Hi All

I've been trying to figure out why almost no Graphics cards really excel in Crysis, could it be that it's badly coded? I really would like to know the answer, as it seems you need one monster machine to run it at extreme resolutions with all the eye candy turned on. 

 Have you played the game?  With all of the settings cranked up, and using a resolution of 1920x1200, it is nearly photo-realistic in places.  It's far and away the best looking game I've played to date.  That being said; I was a bit disappointed with the actual gameplay.

It's not that the game is poorly coded, it's just a monster of a game, and the particle effects, physics, and lighting really tax your computer.  Crytek prides itself on trying to kill computers, just look at Far Cry when it came out, beautiful graphics, but nearly unplayable on the hardware of that generation with everything maxed out.  I was running a 6800 Ultra at the time and was barely able to get playable framerates.

1nteljunki3:

 Have you played the game?  With all of the settings cranked up, and using a resolution of 1920x1200, it is nearly photo-realistic in places.  It's far and away the best looking game I've played to date.  That being said; I was a bit disappointed with the actual gameplay.

It's not that the game is poorly coded, it's just a monster of a game, and the particle effects, physics, and lighting really tax your computer.  Crytek prides itself on trying to kill computers, just look at Far Cry when it came out, beautiful graphics, but nearly unplayable on the hardware of that generation with everything maxed out.  I was running a 6800 Ultra at the time and was barely able to get playable framerates.

 Hi All

Yes I played/own the game.It was a question.

 I know... and by the way, I'm jealous, you have the power supply I want.

yes i'll put it down to the codeing in the game. that goes for most games made today. that are huge! simply becasue they have "fat" codes... fat as in large and un-needed not the FAT file system....lol

I think I heard them say they optimized their engine for Crysis: Warhead. So if I heard correctly, then that would mean the code was indeed "fat". Though it is only part of the reason. They did really up the graphics and effects.

 I can't wait for Warhead!

I actually got really good performance out of Crysis when I played thru it. I played on the highest settings at 1680x1050 in XP I swear. The game kept crashing when I had Vista loaded so I put XP on there and did some tweaking to get the Vista-like visuals.

entermymatrix03:

 I can't wait for Warhead!

I actually got really good performance out of Crysis when I played thru it. I played on the highest settings at 1680x1050 in XP I swear. The game kept crashing when I had Vista loaded so I put XP on there and did some tweaking to get the Vista-like visuals.

I didn't have any problems with Crysis on Vista. But once 1.21 patch came out, it was crashing like crazy every time I tried to load from a save point. Starting a new game was perfectly fine. It was just loading a game... Reinstalled the game several times with no avail. So I just don't use the 1.21 patch and I played through the whole game with no problems at all (loading from save points in the main and puase menu).

I oc my card a bit, with the eye candy turned up at 1280x1024 (my monitors native resolution) I get decent frame rates like 20 to 30 fps. I did read that Crytek claimed to have optimized the code for warhead, it was in an editors responce to a readers letter in this month's PC Gamer.