Why is there so few PC footage in high quality of Crysis 2? Even the TECH DEMO is almost entirely console footage, and in 720p. Why would they do that? The purpose of a tech demo is to show off how good the graphics are. If I released a tech demo, then I would release PC AND console footage, in 1080p.

Crysis 2 TV episode 1 was in 1080p. Episode 2 was in 720p. What is up with that? It makes no sense. This game is supposed to have the best graphics of anything. Why don't they release footage that shows us that?

Because its nothing but a console port with 6x6 players. They sold us out. There is no real PC game.

The CryEngine 3 is new to the consoles, so it would make sense for Crytek to show a technology demo on the consoles, because that is the new technology for Crytek, along with the Stereoscopic 3D, so obviously these new technologies are going to be what Crytek shows.

Crytek gains no benefit from showing PC footage, because we already know the quality they can bring to the platform. However, Crytek is showing the Console footage to get multiplatform developers and console consumers interested in their product.

I think they're holding back on the PC footage for marketing hype when its about to come out. There's been rumors as well that the console hardware won't handle above 720p to help cram a sixy PC game into that small of a space. Doesn't sound much like a port to me. If anything, they're having to work hard to port that good of a PC game down to measly console hardware.

I fully expect Crysis 2's lower graphics settings for the PC to just happen to conveniently line up with PC hardware roughly equivalent to consoles. Since Crysis came out in '07 and still does brutal things to modern hardware, is it really such a stretch to see a game come out in 2010 and be backwards compatible with old hardware?

Sorry,realized just as I hit submit. 2011 in Crysis 2's case.

[quote]I think they're holding back on the PC footage for marketing hype when its about to come out. There's been rumors as well that the console hardware won't handle above 720p to help cram a sixy PC game into that small of a space. Doesn't sound much like a port to me. If anything, they're having to work hard to port that good of a PC game down to measly console hardware.

I fully expect Crysis 2's lower graphics settings for the PC to just happen to conveniently line up with PC hardware roughly equivalent to consoles. Since Crysis came out in '07 and still does brutal things to modern hardware, is it really such a stretch to see a game come out in 2010 and be backwards compatible with old hardware?[/quote]

Well, my guess is that Crysis 2 will be backwards compatible to only the Pentium 4 and Nvidia 7800GT, which is comparable to Console hardware. Believe it or not, Crysis actually had minimum requirements lower than a Console, it just looked crappy.

I'm aware, Talon. I'm just trying to be the voice of reason that the effect that happened with hardware and Crysis 1 can likely be duplicated in reverse to still have an amazing looking game that consoles can sort of play.

My apology if that was unclear.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BR3EH7j8kP0

PC gameplay using a gamepad, I beleive.

What I think is that this'll be another hardware monster that my **** PC (GTX 260 & i5 Dual Core) will get eaten up by.

[quote]What I think is that this'll be another hardware monster that my **** PC (GTX 260 & i5 Dual Core) will get eaten up by.[/quote]

For the sake of god.. it has been posted a million times before.

Crysis 2 will be *less* demand than crysis 1.

Its optimized as hell. GTX 200 Series will do just fine.. trust me.

Ps. The Demo on gamescom ran on a GTX 260 and it was sharp and smooth and looked very high res and cool..so stop the hardware hysteria!

There will likely be PC footage released closer to launch however as with Crysis 1 even 1080p wont do the top quality version justice online.

[quote][quote]What I think is that this'll be another hardware monster that my **** PC (GTX 260 & i5 Dual Core) will get eaten up by.[/quote]

For the sake of god.. it has been posted a million times before.

Crysis 2 will be *less* demand than crysis 1.

Its optimized as hell. GTX 200 Series will do just fine.. trust me.

Ps. The Demo on gamescom ran on a GTX 260 and it was sharp and smooth and looked very high res and cool..so stop the hardware hysteria![/quote]Oh... But they were running an i7 920 Quad at 2.8GHZ, my dual i5 is 3.33ghz. Is that just as good

A vid you guys might find interesting:
http://www.eurogamer.net/videos/cryengine-3-anti-aliasing-tech-demo?size=large

If they advertise a multiplatform game showing it on the high end PC's the entire time they'll get a lot of complaining console gamers on release day.

If they show a game on consoles the entire time, you'll (hopefully) get impressed pc gamers on release day.

To be honest the haven't really taken out any features by the looks of it (i was worried for a while that some had gone), maybe lean, but who really cares about it? I never seriously use it in crysis 1 or any other pc game :/

Sure, i'd like some bigger maps and a variety of environments to really show off the engine, but it's a compromise that's to be expected. As long as the game is good it doesn't matter whether i have a ridiculously big map or just a big map. Let's face it, most of the time in crysis was spent wandering around with hardly any real 'intense' moments until the second half. It was still good in it's own way of course, but the main draw of the original was the graphics

just w8 for beta
i think beta comming januar 2011

[quote]If they advertise a multiplatform game showing it on the high end PC's the entire time they'll get a lot of complaining console gamers on release day.

If they show a game on consoles the entire time, you'll (hopefully) get impressed pc gamers on release day.

To be honest the haven't really taken out any features by the looks of it (i was worried for a while that some had gone), maybe lean, but who really cares about it? I never seriously use it in crysis 1 or any other pc game :/

Sure, i'd like some bigger maps and a variety of environments to really show off the engine, but it's a compromise that's to be expected. As long as the game is good it doesn't matter whether i have a ridiculously big map or just a big map. Let's face it, most of the time in crysis was spent wandering around with hardly any real 'intense' moments until the second half. It was still good in it's own way of course, but the main draw of the original was the graphics [/quote]

Lean was definitely used throughout Crysis, I faced enemies using lean, I used lean, we learned lean, it was a part of the game, especially for the Multiplayer side. The reason lean was removed from Crysis Wars is because the camera for the CryEngine 2 is glitched and is actually above the players head, allowing you to be seen without the enemy seeing you.

Lean in Crysis 2 certainly isnt a necessity because of how many bullets the Nanosuit 2 soaks up, but if Crytek fixed the camera issue for CryEngine 3, that would allow lean to take place correctly. It wasnt only lean that applied to the camera issue, the problem was rampant throughout Crysis and Crysis Wars and promoted the tactic of mind controlled bullets shot from the one pixel of your head showing while the enemy cant do anything about it. Fixing the camera issue to allow lean would also allow for a more fair stance on gameplay without glitchers and cheaters helping to kill off the population like Crysis Wars glitchers did.