Print 110 comment(s) - last by Martimus.. on Nov 1 at 2:22 PM

With Crysis, they're not just system requirements, they're system demands

Crysis will be the landmark game this year for hardcore PC gamers to prove that their platform of choice is technically superior to the newest consoles. Of course, the required hardware to run Crysis costs far more than a $400 console, but that’s always been the case with the cutting edge of PC gaming.

After months of guess work surrounding the system requirements of Crysis, the official specifications were released today. Gamers running Windows Vista will need slightly faster systems with more memory than those still using Windows XP.

Minimum System Requirements
OS Windows XP or Windows Vista
Processor 2.8 GHz or faster (XP) or 3.2 GHz or faster (Vista)
Memory 1.0 GB RAM (XP) or 1.5 GB RAM (Vista)
Video Card 256 MB
Hard Drive 12GB
Sound Card DirectX 9.0c compatible

Supported Processors:
Intel Pentium 4 2.8 GHz (3.2 GHz for Vista) or faster
Intel Core 2.0 GHz (2.2 GHz for Vista) or faster
AMD Athlon 2800+ (3200+ for Vista) or faster.

Supported Video Cards:
NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT or greater; ATI Radeon 9800 Pro (Radeon X800 Pro for Vista) or greater. Laptop versions of these chipsets may work but are not supported. Integrated chipsets are not supported. Updates to your video and sound card drivers may be required.

Recommended System Requirements
OS Windows XP / Vista
Processor Intel Core 2 DUO @ 2.2GHz or AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+
Memory 2.0 GB RAM
GPU NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS/640 or similar

Unfortunately, those with minimum spec machines can expect Crysis to look nothing like what they’ve seen so far in video and screenshots. Crytek’s CEO, Cevat Yerli, explained to GameSpot, “The quality of Crysis running on [minimum spec hardware] does equal the shading and texture quality of games that are about three years old, but with polygonal detail that is bigger then (sic) games from that same generation. The scaling happens in various areas, such as shading-quality, texture-resolution, shadows. View distance and interactivity are close to Far Cry.”

Yerli later added, “I am happy that we managed to scale down Crysis--which is on average 10 times more pushy than Far Cry--down to Far Cry specs. But Crysis is a high-end game that shall define what's now and in the future. Enjoy it as such as much as you can. It's like a concept car available and affordable now. I like also this quote somebody gave: "It's like a sexy blond girl with a PhD degree," upon which I said, "But with curly hair."”

Crysis is set to release to retail on November 16, with the playable demo available on October 26.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Stop repeating this stupid lie
By darkpaw on 10/10/2007 11:12:06 AM , Rating: 3
Seriously, I love PC gaming but trying to say console gaming isn't cheaper is a complete croc.

I bought my PS2 in 2000, will have had it for 7 years in December and it still has had good games come out for it this year. Total cost $300 for system, $50 for extra controller, $40 for memory card. Haven't bought anything else for it buy games since then and game costs are roughly the same.

That same year I built a 1Ghz Athlon system with 512mb RAM and something like a 20gb HDD, and a Nvidia TNT2 for about $1800. That system lasted about 18 months before needing a complete overhaul. If I added up everything I've spent on PC gaming in the past seven years it'd probably be around $5-7K and I don't buy the highest end stuff and I don't upgrade every year. In the same time period I've spent about $1600 on consoles and accessories and I have everything from last gen and everything but a 360 from this gen (hopefully I'll be getting that for xmas so $2100 total by end of the year).

PC games edge out console games in price this generation, but unless you buy a horde of games that won't add up to the price of a single video card upgrade.

Console gaming is very much cheaper then PC gaming, but PC gaming generally is the more satisfying experience.

RE: Stop repeating this stupid lie
By Kenenniah on 10/10/2007 5:06:42 PM , Rating: 2
Overall, this kind of argument depends a lot on the specific user. Unlike a game console, when looking at money spend on a PC you have to look at all its uses. If all you use a computer for is gaming with some internet usage, then the comparison is valid.
However, if you use a PC for a wide variety of applications such as for work/homework, audio/video editing, etc., part of the cost must be attributed to those functions as well. So only a portion of the PC cost can be directly compared.

Also take into consideration the many games that have TONS of fan created content. Neverwinter Nights, The Elder Scroll Series, and a long list of others have enormous amoutns of additional content available free online. For the price of 1 game, you might end up being able to have the equivalent content of 20 or more games.

Console gaming overall is cheaper than PC gaming I agree, but only if gaming is the only real use for your computer. People like me need the high-end parts of our computers for other purposes, so in a way gaming on a PC is cheaper for me since I don't have to buy anything else.

RE: Stop repeating this stupid lie
By rdeegvainl on 10/11/2007 10:14:36 AM , Rating: 2
No, the cost doesn't change based on what else you use it for. That just makes it more useful.
That is like saying the PS3 is cheaper than the 360 cause of the blu ray included.

RE: Stop repeating this stupid lie
By Targon on 10/28/2007 7:03:33 PM , Rating: 2
The difference between your standard computer and a game machine that can compete with the PS3(except for playing Blu-ray movies) is $500 at the most($400 for the vid card and $100 for extra memory).

Many people look at the cost to build a computer from scratch, but I consider the cost of your average computer(dual core processor, 2 gigs of memory, 250+ gig hard drive, DVD-RW drive) to be at around the $550 to $600 range. If you then say how much a game machine would cost, add it to the cost of that existing computer and bingo, you have a decent price parity with current generation game consoles.

No one buys a computer ONLY for games, so the cost of the "gaming" components is the cost that you should be looking at in my opinion.

And, when it comes to Blu-ray, since I don't have a $1200 panel for my TV, I wouldn't see a benefit from it anyway.

RE: Stop repeating this stupid lie
By mindless1 on 10/29/2007 1:05:19 PM , Rating: 2
The cost definitely changes based on what you use it for, unless you don't plan on owning a PC at all! Otherwise the cost is just keeping modern enough for the game vs buying a whole second gaming console.

RE: Stop repeating this stupid lie
By Hieyeck on 10/12/2007 6:07:33 PM , Rating: 2
The system you listed 7 years ago wasn't even CLOSE to bleeding edge. Nowadays, you can have a decent systems for $1200. $120 CPU, $100 RAM, $150 GPU, $180 mobo, + parts. Hell, now that I actually price it out, $1200 can get you a rip-roaring system. I've actually built an $800 ($700 after rebates) system for a friend of mine and for all the gaming he does, he hasn't complained a BIT about performance. (On a side note, people don't need more power, they need a cleaner system. My friend's $800 system is going on 3 years now and I go over once in a while to clean up his system (or do a total reformat) to keep it running fast.)

All the same while, consoles are steadily increasing in price. $300 for the Wii (at release)? How much was the N64? $199 (at release). Don't even TRY to bring up the 360 and PS3. MS and Sony LOSE money when you buy a console and only make it back when you buy games. Actually, this is probably what irks me most - NO ONE has brought up the fact that MS and Sony lose out everytime a console is sold, while PCs, even having MORE levels of middlemen, still profit at all levels from each sale of a component. I think the 360 was losing out $150 per console sold at time of release? so the actual price would've been $550 to not make ANY profit on each console. half the price to build yourself a decent rig from scratch. The PS3 isn't even funny. $600 and it's STILL flopping out a few hundred.

RE: Stop repeating this stupid lie
By Axbattler on 10/28/2007 3:23:00 AM , Rating: 2
Why do you care that MS/Sony lose money for each console sold? From a consumer point of view, that is completely irrelevant. If MS was actually charging $550, then you would have a point about how it is half the price of a decent rig. But it's not, so that's point is moot.

And actually, his system, while not the 'bleeding edge' is pretty good for its time. Seven years ago, that's be 3Q 2000. The 1Ghz T-Bird was released around 2Q 2000, so only months old. The TNT2 would be the weakest link, though only a year old. 512MB of RAM was pretty unusual even when you look at test systems in reviews.

The way I see it, if you play fairly demanding games on PC, yes you will have to pay a premium on hardware (but less on the software; to me, that is the only real argument against consoles when it comes to costs). No matter how many reformatting you do, I do not see a 3 years old $800 play Crysis well. 3 years ago, 6800 Ultra would have been the bleeding edge, setting you back an excess of $400. Even if you go for a 'lesser' version (which -just- makes the minimum spec), it would still cost most of a console (which has a product cycle longer than 3 years on average).

"If you mod me down, I will become more insightful than you can possibly imagine." -- Slashdot
Related Articles
Crysis Demo Delayed Until Oct. 26
September 22, 2007, 12:17 PM
Crysis Release Date Set for November 16
August 3, 2007, 8:17 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki