Comments on: Cry Some More: CryENGINE 3, STALKER 2?

By: wholesale

wholesale — Mon, 22 Nov 2010 05:17:01 +0000

but I want to tell you there is a execting website dollar stores ,everything just be sold a dollar.yes ,it is true,my friend

By: GOnzale$$$

GOnzale$$$ — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 22:25:57 +0000

Stalker > Crysis …. Xray < Cryengine 3 ……. Stalker 2 = Cryengine 3 …that's what i want to see

By: MajorManiac

MajorManiac — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 18:15:34 +0000

So it’ll run like hot sh…er stuff off a shovel on most PCs. :)

By: Blurr

Blurr — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 23:46:50 +0000

I think a lot of people missed the bit of the STALKER Call of Pripyat announcement that said stand alone expansion (now I dono about you but that means “same tec, new story and bits” to me).

I would love to see the Zone in CryEngine 3 tec (can you imagine the Red Forest at night with a blood sucker on your tail?!) but I would rather they incremented XRay to 2.0 rather then drop what was (and still is) actually not a bad engine at all.

As for the Crysis bashing I think O might indulge in a bit of it myself….. My problem with it was that, yes you can go and punch ppl off of cliffs and kidnap them but even if the move your trying to pull fails and your left in the middle of 15 enemies you can still survive with ease. There is no challenge because its basically impossible to die

By: Gamer!

Gamer! — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 16:51:32 +0000

good news!

By: Gorgeras

Gorgeras — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 13:35:23 +0000

Both complaints about GTA 4 and Crysis were justified. Crysis was not enormously more better-looking than games that have come out since, the quality of work was inconsistent in that whilst people looked like they really had realistic skin(notable exceptions being the spy held in the school who looked like those things ouf of Cocoon the way she glowed), the buildings and their interiors could have come straight out of a Source engine game. The whole thing was awful on Medium settings, the disparity between Medium and High settings was huge and the whole thing suffered from terrible dynamic scaling where whole scenes were drawn unneccessarily whilst objects were popping up 20 metres ahead of you.

The problem with GTA 4 is that you could stick it on the exact same settings consistent with either of the consoles and the PC did not see a better performance increase, it should have been vast. You got very little improvement from down-scaling and the benchmark that came with it was a joke that at no point pressures the engine as much as the actual game will in most circumstances. This was not a CPU limited game like everyone claimed; it’s an engine limited game that was most certainly not re-done from scratch for the PC like Rockstar claimed. If you play Unreal on a modern PC, you won’t see a huge performance boost over the best PCs when it came out; that’s what I mean by engine limited. The same will be the case with GTA 4: Rockstar’s claims that the higher settings are intended for ‘future tech’, in a game that doesn’t actually properly utilise more cores than two, doesn’t take advantage of 64-bit proccessing, has no anti-aliasing, no SLI or Crossfire support, probably isn’t even using nvidia unified shaders properly(as evidence by some people experiencing glitches that put the frame-rate at over 100 but with broken shader effects). This game will not see any significant performance increase in the future and even nVidia and ATI acknowledge this enough that they have not done the slightest damn thing with their drivers since release to get more out of it; it isn’t worth the effort.

By: Melupom

Melupom — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 11:30:31 +0000

I really do hope that GSC move to CE3 – for all its goodness 2 or 3 years ago GSC hasn’t done all that much to improve the Xray engine for CoP other than do pretty much what various mod teams were able to do on the original engine for SoC – the handful of new effects barely bring it up to CE2 standard, and no doubt any improvements done by modders will totally destroy the optimisation of the engine, unlike what appears to be the case with CE3.

By: frymaster

frymaster — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 11:14:10 +0000

I’d just like to +1 the “just because you can’t run it maxed out and you can run everything else maxed out doesn’t make it badly optimised” comments. maybe it just means their “max” goes higher than everyone elses.

I’m reminded of people saying the same thing about gta4 when it transpired that maxing it out meant drawing 9 times as much stuff as the console version due to a larger draw distance, for exampe

By: Chaz

Chaz — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 10:17:22 +0000

Well, that looks nice. Guess I’d better get ready to see the bank manager, for a loan to buy a new PC.

By: Spacewalk

Spacewalk — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 06:16:07 +0000

I liked the part where all the boxes got blown away.

By: MD

MD — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 04:18:46 +0000

John Walker == Lewis Denby????

By: Psychopomp

Psychopomp — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 04:10:47 +0000

HOW *DARE* A GAME HAVE A BAD BIT IN IT?