×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Crysis Sequel Announced, Still PC Only

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 5 years ago | from the go-upgrade-your-pc-now dept.

First Person Shooters (Games) 86

EA and Crytek have announced a sequel to Crysis , one of the highest rated games of last year. Unfortunately, it seems that still only PC users will be able to celebrate the good news. "In Crysis Warhead, players will don the Nanosuit of Sergeant Sykes, also known as 'Psycho', one of the most memorable characters from Crysis. More brash and aggressive than his Delta Force squadmate Nomad, players will experience Psycho's parallel story during the events of the original game, finding that life on the other side of the island is even more intense and explosive than they ever could have imagined. Luckily, Psycho's Nanosuit is just as capable and he's equipped with an even bigger arsenal of fully customizable weapons and new vehicles, giving players access to the tools they need to dominate any situation. Aside from this new, exciting single player campaign, Crysis Warhead will also feature new multiplayer content."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

86 comments

So... (5, Funny)

Jor-Al (1298017) | more than 5 years ago | (#23682981)

does this one require dual, dual-gpu video cards and a dual, quad core system just to get 30fps at full settings?

Re:So... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23683105)

Of course not. That was just the *first* crysis.

This one requires quad, quad-gpu video cards and a quad, 8 core system just to get 30fps at full settings.

Re:So... (1)

BobNET (119675) | more than 5 years ago | (#23684021)

This one requires quad, quad-gpu video cards and a quad, 8 core system just to get 30fps at full settings.

I think you have that wrong. This one requires 4 quad-core video cards and 4 8-core CPUs just to get 30fps at the lowest settings...

Re:So... (1)

MoldySpore (1280634) | more than 5 years ago | (#23686073)

You people are so fucking cynical. I get 30-40FPS on my 22" Widescreen @ 1680 x 1050 with settings on high with an SINGLE 8800GT Alpha Dog Edition, 6400+ Black Edition, and 2 gigs of Corsair ram. NO overclocking at all. I built my machine for $1050. Including the monitor. The game looks beautiful @ those settings. You don't NEED a $4000 machine to play Crysis. In fact, it scales very well and plays decent on my old machine too (Athlon 64 3700+, 1 gig of ram, GeForce 7600GT). Quit bitching and get a job to pay for a half decent computer.

Re:So... (2, Insightful)

rhyder128k (1051042) | more than 5 years ago | (#23687145)

Or just wait a couple or three years for it to hit the bargain shelf and then play the SP game with all settings on max and the final patch installed.

Re:So... (1)

PC and Sony Fanboy (1248258) | more than 5 years ago | (#23683127)

what you're trying to ask is ... can anyone without a $3000 computer run this?

Re:So... (2, Insightful)

Lordrashmi (167121) | more than 5 years ago | (#23683341)

My ~$1200 PC ran it well on medium and the game looked good. I don't know what everyone was bitching about. Besides looking good I thought it was a damn fun single player game, and spent a couple of weeks playing around online before getting into TF2 heavily.

Re:So... (3, Informative)

mobby_6kl (668092) | more than 5 years ago | (#23684925)

People are way overreacting over the Crysis hardware needs. Sure, it's a demanding game hardware wise, but not ridiculously so. It ran smoothly (~30fps most of the time) with high settings at 1680x1050 on a one year old $1200 pc, and that was also more expensive that it needed to be (for games) because I got a quad core Q6600 instead of the E7200 as listed below. Otherwise it's quite similar in terms of performance.

Core2Duo E7200 2.53Ghz $135
GeForce 8800GT $180
2GB DDR2 Corsair ram $50
Asus P5K motherboard $130
----
Whoa, that's like $495!

The rest basically won't affect the performance so you can use whatever's lying around. But anyway:
Antec case with a 360W PSU : $80
WD 320gb HDD : $75.
---
+$155
As for the game itself, I really enjoyed most of it. Even the alien spaceship/base part was a pretty good change of paces, although it did drag on a little longer than I'd prefer. So I'm looking forward to this, and especially Far Cry 2.

Re:So... (1)

ivanmarsh (634711) | more than 5 years ago | (#23683777)

My computer is well in excess of $3000 and I can't run Crysis at full settings (unlike with every other game).

I guess the Cryengine was a bit overhyped.

Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23684181)

You don't know how to spec a gaming rig then.

Re:So... (1)

ivanmarsh (634711) | more than 5 years ago | (#23685707)

Yeah... the minimum 120fps while there's a ton of action going in in COD4 is a clear indication of a slow machine.

Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23691395)

COD4 is a DirectX 7 game and Crysis is DX9.

Re:So... (1)

DRAGONWEEZEL (125809) | more than 5 years ago | (#23684939)

Really? 3000 When 1993?

There is no reason why you can't run Crysis at max on any regular resolution (including widescreen)

Or does your PC have 3K allocated like this

150 case (only if your looking for something really extravagant)
300 power supply (Really? no, this should be a touch lower (like 1/2?)
200 Mobo (any decent MOBO)
1000 processor (Top of the line Proc for said Mobo)
1000 4 gb of DDR3 Top speed RAM
150 HDD
600 HDD (assuming twin velociraptors.)
and you forgot to buy a videocard?

Re:So... (1)

jdinkel (1028708) | more than 5 years ago | (#23685647)

He didn't forget, the video is integrated.

Re:So... (1)

ivanmarsh (634711) | more than 5 years ago | (#23685721)

Funny, but no, it's not.

It's an EVGA 8800GTX and like I said, I don't have frame rate issues with other games.

Re:So... (1)

jdinkel (1028708) | more than 5 years ago | (#23685999)

I have a Quaddro FX 1700 and Crysis plays beautifully on Medium settings. I don't know how a Quaddro FX 1700 compares to a 8800GTX though.

Re:So... (1)

ivanmarsh (634711) | more than 5 years ago | (#23685667)

It's got an EVGA 8800 GTX in it.

If you have any wisdom on how to get a greater frame rate in Crysis I'd love to hear it.

Re:So... (1)

Lost Engineer (459920) | more than 5 years ago | (#23689259)

9800GX2 FTW man.

Oh BTW, I got an EVGA 8800GT (no X) and was disappointed that they put a capacitor where they shouldn't have and after market water blocks wouldn't fit it. In fact any sort of full coverage solution probably won't. Definitely buying from another "manufacturer" or whatever nVidia is calling them next time.

I don't really know what your specs are, but... (1)

DRAGONWEEZEL (125809) | more than 5 years ago | (#23736629)

I am in the middle of playing it now. Do you turn off AV when playing? What about indexing services (Msft indexer slows me down / distributed clients (FAH, Seti) / Torrents

I'll double check everysingle setting I have on, but if your running a high res (like I do, I am either @ 1280 or 16x1200 can't remember, but I'll check tonight) TURN OFF AA. The higher the res, the less AA you need! 800x600 You need it up there. as you increase resolution, decrease AA. so for 1024x768 go down to 4x (or 2x), and 2x (or none)for 1280x1024 (asuming 4:3 ar) and just drop it from there up.

Most people want to run 8x AA on a 2048x1536 screen becuase it's the "MAX setting" but AA was designed for medium/poor resolutions. If your up in the 1280+ range, do you need it? Because the higher the res you go, the Harder (more FR costly) AA is to implement (pixel averaging a line w/ Greater and greater pixel counts, and more lines /frame.)

I wasn't trying to be too much of a jerk but 3K is a lot if your designing your machine for games. I build gaming rigs for friends / family / coworkers. First thing I tell them, set a budget, cause the sky is the limit on specs. But thats the hard work. The rest is easy, spec out w/ their budget, divide your budget (3K) into 3rds, spend ~ 1/3 (or a touch less) on proc, 1/3 on videocard(s) (again or a touch less), and scrape teh rest together w/ what's leftover 8') Most procs take a 10% OC stock. Level load times are Proc dependant not so much HDD. Two mid to cheap drives Raid 0 are often faster than 1 fast drive, and often cost less. PSU / Mobo is important don't skimp, but be reasonable. You don't need a $150 PSU! Good mobo's are about 130-230. Ram is cheap these days. You allready have a Case/mouse/Keyboard/Monitor right? If not Then re-start calc dividing it into 1/4ths w/ 1/4 budget going to monitor (the Main Output of your PC) 1/4 going to proc, 1/4 going to vid, and scraping the rest together.

Re:So... (1)

DRAGONWEEZEL (125809) | more than 5 years ago | (#23742627)

So I checked my settings and I play @ 2048x 1536 (I didn't think I set res that high but I guess I did I'll turn it down, and graphics up, but out of time this evening) but all options other than physics and sound are set to medium (those 2 at High).

Re:So... (1)

Taibhsear (1286214) | more than 5 years ago | (#23685739)

My system as a reference (bought in march):
$100 case
$180 PSU 750W
$400 mobo X48
$1000 CPU QX9650
$400 4GB DDR3 1333MHz
$200 ($100x2) 500GB HDD SATAII 32MB, raid0
$300 8800GTS (G92)
used dual monitors from previous system
$2380 total without tax/shipping

Runs on 1280x1024 on high for everything except antialiasing. I can run AA at x2 for whole game, or x4 for everything except last scene but I have to set the graphics card to single performance mode or it gets bad, like in Doom3. I'd try higher but my monitor doesn't support higher res.

Re:So... (1)

Kneo24 (688412) | more than 5 years ago | (#23695547)

My computer is well in excess of $3000 and I can't run Crysis at full settings (unlike with every other game). I guess the Cryengine was a bit overhyped.
High on Vista? Or High on XP? There is a difference between the highest settings on the two different OSes.

Re:So... (1)

@madeus (24818) | more than 5 years ago | (#23703087)

Good point - to which I'd like to add that IIRC "High" isn't even the highest setting in Crysis.

Re:So... (4, Insightful)

Spatial (1235392) | more than 5 years ago | (#23683903)

Anyone who bought a $3,000 computer for gaming is a complete sucker (or can afford Ferraris). An extremely high-end gaming machine can be put together for $1,000 including a 20" monitor and all required peripherals. Beyond that price-point you begin hemhoraging money for practically no gain.

Seven months ago I bought one for 950 euros, with which I happily played through Crysis on high settings at a merry 35-40 FPS. Currently, for that much money I could buy a significantly more powerful computer.

Re:So... (1, Insightful)

Jor-Al (1298017) | more than 5 years ago | (#23684085)

An extremely high-end gaming machine can be put together for $1,000
You must have a different notion of "high-end" than the rest of the world, then.

Re:So... (2, Insightful)

Dark Kenshin (764678) | more than 5 years ago | (#23684497)

You do realize you just contradicted yourself. 1 euro is not equal to 1 dollar. 950 euros is roughly $1495 give or take the exchange rate.

Re:So... (2, Insightful)

Cecil (37810) | more than 5 years ago | (#23684603)

extremely high-end

You keep using those words. I do not think they mean what you think they mean.

Re:So... (1)

compro01 (777531) | more than 5 years ago | (#23687399)

your rig comes to about $1500.

my $2k system (as of last september. core2 duo e6850, 8800GTS, 2GB ram. likely about $1500 now) runs crysis nicely on high

Re:So... (1)

rantingkitten (938138) | more than 5 years ago | (#23688941)

That's true to an extent. Almost exactly one year ago I put together my first "new" computer (as opposed to ones I'd cobbled together from random discarded or donated hardware). I wanted to keep the price down but have gaming performance since I do love my FPS games.

The final cost was about 1100 dollars for a dual-core e6600, GTS8800 768, two gigs of RAM, 500 gig SATA drive, motherboard, case, power supply, fans, and a very nice 21" 1680x1050 LCD. It's not a completely top-of-the-line machine (though at the time, it almost was), but who cares?
(To my dismay, two weeks later, Intel dropped the price of the quad core q6600 to exactly what I'd just paid for the dual core. Ah, well, it was bound to happen..)

Anyway, this machine runs Crysis beautifully with everything except antialiasing maxed out. It slows down in a few parts but never below playability level, and not often enough for me to really care. Bioshock, Quake 4, Doom 3, and all the others run at ridiculously high rates with everything maxed.

If you know where to shop and consider your options, it's easy to get a nice gaming rig without spending a truly insane amount of money. I have friends that spent twice what I did, and only get marginally better performance; there comes a point of diminishing returns, so to speak.

They'd probably argue that their machines are more "future proof" than mine, but really, that's kind of ridiculous. By the time the "next gen" of games after Crysis come out, all this stuff will be considered mid-level or lower anyway. Plus, with today's architecture, it's easy to drop in a quad core down the road if you need it, when the price will be cheaper anyway, or SLI your video card, again, much later, when you need it, when the price is cheaper anyway.

Re:So... (1)

@madeus (24818) | more than 5 years ago | (#23703235)

An extremely high-end gaming machine can be put together for $1,000 including a 20" monitor and all required peripherals.
After buying two 9800 GX2's and a motherboard (no processor, no display, no RAM, no peripherals at all) you'd already be over 1,000 USD - with a fully loaded motherboard (3 x 9800 GX2's) you'd be well over 2000 USD after adding 2-4 GB of RAM, A CPU and a PSU... and that's before you even include a display or any peripherals.

Beyond that price-point you begin hemhoraging money for practically no gain.
That's true once you pass about the 3,000 USD mark for a system, not the 1,000 USD mark.

If you are regularly playing games like Call of Duty 4, Crysis or Gears of War on your PC your are going to easily notice the difference, especially if you are playing at native resolutions for larger displays (e.g. 1920x1200).

For me, compromises on texture quality through lower AF levels (in particular x8 AF) and not being able to use FSAA is really noticeable (although at high native resolutions 2xFSAA is enough to take the edge of it being distracting most of the time, 4x FSAA being preferable).

Re:So... (4, Insightful)

Hatta (162192) | more than 5 years ago | (#23683673)

If your computer can't handle that, why not just run it on a lower setting? I don't get this complaint. Would you rather they artificially limit the graphics of the game so that "full" is what "medium" is now? That would be silly.

Mod parent up (5, Insightful)

vecctor (935163) | more than 5 years ago | (#23684019)

So true.

The best is when people compare it consoles - where you have no choice on quality and it is locked at whatever the devs could get to run.

I guess the take away "winning strategy" from this is just to artificially limit the settings so stupid people don't bitch and give your game a bad reputation. Then 2 years later release a "graphics upgrade patch" that removes the limits :)

Future-proofing AND idiot mitigation. Win! (Profit???)

It's all perception. People want to think they are running it at "The Best Settings" and feel cheated if they aren't. Because, by God, they are entitled to the best settings no matter what their computer is like. It's just not fair otherwise!

Re:Mod parent up (1)

The Gaytriot (1254048) | more than 5 years ago | (#23687527)

I've heard that Crytek will release the "Ultra High" graphics settings in a patch later on when they think machines can handle it. I guess they did the same thing with Farcry before, but I don't know.

Re:Mod parent up (1)

KefabiMe (730997) | more than 5 years ago | (#23688379)

The problem with Crysis is that it looks like shit running at medium or lower graphic settings. I mean, it looks uglier than Half-Life 2 does on the same computer. People who play on medium or lower wouldn't understand what the fuss around Crysis was about. For the record, it's very pretty on high settings, but not the best FPS out there. Half-Life 2 was still much better.

Re:Mod parent up (1)

vecctor (935163) | more than 5 years ago | (#23688553)

That's fine - then the critism should be "it looks shitty on medium" rather than "it runs like crap on high! Why did they bother releasing this since nobody can play it!".

Not understanding what the fuss is about is fine too - there are a ton of games I play where I have that feeling. I just figure it isn't my kind of game.

Incidentally, I think HL2 was one of them for me. I borrowed it using a friends steam account one time, got bored, and quit part way though. I now own it with the Orange Box bundle, but I've never finished it.

(Portal and TF2 were enough fun to justify the cost, of course :-) )

Re:So... (1, Troll)

kalirion (728907) | more than 5 years ago | (#23684395)

The problem is when those "medium" settings both look and perform worse than the "full" settings of another game.

Re:So... (1)

drsquare (530038) | more than 5 years ago | (#23686811)

Because people don't want to spend money on the latest game only to have to turn down all the settings and make it look like shit. Especially as modern games are pretty much based on having slick graphics.

Re:So... (1)

Kneo24 (688412) | more than 5 years ago | (#23695565)

The problem here is not exactly as clear cut as you make it out to be. It's expected of games to be able to run smoothly on high settings (minimum 30 FPS) on gaming rigs that don't cost in excess of $1200 these days. When the game came out, it obviously couldn't. It couldn't run on rigs at those settings where people threw more money at. That's a pretty big no-no and it pisses people off. A good portion of the people who are bitching aren't bitching because they have shit PC's.

Re:So... (1)

tooler (36824) | more than 5 years ago | (#23716743)

Would you rather they artificially limit the graphics of the game so that "full" is what "medium" is now?

Oh no, vanity sizing for geeks has arrived.

Re:So... (1)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 5 years ago | (#23685397)

Imagine a beowulf cluster of those... then maybe that cluster will be able to perform at 30fps at full settings with the next version.

But your options don't end there, technology has advanced. You can get people to run a modified seti@home client to give you the missing cpu cycles to be able to get that performance (2-3k machines could do the trick?), or go to the black market and hire a mid-sized botnet for that task (will have the side effect of reducing global spam too, those machines will not have spare cpu cycles to send spam while serving you)

Re:So... (0)

zonker (1158) | more than 5 years ago | (#23690653)

Yes but only if you want to see the sharks in wireframe models. Otherwise you'll have to use a Cray to do those calculations in 3D.

"unfortunately"? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23683041)

Unfortunate for who? Sony fanboys? Let me check for some sympathy...

$sys$nope, isn't there.

requirements (1)

lukrop (1302325) | more than 5 years ago | (#23683073)

it's sad that the cryengine2 needs so much performance, look at Call of Duty 4, i think it's look pretty much the same like crysis but it doesn't need that much performance :/

Re:requirements (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23683607)

and Call of Duty 4 limits you to a single tiny linear path with invisible walls and unclimbable rickety fences. And relies on tricks to deliver those visuals.

Why does everyone hate on the crysis engine when it WORKS FINE FOR MEDIUM SPEC MACHINES, JUST NOT ON MAX SETTINGS.

Re:requirements (1)

dfm3 (830843) | more than 5 years ago | (#23684115)

Crysis is just as linear as any other FPS, they just did a much better job of hiding it.

I remember reading numerous reviews and forum hype about how Crysis was supposed to be so "open" and less "linear". Sure, the environments create the illusion of openness, but when you get down to it, Crysis was just another "go through each objective one at a time in this exact order" game. Any choice you had was more along the lines of "do I take the beachfront path to reach the village, or do I stick to the road? To I sneak around the perimeter of that valley behind the treeline, or do I plow my way right up the middle with guns blazing?"

From the way I heard alot of people describe the game, I expected something more along the lines of an Elder Scrolls style "go anywhere, do anything" openness. Not that I think such non-linearity necessarily would have worked for an FPS, but that's the way people seemed to describe it.

Ever tried to actually explore a level in Crysis? Wander too far, and you'll find that the developers have used tricks to keep you on the path they want you to take. Swim out too far, and you are eaten by sharks. Manage to get around the invisible barriers at the top of that rock pile (or just use the Sandbox editor to remove the barriers), and you get a "return to the combat area or be terminated in 7 seconds" message.

Re:requirements (1)

mrchaotica (681592) | more than 5 years ago | (#23684317)

I expected something more along the lines of an Elder Scrolls style "go anywhere, do anything" openness. Not that I think such non-linearity necessarily would have worked for an FPS

What's the difference between an Elder Scrolls game and a FPS, anyway? I almost always play Oblivion in first-person view, and if you've equipped a bow and arrows you can shoot people.

And what about Grand Theft Auto? That, likewise, can be first person, and it sure as Hell is a shooter!

Swim out too far, and you are eaten by sharks.

Is that any worse than the situation in TES or GTA, where you just end up swimming across a featureless, flat-bottomed ocean forever?

Re:requirements (1)

dfm3 (830843) | more than 5 years ago | (#23685259)

My point is that people often fail to differentiate between linearity in gameplay/plot and linearity in level design. Crysis has a fairly linear plot (there are a few optional side missions, though), and sticks you on an linear path along the way. However, unlike the "single tiny linear path" as described by the GGP, Crysis does a very good job of "widening" the path to create an illusion of openness.

The way I'd heard the game described before I played it, you'd think that your character was plunked down on a big island and allowed to roam around GTA-style. Not that I necessarily wanted the game to be that way, but based on my expectations from what I had been told, I was surprised that the game was laid out the way it was. Overall, I thought it was far, far better designed than the "endless chain of rooms and hallways" level design that tends to be all too common in the FPS genera (to use the tern genera loosely), but not so open that you wander around completely lost. However, it does maintain one characteristic that has become a common convention of FPS-style games, in that you visit many areas exactly once and travel through them in one direction.

Re:requirements (1)

The Gaytriot (1254048) | more than 5 years ago | (#23687717)

I think it's less linear, most of Farcry was the same way. You could take very different routes through each level and not just different approaches to scenarios.

I originally thought the same thing about Farcry, where you have an entire island you can explore. You can explore to a certain extent but there are definite boundaries that guide you in a certain direction.

Re:requirements (2, Insightful)

Aranykai (1053846) | more than 5 years ago | (#23684325)

Lets see. It has a singleplayer plot where you take on a role?

Seriously, how "open" can it be? You still have to hit the plot points or the story wont progress.

Re:requirements (1)

bealzabobs_youruncle (971430) | more than 5 years ago | (#23685409)

What version of COD4 did you get? Because mine looks nothing like Crysis? I enjoyed COD4 but that engine can't hold the Crysis engines jock.

would be interested... (4, Funny)

flyingsquid (813711) | more than 5 years ago | (#23683103)

I would be interested in this, but I just heard about that video showing gameplay for Duke Nukem Forever, so I think I'm going to wait and get that instead.

You insensitive clod! (5, Interesting)

XanC (644172) | more than 5 years ago | (#23683205)

I have a PC, but as a Linux user I'm left out too! You mean it's only for Windows, not for "PC".

That's MISTER Insensitive Clod to YOU buddy! (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23683531)

But Linux is dying...

Err...

Nobody games on Macs anyhoo?

Uhm...

Something something Wii, something something PS-whatever, something something X-Box, your momma wears combat boots!

Not particularily enthusiac about this. (3, Interesting)

Rageon (522706) | more than 5 years ago | (#23683241)

I'm not typically an FPS guy, but I found the first half of Crysis to be one of the best games I've ever played. The found the second half extremely boring. Once the aliens show up, the game just wasn't the same. If Pyscho's story is supposed to involve "life" on the other side of the island, as the release calls it, I have to assume they are talking more about the aliens than the Koreans. Too bad.

I wouldn't think so (2, Interesting)

vecctor (935163) | more than 5 years ago | (#23683781)

If Pyscho's story is supposed to involve "life" on the other side of the island, as the release calls it, I have to assume they are talking more about the aliens than the Koreans.
I would think just the opposite. IIRC Nomad and the squad leader were the two mucking around in the ship while Psycho was off doing something else. This says to me more koreans rather than less.

Like you, I found the first half the game much better (and CERTAINLY more replayable) than the second. The second part was fun for about 10 minutes with the whole floaty thing, but that is only novelty value.

PC only? (-1, Offtopic)

clarkn0va (807617) | more than 5 years ago | (#23683321)

Is this article telling me that this game will only run on personal computers? Because I spend my evenings on the mainframe and PC-only games are of no use to me, unless I can get some kind of emulation working.[/sarcasm]

Okay, seriously, can we drop the "pc" nomenclature? If you're talking about a specific cpu architecture then say "x86 only" or "68k only" or "alpha only". If, on the other hand, you're referring to a software platform, then say "DirectX 10" or "OpenBSD".

To say that a piece of software is "PC only" is to say nothing at all, except maybe "I subscribe to marketeer-perpetuated [youtube.com] archaisms".

db

Re:PC only? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23683467)

Okay, seriously, can we drop the "pc" nomenclature?

You know and I know and most people here on /. know that "PC" is a bad name to call windows machines (particularly 'modern' windows such as XP/Vista, but obviously not 95/98) but this will never happen, given it's become a standard marketing term now, and we all know it.

It's like asking people to stop calling me African-American, because, Africa isn't the only continent that has/had people with dark skin, such as the Caribbeans... *ehem* mon.

Re:PC only? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23683473)

"waah waah waaah". God I hate you. You and your scruffy little beard and big bloated belly. You know what the fuck PC-only means. That nomenclature is here to stay, and you can just quit your goddamn bitching about it.

Re:PC only? (5, Insightful)

liquiddark (719647) | more than 5 years ago | (#23683489)

Are you worried that anyone (other than you, apparently) is going to be confused? Because that, honestly, is not a problem I've run into. Pretty sure most of us understand that "archaism" pretty well, actually.

Re:PC only? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23683583)

How does "non-console" strike you? Too ambiguous?

Re:PC only? (4, Insightful)

irc.goatse.cx troll (593289) | more than 5 years ago | (#23683599)

It will probably run on DirectX10 with backwards support for Directx9. IIRC, thats what the xbox uses too, so you'll probably need to specify DX9 or 10 on x86 or x64. More specifically I imagine theres a lower end on the number of processor extensions needed, so probably x86/x64 with at least support for sse3, mmx, sse, etc.

Or you could just not be a douche and say "PC" like everyone else. Leave the specifics for the hardware requirements.

Not saying "PC only" is saying I'm so insecure about myself that I need to arbitrarily use my own terminology because whats popular does not make me stand out. Just like people saying "USian" or "GNU/Linux"

Re:PC only? (0, Offtopic)

clarkn0va (807617) | more than 5 years ago | (#23688005)

Or you could just not be a douche and say "PC" like everyone else.
I didn't realise that not saying "PC" made me a douche, but thanks for the insight.

Not saying "PC only" is saying I'm so insecure about myself that I need to arbitrarily use my own terminology because whats popular does not make me stand out.
Saying "Windows" when I mean Windows is drawing attention to myself?

And if I'm feeling insecure you have my assurance I won't reduce myself to ad hominem attacks in a public forum.

db

Re:PC only? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23683719)

It says PC because when it comes to games, there are games for PCs or games for 3 major consoles.

If you have a 'MacOSX' PC, you can still run windows on it and run a 'PC' game.

If you have a 'Linux/BSD' PC, you can still run windows on it off another partition and run a 'PC' game, or run the 'PC' game under WINE, etc.

So yes, folks still refer to 'PC' games because you can run them on a PC, even if you have to go to some effort to set up emulation or a separate partition, but you can't run the 'PC' game on a console because it won't run on it at all.

Get it?

Re:PC only? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23683721)

windows games have been labeled "PC" for a LONG time. either you people are complete newbs or just elitist pricks with nothing better to do than cry about your preferred platform.

Re:PC only? (1)

Cecil (37810) | more than 5 years ago | (#23684661)

You know exactly what "PC only" in this context meant. So you're just being pedantic.

Irony (1)

immcintosh (1089551) | more than 5 years ago | (#23683475)

I think it's just a little ironic this will be a PC only title, considering how loudly these guys bitched and moaned about piracy and swore up and down they'd never put out another PC exclusive title.

Re:Irony (1)

Shinmizu (725298) | more than 5 years ago | (#23683879)

And I seriously doubt piracy had anything to do with their crappy sales. Who would want to pirate a game that got 5 fps on their system? I'm convinced that the horrible performance of the game is a big factor in its "lack" of sales. (I sure wish I could sell a million of something.)

Re:Irony (1)

Haeleth (414428) | more than 5 years ago | (#23687667)

And I seriously doubt piracy had anything to do with their crappy sales. Who would want to pirate a game that got 5 fps on their system?
It's not just performance, either. I tried the demo. It ran very nicely on my system and looked fantastic.

Unfortunately, it wasn't fun. Admiring the sunlight filtering through the leaves was very nice, but hardly exciting. Cutting down trees with a machine gun is fun for a few minutes at most. The AI was lacklustre, the plot derivative, the combat uninspired, the characters cliched, the interface clunky, and the level design nonexistent. I yawned through the demo, admired the quality of the game engine, and promptly deleted the whole thing and went back to Portal.

Irony - thy name is not piracy (1)

IBBoard (1128019) | more than 5 years ago | (#23685177)

I was thinking the same thing - I thought PC gaming was so rife with piracy that PC only (more specifically Windows only) games were a no-go for studios? Either someone was lying about that or they're making a stupid choice, and I'm guessing the former.

Reaks of EA (5, Interesting)

phresh (1285616) | more than 5 years ago | (#23683649)

The really lame thing about this is they've told us they will not be continuing to patch Crysis because of this game being their new priority. In fact they canceled the continued development of the much anticipated 1.3 patch for Crysis.
(http://www.crymod.com/thread.php?threadid=29356)

This is a big slap in the face to everyone who bought Crysis with high hopes for it's multiplayer aspect and especially those of us working on multiplayer-focused mods for it. Even those who were just hoping to get more improved performance from a future patch - not yours.

EA seemed to pull the same shit with DICE and the Battlefield series, before this. BF2 expansions and then BF2142 were out before major issues with BF2 were ever resolved. Some of the same old BF2 bugs still exist in all of the games on that engine, today. We've once again been sold on continuing support that ended up amounting to nothing but too-few-patches and hosted community forums. At least DICE continued patching BF2. Crytek seemingly wants us to buy Warhead if we want the 'optimized' and presumably less-buggy CryEngine2. Still, given their track record thus far, I imagine many of the issues that plague Crysis will remain in Warhead. Then you can expect the next installment to end support of Warhead, just the same.

The sad thing is that this should, by most PC gaming standards, be an expansion pack, with the core game being updated with the revamped code and assets. The single player campaign is going to be parallel to the Crysis one, you just play a different character. Yet it sounds like it's going to be a full-priced title.

Personally I've despised EA for years and hate supporting them. I bought Crysis with a frown because of this. Now this. At least I know I wasn't delusional when I flamingly urged the Crytek people to sever ties with EA, once Steam went to free e-publishing.

I for one will not support this sort of bullshit. Boycott EA. Everything they touch turns to fail and AIDS!

Re:Reaks of EA (1)

vecctor (935163) | more than 5 years ago | (#23683847)

Yeah, I agree. But they'll keep doing it as long as they can get away with it. Look how many people play BF2 and BF2142. It is many times more than people who play similar team-based FPS games made by non-asshat companies.

This habit of theirs is one reason I passed on BF2142 and simply waited for ETQW to come out.

Re:Reaks of EA (1)

Wildclaw (15718) | more than 5 years ago | (#23685283)

That is because EA isn't a quality brand. It is a mass production one, that relies on advertising and other brands to sell their products. The EA brand on a product is a negative factor, not a positive one.

If you want quality you have to with a brand like Blizzard which is know to support their products far beyond what is expected.

If you want a product from a company that are only interested in your money and not in your satisfaction go with EA. Sure, they may produce soom good products, but that is because good products sell. They will however never support product after sale, because it is more profitable to squeeze the most out of the market by selling expansion packs and other upgrades.

Yeah, I'm inclined to agree (1)

Joelfabulous (1045392) | more than 5 years ago | (#23685481)

I haven't played Crysis, but the description in the summary (no, I didn't RTFA due to being in a rush) sounds *exactly* like an expansion pack. Sequel, my ass.

The Half-Life series did this several times with Opposing Force, Blue Shift, and arguably Portal as it has ties to that universe indirectly... This doesn't seem to be advancing the main plotline in the same way that a true sequel would, but then again, I think I'm hair splitting here.

Hell, I seem to remember Quake mission packs billing themselves in the same manner... but at least they didn't kid themselves that it was an expansion and not a full blown sequel... /facepalm

Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don't. (1)

Kneo24 (688412) | more than 5 years ago | (#23695583)

The sad part is, companies don't see lack of sales equating into that no one likes their game. They look into some divine epitaph and conjure up some bullshit numbers stating that piracy was the reason why the game sold poorly. The game couldn't have been bad, right? All the while not releasing where they get their sources of information.

By the time of its release... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23683661)

I'll probably have a system capable of running the first title.
The folks at Crytek should focus a bit more on optimizations: they make great games but their system requirements are simply out of reality.

Won't Buy Another Crytek/EA Game (1)

vorwerk (543034) | more than 5 years ago | (#23685475)

I thought that Crysis was fun. But the final 1/4 of the single player game left much to be desired -- it was buggy as hell. (Falling through the world in the final boss fight, anyone?)

I expect that a game of this calibre should actually be finishable -- not be impossible to complete because of clipping issues with the world terrain and corrupted savegames. Their lack of support on Patch 1.3 is a slap in the face.

Wonder how many days... (1)

Taibhsear (1286214) | more than 5 years ago | (#23685597)

it will take before the official release date that the cracked version of the game will be on the bay this time. Last time I believe it was 3 days. If they keep that secuROM crap or any other debilitating DRM on it I'm not buying it. I got Crysis 'free' with my graphics card. I wasn't going to install it because of this. But then I found out that Daw of War: Soulstorm had already installed it on my computer anyways without me knowing. If you have it on your game list it on the box! I'm sick of this shady manipulative bullshit some software companies are pulling these days...

As far as the new one, are they doing a parallel timeline to when nomad was inside the ship or continuing the timeline after the end of Crysis? In the first case I can see why they are changing characters. In the second I don't really understand the point to changing to psycho.

As far as the tech requirements go. I'm damned glad that damn near nothing will run it at highest quality. It pushes the hardware technology to its limits. If you dumped buttloads of money into a badass system why should you have to limit yourself to low quality games (relatively speaking). If every company catered only to the mid to low range systems we'd never see any drive for improvement in graphics cards. There's a point where you have to stop pushing extra fps out of an old game that no one will, or can, visibly notice and start utilizing new technologies that will focus more on greater effects.

I have an expensive new system. I like having an extremely taxing game to see how badass I can get it. I have other games to play when my friends have a lan, that are still fun, that everyone can play. Someday in the future Crysis will be one of those games. Hell, Doom 3 IS one of those games. Used to be NO ONE could play it. Now every one of my friends can play it even on 'shit' systems.

Re:Wonder how many days... (1)

Kneo24 (688412) | more than 5 years ago | (#23695615)

No one played DOOM 3 online even when people could play it. That game goes to show that amazing graphics can't make up for lackluster gameplay. Crysis will be in the same boat.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...