I'm running one Radeon HD 4870 X2, which runs at about 52 degrees on idle. Now Crysis 1, run at almost maxed settings brings up the temperature to almost 80 degrees. Crysis 2 barely pushes it past 60 because of the **** graphics of the game.
Don't get me wrong, I still think that this is a great game... I just wish that Crytek actually worked on it so that it would give current PCs a run for their money. Oh well, let's hope that there will be an update soon that will alow us PC users to max-out the graphics and really put cryengine 3 through its paces.

People seem to think i do not understand the topic on which i made my OP.
Well if you have watched ANY of the CryEngine 3's "tech" demos you will see the only thing it is optimised for is the Xbox!
All the tech demos have been revolving around the 360 and the ps3 was just tagged along to appeal to a larger demographic.

Speaking of optimisation of the engine. CryEngine 2 was well optimised for Crysis in a way that it pushed the graphical boundary ever so further - giving the high end PC's of 2007 run for their money. However, wheather you think CE2 was optimised for PC's is debatable. Many will agree that it was poorly coded in some parts causing bigger preformace drops that it had to.

And if you try to tell me that console can handle AA you are clearly either joking or being pants-on-head retarded. The max AA they can do is probably 2 and not even on all textures.

And yes the textures are atleast half the size of Crysis' - there was even a post about this! Look at the grass for example - it is nothing like the lush, colourfull and 3D grass of CE2.

The render distance is very low also - have you noticed how barrels, wall textures and player models load only when you are a certain distance away? Yes thats because consoles cant handle that either and it is pointing into the direction of C2/CE2 being optimised for consoles!

For everyone who says CE3 is not optimised for consoles - what proof do you have? Have the devs relased any support for DX11? Have they even mentioned working on higher-res texture? Have they given a sandbox editor? The answer to all these questions is NO.
Best example of C2 not being on par with C1 graphic wise is the fact i can run C2 on "Extreme" with no preformance drop on my 6870. However it struggles to keep 45 FPS on C1 on very high -(1280x1024).

Please i am not trolling and if you think i am and you say i know nothing you are just trying to deny the facts infront of you

People seem to think i do not understand the topic on which i made my OP.
Well if you have watched ANY of the CryEngine 3's "tech" demos you will see the only thing it is optimised for is the Xbox!
All the tech demos have been revolving around the 360 and the ps3 was just tagged along to appeal to a larger demographic.

Speaking of optimisation of the engine. CryEngine 2 was well optimised for Crysis in a way that it pushed the graphical boundary ever so further - giving the high end PC's of 2007 run for their money. However, wheather you think CE2 was optimised for PC's is debatable. Many will agree that it was poorly coded in some parts causing bigger preformace drops that it had to.

And if you try to tell me that console can handle AA you are clearly either joking or being pants-on-head retarded. The max AA they can do is probably 2 and not even on all textures.

And yes the textures are atleast half the size of Crysis' - there was even a post about this! Look at the grass for example - it is nothing like the lush, colourfull and 3D grass of CE2.

The render distance is very low also - have you noticed how barrels, wall textures and player models load only when you are a certain distance away? Yes thats because consoles cant handle that either and it is pointing into the direction of C2/CE2 being optimised for consoles!

For everyone who says CE3 is not optimised for consoles - what proof do you have? Have the devs relased any support for DX11? Have they even mentioned working on higher-res texture? Have they given a sandbox editor? The answer to all these questions is NO.
Best example of C2 not being on par with C1 graphic wise is the fact i can run C2 on "Extreme" with no preformance drop on my 6870. However it struggles to keep 45 FPS on C1 on very high -(1280x1024).

Please i am not trolling and if you think i am and you say i know nothing you are just trying to deny the facts infront of you

+1 but really, Some people just won't see it. It is like blind fanboysm. I like the game,but it could have been better if it was only for pc in 1000 ways ( Better AI , better gfx, better physics, story that continues and not starts fresh so everybody (consoles) can understand the storyline etc etc.)

codename I couldnt agree more with you, thats why I have a feeling we wont see editor, dx10/11 or 64 bit support until an Expansion to crysis 2 for the PC. I just dont see a "god" patch happening. But I am sure crytek is aware that ALOT of customers on PC is very upset. If they arnt aware then they have some serious issues. But reason I think expansion is due to crysis warhead and crytek not giving any information what so ever.

How can u say that Crysis 2 is a consoll port when all games are made on a PC? You don't understand what you are talking about Codename205. And all game engine are also made on PC before it ported over to a consoll, so check ur facts before u **** ur leg again. You can't make a game on Xbox 360 or PS3, but it would be more correct if u said like this. Crytek and EA is more focused on consoll then pc and gives us crapy graphics with bugs.

How can u say that Crysis 2 is a consoll port when all games are made on a PC? You don't understand what you are talking about Codename205. And all game engine are also made on PC before it ported over to a consoll, so check ur facts before u **** ur leg again. You can't make a game on Xbox 360 or PS3, but it would be more correct if u said like this. Crytek and EA is more focused on consoll then pc and gives us crapy graphics with bugs.

What he means is that the engine was made to max the consoles out. No the pc. That they made sure the consoles memory didn't run out and they didn't really improve the pc version, we have lots more memory however they really didn't optimise it for the pc. Just a PORT=> They made the engine for consoles, the backbone speaks CONSOLE and they optimised it for CONSOLES changing basically Nothing for pc. => a port.


:)

How can u say that Crysis 2 is a consoll port when all games are made on a PC? You don't understand what you are talking about Codename205. And all game engine are also made on PC before it ported over to a consoll, so check ur facts before u **** ur leg again. You can't make a game on Xbox 360 or PS3, but it would be more correct if u said like this. Crytek and EA is more focused on consoll then pc and gives us crapy graphics with bugs.


you clearly do not understand what PORT MEANS!

yes all games are MADE on the PC. But they are made for a specific system - e.g Xbox 360.

The programmers then take the code - to save money, and time - and adjust it to work with the PC OS. It produces an inferior version as there are system bottlenecks - even though PC's is much wider than any console.

Why is it cheaper to use already-made code?
Well first of all you dont have to wright it out from scratch - you have a base on which you can work the game up from making the process much much faster at the cost of the final product like i said before.

Portions of the code can even be translated using specific translators - depends what the system uses - to save time even further and cut the cost drastically. This is why C1 was so advanced - because all of it was done FOR THE PC. PC was the main platform AND NOTHING ELSE! Also Crytek had almost unlimited time to make it

while this is still in my head i must mention it.

if this is not a console port - tell me - jsut tell me why there is no piracy protection such as SecuROM or why there is no anti cheat such a Punkbuster?
if C2 was aimed at the PC those two would be top-noch! Trust me!

PC devs know about piracy and a system not being protected is just VERY SUSPICIOUS

1-Crysis 2 was made simultaneously GROUND UP ON EVERY PLATFORM. There is no such thing as porting on CryEngine 3. It's a big key feature.



LOL you see what you just said there.. yeah this KEY FEATURE that is only a selling point to the people using the SDK to make their games. It saves them time from having to port the game from their lead platform. Time saved = less pent = more monies for them.

But what happens when you make all 3 versions at once? Yeah the PC version is identical to the Xbox version.

Sure it's not a port in the literal use of the word, but what do you call it then? I call it a rip-off.

Ask Crytek CEO Cevat Yerli what he thinks of console-tech. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVsT4D2_VTI&feature=player_embedded

Cevat Yerli interview you posted=OLD. I think near everyone's seen it lol.

I never said it wasn't made without limitations. PC graphics (the actual ones to exceed the console graphics immensely) are through DX11 which is going to be given when it's done (there's less than 16 ms of DX11 for Crytek to work with. Simple). I simply proved it's NOT a console port. Nor is it a PC port.

Porting on the CryEngine 3, I say again, HAS NO NECESSITY to be possible. You call it a rip-off? I call it a multiplatform game simple. Plus, FYI, Crytek managed to squeeze in a few PC specific features in terms of graphics that consoles can't handle like specific water reflections, certain particles, and etc. They didn't finish putting ALL of the PC specific graphics in. On CryEngine 3, they finish the game first, then work on giving exlucive features separately (though they didn't have time to complete this due to EA's funky release date and thus they must finish through patches and updates). I HAVE TO KEEP explaining all this to idiots like you because you people don't use your **** brain >_<"

while this is still in my head i must mention it.

if this is not a console port - tell me - jsut tell me why there is no piracy protection such as SecuROM or why there is no anti cheat such a Punkbuster?
if C2 was aimed at the PC those two would be top-noch! Trust me!

PC devs know about piracy and a system not being protected is just VERY SUSPICIOUS


ARE YOU STUPID? Do you THINK Crytek likes the fact that there's POOR piracy protection? They **** hate it. Don't even bring that up LMFAO, they care way more than any PC gamer. So stfu lol. NO DEVELOPER would want their blockbuster action game to be prone to full piracy. All that happened was this game had REALLY **** POOR piracy protection and when the leak came out, that tool to allow for automatic multiplayer access was included.

You guys keep complaining about pirates, DON'T **** WORRY. Crytek is DEFINATELY trying to fix the issue and is DEFINATLEY trying to keep them offline.

Also, SecuROM kinda svcks now so I'm guessing Crytek is going for a new type of DRM. As for Punkbuster, that also svcks. So they are making their own anti-cheat (which is why it's in the first stages. It's not a complete anti-cheat, but ****, it works GOOD at the current moment).

The illiteracy of the OP is astonishing.

1-Crysis 2 was made simultaneously GROUND UP ON EVERY PLATFORM. There is no such thing as porting on CryEngine 3. It's a big key feature.



LOL you see what you just said there.. yeah this KEY FEATURE that is only a selling point to the people using the SDK to make their games. It saves them time from having to port the game from their lead platform. Time saved = less pent = more monies for them.

But what happens when you make all 3 versions at once? Yeah the PC version is identical to the Xbox version.

Sure it's not a port in the literal use of the word, but what do you call it then? I call it a rip-off.

Ask Crytek CEO Cevat Yerli what he thinks of console-tech. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVsT4D2_VTI&feature=player_embedded

Cevat Yerli interview you posted=OLD. I think near everyone's seen it lol.

I never said it wasn't made without limitations. PC graphics (the actual ones to exceed the console graphics immensely) are through DX11 which is going to be given when it's done (there's less than 16 ms of DX11 for Crytek to work with. Simple). I simply proved it's NOT a console port. Nor is it a PC port.

Porting on the CryEngine 3, I say again, HAS NO NECESSITY to be possible. You call it a rip-off? I call it a multiplatform game simple. Plus, FYI, Crytek managed to squeeze in a few PC specific features in terms of graphics that consoles can't handle like specific water reflections, certain particles, and etc. They didn't finish putting ALL of the PC specific graphics in. On CryEngine 3, they finish the game first, then work on giving exlucive features separately (though they didn't have time to complete this due to EA's funky release date and thus they must finish through patches and updates). I HAVE TO KEEP explaining all this to idiots like you because you people don't use your **** brain >_<"

"Crytek managed to squeeze in a few PC specific features in terms of graphics that consoles can't handle like specific water reflections, certain particles, and etc. "

Wow. For real? Squeezed in? Are you trying to prove my point further?
We as PC gamers are not the bastard child here FYI. And please explain to me - in which freaking dimension of your mind is a 4 year old game allowed to look better? Well Crysis looks better than Crysis 2.
AND THERE IS A 2 FOR A REASON - ITS MORE ITS BIGGER!
However C2 (graphically and game physics wise) is the crippled version of C1

The illiteracy of the OP is astonishing.

im sorry if english isnt my 1st language

How can u say that Crysis 2 is a consoll port when all games are made on a PC? You don't understand what you are talking about Codename205. And all game engine are also made on PC before it ported over to a consoll, so check ur facts before u **** ur leg again. You can't make a game on Xbox 360 or PS3, but it would be more correct if u said like this. Crytek and EA is more focused on consoll then pc and gives us crapy graphics with bugs.


you clearly do not understand what PORT MEANS!

yes all games are MADE on the PC. But they are made for a specific system - e.g Xbox 360.

The programmers then take the code - to save money, and time - and adjust it to work with the PC OS. It produces an inferior version as there are system bottlenecks - even though PC's is much wider than any console.

Why is it cheaper to use already-made code?
Well first of all you dont have to wright it out from scratch - you have a base on which you can work the game up from making the process much much faster at the cost of the final product like i said before.

Portions of the code can even be translated using specific translators - depends what the system uses - to save time even further and cut the cost drastically. This is why C1 was so advanced - because all of it was done FOR THE PC. PC was the main platform AND NOTHING ELSE! Also Crytek had almost unlimited time to make it

Crysis 2 was made simultanously with all limitations in mind to ensure it is effectively and consistently functioning for all platforms equally, and thus after this, the polishing/finishing touches stages of game development will ensure that the more powerful platforms achieve the maximum features they were to originally get without any limiting factors. BUT FYI, Crytek didn't have time to implement such features to the strongest platform because EA didn't give them enough time thus Crytek must complete through patches and updates.

Crysis 1 is NOT THAT advanced. It was groundbreaking in 2007, but Crysis 2 on PC manages to actually be the same and better in every single thing compared to Crysis 1. The only issue is many textures are half the size of the first game (BUT DO NOTE that most of the textures are not bad at all and are actually equal quality to that of Crysis 1). Crysis 1 was simply BADLY OPTIMIZED and the jungle setting made it VERY graphical intensive. It also had bigger coreographed sandboxes (yes, Crysis 1 was linear to a degree). Crysis 2, I would say, achieves more than Crysis 1. IT BROUGHT the graphics of Crysis 1 (for the most part) TO CONSOLES, and it managed to achieve the same look with several improvements AND better optimization on PC. In addition, the PC will recieve DX11 showing how much superior it is to the first game. THAT is impressive. Oh yeah, and the second game also has GOOD multiplayer and a WELL WRITTEN story/INTENSE cinematic-like campaign (which was the aim for the first game but that was not achieved).

ALL CONSOLES HAVE NOT BEEN CREATED EQUAL FYI

And neither are games for them.
Please stop denying that this game was not optimised for the 360 - the evidence is overwhelming.

How about: Press start to continue
WTF?

OOOH, PRESS START TO CONTINUE DESTROYS EVERYTHING ABOUT CRYSIS 2. Come on...

ALL CONSOLES HAVE NOT BEEN CREATED EQUAL FYI

And neither are games for them.
Please stop denying that this game was not optimised for the 360 - the evidence is overwhelming.

How about: Press start to continue
WTF?

Are you actually taking the time to read what you are typing?

OOOH, PRESS START TO CONTINUE DESTROYS EVERYTHING ABOUT CRYSIS 2. Come on...

no but it gives away the fact that they did not even bother changing the freaking welcome screen - the very first thing that you are going to see when you launch the game!

this just shows they did not care for the PC version as such miniscule thing would have been changed - infact it would take a single coder less than 1 minute to find a fix!

the bad textures and lack of custom graphical options are just the final nail in the coffin of C2

LOL you see what you just said there.. yeah this KEY FEATURE that is only a selling point to the people using the SDK to make their games. It saves them time from having to port the game from their lead platform. Time saved = less pent = more monies for them.

But what happens when you make all 3 versions at once? Yeah the PC version is identical to the Xbox version.

Sure it's not a port in the literal use of the word, but what do you call it then? I call it a rip-off.

Ask Crytek CEO Cevat Yerli what he thinks of console-tech. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVsT4D2_VTI&feature=player_embedded[/quote]

Cevat Yerli interview you posted=OLD. I think near everyone's seen it lol.

I never said it wasn't made without limitations. PC graphics (the actual ones to exceed the console graphics immensely) are through DX11 which is going to be given when it's done (there's less than 16 ms of DX11 for Crytek to work with. Simple). I simply proved it's NOT a console port. Nor is it a PC port.

Porting on the CryEngine 3, I say again, HAS NO NECESSITY to be possible. You call it a rip-off? I call it a multiplatform game simple. Plus, FYI, Crytek managed to squeeze in a few PC specific features in terms of graphics that consoles can't handle like specific water reflections, certain particles, and etc. They didn't finish putting ALL of the PC specific graphics in. On CryEngine 3, they finish the game first, then work on giving exlucive features separately (though they didn't have time to complete this due to EA's funky release date and thus they must finish through patches and updates). I HAVE TO KEEP explaining all this to idiots like you because you people don't use your **** brain >_<"[/quote]

"Crytek managed to squeeze in a few PC specific features in terms of graphics that consoles can't handle like specific water reflections, certain particles, and etc. "

Wow. For real? Squeezed in? Are you trying to prove my point further?
We as PC gamers are not the bastard child here FYI. And please explain to me - in which freaking dimension of your mind is a 4 year old game allowed to look better? Well Crysis looks better than Crysis 2.
AND THERE IS A 2 FOR A REASON - ITS MORE ITS BIGGER!
However C2 (graphically and game physics wise) is the crippled version of C1[/quote]

Wrong, I proved no point of yours. YOU HAVE no point, I have delivered a proper rebuttal proving you wrong, LEARN TO READ.

Like I said, USE YOUR **** BRAIN! Let me explain. They, SQUEEZED IN because they were RUSHING at the end of development when appraching release date. WHY DID THEY RUSH? Because EA didn't give them enough time. WHY DID EA DO THIS? Because they are douchebags and Crysis 2 is THEIR March 2011 Quarter 1 financial sales. DOES THIS MAKE SENSE? What, would you have rather Crytek squeezed NOTHING unique to the PC version? Right now they are completing the game with patches and updates, so whatever they couldn't implement WILL come, e.g. DIRECT X 11.

Also, you forgot that the 4 year old game Crysis DID NOT RUN WELL ON ANY RIG IN 2007. Crysis 2 is SMOOTH today and Crysis 1 JUST STARTED to get ran smoothly on many PCs. YOU GET THE PICTURE? It's a game that was meant for hardware in 2 years after its release, YOU IDIOT. Oh yeah, and Crysis came out VERY late in 2007, almost 2008, so TECHNICALLY it's not exactly a 4 year old game >_> Also, Crysis 2 improved on particles, water ripples, lighting, and shadows over the first game. THE ONLY DOWNGRADE I see from Crysis 1 to 2 are the textures, where most of them are flatish and half the size of Crysis 1. DO NOTE THOUGH that many of Crysis 2's textures are at the same level of standards to Crysis 1. If anything, Crysis 2 was made BETTER and MORE EFFICIENTLY than Crysis 1 because aside from textures, it retains/slightly improves on every graphical aspect in the first game yet with the ability to be PLAYED PROPERLY. I don't give a **** how good a game looks if I can't play it well. This is what I think about Crysis 1. Of course, I can play it properly now witha 6970, but I should've been able to play it easily from the get-go in 2007.

Also, stop focusing on the ugly in Crysis 2 and don't forget the beauty in it, you guys keep comparing a MODDED Crysis 1 MAXED OUT to an unmodded Crysis 2, where the Crysis 1 pic focuses on the beautiful areas and the Crysis 2 pic focuses on the ugly area.....AND SOMETIMES there's even a comparison to the PC Crysis 2 on LOWEST settigns....PATHETIC. Btw, Crysis 2 has A LOT LESS jagged edges than Crysis 1. I mean A LOT LOT LOT LESS.

ALL CONSOLES HAVE NOT BEEN CREATED EQUAL FYI

And neither are games for them.
Please stop denying that this game was not optimised for the 360 - the evidence is overwhelming.

How about: Press start to continue
WTF?

I NEVER EVER denied that you **** idiot. Re-read my post. Notice I mention limiting factors. Limiting factors=360's max potential holding back the other potential of the more powerful platforms. In this case, it's console limiting the PC's max. THEN i further talk about how during the final game development stages that features not put into PC due to limiting factors are thus implemented because in the final stages, development across platforms bridges and splits away, where the PC gets the features that it should have, but I further explain Crytek didn't have all the time to do this and must complete through patches and updates.

LEARN TO READ!

.

I don't think folks like him has the capacity to use reason.

Heheh some of these guys are so rabidly defending this game's faults I have to wonder if they have financial stake in EA or something. Or their dad works for Crytek? I mean it's baffling.

Nothing about Crysis 2 struck me as particularly great not the graphics, story or characterization, and that's aside from it's many bugs.

i hate consoles.making on of the most anticipated supposedly grapihcally dominant game a effin pile of septic residue.cryengine2 > cryengine 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WJG14uLA3k&hd=1

i hate consoles.making on of the most anticipated supposedly grapihcally dominant game a effin pile of septic residue.cryengine2 > cryengine 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WJG14uLA3k&hd=1

even thought its old i agree.

the fact is that they dont even bother to compare CryEngine 3 on PC vs CryEngine 2 on PC.

you cant compare CE2 on PC vs CE3 on PS3 or 360 - it is not a fair comparison and crytek did only show PC once in their tech demos this is pathetic