Which Crysis is your favourite?

I have all three and finally can play the first at Very high at 1080p on my m18x. I have to say this game is pure beauty. The levels are much more sprawled out compared to Crysis 2. The vegetation and physics are still mind blowing. I think Crysis 2 offers better lighting and particle effects. Crysis 1 and Warhead really are games you can marvel in just because of how many different ways to approach a situation with the nano suit. I played it on Medium years ago but playing at Very High is really a breathtaking experience. What are your opinions?

 

I own all 3, but have only played Crysis 1 and 2. Still getting around to playing Warhead.

Personally, I think Crysis 1 looks great (graphically as good as Crysis 2, if not better). I do agree Crysis 1 is more "sandboxed" than 2. I thought the cloaking system in 2 was better (probably because easier: cloak doesn;t drain energy as fast in 2).

However, I like Crysis 2 over Crysis 1 for story and environment. Though Crysis [2] was more "mainstream" and allowed the player to intereact less with the environment, I do think the story was stronger and the setting was better. (imo).

To each their own gem. I do know many people initially despised Crysis 2 for the lack of improvements and lack of graphical advancements over the first.
I for one would rather enjoy a game that is playable, than play a game that can only be played by a select few with uber systems.

 

I've only played Crysis 1 SP and Crysis 2 MP so I can say that Crysis 1 has better SP and Crysis 2 has better MP xD

 

I like the first Crysis because it was so badly optimized. I used it as a "benchmark" in the good old days. Back then the graphics were mindblowing.

 

What settings do you guys play on Crysis 2. Still trying to find what works. The texture pack, dx11 and Ultra is WAYY too much. I think I am playing 1080P with Extreme and DX11. A question, if my DX11 features are turned off in my CCC are there still enhancements that I will see from running in that mode? I hear the API is good to run in that mode. I personally didn't think the texture pack added much to the visuals but really bogged down my CF 6970s. So what settings do you run and what are your framerates?

 

I run it at max settings 1080p with the dx11 and the texture pack and frame rate stays slightly above 30.

 

I play on the second to the highest setting (I think it's Very High), but only at 1680x945p (as that is my MAX resolution).

Runs pretty good at those settings on my GTX 460m.

 

Was the game meant to run at 30 or 60 FPS? 30 does seem relatively smooth for this particular game. I just can't seem to get into it much yet. What settings is the console equivalent?

 

I have an M17x with 280's in sli. I can run Crysis 1 with everything set to max, other than rezz (1440X900) and AA off. It looks fantastic, and runs very smooth. Crysis 2, is even better since the engine is quite a bit more optimized. Everything set to ultra, high rezz texture pack installed, but obviously I can't run DX11. It is even smoother than Crysis 1.

It's a toss up for me on which one I think it better. They each have their strengths/weaknesses.

When I'm in the mood for some "Michael Bay" story and destruction, Crysis 2 is the only way to go since it's a much tighter story, and progression. When I'm in the mood to really get some special forces-like stealth going, I put in Crysis since it just really seems to play out that way for me. It's rare that I ever go in guns blazing in that game. Easy way to get your handed to you.

In Crysis 2, armor mode on, and lugging the heavy machine gun, it's just mass destruction. Could care less about who or what's shooting at me. All I have to do is keep an eye on my suits power.

Graphically, I originally thought that Crysis looked better. Now, after finally installing the 170.61 drivers (Nvidia), and getting official SLI support which allows me to finally run everything on ultra, and installing the high rezz texture pack, I have to say imho, Crysis 2 is the winner. The lighting is MUCH better and, I'm a sucker for great lighting.

Would love to see what someone could do with Cryengine 3, and the original Crysis. Now there would be some eye candy!!!!

 

ive only played warhead and crysis 1 and the crysis 2MP demo. i liked the online of crysis 2 demo but untill i break down and pay more then 30 bucks on a game crysis 1 FTW!

 

Well I just replayed with the settings in Crysis 2. I dropped resolution to 720P (still a great resolution for a lappy screen IMO) and put on Ultra with high res pack. Framerates are 50-80FPS. I have to say it is the most beautiful game I have every played. The water and lighting are AMAZING. I CANNOT believe I am running these games on a laptop. Sure I can have a higher resolution experience on a desktop, but there is just "something" about running on a laptop with stand on a couch with a mousepad.

Again, i can't believe these graphics are being run on a laptop. Unbelievable. This makes me think that BF3 will run fine. I have a feeling that Crysis 2 with DX11 and the high res packs are a bit more intensive than BF3. I don't mind running 720P Vs 1080P.

 

I couldn't get through the original. I vastly preferred Crysis 2 and couldn't put it down until I finished.

 

I preffered the first one over the second one. I think the story of the second is too #"$"##$% erhm... bad. I only played it because the game is fun, but it just isn't crysis, or at least what made me like crysis.

It feels quite claustrophibic. I can't do anything, it is all scripted. One would think that leaving a building could be achieved by the numeros wholes, huge windows, wooden doors instead of a forced latch on a sewage whole...

On the bright side, the armor mode does last much more and is quite useful, but strenght (jump and dmg) are gimped, as well as speed ( I cant run without using energy ).

Anyways, its a decent game, but it is not better than crysis. I would even argue it changed what made crysis, crysis, thus it is an entirely new game. Graphicswise, it looks stunning, but then again I started playing Crysis 1 again and it also looks stunning.

anyways it is all down to opinion but I don't think Crysis 2 is an actual crysis game. Nor as good as the first one.

 

I love the graphics in Warhead since everything looked very realistic and destructible, however Crysis 2 had the best suit experience (Q and E for modes) as well as the visor highlighting and story.

 

Crysis 1 was a stupid game made by a stupid developer who end up making games for console

 

Seeing how this is a Crysis thread, anyone have any idea as to what is causing this?

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e347/Yawn_God/Crysis22011-07-2312-46-21-71.jpg

It appears when DX11 and High Res textures are on, but not with DX9 and off High Res textures.

 

Crysis 2 by a mile! The story was MUCH better! I loved the lighting effects, and the gameplay was very solid! I really think crysis 2 is a better game!

 

I really enjoyed Crysis 1, but liked Warhead better. Only partially through Crysis 2 so far. I do like it but it feels consolized. I don't know why people think you need an Uber system to play Crysis 1. I finished Crysis 1 on my Vostro 1500 with Core 2 Duo @ 2.2GHz and 8600m GT. Even with medium level graphics I thought it was phenomenal.

 

I prefer Crysis 1 because it was breathtaking at the time of release compared to other options. I was also a fan of farcry.

 

At least for me, I think the difference between medium and very high was mind blowing. I actually never played it through on medium. I had a penryn 2.5ghz processor and 8800GTX and it choked on high settings. Only now in my system can I crank to very high. It's like playing a completely different game in my opinion.

 

What system do you have? It almost looks like artifacting. Are you restarting your game after enabling those settings like it suggests? Do you have an overclock going? It was hard to tell from that picture what exactly the problem is. However I would imagine playing at 20FPS could be annoying as well. Maybe drop the High Res pack and see if you still have the problem in DX11 mode. Then maybe redownload and install the texture pack.

 

I actually had to finish the game on my desktop though because the final alien battles on the ship was a little too much to bear for my meager 8600m GT. I did play through a bit of it again on max details on my desktop (well max it could handle fluidly) and didn't think it looked extremely better.

 

Yeah, I'm overclocking a 5650. I did benchmarking beforehand, and it seemed stable, so I guess I suppose that Crysis 2 DX11 + HR Textures is more demanding than FurMark or OCCT.

The problem is the glass and those little black cloud boxes that form when they break. If that's artifacting, I guess I need to downclock. I know The Witcher 2 artifacts with little multicolored pixels, and I assumed if it artifacted Crysis 2 would look the same.

EDIT: Those black cloud boxes still appear while using DX11 + HRT even at default clocks, so I don't think they're artifacts, at least to the definition I am aware of regarding artifacts.

EDIT 2: After wayyyy overclocking my memory, I see now what Crysis 2 artifacting looks like, and unfortunately it doesn't look like little black square clouds. I think the black clouds are something else.

As for the FPS, on 1366 it's averages around mid-twenties with tweaked the settings. That is, when I'm trying a few Ultra settings; changing Ultra to Extreme seriously improves framerate, but even on lowest settings with native resolution and no v-sync, it still caps at around the low 30s. I can only hit 40+ if I changed resolution.

 

Ok then it is probably a driver issue. Maybe do a clean install of the newest drivers or if you are running the newest drivers just re-install them. What resolution are you running? 6970CF makes dx11 and HRP hard to run at native 1080p. So i run 1600 by 900 and it still drops to mid 20s in some instances. I think dx11, high res textures and extreme settings at 720p should be a nice combo for your system. Sometimes it's fun to play with settings but sometimes, since I am a videophile it turns out to be more of a chore doing that then actually playing and enjoying the game!

 

Thanks for the info, bro.

I found out it was the DX11 causing the problem. I'll reinstall the graphics drivers as you say; it seems to be the only thing to do at the moment.

I've always had a little bit of O.C.D. in me, so playing on native resolution (1366x768) is almost always a must. I suppose I could try to train myself to play more gpu intensive games with 720p settings.

Windowed or full screen, by the way? I assume full screen.

EDIT: Uninstalling and reinstalling the drivers did not make the black glass square clouds disappear.

EDIT 2: Apparently this is not a unique issue. At that part, Lab Rat, during the Helicopter Gunship fight, with DX11, the glass has that glitch. Since mostly everyone had already beaten Crysis 2 before 1.9 (including myself), only those replaying the game with DX11 would have noticed it, which is a smaller population than those that played it with DX9.

 

The best optimized Crysis is Crysis Warhead. Also it has better story than Crysis 1 so...that's my favorite.

I played about 3 hours into Crysis 2 and got bored.

 

Does anyone notice progressively WORSE FPS in Crysis 1 original? I am not even to the "last level" where everyone says it is bad. But level 4 and 5 I am gettnig horrid framerates. What was a constant 40-50FPS on very high is now 20 to 35. The framerate seems really inconsistent. I had to check to see if I was throttling....but wasn't.

 

I did notice that framerate tended to go down little by little, but I usually stayed at 30fps with my rig. Even the last leve, there were just a couple of parts that dipped low, but usually maintained a decent fps specially during the last fight. The thing is, during the island regular setting, the switch from day to night does affect fps, and at some points you might get very high fps that quickly fall down.

However, when I had my previous GPU, the 260m GTX, I did get a steady drop in fps as the game progressed, until quite unplayable unless I switched settings down.

 

I like Crysis 1 and Warhead better. The open world and letting me do the mission how I wanted is something that Crysis 2 has none of. Its VERY linear. And while the story of Crysis 2 "continues" after Crysis 1, I felt that because they brought it to consoles, where the players have never played the original and have no idea went on in the first one, that the story suffered. Had it been a PC exclusive like the 1st one and its expansion, personally I thought the story would've been richer and deeper. But because of consoles, they made it playable without knowing what happened in the first one.The only thing the story had in common with the first one was Prophet and the nano-suit. Nothing from the past games even has a mention in the sequel. Crytek put alot of fast action and shooting in Crysis 2 to mask it's lacking story, and put HEAVY post processiong to mask that it is a console game.

 

i had a lot of fun with crysis warhead, thats my fav

 

I must say :

IMO, the best Crysis would be Crysis 2's setting with Crysis 1's sandboxing. It would be pretty epic.

Now, graphically-wise, deferred rendering is better than forward, so I would say to have Crysis 1's texture quality combined with Crysis 2's lighting & shading effects. Would be amazing IMO.

 

Probably not the best thread to post that in

 

my favorite crysis is crysis warhead and ended it in a week
this game has awesome graphics
i upgraded my desktop to play this game

 

There wasn't a real deep story to the original either, bro. It was "scientist uses North Koreans to release aliens". The story to the second one was "released aliens use disease to soften population to take over Earth". Fine by me.

 

It was a good setup to make the second one.

 

Cheesy but true, imagine Crysis 2 had it not been made on console? Oh, the possibility...one can dream.

 

If it hadn't been made on console? Then this thread would probably be 'How many people can run Crysis 2'

 

ROTFLMFAO!

That is so true though, however the single player would be longer and even more immerse. Grant I never even finish Crysis 1 I couldn't get past that giant indoor cell like thing so I don't actually know how big or long Crysis 1 is.

 

Vote goes to Crysis 2.
Probably because I don't have Crysis 1. Heh.

 

I honestly thought C2 was more immersive than C1. Granted, it was more linear, but immersion to me is more than just huge levels and length. Part of the problem I had with C1 was that there really wasn't a whole lot of variation in gameplay. You had to stand and fight a lot, because you couldn't sneak through the woods since they were full of North Koreans.

In contrast, I played a good portion of C2 in stealth mode, picking soldiers and aliens off with M8 and sniper rounds to the domepiece, but there were also several sections where I just had to armor up, snap the nearest HMG off its pintle, and do work, son.

There were also some crazy epic moments, like the scene on the steps of the library. Aliens coming up the stairs, gunning them down as the reactivated SAMs are going off shooting down alien ships and Hans Zimmer music is playing. So awesome.

 

Crysis 2 was my favorite Crysis.

Why? Because I didn't spend $1400 to ugprade my PC; and upgrade to the latest-and-greatest Windows Vista for DirectX10 support; only to be let down by a huge disappointment in terms of miniscule improvements in graphics quality, and poor framerates like I did with Crysis 1.

I knew going into Crysis 2 that the gameplay would be mediocre, and that the graphics performance scaling would be less-than-awesome. So for that, Crysis 2 wins.

 

I don't understand how people had this experience with C1.

I built an entire PC for less than $1200 that ran Crysis just fine on high settings.

 

There are many factors to take into account here:

- Crysis is a lot more optimized now than when it was first released (due to patches) so the people who ran it then and couldn't get playable frame rates (and most likely gave up) would have a much better chance now.

- A lot of people assume because they have a gaming pc that they can crank everything up to full, including Anti-Aliasing (AA). Even the top end graphics cards (I think it was something like the 8800GTX) at the time could not play Crysis at a high resolution with full (8x) AA.

- There is a lot of ambiguity between people saying they can run Crysis on full. Some people turn up the settings one by one until it becomes unplayable and then drop it back down a few (generally around the 'high' setting). Others think that because they have read somewhere that someone with similar hardware can run it on full, they can run it on enthusiast.

- Finally, it could even come down to the operating system and background applications. I had oblivion installed on my desktop with no mods. It ran fine on full settings except when I went into areas with more than a few NPCs. It would then lag like a ***** and there was nothing I could do to stop it. I assumed it was a cpu, not gpu issue. However, after reinstalling windows, I played it again, with the exact same hardware/software/settings setup, and it ran perfectly fine.

Luck of the draw

Blazin

 

I did buy it the day it was released and ran it on an 8800GT. I guess one difference is probably that I usually don't bother with high AA because I generally don't find jaggies to be noticeable enough to warrant turning it on.

 

I agree, at 1920x1200 I can barely notice the difference between AA and no-AA in most games. One of the benefits of a high resolution I guess.

Blazin

 

I like the gameplay of Crysis 2 a lot more than Crysis 1 and Warhead.

 

Whatever happen to 1200p That was what make PC gaming so awesome, I remember playing Battlefield 2142 on 1200p on a 26 inches monitor screen which was bigger than my HDTV at the time and it was so amazing! AA hardly applies to 1200p screen, so why only 1080p now? Really, or is it just me but console PC gamer hard!

 

This entirely depends on the size of the monitor.

 

This is mainly due to the 16:9 vs. 16:10 aspect ratio battle. 16:9 is the mainstream ratio, hence why most televisions are 1080p, not 1200p, and why Blu-Rays are 1080p (although most of the time they are more like 960 to 1000p!)

Yes, but most (higher quality) monitors will go to 2560x1440 (or similar) once they go above 27/28inches so the 'jaggies' become even less noticeable.


Blazin