Crykee... Crysis(lrg pics)

unklerosco

This has to be the next must have game, the GFX are looking amazing....






Seemingly it'll be on a bigger scale than farcry, all the scenery is interactive.. if u brush past a bush it moves n tracks will be left in the ground etc..

Me is looking forward to it..

http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/2006/04/20/crysis_new_screenshots/1.html

angelofdeath

looks pretty awesome alright, dof effect looks good there, will be interesting to see how it works ingame

The Free Man

all i can say is.....holy crap.

you should post this in games.

unklerosco

The Free Man wrote:

all i can say is.....holy crap.

you should post this in games.

yeah, i was meant to write about what u'll need to run it but im to lazy.. Its DX10 only tho...

8T8

It's not DX10 only there is a DX9 SM3.0 and 2.0 path as well barely anyone will have the DX10 hardware for the game when it comes out at the end of this year/start of next to begin with.

The DX9 SM 2.0 path will more than likely end up looking like the ugly step child compared to the DX9 SM 3.0 and DX10 SM 4.0 path so those wanting to run the game with all the bells and whistles enabled will need to upgrade (that is unless Crytek are feeling generous and go out of their way to implement as many as of the effects as possible in SM 2.0 - not an easy task if your target platform is SM3.0 or greater).

There might be one or two special effects exclusive to the DX10 path in an old interview Crytek said the DX10 was for performance only but in an interview at CVG a week ago you could interpret they sort of said that it would look best on DX10.

Bernd Diemer Everything you've seen has been running on DX9 and normal hardware you can get in the shops right now. It's all normal spec and doesn't even use a dual processor or anything like that, we don't have any special graphical hardware inside these boxes. However, with DX10 and a dual core CPU, you're going to see something very special indeed. When we compare Far Cry to Crysis we're talking about two to three levels better in terms of generations, but if you compare DX 9 to DX10 it's at least a generation better, so there's a tangible difference, visually as well as from the intensity.

So I'd take that as a hint it shouldn't look majorly different to the DX9 SM3.0 version I'm betting its fairly minor stuff. They did say everything shown so far has been on current hardware nothing special or unreleased.

Dooom

8T8 wrote:

They did say everything shown so far has been on current hardware nothing special or unreleased.

Yeah, that's why they released this bunch of screenshots - it wouldn't run faster than 1fps

/nerd moment over.

projectmayhem

looks very nice but anyone with any illusions of running it on dx9 hardware with any sort of decent performance should really stop dreaming.

this'll be a dx10 game, and will probably only run well with dualcore systems. i'd say the last great dx9 series of games will be whatever comes out on the Unreal3 engine... and even that is asking a lot of hardware running at high (it'll implement the ageia physics chip among other things)

TerrorFirmer

projectmayhem wrote:

looks very nice but anyone with any illusions of running it on dx9 hardware with any sort of decent performance should really stop dreaming.

They've already said that it'll run on current gen dx9 hardware - they'd be shooting themselves in the foot if it was only dx10 compatiable or even only capable of running well on dx10. I'd be willing to bet it'll look almost as good on a high end dx9 card. Not as good obviously, but almost.

I mean after all the majority of the market is not going to be able to afford a dx10 card in a few months, literally a few months after previously upgrading in alot of cases.

projectmayhem

HavoK wrote:

They've already said that it'll run on current gen dx9 hardware - they'd be shooting themselves in the foot if it was only dx10 compatiable or even only capable of running well on dx10. I'd be willing to bet it'll look almost as good on a high end dx9 card. Not as good obviously, but almost.

I mean after all the majority of the market is not going to be able to afford a dx10 card in a few months, literally a few months after previously upgrading in alot of cases.

i'd like to think you're right - but i'm looking at these pics and comparing them to bf2, fear etc. i can't imagine getting 60fps or above with this, when your card has to work with uber dynamic lighting and soft shadows on all objects. then throw in the fact that everything on screen is a physics object...

i just upgraded my PC recently myself, and i've no plans to do anymore work (bar maybe an extra 512 RAM - get it up to 2gig) on this machine. i'll sell it next year and buy a new one in the summer... but if it turns out i'm right and crysis runs badly on dx9 cards, then i'll get the ps3 version (which i'd say is inevitable)

ChityWest

Those shots are bloody impressive - about as close to movie-like as I have seen (up there with unreal 3) - there are some other shots on the site in the original link worth checking out too. I can see it maybe running on high end current gen cards - but not on lower end ones.

DemonOfTheFall

projectmayhem wrote:

looks very nice but anyone with any illusions of running it on dx9 hardware with any sort of decent performance should really stop dreaming.

Anyone with illusions that a company would release a game that maybe 10% of the market could play should stop dreaming...

projectmayhem

DemonOfTheFall wrote:

Anyone with illusions that a company would release a game that maybe 10% of the market could play should stop dreaming...

i said "decent performance"... not "no one can play this"

anyway, looks like i may have to eat my words

crytek wrote:

"Everything you've seen has been running on DX9 and normal hardware you can get in the shops right now. It's all normal spec and doesn't even use a dual processor or anything like that, we don't have any special graphical hardware inside these boxes. However, with DX10 and a dual core CPU, you're going to see something very special indeed."

though i don't hold out much hope to run this anything like those screenshots on my x800GT and athlon64 3200+

Balfa

Why does the dude in the first picture look about a hundred times more detailed than the guy in the third picture? What's the point in having ultra-realistic faces when you're four inches from them if they look, to be fair, nothing at all special when you're four feet away?

projectmayhem

Balfa wrote:

Why does the dude in the first picture look about a hundred times more detailed than the guy in the third picture? What's the point in having ultra-realistic faces when you're four inches from them if they look, to be fair, nothing at all special when you're four feet away?

2 possibilities:

1) the first pic is a tech demo showing off what the engine is capable of

2) the engine uses the usual trick of scaling down graphics when you move away. so if you DO move close to that dude in the 3rd pic, the render gets to the same level of the first pic

Balfa

projectmayhem wrote:

2) the engine uses the usual trick of scaling down graphics when you move away. so if you DO move close to that dude in the 3rd pic, the render gets to the same level of the first pic

That's my point. I'm not in the habit of standing four inches from my oppoonents when attempting to kill them. The guy in the third image looks decidedly below par. Humans in a jungle scene are a focal point that the eye gets drawn to... You don't want to put all the effort into make the branches sway beautifully if you've got a crappy character looming at you.

Their LOD scaling is messed up, because he should look much better than that at that distance

awhir

omg its looks soo COOL