Crysis 3 whats the graphical difference?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#51 Posted by R4gn4r0k (16296 posts) -

I only played the alpha of crysis 3 and if I remember correctly it didn't allow you to set everything on highest settings. Does the beta allow that ?

#52 Posted by mitu123 (153911 posts) -

I only played the alpha of crysis 3 and if I remember correctly it didn't allow you to set everything on highest settings. Does the beta allow that ?

R4gn4r0k

Yes, beta goes up to very high.

#53 Posted by R4gn4r0k (16296 posts) -

Yes, beta goes up to very high.

mitu123

thanks for the answer :) 

So it allows the same settings the game will offer at launch ? Nothing is greyed out or something ?

 

 

#54 Posted by Ondoval (3103 posts) -

 

 

FX.jpg 

11.jpg

13.jpg

 

5.jpg

    I did need to install the 313.96 beta drivers from Nvidia in order to made work my GTX 690 as a SLI (before was working as a single GPU card); once this was corrected I did achieve 40-60 fps with very high + FXAA x2 and 60-65 fps with very high + SMAA x1 (2560 x 1440, specs: i5 2500k 3.3 Ghz, 16 GB DDR3 1600 Mhz, GTX 690).

 

   The game has less scale than BF3 and performs about a 15-25% behind but the wireframe -polygon count- is a lot more detailed, there's a lot more variety in textures and the fx are much more subtle. The pace is also higher, if you play as a shotgun soldier with the mobility enhancement you're near to "UT/QIIIA fast", and the roaming is very, very smooth.

   My main complaint is the mouse lag and general laggy imputs, but that was fixed in some way in C2 using the .cfg files, so as long as this problem end corrected I think that the overall impression is possitive despite my doubts.

 

 

In terms of scale/performance I still think that BF3 beats the Crysis 3 beta -despite the performance itself is good-, but in the pure degree of detail and pace Crysis 3 is ahead. The map design is excellent and the only fault in gameplay is that currently the shotgun, bow and sniper gun are comparatively overpowered.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

#55 Posted by FaustArp (1038 posts) -

But Crytek recommended a 690 to run the game at its best :?

seanmcloughlin

Gotta sell those $900 Titans lol.

#56 Posted by mitu123 (153911 posts) -

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

Yes, beta goes up to very high.

R4gn4r0k

thanks for the answer :) 

So it allows the same settings the game will offer at launch ? Nothing is greyed out or something ?

 

 

Yep, and nothing is greyed out either.

#57 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38214 posts) -

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    I did need to install the 313.96 beta drivers from Nvidia in order to made work my GTX 690 as a SLI (before was working as a single GPU card); once this was corrected I did achieve 40-60 fps with very high + FXAA x2 and 60-65 fps with very high + SMAA x1 (2560 x 1440, specs: i5 2500k 3.3 Ghz, 16 GB DDR3 1600 Mhz, GTX 690).

 

   The game has less scale than BF3 and performs about a 15-25% behind but the wireframe -polygon count- is a lot more detailed, there's a lot more variety in textures and the fx are much more subtle. The pace is also higher, if you play as a shotgun soldier with the mobility enhancement you're near to "UT/QIIIA fast", and the roaming is very, very smooth.

   My main complaint is the mouse lag and general laggy imputs, but that was fixed in some way in C2 using the .cfg files, so as long as this problem end corrected I think that the overall impression is possitive despite my doubts.

 

 

In terms of scale/performance I still think that BF3 beats the Crysis 3 beta -despite the performance itself is good-, but in the pure degree of detail and pace Crysis 3 is ahead. The map design is excellent and the only fault in gameplay is that currently the shotgun, bow and sniper gun are comparatively overpowered.

 

Ondoval

You need to increase your FOV.

#58 Posted by jun_aka_pekto (15916 posts) -

Are the gun sounds better than the wimpy ones in Crysis 2? I mean the sounds should at least be KZ3-good. I heard those in BF3 sound great as well. But, I don't have that one.

#59 Posted by Elann2008 (32953 posts) -

Are the gun sounds better than the wimpy ones in Crysis 2? I mean the sounds should at least be KZ3-good. I heard those in BF3 sound great as well. But, I don't have that one.

jun_aka_pekto
They sound about the same. Can't tell.
#60 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38214 posts) -

Are the gun sounds better than the wimpy ones in Crysis 2? I mean the sounds should at least be KZ3-good. I heard those in BF3 sound great as well. But, I don't have that one.

jun_aka_pekto

They're the same. Most guns are the same anyway so the gun sounds haven't changed at all. LIkely the exact same raw files. It was one of the problems I had when it was shown at E3. But there are plenty of new guns that have good sounds, like the new alien weapons. I hate the sound of the Bow though, it sounds way overdone

And yes BF3's gun sounds are the best in the business, nothing comes close to the audio in BF3. Mainly because they were real gun sounds that were captured and not exaggerated as much as some games

#61 Posted by trastamad03 (4852 posts) -
Only way to achieve 60fps was by setting the game to LOW and 1920x1080 (native is 2560x1440)... I'll just pass on this for now.
#62 Posted by Elann2008 (32953 posts) -
Only way to achieve 60fps was by setting the game to LOW and 1920x1080 (native is 2560x1440)... I'll just pass on this for now.trastamad03
ouch! But I hear the game still looks great on low. I'm too lazy to do comparison shots on my own though. It's alright Trastamad. I won't be picking up Crysis 3 until I have a GTX 770/780. :P
#63 Posted by darksusperia (6899 posts) -
[QUOTE="trastamad03"]Only way to achieve 60fps was by setting the game to LOW and 1920x1080 (native is 2560x1440)... I'll just pass on this for now.Elann2008
ouch! But I hear the game still looks great on low. I'm too lazy to do comparison shots on my own though. It's alright Trastamad. I won't be picking up Crysis 3 until I have a GTX 770/780. :P

Im thinking the same haha. especially if that other thread is true with the 780 being double the 680 performance and even beating the 690/ares cards... BEAST. Worth the price of admission there.
#64 Posted by Elann2008 (32953 posts) -

[QUOTE="Elann2008"][QUOTE="trastamad03"]Only way to achieve 60fps was by setting the game to LOW and 1920x1080 (native is 2560x1440)... I'll just pass on this for now.darksusperia
ouch! But I hear the game still looks great on low. I'm too lazy to do comparison shots on my own though. It's alright Trastamad. I won't be picking up Crysis 3 until I have a GTX 770/780. :P

Im thinking the same haha. especially if that other thread is true with the 780 being double the 680 performance and even beating the 690/ares cards... BEAST. Worth the price of admission there.

Lol yup. Now, if a 780 Titan doesn't max out Crysis 3.. oh my golly.. mother of Zeus!

#65 Posted by darksusperia (6899 posts) -

[QUOTE="darksusperia"][QUOTE="Elann2008"] ouch! But I hear the game still looks great on low. I'm too lazy to do comparison shots on my own though. It's alright Trastamad. I won't be picking up Crysis 3 until I have a GTX 770/780. :PElann2008

Im thinking the same haha. especially if that other thread is true with the 780 being double the 680 performance and even beating the 690/ares cards... BEAST. Worth the price of admission there.

Lol yup. Now, if a 780 Titan doesn't max out Crysis 3.. oh my golly.. mother of Zeus!

if a single 780 doesnt max it then expect cries of poor optimization/console port lol.

End of february was the apparent eta.. 4 weeks and hopefully we'll know the definitive answer.

#66 Posted by faizan_faizan (7849 posts) -

Anyone tried starting this game in -devmode and playing it in Third person?

#67 Posted by mitu123 (153911 posts) -

Man these recent comments make me want to go SLI again.

#68 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38214 posts) -

[QUOTE="darksusperia"][QUOTE="Elann2008"] ouch! But I hear the game still looks great on low. I'm too lazy to do comparison shots on my own though. It's alright Trastamad. I won't be picking up Crysis 3 until I have a GTX 770/780. :PElann2008

Im thinking the same haha. especially if that other thread is true with the 780 being double the 680 performance and even beating the 690/ares cards... BEAST. Worth the price of admission there.

Lol yup. Now, if a 780 Titan doesn't max out Crysis 3.. oh my golly.. mother of Zeus!

lol I thin you're overreacting there a bit. I can max the game now (with FXAA though) and easily stay above 50 fps on my 670. And that's beta in multiplayer. If BF3 and Crysis 2 are any indication it's that the Single Player will be more stable and run better. 

I don't think it's gonna be as hard as everyone thinks to max it out. Similar stuff was said about BF3 before that launched and it was a piece of cake to run. That and proper drivers haven't released for it to further boost the performance

#69 Posted by Elann2008 (32953 posts) -

[QUOTE="Elann2008"]

[QUOTE="darksusperia"] Im thinking the same haha. especially if that other thread is true with the 780 being double the 680 performance and even beating the 690/ares cards... BEAST. Worth the price of admission there.seanmcloughlin

Lol yup. Now, if a 780 Titan doesn't max out Crysis 3.. oh my golly.. mother of Zeus!

lol I thin you're overreacting there a bit. I can max the game now (with FXAA though) and easily stay above 50 fps on my 670. And that's beta in multiplayer. If BF3 and Crysis 2 are any indication it's that the Single Player will be more stable and run better. 

I don't think it's gonna be as hard as everyone thinks to max it out. Similar stuff was said about BF3 before that launched and it was a piece of cake to run. That and proper drivers haven't released for it to further boost the performance

Yeah I know i was joking. I expect with proper drivers after release, a 680 should max it, or an OC'ed 670 at 1080p. It might take a few drivers to get it right though. My friend with a 680 isn't too pleased with the beta performance. Yes, I know i know.., it's a friggin beta but still.

But then again, a GTX 580 still can't max Crysis 2.  When I mean max, I mean max with 4xAA.  So I don't know... I might just take that statement back.  And comparing DICE to Crytek.  I wouldn't go that far.  DICE is better at optimizing their games.  Plus, 64 players on a huge map.  DICE is simply good.  Two different games, two different developers.

#70 Posted by jun_aka_pekto (15916 posts) -

[QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]

Are the gun sounds better than the wimpy ones in Crysis 2? I mean the sounds should at least be KZ3-good. I heard those in BF3 sound great as well. But, I don't have that one.

seanmcloughlin

They're the same. Most guns are the same anyway so the gun sounds haven't changed at all. LIkely the exact same raw files. It was one of the problems I had when it was shown at E3. But there are plenty of new guns that have good sounds, like the new alien weapons. I hate the sound of the Bow though, it sounds way overdone

And yes BF3's gun sounds are the best in the business, nothing comes close to the audio in BF3. Mainly because they were real gun sounds that were captured and not exaggerated as much as some games

Aw, crock. Crytek needs to take some lessons from DICE or Guerilla Games and learn a thing or two about gun sounds. Oh well, I'll wait and see when the real game comes along.

#71 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38214 posts) -

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

[QUOTE="Elann2008"] Lol yup. Now, if a 780 Titan doesn't max out Crysis 3.. oh my golly.. mother of Zeus!

Elann2008

lol I thin you're overreacting there a bit. I can max the game now (with FXAA though) and easily stay above 50 fps on my 670. And that's beta in multiplayer. If BF3 and Crysis 2 are any indication it's that the Single Player will be more stable and run better. 

I don't think it's gonna be as hard as everyone thinks to max it out. Similar stuff was said about BF3 before that launched and it was a piece of cake to run. That and proper drivers haven't released for it to further boost the performance

Yeah I know i was joking. I expect with proper drivers after release, a 680 should max it, or an OC'ed 670 at 1080p. It might take a few drivers to get it right though. My friend with a 680 isn't too pleased with the beta performance. Yes, I know i know.., it's a friggin beta but still.

But then again, a GTX 580 still can't max Crysis 2.  When I mean max, I mean max with 4xAA.  So I don't know... I might just take that statement back.  And comparing DICE to Crytek.  I wouldn't go that far.  DICE is better at optimizing their games.  Plus, 64 players on a huge map.  DICE is simply good.  Two different games, two different developers.

Crysis 2 is horribly optimised, it was running in pieces on an engine they hadn't finished and had a terribly poor implementation of Dx11 admitted by Crytek themselves. I have no doubt this game will run far better. I mean Crysis 2 had tesselation on everything and it was a hog on performance at times (such as the water under the levels that was tesselated but not seen) but this time they don't even tesselate many objects like trees yet the result is better than tesselation, they did all new models for stuff like that. And did new methods for shadows and lights. It might be a bit more pre-baked than Crysis 2 was, but if the result is good i'll be happy

And yeah they're very different, I was just using examples. Things can change dramatically between SP and MP and Beta and final release. 

In the end who the hell knows :P Excited to find out though

#72 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38214 posts) -

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

[QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]

Are the gun sounds better than the wimpy ones in Crysis 2? I mean the sounds should at least be KZ3-good. I heard those in BF3 sound great as well. But, I don't have that one.

jun_aka_pekto

They're the same. Most guns are the same anyway so the gun sounds haven't changed at all. LIkely the exact same raw files. It was one of the problems I had when it was shown at E3. But there are plenty of new guns that have good sounds, like the new alien weapons. I hate the sound of the Bow though, it sounds way overdone

And yes BF3's gun sounds are the best in the business, nothing comes close to the audio in BF3. Mainly because they were real gun sounds that were captured and not exaggerated as much as some games

Aw, crock. Crytek needs to take some lessons from DICE or Guerilla Games and learn a thing or two about gun sounds. Oh well, I'll wait and see when the real game comes along.

The guns still sound decent but yeah DICE do it better. Having said that the nanosuit is where the auiod shines, listening to the deep bass when you go into cloak or armor mode is great and hearing the heavy clunking footsteps as you run around. So far DICE are the only ones that do pitch perfect sounds that are really clean at the same time. But that's realism as opposed to hollywood sounds, which is what Crytek are aiming for. Real guns clack rather than boom 

#73 Posted by Toxic-Seahorse (4118 posts) -

Crysis 2 is horribly optimised,seanmcloughlin
Bullsh*t. It's currently the best looking game out (until Crysis 3 probably) and yet I can run the game on ultra with over 50 FPS. Yes the optimization could be better, but horrible? No way.

#74 Posted by ferret-gamer (17310 posts) -

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]Crysis 2 is horribly optimised,Toxic-Seahorse

Bullsh*t. It's currently the best looking game out (until Crysis 3 probably) and yet I can run the game on ultra with over 50 FPS. Yes the optimization could be better, but horrible? No way.

Take the scar and empty the clip into the ground infront of you. Watch as your fps just drain away no matter what your computer is, because of the really poor implementation of particle shadowing. Crysis 2 has major optimization problems with some of the DX11 effects. 

#76 Posted by kris9031998 (7554 posts) -
Should 2x SLI'd 670's be able to max it at 2560x1440? With stable fps?
#77 Posted by mitu123 (153911 posts) -

Should 2x SLI'd 670's be able to max it at 2560x1440? With stable fps?kris9031998
It definitely would. But I'll check on that later hopefully.

#78 Posted by FelipeInside (25312 posts) -
The Beta put my 5 year old rig to shame....ON LOW. Where are all the hater comments saying "Crysis 3 is a console port..."? Hmmm, funny....they disappeared...
#79 Posted by mitu123 (153911 posts) -

I wonder if Crytek is right about it melting PCs after all.

#80 Posted by darksusperia (6899 posts) -

I wonder if Crytek is right about it melting PCs after all.

mitu123
possibly. we'll see soon enough whether its true or just hype I guess.
#81 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23460 posts) -
Yeah after playing it a bit more this game has everything wrong with it: netcode is ultra bad mouse accel default mouse sensitivity is on or off poor optimization(does not look that great for how it runs) artstyle is mediocre permanent blur, and it's not done correctly like BF3. input lag engine
#82 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23460 posts) -

The Beta put my 5 year old rig to shame....ON LOW. Where are all the hater comments saying "Crysis 3 is a console port..."? Hmmm, funny....they disappeared...FelipeInside

it feels like one
the control setup is a total joke


i can't say poor artstyle is a console port thing, console ports typically have good artstyle.


#83 Posted by FelipeInside (25312 posts) -
[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"]Yeah after playing it a bit more this game has everything wrong with it: netcode is ultra bad mouse accel default mouse sensitivity is on or off poor optimization(does not look that great for how it runs) artstyle is mediocre permanent blur, and it's not done correctly like BF3. input lag engine

Google the word "Beta"
#84 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23460 posts) -

[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"]Yeah after playing it a bit more this game has everything wrong with it: netcode is ultra bad mouse accel default mouse sensitivity is on or off poor optimization(does not look that great for how it runs) artstyle is mediocre permanent blur, and it's not done correctly like BF3. input lag engineFelipeInside
Google the word "Beta"

none of these will be fixed

it may be more optimized, but that's it.

#85 Posted by DevilMightCry (3476 posts) -
I agree with JigglyWiggly, I have yet to see a Beta that I've played that actually improved things in the final build. The mouse speed is a shame, but you could adjust it like Crysis 2 I think in initial file. Btw, where is this FOV slider everyone keeps talking about? I don't see it anywhere in the menus.
#86 Posted by FelipeInside (25312 posts) -
I agree with JigglyWiggly, I have yet to see a Beta that I've played that actually improved things in the final build. The mouse speed is a shame, but you could adjust it like Crysis 2 I think in initial file. Btw, where is this FOV slider everyone keeps talking about? I don't see it anywhere in the menus. DevilMightCry
The Secret World improved a lot from Beta to Launch.
#87 Posted by trastamad03 (4852 posts) -

[QUOTE="darksusperia"][QUOTE="Elann2008"] ouch! But I hear the game still looks great on low. I'm too lazy to do comparison shots on my own though. It's alright Trastamad. I won't be picking up Crysis 3 until I have a GTX 770/780. :PElann2008

Im thinking the same haha. especially if that other thread is true with the 780 being double the 680 performance and even beating the 690/ares cards... BEAST. Worth the price of admission there.

Lol yup. Now, if a 780 Titan doesn't max out Crysis 3.. oh my golly.. mother of Zeus!

=[ I wants me a 780 titan...
#88 Posted by mitu123 (153911 posts) -

Btw, where is this FOV slider everyone keeps talking about? I don't see it anywhere in the menus. DevilMightCry
Play a match, go into Options, Game, and you'll see it.

#89 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23460 posts) -

[QUOTE="DevilMightCry"]Btw, where is this FOV slider everyone keeps talking about? I don't see it anywhere in the menus. mitu123

Play a match, go into Options, Game, and you'll see it.

console port dhat
#90 Posted by mitu123 (153911 posts) -

Yeah after playing it a bit more this game has everything wrong with it: netcode is ultra bad mouse accel default mouse sensitivity is on or off poor optimization(does not look that great for how it runs) artstyle is mediocre permanent blur, and it's not done correctly like BF3. input lag engineJigglyWiggly_
You forgot bad hit detection.

#91 Posted by Elann2008 (32953 posts) -

[QUOTE="Elann2008"]

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

lol I thin you're overreacting there a bit. I can max the game now (with FXAA though) and easily stay above 50 fps on my 670. And that's beta in multiplayer. If BF3 and Crysis 2 are any indication it's that the Single Player will be more stable and run better. 

I don't think it's gonna be as hard as everyone thinks to max it out. Similar stuff was said about BF3 before that launched and it was a piece of cake to run. That and proper drivers haven't released for it to further boost the performance

seanmcloughlin

Yeah I know i was joking. I expect with proper drivers after release, a 680 should max it, or an OC'ed 670 at 1080p. It might take a few drivers to get it right though. My friend with a 680 isn't too pleased with the beta performance. Yes, I know i know.., it's a friggin beta but still.

But then again, a GTX 580 still can't max Crysis 2.  When I mean max, I mean max with 4xAA.  So I don't know... I might just take that statement back.  And comparing DICE to Crytek.  I wouldn't go that far.  DICE is better at optimizing their games.  Plus, 64 players on a huge map.  DICE is simply good.  Two different games, two different developers.

Crysis 2 is horribly optimised, it was running in pieces on an engine they hadn't finished and had a terribly poor implementation of Dx11 admitted by Crytek themselves. I have no doubt this game will run far better. I mean Crysis 2 had tesselation on everything and it was a hog on performance at times (such as the water under the levels that was tesselated but not seen) but this time they don't even tesselate many objects like trees yet the result is better than tesselation, they did all new models for stuff like that. And did new methods for shadows and lights. It might be a bit more pre-baked than Crysis 2 was, but if the result is good i'll be happy

And yeah they're very different, I was just using examples. Things can change dramatically between SP and MP and Beta and final release. 

In the end who the hell knows :P Excited to find out though

Ahh didn't know Crysis 2 had poor optimization. Didn't look that great for the performance hit anyways. Crysis 3 on the other hand looks better. The more I play, the more I notice the differences. I was wrong about that. Can't wait to see what the SP has to offer.
#92 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23460 posts) -

[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"]Yeah after playing it a bit more this game has everything wrong with it: netcode is ultra bad mouse accel default mouse sensitivity is on or off poor optimization(does not look that great for how it runs) artstyle is mediocre permanent blur, and it's not done correctly like BF3. input lag enginemitu123

You forgot bad hit detection.

"netcode is ultra bad"

or as zubin put it

netcode: off

#93 Posted by Toxic-Seahorse (4118 posts) -

Yeah after playing it a bit more this game has everything wrong with it: netcode is ultra bad mouse accel default mouse sensitivity is on or off poor optimization(does not look that great for how it runs) artstyle is mediocre permanent blur, and it's not done correctly like BF3. input lag engineJigglyWiggly_
I feel like you hate everything that isn't a twitch shooter. I've never seen you have anything good to say about any games besides them. The game doesn't look that good for the performance you get? Are you being serious? Not only is it the best looking game yet (SP will probably be better) but judging by your sig you're only using 2 460s, not enough to max the game out. Art style is subjective and the blur makes the game more realistic. I feel like you're taking points off because you can't just turn everything off like you would in a twitch shooter to get the best performance with the least amount of visual effects to get a clearer game. 

#94 Posted by GameFan1983 (2126 posts) -

[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"]

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]Crysis 2 is horribly optimised,ferret-gamer

Bullsh*t. It's currently the best looking game out (until Crysis 3 probably) and yet I can run the game on ultra with over 50 FPS. Yes the optimization could be better, but horrible? No way.

Take the scar and empty the clip into the ground infront of you. Watch as your fps just drain away no matter what your computer is, because of the really poor implementation of particle shadowing. Crysis 2 has major optimization problems with some of the DX11 effects. 

empty a clip of scar never slowed down on me. 

crysis2 is probably the most optimized game around. prior DX11 patch, simply put, there was no game on the market run or look as good as crysis2 on similar spec, performance/visual wise.  my cousin's none gaming pc maxed crysis2 @ extreme setting with a mere 8800GT while stays at 30-40 fps throughout

 The dx11 features involved a dozen of features that should've been selected individually. tessellation doesn't consume any worthy bandwidth from a high end 4xx/5xx cards. particle shadow is somewhat demanding, the only big draws are atmospheric fog and volumetric particles such as particle dust and floating smokes from fire fight. The only "unoptimized" issue about crysis2 I can think of was probably the crysis2 built cryengine3 stress all the destruction physics solely on CPU, but not so much an issue if you own the best CPU of its time.

 

#95 Posted by Toxic-Seahorse (4118 posts) -

[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"]

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]Crysis 2 is horribly optimised,ferret-gamer

Bullsh*t. It's currently the best looking game out (until Crysis 3 probably) and yet I can run the game on ultra with over 50 FPS. Yes the optimization could be better, but horrible? No way.

Take the scar and empty the clip into the ground infront of you. Watch as your fps just drain away no matter what your computer is, because of the really poor implementation of particle shadowing. Crysis 2 has major optimization problems with some of the DX11 effects. 

I just tested it and there was 0 FPS drop. I have no idea where you got that from. I could take a video if you don't believe me...
#96 Posted by GameFan1983 (2126 posts) -

[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"]Yeah after playing it a bit more this game has everything wrong with it: netcode is ultra bad mouse accel default mouse sensitivity is on or off poor optimization(does not look that great for how it runs) artstyle is mediocre permanent blur, and it's not done correctly like BF3. input lag engineToxic-Seahorse

I feel like you hate everything that isn't a twitch shooter. I've never seen you have anything good to say about any games besides them. The game doesn't look that good for the performance you get? Are you being serious? Not only is it the best looking game yet (SP will probably be better) but judging by your sig you're only using 2 460s, not enough to max the game out. Art style is subjective and the blur makes the game more realistic. I feel like you're taking points off because you can't just turn everything off like you would in a twitch shooter to get the best performance with the least amount of visual effects to get a clearer game. 

 

ignore that dude. he's just a stubborn old time quack live ballraider who hates any modern shooters.  more pathetically, he still believes that simplistic none moving weight, none recoil, PS1 level sci-fi style shooting mechanic should be implanted to all mordern shooters. 

obvious the old saying "an old dogs can still learn a couple new tricks" doesn't work out on him

 

 

 

#97 Posted by ferret-gamer (17310 posts) -
[QUOTE="ferret-gamer"]

[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"] Bullsh*t. It's currently the best looking game out (until Crysis 3 probably) and yet I can run the game on ultra with over 50 FPS. Yes the optimization could be better, but horrible? No way.

Toxic-Seahorse

Take the scar and empty the clip into the ground infront of you. Watch as your fps just drain away no matter what your computer is, because of the really poor implementation of particle shadowing. Crysis 2 has major optimization problems with some of the DX11 effects. 

I just tested it and there was 0 FPS drop. I have no idea where you got that from. I could take a video if you don't believe me...

You actually need to be maxing the game out so the particle shadows are on. It is a well known problem. Even if the MaldoHD configuration tool it says to turn them off because of the framerate drops when you shoot the ground in front of you.
#98 Posted by Jebus213 (8743 posts) -
[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"]Yeah after playing it a bit more this game has everything wrong with it: netcode is ultra bad mouse accel default mouse sensitivity is on or off poor optimization(does not look that great for how it runs) artstyle is mediocre permanent blur, and it's not done correctly like BF3. input lag engine

I agree with on everything but........BF3 does nothing correctly.
#99 Posted by Jebus213 (8743 posts) -
[QUOTE="DevilMightCry"]I agree with JigglyWiggly, I have yet to see a Beta that I've played that actually improved things in the final build. The mouse speed is a shame, but you could adjust it like Crysis 2 I think in initial file. Btw, where is this FOV slider everyone keeps talking about? I don't see it anywhere in the menus. FelipeInside
The Secret World improved a lot from Beta to Launch.

That's an MMO.
#100 Posted by FelipeInside (25312 posts) -
[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="DevilMightCry"]I agree with JigglyWiggly, I have yet to see a Beta that I've played that actually improved things in the final build. The mouse speed is a shame, but you could adjust it like Crysis 2 I think in initial file. Btw, where is this FOV slider everyone keeps talking about? I don't see it anywhere in the menus. Jebus213
The Secret World improved a lot from Beta to Launch.

That's an MMO.

Correct. You know ur gaming...