Crysis demo

[stabiz]

:-? Well, I think its okay, but nothing more. It looks really good, though. Armed Assault with this kind of graphics and physics would be awesome.

[Biggles]

still downloading. I know my comp. will cope, but how much, I still don't know.

[SUBMAN1]

I probably get about 50 to 60 FPS with max detail on and 1024x768. It won't allow me to select any higher detail than high though. Very High is probably reserved for DX10, and I'm running on DX9. Doesn't matter though because like BioShock, I doubt you could point out the difference. The machine starts to drop to the high 20's in FPS though at 4x AA and above. 2x still works, and actually I'd trade better detail in a game over AA anyway. AA looks nice, but not at the expense of the environment in my opinion.

My system is getting old too - x1900 XTX for a vid board, 2 GB RAM, and a 4400+ X2 CPU. If BioSHock and Crysis both play this well, there is no need for an upgrade in my future!

-S

PS. I made some video already if anyone wants to see how it plays. Here is the thread to the 3 I've made already:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=124197

[Biggles]

I can't play on low or medium settings, I don't see anything then, so I have to use high settings. Rather....odd:doh: , but hell, why complain, it works. Need to upgrade my comp. though.

[Bort]

I love the demo, but am so horribly dissapointed with the performance of it, I have decided I will buy COD4 next weekend and wait for reviews before I decide whether I'm even going to buy it.

With my system, QX6800, 2 8800 GTXs in SLI, 4 GB RAM, etc., I should be able to play this game at Very High settings no problem, but no, I average about 15-20 FPS on very high, about 25-30 FPS on high, and about 25-40 FPS on medium settings, I haven't even bothered putting it on low since that would be a complete and utter joke. :damn:

Bah!

[kiwi_2005]

Okay i just DL crysis SP demo and im getting weird graphics. The npc's eyes are popped out of there heads and thats all i can see is the eyes, the guns dont show up well they do but all fuzzy and i got half the screen with a square showing the game as well what i mean is i got two views of the game on the one screen. Its all Farked up!

Intel dual 64 3500
GF 7800GTX 256 ram
2 gigs ram
latest nvidia drivers
windowsXP SP2
DX 9c

Any ideas surely my PC can play the demo on low settings. Ive tried different resolutions, set graphics to low, still no go.

Only thing i haven't updated is DX9c yet i dont know if there is an update needed, This PC plays Bioshock nicely so it should at least play the crysis demo.

Should i boot to vista and try it:hmm: But i figured if it wont play in XP then most likely it wont in vista.

Any ideas...

EDIT: Fixed. I downloaded the beta drivers (169.01) for my GF and game looks fine. Running at medium to high settings res 1280x800. Anyone has similar problems like i did DL the beta driver here: http://www.nvidia.com/object/winxp_169.01.html

[SUBMAN1]

I love the demo, but am so horribly dissapointed with the performance of it, I have decided I will buy COD4 next weekend and wait for reviews before I decide whether I'm even going to buy it.

With my system, QX6800, 2 8800 GTXs in SLI, 4 GB RAM, etc., I should be able to play this game at Very High settings no problem, but no, I average about 15-20 FPS on very high, about 25-30 FPS on high, and about 25-40 FPS on medium settings, I haven't even bothered putting it on low since that would be a complete and utter joke. :damn:

Bah!This game has some major problems with AA. Turn that down to 4 max. I found 2x to be a decent trade off. However, I can't really notice a difference with all the detail in this game with it off!!! Try turning it off, and maxing out everything else and then see what you get. WIth your kind of HP, you should have no problem at all.

I ahve heard of reports where SLI can slow you down by the way, instead of speed you up in various games. Maybe this is one of those cases. I have much less HP than you and I still never drop below 30 FPS. I'd estimate I average 50 to 60 FPS at 1280x1024.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

I can't play on low or medium settings, I don't see anything then, so I have to use high settings. Rather....odd:doh: , but hell, why complain, it works. Need to upgrade my comp. though.Sounds like a driver issue. Change drivers.

-S

[kiwi_2005]

Wow! Going by the demo, this is going to be one of the best shooters of 2007-2008. This is a must buy for me.:yep:

[goldorak]

Wow! Going by the demo, this is going to be one of the best shooters of 2007-2008. This is a must buy for me.:yep:

Easily one of the best shooters for the timeframe 2008-2009. the CryEngine 2 is just too advanced to really shine in 2008. And have you even tried the editor ?
It's really amazing, so powerful you can edit in real time and play at the same time.
Don't get me started on the tactical nukes you can shoot with the tank, the explosion is just gorgeous. :o :o :o
The best rendered nuclear blast in a game, even superior to what WIC offers.

[goldorak]

I love the demo, but am so horribly dissapointed with the performance of it, I have decided I will buy COD4 next weekend and wait for reviews before I decide whether I'm even going to buy it.

With my system, QX6800, 2 8800 GTXs in SLI, 4 GB RAM, etc., I should be able to play this game at Very High settings no problem, but no, I average about 15-20 FPS on very high, about 25-30 FPS on high, and about 25-40 FPS on medium settings, I haven't even bothered putting it on low since that would be a complete and utter joke. :damn:

Bah!

The CryEngine 2 is just geared for the future, as was the CryEngine 1 of Far Cry in its day.
Just look at the benchmarks of Far Cry when it came out, low twenties frames on top of the line graphics cards.
Its the same all over again.
Crytech really knows how to push the envelop, the free roaming, the physics, the graphics etc.. is just one generation above everything thats currently available.
No wonder you'll need second generation/third generation dx 10 graphics cards to tame this beast.
G100 here I come. :cool:

[Bort]

I love the demo, but am so horribly dissapointed with the performance of it, I have decided I will buy COD4 next weekend and wait for reviews before I decide whether I'm even going to buy it.

With my system, QX6800, 2 8800 GTXs in SLI, 4 GB RAM, etc., I should be able to play this game at Very High settings no problem, but no, I average about 15-20 FPS on very high, about 25-30 FPS on high, and about 25-40 FPS on medium settings, I haven't even bothered putting it on low since that would be a complete and utter joke. :damn:

Bah!This game has some major problems with AA. Turn that down to 4 max. I found 2x to be a decent trade off. However, I can't really notice a difference with all the detail in this game with it off!!! Try turning it off, and maxing out everything else and then see what you get. WIth your kind of HP, you should have no problem at all.

I ahve heard of reports where SLI can slow you down by the way, instead of speed you up in various games. Maybe this is one of those cases. I have much less HP than you and I still never drop below 30 FPS. I'd estimate I average 50 to 60 FPS at 1280x1024.

-S

I have not been running with AA, sorry about that misconception, and I've also turned off SLI, turned on SLI, tried all the different frame-display options and lowered the res yet still: no dice. :shifty:

[kiwi_2005]

Wow! Going by the demo, this is going to be one of the best shooters of 2007-2008. This is a must buy for me.:yep:
Easily one of the best shooters for the timeframe 2008-2009. the CryEngine 2 is just too advanced to really shine in 2008. And have you even tried the editor ?
It's really amazing, so powerful you can edit in real time and play at the same time.
Don't get me started on the tactical nukes you can shoot with the tank, the explosion is just gorgeous. :o :o :o
The best rendered nuclear blast in a game, even superior to what WIC offers.

Yes ive tried Farcrys editor the "sandbox" which crysis editor is the same just an updated version. I saw Crysis editor in the demo folder i installed it, but where do i load it up i dont see an editor option in the game.

[goldorak]

Yes ive tried Farcrys editor the "sandbox" which crysis editor is the same just an updated version. I saw Crysis editor in the demo folder i installed it, but where do i load it up i dont see an editor option in the game.

Once you install the editor, the exe file will be in the bin32 folder, editor.exe.
Now once you load a map, go in objects, choose archetype, then vehicles and lastly land.
There you have a choice of different drivable units.
Pick the tactical tank us and drag and drop the option onto the map and enjoy the blasts. :rotfl:
To enter the map just press control+g and to exit press esc.

[kiwi_2005]

Once you install the editor, the exe file will be in the bin32 folder, editor.exe.
Now once you load a map, go in objects, choose archetype, then vehicles and lastly land.
There you have a choice of different drivable units.
Pick the tactical tank us and drag and drop the option onto the map and enjoy the blasts. :rotfl:
To enter the map just press control+g and to exit press esc.

:up: Great i will load her up.

[SUBMAN1]

I have not been running with AA, sorry about that misconception, and I've also turned off SLI, turned on SLI, tried all the different frame-display options and lowered the res yet still: no dice. :shifty:FYI - I have a friend with the same prob on an NVidia board. He got some Beta drivers for it and things vastly improved.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

...Don't get me started on the tactical nukes you can shoot with the tank, the explosion is just gorgeous. :o :o :o
The best rendered nuclear blast in a game, even superior to what WIC offers.

Nothing can compare to the nuke at the end of FEAR. That is the best I've seen yet.

-S

[ajrimmer42]

I'm gobsmacked! I can actually play Crysis on high settings with only minimal fps loss! I have a 1.6GHz Processor, 1.5GB RAM, and a GeForce 7600GS. Awesome.

[stabiz]

Sorry, I dont believe that. What resolution?

And what fps are we talking about?

[ajrimmer42]

lol, I have it on 600 x 800 and I'm gettin about 8-10 fps, not great but playable. It still looks good too.

[Bort]

I really wouldn't consider 8-10 FPS as anywhere near playable. But if it floats your boat, then more power to ya! :)

Also, the new beta drivers helped a tiny little bit so now I'm getting around 25 frames per second at all high, still not what I would like.

[FAdmiral]

Even at all low settings, this game makes COD4 look like 10 year old shareware...

JIM

[Dowly]

Shareware version of 'Shadow Warrior'
http://i.d.com.com/i/dl/media/dlimage/89/48/2/89482_large.jpeg

COD4
http://www.tech2.com/media/images/2007/Jul/img_11941_cod4.jpg

:p

[FAdmiral]

Now go here....

http://www.fileplanet.com/promotions/crysis/beta/index.aspx


Fantastic gun control, long rolling landscapes, good-looking color-radiant
foliage, etc. etc. etc. VS. drab-looking urban settings as big as postage
stamps (I get better color in COD:UO than i do with COD4)

JIM

[Reaves]

Shareware version of 'Shadow Warrior'
<Imagine Image here>

COD4
<Imagine Image here>

:p



If you ever played the full version Shadow Warrior you would know that it is still better than COD4.

Sticky bomb likey you!

:p

[stabiz]

Actually, Crysis looks very unimpressive at low settings, and not very good at medium either, but at high and up its very pornographic. (If you have NASA technology)

But I still like the look of COD4 more, and the death animations are way better in COD4. And why oh why does it take 5-10 torso hits to kill a Korean soldier? Flak jackets must be amazingly good in 2020.

Both are good looking semi-interactive movies (COD4 is linear like its 1990), its just such a shame Crytek abandoned the sense of freedom you got in FarCry. Crysis is much more of a walk-this-way than FarCry was. And dont get me started on the Aliens ...

Nah, I am waiting for the AI-revolution, its all graphics and hype these days.

[Dowly]

Just tried Crysis on low settings and it was quite unplayable to be honest. Not because it was ugly (well, it kinda was), but because I had to ~10-15m away from a building for it to show up. :doh:

And like Stabiz said, the "freedom" in Crysis is just an illusion, you walk in a pipe like in most games, a big pipe, but still.

[FAdmiral]

I guess to each his own when it comes to game playing. After playing the demo
for many hours on low settings (still looks better than COD4) I love the chance
to do stealthy combat like I enjoyed doing in the old "Joint Operations: Typhoon Rising" game. Crawling in the foliage, flanking and snipe the enemy then moving
on to do more of the same. In COD4 multiplayer, I spawn in a very small urban
area, move out to do the mission, get shot & killed, respawn again, move out to
do the mission, get shot & killed, respawn again (same ole same ole) This gets
very boring to me and I don't get a realistic challenge. Like I said, I would rather
crawl in the weeds & snipe than to do that over & over & over & over & over.
PLUS, in the full game (coming out in a few days) I can drive & fly any vehicle I want. Try doing that in COD4....

JIM

[goldorak]

Actually, Crysis looks very unimpressive at low settings, and not very good at medium either, but at high and up its very pornographic. (If you have NASA technology)


The great graphic upgrade is by choosing shaders on high, everything else can be on medium but shaders need to be high or very high if you want a next gen Crysis.
Crysis as is meant to be played.


But I still like the look of COD4 more, and the death animations are way better in COD4. And why oh why does it take 5-10 torso hits to kill a Korean soldier? Flak jackets must be amazingly good in 2020.


You realize don't you that by using a silencer the weapon is less effective ?



Both are good looking semi-interactive movies (COD4 is linear like its 1990), its just such a shame Crytek abandoned the sense of freedom you got in FarCry. Crysis is much more of a walk-this-way than FarCry was. And dont get me started on the Aliens ...


No no and no. COD 4 is heavily scripted, Crysis beyond the necessary points for advancing the story is really 100% freedom. You can do whatever you like, you can go werever you want etc... Crysis is not just more of Far Cry, if you say so you don't understand what Crysis is.


Nah, I am waiting for the AI-revolution, its all graphics and hype these days.

Yeah ok, so lets ditch 99,99% of all games, pc games, xbox 360 games, ps 3 game and wii games for subpar perfomance in the ai sector.
Just to be clear, ai in heavily scripted games like COD 4 are far far more easier to develop that for a game that gives you complete freedom.

[goldorak]

Just tried Crysis on low settings and it was quite unplayable to be honest. Not because it was ugly (well, it kinda was), but because I had to ~10-15m away from a building for it to show up. :doh:

And like Stabiz said, the "freedom" in Crysis is just an illusion, you walk in a pipe like in most games, a big pipe, but still.


You got to be kidding, you have a freaking whole island at your disposal.
How much more freedom do you need ? :rotfl:

Really guys, you got it backwards, its all the other games that give you the illusion of freedom, but invariably put you on invisible railtracks.

Halo ? Halo 2 ? Half Life ? Half Life 2 ? Deus Ex ? Doom 3 ? Sin ? ..."insert here your favorite shooter, rpg etc."
No other game has ever ever given you the freedom and interctivity with the environment that Crysis gives the player.

[stabiz]

Goldorak, are you employed by Crytek?

Oh, and using a silencer does not turn a assault rifle into a beebee gun.

The only thing that is better in Crysis than in Farcry are the graphics. You cant argue that. The AI in Farcry tries to flank, as does the AI in Crysis. The stury is retarded in Farcry, as in Crysis.

Two things impressed me with Cysis. The first is the destruction of the enviroment, and secondly the grenades. Throwing a grenade has never been more fun.

PS: To say the game is wide open is a lie, the borders are clear and easy to see. In Farcry I actually got lost one time. (And reviews indicate the later levels are even more restricted than the early ones)

[Dowly]

Just tried Crysis on low settings and it was quite unplayable to be honest. Not because it was ugly (well, it kinda was), but because I had to ~10-15m away from a building for it to show up. :doh:

And like Stabiz said, the "freedom" in Crysis is just an illusion, you walk in a pipe like in most games, a big pipe, but still.

You got to be kidding, you have a freaking whole island at your disposal.
How much more freedom do you need ? :rotfl:


Umm.... no you havent. The area of the level is bordered with unclimbable cliffs and if you try to swim around the island, the game kills you. :roll:

I actually went off the intended path in the demo and there was nothing in the forest, no grass, no foliage, no rock just trees and I bet if I launch the sandbox editor and check the retail's Island level, it's the same thing.


RETAIL ISLAND

See those red & black walls on top of the cliffs? They are invisible walls. :)
http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee274/Finnish_Ferret/Crysis1.jpg

And this is how it looks like in a place you shouldnt be able to go.
http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee274/Finnish_Ferret/Crysis2.jpg


Oh yeh, and yes the whole island is now modelled on every level, just to make sure your PC has to process dozens of square miles of island you will never get to. :roll:

[FAdmiral]

INCREDIBLE !!! I just received the Dec. 2007 #169 issue of
P.C. Gamer. It has a 7 page article on what this game truly
has in the way of everything. Up to now I had only scratched the
surface on what it has waiting for us. UNBELIEVEABLE !! This will
be truly the game of the year with a rating of 98% (highest I have
ever seen) AND the amazing Sandbox 2 Editor which will mod everything from maps to how you can play. Hello Crysis, Goodbye
COD4....

JIM

Edit: BTW, I have spent hours combing that island and I have NEVER seen a bare grassey spot that big.

[Dowly]

Well now you saw it. :rotfl:

[stabiz]

I dont see why people are making this a COD4 vs Crysis? Its all over several gaming-sites I visit.

Oh, I agree Crysis is better than COD4, by the way, but both are heavily flawed. And a 98% rating is just plain wrong.

[SUBMAN1]

Hmm - some of those walls I was able to get up with the power setting. I climbed up, and snuck behind enemy positions by jumping. The demo was supposed to keep you from getting the whole game, but people hacked it obviously.

Anyway, yes - the freedom in Crysis is apparent. You can swim around all the baddies or you can try alternate paths. I never seem to take the most obvouis path when I play things, and this game allows you to experiment - which I did.

They have to stop you from traveling in certain situations, like any other game, or scripts / video will not execute right, so they funnel you. Outside of these minor funnels which only happen a couple times, you are good to go wherever you want.

-S

[FAdmiral]

Checkpoints (saves the game when you reach them) are placed towards your objective. I have just tried different paths from one checkpoint to another.
I tried 4 and reached it by using 3. The 4th one had multiple bad guys & I got
killed. It looks like checkpoints can be reached by many routes...

JIM

[FAdmiral]

As for the modders of this game, they are already very busy at their tasks:

http://www.crymod.com/portal.php


If you don't see what you want in the out of the box version, just wait:
the modders will make it happen !!


JIM

[FAdmiral]

I just bought this game today. Installing it now and will be getting ready
for some great battles. COD4 will go on the shelf till they get it right.
By right, I mean, maps 10x larger and driveable land, air & sea vehicles.

JIM

[FAdmiral]

Well now you saw it. :rotfl:

Well, actually I saw big grass areas like that in the Bnocs (low setting)
BUT, when I approached, the high foliage sprang into view. I saw later
on a CrysisMod website that you don't see stuff at distance with low
graphic setting. When you move towards that way, it becomes visible....

JIM

[Dowly]

Well now you saw it. :rotfl:
Well, actually I saw big grass areas like that in the Bnocs (low setting)
BUT, when I approached, the high foliage sprang into view. I saw later
on a CrysisMod website that you don't see stuff at distance with low
graphic setting. When you move towards that way, it becomes visible....

JIM

Yes, that's what the low settings do. But in that shot, you can see the little grass on the distance, the same that is near the camera on the shot. ;)

[Dowly]

Uh oh...

http://www.sweclockers.com/recension/?id=5988

TRANSLATION

Around 3 years ago Far Cry was launched by the same developers behind Crysis: Germany based Crytek. The Game was an average FPS that didn’t bring anything new to the genre, but was still a pleasant game, playable at least one time. Back then just like now, graphics were at the center of things.


Far Cry had beautiful environments that few computers at the time could handle. Hardware websites and enthusiasts quickly made Far Cry a benchmark standard for all types of hardware. A little later however, something happened which became the beginning of this whole story. AMD launched their 64-bit processor Athlon 64 and were hunting for sales arguments.


Due to the fact that AMD were the first to create 64-bit processors in regular home PC’s, there was almost no software that supported this new technology. This made it difficult for AMD to convince the consumers of the advantages of more “bits in the processor”. AMD was simply forced to convince developers to use the new technology, and one of the goals of this campaign was a 64-bit version of Far Cry.


Apparently AMD managed to “convince” Crytek. About the same time that Microsoft released their 64-bit version of Windows XP a patch popped up on AMD’s website promising gold to those with the courage to buy a new processor and upgrade their operating system. The advantages of “more bits in the processor” was demonstrated with snapshots showing more badass explosions and more detailed textures. Isn’t 64-bit wonderful? (http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/DevelopWithAMD/0,,30_2252_875_10543,00.html)

For those of us with our feet on the ground, these arguments were not as convincing. 64-bit in fact has nothing to do with bigger textures. To be able to adress more memory and have access to wider registers can make it easier to handle large sums of data, but at the time no personal computer was even close to breaking the 32-bit barrier. Cut short, this PR scam had nothing to do with “more bits in the processor”.


Back to present day and the launch of the Crysis Demo. Just like last time an enormous amount of hype was built up, largely about the astounding graphics. By using Microsofts latest graphics standard Directx 10, which is only available in Windows Vista, the developers have been able to push the boundaries of what is possible with todays hardware. That is the official version at least.


The truth is the true purpose of Directx 10 is to make developing easier by cleaning up registers and supplying new useful functions. This however is nothing the consumer notices, and therefore Microsoft must point out Directx 10’s “graphical improvements” in order to convince gamers to upgrade to Windows Vista. In reality DX10 does not mean drastically improved visual effects, at least not with todays graphics cards. There is a certain repetition of history to be seen here, right?


And then a few days after the Crysis demo launched the bad news was announced. When using Directx 9 you can’t run the game at “very high” settings, which drastically improves the visual experience from lower settings. A member at Crysis-online (http://www.crysis-online.com/forum/index.php?topic=11837.0#msg203789) poked around a bit with the demo files and found a way to get almost exactly the same visual quality (http://www.gamespot.com/features/6182140/index.html) with Directx 9. This meant that the developers (Crytek) had purposefully worsened the Directx 9 setting to make Microsofts new technology appear superior. Apparently Crytek dosen’t mind lying to their customers.

This is not all. Crytek CEO Cevat Yerli was interviewed a while back by Shacknews (http://www.shacknews.com/featuredarticle.x?id=639) and talked about how beneficial multi-core processors would be for the game. Finally those who had spent big bucks on quad-cores would earn their increased perfomance.“Multi-core will be beneficial in the experience, particularly in faster but also smoother framerates. […] We recommend quad core over higher clock.”
Quad core was the advice Crytek had to give to hopeful gamers saving money for upgrades. What was the reality again? The reality is that four cores gives zero, I repeat, ZERO perfomance increase (http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,2209093,00.asp?kc=ETRSS02129TX1K0000532) in Crysis. And thats not all, because once again the 64-bit question has to be adressed. Cevat Yerli was also interviewed by Gamespot (http://www.gamespot.com/news/6180628.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=multimodule&tag=multimodule;picks;title;6) among others praising “more bits in the processor”:“I would recommend gamers run 64-bit only under very high configurations.”

Better Performance at higher graphics settings? This was not the reality. The truth is that 64-bit improves NOTHING (http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=468) in Crysis!

This is of course the demo version we are talking about, but everything points toward the full version of the game functioning the same. Is this the kind of behaviour us enthusiasts and gamers will have to live with in the future? Game developers being a part of the marketing of new technology and hardware, no longer concentrating on delivering the best possible product but convincing consumers to open their wallets and unnecessarily upgrading their systems? I assume money has exchanged hands more than once behind the scenes, and who the suspects are need not even be mentioned. As a true gamer and hardware enthusias i declare that Crysis makes me sick.

:roll:

[FAdmiral]

Thats Funny !! Crysis looks very good to me. It's COD4 that makes me SICK....

JIM

[Dowly]

Sir, I think you're disgust for COD4 has been discussed numerous times already. I just happened to come across this news and decided to share it with you ppl. I love Crysis and I love COD4, both are excellent in their own way. The post was in no means intended to diss Crysis. :shifty:

[stabiz]

The admiral is going crazy?:hmm:

[Dowly]

The admiral is going crazy?:hmm:

Not more than any of us. Just another day at SubSim. :p

[Dowly]

Whoever missed the blood decals & ragdoll physics on the dead enemies, there's a script for it.

http://crymod.com/filebase.php?fileid=345&sid=2f5c3dc8ed4bf474c48a07ee5ba7a2a4

This modified .lua file must be inserted in gamedata.pak under scripts\Entities\actor and replace the original file. Make a backup...



Description:
This .lua file enables ragdoll and blood effects.
This way bullet decals and ragdoll physics are enabled on dead enemies.

Features:

Enable ragdoll physics on dead enemies
Enable blood decals

Installation guide:


Go to your Crysis game folder -> Electronic Arts -> Crytek -> Crysis -> Game ->
Copy the downloaded script into gamedata.pak - Location:
(scripts\Entities\actor).

NOTE:If you use modified object files, scripts, textures the cheat protection won't let you play.
Therefor make sure that you have a backup of gamedata.pak

[FAdmiral]

For those of you that have DLed the demo and played it over & over
(till sick of it) but can't quite afford the full game, I have good news.
The modders & mapmakers have created about 6+ different demo maps
that you can play too. Some are the same island map as stock but with
more AI bots to contend with. Other have altered the map somewhat for
a different experience. All in all, you can play these different maps & settings
for completely new experiences without having to spend the $$$ for the full game...

JIM

[Dowly]

So, what's up with the people at EA & CryTek??? They have now banned the community of making a mod to re-enable the ragdoll physics & decals on dead bodies? :doh:

[NeonSamurai]

Perhaps they were concerned that the mod would raise their esrb rating due to additional gore from blood decals on dead bodies. But even if not so they are well in their legal rights to refuse to allow certain mods.

Heck in some countries (japan is a good example) modders often post mods annonimously to avoid legal prosecution by the game company, and potentialy even prison time. Modding commercial games is highly illegal.

As for microsoft, dx10 etc, yep not surprized, ms has been doing every dirty trick in the book to try to force gamers to switch to vista, including making many of their more recent releases vista only in spite of the game using dx9. Unfortunatly this is not entirely new, nvidia has been advertising in game intros for a while now (and ATI though less so), and has gotten game developers to "tune" their games for nvidia cards. As for vista, i think ms is learning the hard way, all its vista only games have sold poorly (no surprise since most gamers i know dont want to touch vista), they may even be forced in the end to release dx10 for XP.

[Dowly]

Yeh, I know they have the right to do that. But it just sucks. I mean, they even left a teaser for the players on how the bulletwounds would look like in the body (just shoot an hat off an soldier and shoot the hat). As for the esbr rating, I cant see how it would be affected by a mod. Besides, IIRC, Crysis is already rated as an adult.

[NeonSamurai]

Hmm well here its rated M for mature not AO for adults only, and since it sounds like this feature is included in the game just not enabled (like hot coffee for GTA SA) It could affect the game's rating, and in the states developers do not want to go beyond M or they will not be able to easily distribute and sell their game retail, as most major chains refuse to carry AO titles, particularly anything having to do with sex (not that this game has any, but the added gore could push its rating into the AO catagory for "prolonged scenes of intense violence").

The last thing EA wants to be forced into doing is what Rockstar had to do due to the hot coffee mod, ie pull all the games off the shelves and remove the code/images from the game, then rerelease, that would cost a fortune. So I can see why this mod would make them nervous.

But ya I agree, it sucks. It also annoys me that most stores won't carry AO titles, and that depicting sex is viewed by it would seem alot of people to be far worse then depicting violence (which doesnt make the slighest bit of sense to me).

Btw ESRB definition for Intense Violence: Graphic and realistic-looking depictions of physical conflict. May involve extreme and/or realistic blood, gore, weapons, and depictions of human injury and death.

So having bullet wounds and rag doll effects may indeed push it over the edge.

[Dowly]

Ah, yes. My mistake, it's indeed rated M. :up:

The wierdest thing here is that FarCry, the last title from CryTek, had bulletholes & somekind of ragdoll physics on the bodies. Oh well, what can you do. Need to reinstall Crysis and have a look myself, the modding is quite noob-friendly in Crysis. Might be just an job of changing some materials of the flesh to for example a chicken's material as there's holes in dead chickens. ;)

[NeonSamurai]

From what I read at the crymod site it seems blood mods are perfectly acceptable, but ragdoll mods are not. It seems to be the main reason for dissalowing it is due to germany and its laws or something.

As for modding, ya it does look fairly simple, I was looking at it to mod the weapons and ai armor a bit. Mainly to get rid of the dual weilding for the pistol which i can't stand, also gona alter some of the ammo loads to be a little more fair (40 rounds for the shotgun and 30 for the sniper rifle is a bit light compared to the 300-1000 rounds for assault rifles and the minigun), plus i find it rather rediculous that the ai guys in the heavy armor can take over 1 30 round clip to the chest at 100m and still be walking around virtualy unharmed, and your guy in the ultra modern nano suit can get guned down in under a second on the harder modes, whats even worse is the AI nano suit guys which can take a rediculous beating compared to you, and their suits are suppost to be inferior copies, yet they can take over 1 gauss rifle shots to the head (sometimes 2). Oh well at least that tactical attachment is good for taking them down fast (about the only thing its good for that ive found) then you can run over and clock them with super strength.

The pack files are super easy to open and make, just unzip them, and zip and rename to pak. Way simpler then the o'l UT files which could make you want to pound you head into a desk trying to get them to unpack.

[Dowly]

From what I read at the crymod site it seems blood mods are perfectly acceptable, but ragdoll mods are not. It seems to be the main reason for dissalowing it is due to germany and its laws or something.

Yes, adding more blood is acceptable. But enabling the real bulletholes (and ragdolls) is banned.


Here's the discussion about it:
http://www.incrysis.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=15037

"Please respect Crytek & EA and do not post details of the tweak."

[NeonSamurai]

Ah thanks for the link :)

[Dowly]

Finally got around to finish this game. I'm happy to say I have only ONE complaint about this game instead of the many I've said before:

THIS IS A STINKING PILE OF POO :yep:

Now, off to play some real games that look equally good but have better gameplay, run smoother, last longer and have a better story.