For the longest time I have known that minimum specs mean absolutely nothing. Every games performance varies in comparison to the minimum specs.

There is no set rules for system specs and the developer could say whatever they want.

I can tell you FOR SURE 100% that the minimum system specs will be able to run this game singleplayer at medium/high graphics (not very high).

I have a core 2 duo and an 8800 gts 512mb and I GUARANTEE I will run the demo at 35fps on high graphics!

I know for sure that Crytek just decided that they want have higher minimum specs....for what reason I do not know.

Don't listen to all the noobs out there that don't know anything......Crysis 2 will run the exact same as Crysis if not better.

If you can run Crysis , you will run Crysis 2 the same.


Can anyone refute this? Can you think of drastic graphical effects changes that could explain this new demand?

The new urban environment and "console" capable level design has drastically dropped the draw distance and total polygons being rendered at one time, along with the total amount of memory required. These are things they are greatly dependent on level design, and subsequently can not easily be varied from console to PC version.

Don't sweat it people your PC will run it! Smile

Thats just exactly what i needed to hear thx man

-.- ye you can run it on high 35fps with the lowest resolution
but they didnt say run on a 10inch monitor now did they

-.- ye you can run it on high 35fps with the lowest resolution
but they didnt say run on a 10inch monitor now did they

I run it on 35fps on my 24" monitor at 1920x1080.

After moving to my larger monitor I had to make some changes to my config though like dropping shadows does to medium.

I suspect in Crysis 2 I should be able to keep everything at high though thanks to the much more restrained level design.

lawl you mean max fps at 35
WOOPY
you meet the min specs so you
can play be happy bout that!!

Average. Max is about 50. I will be enjoying Crysis 2 on high at excellent FPS......so I am happy.

your just an annoying troll.....congrats on that accomplishment.

I think it will be playable for lower systems than minimum requirements but I don't think you can play on high and 35 fps.

What specific part of the specs list are you attempting to refute? All you've really stated as far as technicality goes is that you assume you'll be able to run a demo at 35fps on High with absolutely zero hands-on experience to back up your claims.

I'm not stating you're correct or incorrect, i'm just interested in how you managed to formulate this thread

dude you dont avrg 35
even with shadows on med
go do crysis bench n post proof

Indeed, i would personally hazard a guess at minimum correlating to least medium though. Considering that consoles have a less powerful gpu (although more powerful CPU's by a fair margin) than stated as a minimum and they run low/medium.

Still, i'm more interested in the specs needed to max it all out

Well I will play on "high like" settings. I am not a noob like most of you, so I make my own custom config and remove stupid things that lag the rendering but hardly look good.

Motion blur is always off because your eyes adjust to it. I turn of TERRAIN ONLY normal map because it is always a good 3-4 fps increase. Never EVER use parralax occlusion, because that just looks like **** and runs horrible (and disables anisotropic filter). Shadow resolution is usually around 768 where medium is 512 and high is 1024. Hardly can tell the diff.

Also you can get a good fps by tweaking the ambient occlusion and it will still look the same.

Also cryengine's proprietary edge smoothing effect can make the image look blurry, and it actually looks better with it disabled......you gain 1-2 fps increase there solid across the board.

So, basically, you'll be playing medium + one or two little tweaks.

Actually my old 9800gt(same as 8800gt) ran crysis on max at around 25 so 35 on high isn't impossible. This was on 1680x1050, however. I can barely get that average on a 5770 even on high graphics @ 1980x1080. I do not believe that the Crysis2 specs are fabricated. Yes the engine is optimized, and yes there are less background polygons, but you have to keep in mind that maybe the lowest graphical setting requires a 8800gt minimum to run, unlike warhead which was a 6800gt. Plus you have to consider an improved physics system, and possibly higher resolution textures. Just because the game is out of the jungle doesn't mean your older hardware is.
You will have to wait and play the demo before you can prove your guarantee of 35 FPS and i will not be surprised if you do not even hit that average.

So, basically, you'll be playing medium + one or two little tweaks.

You don't know jack squat.

The largest visual difference between medium and high is the "sys_spec_quality" config.

between medium and high you have all higher quality shaders being used on all materials.

I have EXTENSIVE experience tweaking Cryengine2. If I simply change sys_spec_quality from value 2 to value 3 you will be like "oh one is high one is medium" but if I change shadows and edge smoothing from one setting to another you would hardly tell the difference.

The most significant differences between medium and high are HDR rendering, screen space ambient occlusion, and most importantly the material shaders.

In fact my high actually looks better than high because I add sunshafts which look awesome and are only a 2 fps hit on average.

Then there are commands like "e_max_entity_lights" that control how many unique dynamic light sources can exist at one time on screen. You change this from 11 to 3 and you will get a nice increase, and you will NEVER ever realize "hey I might be missing 1 or 2 dynamic light sources". This is how you drop things that you don't even notice and keep things that are important like HDR and high quality material shaders.

I know I am a nerd, but I have hundreds of cryengine command varaibles memorized and the performance hits they impart.


So hate on my claims if you want, but I am just saying, son't be worried about the minimum specs.

Yes, Ap0c, because you know more about me than an unreleased game engine we both know next to nothing about. My point still stands however, it is just medium + tweaks (yes, yes, i know, it looks closer to high, but it's still not quite high. The only custom configs i liked were the ones that went beyond very high personally)

The fact that Adam took a exasperated/dismissive stance on your arrogance should set off alarm bells.

Its not arrogance, its knowledge and experience. You will see......

Adam completely failed to even take note of the argument I made about total level resources allowed on consoles, and the fact that it is not feasible to design whole new levels for PC. So for this fact alone I dismiss anything this Adam fellow has to say.....whoever he may be......

And you are wrong too. Those settings are much closer to high. In fact because they have some very high effects in them, they are closer to high than medium. Like I said, they will look COMPLETELY different from medium, and hardly indistinguishable from high. If you call that medium.....thats fine by me.....your the one who sounds retarded.

Its not arrogance, its knowledge and experience. You will see......

Adam completely failed to even take note of the argument I made about total level resources allowed on consoles, and the fact that it is not feasible to design whole new levels for PC. So for this fact alone I dismiss anything this Adam fellow has to say.....whoever he may be......

And you are wrong too. Those settings are much closer to high. In fact because they have some very high effects in them, they are closer to high than medium. Like I said, they will look COMPLETELY different from medium, and hardly indistinguishable from high. If you call that medium.....thats fine by me.....your the one who sounds retarded.
Adam is a Admin. You are dismissing an Admin who knows way more than you know about an unreleased game engine and its minimum specs. Your ignorance exposes your arrogance, because you cannot accept opposing views. You cannot call those high graphics, but rather optimized graphics. By minimizing unneeded graphical settings, which is personal preference, you not making the graphics "high" but rather cutting out what you consider unneeded graphical enhancements with, more prized enhancements, which again is optimization. It may be close to high, but thats still not high, as almost isn't good enough...
Oh, and you have no right to call people trolls, as you act as if you are one of their kind.

An admin on a forum......therefore he knows more about the game engine!!

Sound logic indeed my friend.

I assure you I know more about Cryegine2 than adam, and most of you common folk don't understand that CE3 is more like CE2.01

Time will prove me right, and I invite all you to revisit this thread!

Crysis 2 , though it has higher minimum specs, will run smoother than Crysis1. That was my initial claim. Hold me too it......you will see.

An admin on a forum......therefore he knows more about the game engine!!

Sound logic indeed my friend.

I assure you I know more about Cryegine2 than adam, and most of you common folk don't understand that CE3 is more like CE2.01

Time will prove me right, and I invite all you to revisit this thread!

Crysis 2 , though it has higher minimum specs, will run smoother than Crysis1. That was my initial claim. Hold me too it......you will see.
Actually he does. Most of the admins on this forum have information about crysis2 not released to the public and as an admin he may be entrusted with this information. Again you let your ignorance overtake logic. Do not sarcastically infer that my statements are illogical until you actually think about the statements made, but apparently you are blind. Please, i'm not saying you aren't right i'm just trying to show you how ridiculous your statements sound, by simply attacking the writers of the opposing views. Yes developers can release whatever specs they want, and yes computers that do not fulfill these requirements can still run the game, but that doesn't mean they are false.
And you attempt to insult us by calling people on this forum common-folk. I laugh at the thought. I do not specialize in CE2 or CE3 but that doesn't mean i do not understand them. CE3 does not bring anything revolutionary necessarily to the table, except optimizations to enable the game to be console playable. I am not so different, in that i myself am a tech "nerd" but specialize in a different more broad area of technology in general.

You make it sound as if I say "your are stupid, therefore you argument is null"

I in fact only made claims that I supported with reasoning.

Like take the following for example.

Admin may have information on Cryengine, but I have no reason to believe he is a computer programmer. I then said that I know more about CE2 a completely released and accessible engine to me. From that I reasoned that because CE3 is only a modified and ported CE2, that by extension I also ahve greater understanding of this engine......and probably all engines.

Lots of arguments were made in this thread, some were won (by me) some were lost be (you).

But what is really important is that through purely armchair reason, one could come to a very reasonable conclusion that Crysis2 will not be more demaning than crysis 1. That is ultimately what is important, and that readers should take away from this thread. Many people **** their undies when they saw the minimum specs, and I want to ease their minds about this.

Like I said, let time tell the truth.

They put higher min-req so they dont get rages when 2ghz single-core, Nv 6xxx series person (there's probably like 1 gamer out there than runs that setup seriously as a main) tries to play the game and get 5fps.

The only part of the minimum requirements that seems off is the 8800GT. It could be that this was the lowest card they tested the game with and they're overestimating. The consoles have a much less powerful GPU. Heck, the 8800GT with 512MBs of VRAM has more memory than the entirety of either the Xbox 360 or Playstation 3. If the minimum requirements are accurate, I can only draw these conclusions:

1. The PC version is a crappy console port.

or

2. The PC version has many added features (larger levels, more objects per scene, GPU-accelerated physics, etc).

Like I said, let time tell the truth.
And yet your thread completely dismisses what official information has been shared so far? You were so sure, now you're suggesting to wait and see?

I'm unsure why consoles are even being brought into this discussion. Consoles have absolutely nothing to do with PC system requirements. Consoles hardware and settings are matched and optimised as best as they can be for one another, PC does not have this kind of luxury. Therefore, if PC specs state a minimum of 'X' hardware on the PC platform, it has absolutely zero relation to what console hardware and/or settings are. You're trying to relate apples to oranges.

As for my role and what i do or don't know, that has little to do with anything. I am, however, posting the official specs from Crytek, the people creating this game and who have spent the last 3 years developing this engine. I have no doubt they know what they're talking about when it comes to listing specs

Dude seriously wtf .You learned some commands and u think u know about pc? ffs .If crytek said these are the minimum then THESE are the minimum!Tweaking cfg might increase some fps but removing features doesnt make it high cause u removed things that are supposed to work on high.

Maybe it should have been the 8600 and the 2900 series as minimum otherwise i found everything else normal