After actually reading the article they sounds like some kind of Crytek goons, they just haven’t locked down name for them yet.
They look like they have some kind of power suit, which would make sense if they are working for crytek. So why do you think Crytek’s gone bad? Maybe they want alien technology?
crysis 2 requirements
CPU: 32-core xeon 128bit CPU @ 800Ghz minumum, 3.2 TeraHertz recommended
RAM: 8-channel 1024TB of ram @ 9000Ghz CAS latency 0.00001
GPU: Cray XT5 Codename “Jaguar” prototype (must be overclocked 1.5x on top of maximum speed)
I’m assuming that it’s going to be PC only.
Well, that’s fucking gay. I bet it’ll run twice as worse for me than the first Crysis. Sadly I can’t afford a new Vid/GFX card. I have to live playing Crysis with bad detail and low frame rates. :’(
Lern2Research
They won’t, and they will. It’s all about hardware.
Well, I have faith in them. Then again, I had faith in Infinity Ward also. :[
Fuck, I use fake anti-aliasing for those games ( running them 4x my resolution and then downscaling them. ) But it kills performance. I really hope that they are stricly doing that for consoles.
The CryEngine 3 is a heavily optimized version of CE2. It will run much better than Crysis just like Crysis: Warhead did.
Unless you’re aiming for all settings @ “Very High” with 1920x1200 16x AF and 8x AA you shouldn’t worry about it too much.
Except Warhead ran 10 fps slower than Crysis for me… 
Crysis very high was DX10, Warhead very high was DX9 so I doubt you would get 10 fps less…
i hope there’s more scar ammo lying around, because that gun is sexy
Right, sorry to sound stupid, but can someone explain to me what ‘Q4’ means?
I’m, assuming it’s a stage in the year, but I’ve never understood.
Also, I’m looking forward to this. :3
It means it will come out in the 4th Quarter of the year, as in the last 3 months of the year, October , November or December. It’s pretty obvious what it means.
~10 fps slower, then again I was not running it on Very High.
Not necessarily. Crysis very high could also be DX9 save for motion blur, all it required was a change to the config. Warhead had the same very high, just removed the silly lock for those playing in DX9. If you have DX10 then they both played in DX10 mode.
woot! another awesome graphics engine with a horrible game attached.
woot! Another user with utterly wrong posts attached.
well, based on Crysis 1 (which is all we have to go on in this regard) I am perfectly correct. Crysis was nothing but a benchmarking tool.
Crysis wasn’t the best game ever, but I don’t see how it failed as an FPS. It had workable gameplay, a story that didn’t completely suck, and characters that, while not super deep, at least made an attempt at personality.
Although I will admit it works great as a benchmarking tool.
I have the same things against Crysis as I do against Halo. By themselves, they are average, nothing special but atleast playable and a bit of fun. The thing I cant stand about them both is that people insist on saying they are the best things ever made, and keep lecturing me about how I should rush out and buy them (and their million sequels).
These games are full of holes and problems, but people proclaim them to be the saviour of gaming…LOL
Its the level of hype surrounding them. When that dissipates, maybe I will actually have some respect for the people who play those games.
I disagree. Crysis wasn’t a cookie cutter FPS like Halo.
While I wouldn’t call it the saviour of gaming (lol) I would say it’s a game well worth hours of fun.
Founded in 2004, Leakfree.org became one of the first online communities dedicated to Valve’s Source engine development. It is more famously known for the formation of Black Mesa: Source under the 'Leakfree Modification Team' handle in September 2004.