - two areas where Crytek and EA have zero software being effected.) Casual piracy affects publishers more than developers, but it DOES affect developers - developer contracts with publishers - all of which include a share of sales revenues - suffer when revenues drop for ANY reason - including piracy, casual or not. Again, the pirated material itself is irrelevant.

If it's an "issue" then it's purely of the publisher's invention, piracy is nothing more than a scapegoat.

I'm not going to go in depth and rehash a bunch of arguments on this topic because it's been beaten to death, but it can be summarised with a few points.

- Some people will pirate regardless.

- Pirates can be converted into paying customers. (2nd hand game sales cannot, ignoring microtransactions)

- DRM only hurts paying customers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

funny, I'm the only that actually enjoyed Crysis? Yeah i just played in 2011 when i had my new puter (before i had only laptops for quite some time and they were more work oriented than game oriented) and with all the gfx in max quality the game looks suberb; although i must agree that the engine was poorly developed.

I liked it well enough to finish it so it's definitely got that over many other games, but I think the 'alien invasion' thing is boring as all hell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I liked it well enough to finish it so it's definitely got that over many other games, but I think the 'alien invasion' thing is boring as all hell.

well that theme is used into oblivion that's for sure, but it was a game that, apart from the graphics, it had some perks: the suit (speed, strength, cloaking) and the environment. Sure the graphics is the main attraction and the fact that only top notch computers (at the time) could run it (that even made into a meme), but it is a top game, not a mediocre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I truly cannot even fathom how people can say that somehow the Crysis series has not been good from a gameplay perspective. It damn near boggles my mind. Even as they have progressively dumbed down the gameplay to make the game more suited for the consoles, it is still overall one of the better FPS experiences one can have in gaming. At least IMHO. It is just damn fun to play.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.