backtop


Print 118 comment(s) - last by Armorize.. on Nov 3 at 9:59 PM

Crysis demo released; gamers lament the weakness of their PC hardware

Gamers who recently spent a considerable sum of money on a high-end video card will finally find that their piece of hardware is no longer overkill. That’s right, the Crysis single-player demo is here as promised by the developers late last month.

The demo was originally set for release on September 25, but developer Crytek decided to push the public debut date back a month in the interest of quality. The retail date of November 16 still appears to be on-track.

“We are taking some extra time to make sure you that you have an amazing experience but also we did not want to risk the release date of Crysis at this stage,” Cevat Yerli, CEO of Crytek, explained regarding the delay. “To get the game into your hands by November the 16th, we had to make this call.”

The demo may be downloaded directly from an EA Canada web server. The 1.77GB download includes the entire first level and the CryEngine 2 - Sandbox 2 game editor, giving the community an opportunity to get familiar with the tools before the retail game ships.

As should be well known by now, Crysis is the most hardware-demanding game to ship this year. Those who are interested in diving into the demo should read the official system requirements and recommendations before downloading.



Comments     Threshold


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

RE: Q6600 and 8800GTX?
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 10/28/2007 3:16:28 PM , Rating: 2
Q6600 @ 3.06GHz and 8800GTX, gameplay is decent, averaging 60FPS all settings maxed 4Gigs RAM, Vista Ultimate 64.


RE: Q6600 and 8800GTX?
By Smoza on 10/28/07, Rating: -1
RE: Q6600 and 8800GTX?
By BitJunkie on 10/28/2007 6:38:18 PM , Rating: 2
Call BS if you want but you'll be wrong. I have a Q6600 (stock speed for now), 8800GTX Evga AC3 oc'd version, 4 GB RAM, and running on Vista x64 at 1920 x 1200. I didn't check the frame rate but it's smooth as you like and looks fantastic.


RE: Q6600 and 8800GTX?
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 10/28/2007 8:30:57 PM , Rating: 2
I'm at 1280x1024


RE: Q6600 and 8800GTX?
By BitJunkie on 10/28/2007 9:13:46 PM , Rating: 3
I'm not using AA, just played it again at the res you quote and it's noticably smoother, but personally I can handle it at 1920 x 1200....it's not a slide show and being an old git, I don't react that fast anyway :P


RE: Q6600 and 8800GTX?
By feraltoad on 10/29/2007 5:00:58 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
I didn't check the frame rate


I hope your not a Doctor. Or at least not mine.

Strange, heres a GTX only getting 37.7 avg FPS at 1600x1200 no AA/AF.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/29/geforce_880...

Too bad eVGA doesn't offer an AC3 oc'd Honda Fit, it would hold its own with a Murcielago with semi-comfortable seating for 4! ;)


RE: Q6600 and 8800GTX?
By BitJunkie on 10/29/2007 6:58:24 AM , Rating: 2
I didn't check the framerate because it plays just fine to my eye.

If you check the graph from that link you'll see they have 8x AA on and get 18 FPS. I added later that I'm not using AA - I think it's a waste of time at that high resolution. Specially when I can get smooth high quality performance with only a small change in IQ (to my eye).

You'll also notice that those benchmarks were peformed with 2 GB of RAM, when I posted before that my system is running with 4GB and using 2.25GB.

The point is that it isn't crawling, and If I set everything at Very High and reduce post processing effects to High it flies at 1920 x 1200.


RE: Q6600 and 8800GTX?
By BitJunkie on 10/29/2007 7:04:55 AM , Rating: 2
Sorry, it's 8x AF and 4x AA, Regardless, you'll see that without AA or AF they are showing pretty much 30 FPS for 1900 x 1400 or whatever bizzare res. they used.


RE: Q6600 and 8800GTX?
By feraltoad on 10/30/2007 3:40:16 AM , Rating: 1
That is a weird resolution; thought it was 1200. They also only got 38fps at 16x12 no AA or AF. At any rate, I think you have the right attitude that if it looks good and plays good then who cares what the frame rate is. To my eyes anything in the mid twenties looks fine to me as long as it is solid, I thought the 15 fps I was playing at seemed ok since it was steady, I think I have "slow" eyes or low expectations. I was just saying that you weren't getting 60 fps because from what everyone is reporting and from benchmarks I've seen that really isn't going to happen with everything on High at a big resolution with the current hardware available. Which isnt to say it isnt running great on your PC. Since we keep posting you should just check it with fraps, it has that nifty benchmark feature and post it. I think you will find it is not 60 fps average. If it is then I'll say you were correct and maybe I need to get another 2gb of ram! I'm not trying to be a dick, although I am obviously anal :), I just don't think it is very scientific or appropriate to make claims based assumptions and protest people's objections if you won't test it when it is really easy. Fraps is free too! Cheers


"If you can find a PS3 anywhere in North America that's been on shelves for more than five minutes, I'll give you 1,200 bucks for it." -- SCEA President Jack Tretton

Related Articles
Crysis System Requirements Revealed
October 9, 2007, 3:43 PM
Crysis Demo Delayed Until Oct. 26
September 22, 2007, 12:17 PM
Crysis Demo Set for Release on 9/25
August 28, 2007, 9:46 AM













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki