plz plz plz release a patch immediately so that pirates cant play the mp game any more.
these pirates are just making me feel fool right now and they are enjoying the mp of the game with hacks :rant:


yes, that's true. i even had an issue that sayd that my serial was allready in use. i did not bought this game because of the mp but... pirates playing it for free???? i would like to have my money back, if it remains like that. are the pirates using my serial?
come on crytek, do something.
sold enough games for PC. what about a few hundreds of thound more?! MAKE THE DX11 PATCH!!!!

4 germans i found some amazing stuff:

http://inside-network.net/crysis-2-problemlosungen/

Hey guys!

I can finally play the game it seems. I bought my game through steam so this fix might not work for others. And second i just played for like 5 mins on ranked so i dont know if I just got really really lucky or if it really works. But this is how I did it.
1. Open steam library
2. Go to crysis2 -> right-click-> downloadable content
3. Go to local files
4. and hit " Verify integrity of game cache"

Thats all I did and I do not know if it works but try it out.

Thank you, just enjoyed my first time playing multiplayer

You are welcome my dear gaming opponent =)

PC gamers biched endlessly about the high requirements of the first game, and now they’re biching about the lack of them for this one.

can any one help me in this madness ...i installed the game twice and the game wont let me make a profile it has no defualt option ..when i try to play single player it crashes and says no users logged in error ..and when i try to play multi it gives me the check your network connection thing ...my connections fine and no i dont have a firewall on or antvirus....PLEASE ANYONE .....help!

Why the **** has nothing been done about the insane flickering with SLI & Crossfire yet.... **** sake.

PC gamers biched endlessly about the high requirements of the first game, and now they’re biching about the lack of them for this one.

No, they're not biching about it not having high requirements. They're biching about it not taking advantage of higher resources, when they're available.

Why the **** has nothing been done about the insane flickering with SLI & Crossfire yet.... **** sake.

Agreed. I know it has only been a few days, but at least a confirmation that it will be fixed would be appreciated. I don't consider "disable one GPU on your card" as an acceptable solution.

I have had an uncharacteristically high optimism for PC gaming this year, but this experience is truly undermining it. They charged console prices for this PC game and in the time spent trying to get things to work properly (not with a shifty "disable half of your processing power" option), I could have finished the console version and played enough multi-player to be tired of it, already. Instead, I'm still waiting to hear news from Crytek as to what's going to happen with the flickering issue.

I'm a software engineer, by profession. I know you can't expect an overnight solution and a certain amount of time is required to properly diagnose and resolve this sort of thing. But communication would be appreciated, beyond "yeah, we here this is an issue, so go follow this thread that tells you how to turn off half of your video card".

More, it baffles me how they made it through QA without the flickering being noticed, which leads me to suspect they did noticed it and dismissed it as not being a show-stopper, since it only affected PC players. I mean, seriously nobody in QA or even development at any time saw the flickering issue on any SLI configuration or any multi-GPU card (such as the Radeon 5xxx or 6xxx series)?

The anecdotal evidence growing online illustrates that this is not merely an edge-case problem. This is a common problem.

Tell me it'll be another week before it's fixed. Fine. But at least acknowledge it will be fixed (and that it wont' be fixed by disabling a GPU).

so, now crytek says that they never anounced a DX11 patch for crysis 2. but they also never denied it too. they were just waiting to launch the game to sell as many as possible and then after the first sale... (oh but we poor, poor crytek never anounced that we would lauch a DX11 patch. it's not our fault that someone else does the false marketing for us.)

this crysis 2 is a big disapointment to me and all High-end PC gamers.

As far as I know, they don't really use DX10, either, right? I must admit, I didn't pay attention to Crysis 2 until launch, because I chose to dismiss the title during the lead up. However, I was to understand that Crysis 2 is DX9 with merely rumors of DX11 down the pipe line (pretty much useless to announce that it might be out "down the pipeline", since I'm only going to play your game one time -- it's not like I'm going to play it all over again in two months just because it has DX11 finally).

Really, the game looks good, anyway. It's just a little disappointing when it's known as the title that is supposed to truly push the limits of high end rigs.

Come on Crytek, why the hell don't you say anything...
you're losing fans with this..

MAKE THE **** DX11 PATCH!!

I say it again,

MAKE THE **** DX11 PATCH!!

Thats my biggest concern, Ive never owned a computer game that limited you to only 3 preset choices for graphics.... My comp can run the game fine by motion blur makes the game unbearable to play for more then about 10 minutes...

If you've never played a game that limited you to only 3 preset choices, it means you have played very few games in your life. That also means you're not eligible to make comparison comments. As a consequence, you don't have the skills to judge a game like this.

Come on Crytek, why the hell don't you say anything...
you're losing fans with this..

MAKE THE **** DX11 PATCH!!

I say it again,

MAKE THE **** DX11 PATCH!!

Can you elaborate which advantages will bring DirectX 11 support for this game? Also, can you say which hardware do you use to play this game? Sorry dude, I don't want a game to play in three years like the first Crysis. I want a game to play now. The majority of people who are asking for DirectX 11 are people who don't even realize what the differences are. DirectX 11? What do you want? Tessellation? No thank you. It kills performance and the quality increase is minimal. Multithreading renderer? That's not specific to DirectX 11, even if DirectX 11 added specific APIs for that. This means it's already implemented. Compute shaders? Wow, another crappy feature ported from the GPGPU world. Killing performance to add more tasks to the GPU. Is this what you want? Come on.

advanced depth of field and tesselation, tesselation by the way can be adjusted via a slider in catalyst control centre so performance loss can be set at user level. Plus people like to benchmark hardware, crysis 1 is good for that, many want another dx11 bench, metro bench is good but Im certain a crysis2 dx11 bench would be better on the eyes and be a good for setting WR's.

Really, the game looks good, anyway. It's just a little disappointing when it's known as the title that is supposed to truly push the limits of high end rigs.

I don't know you, but when I buy an high end system, I buy it to obtain high end performance. Not to kill it with stupid unoptimized games. Surely I don't spend 3000€ to push its limits with a game that runs at 30 fps.
I own an high end system and all I want is to be able to play at 60fps. Crysis 2 delivers this kind of performance with amazing graphics. All that I want.

advanced depth of field and tesselation, tesselation by the way can be adjusted via a slider in catalyst control centre so performance loss can be set at user level. Plus people like to benchmark hardware, crysis 1 is good for that, many want another dx11 bench, metro bench is good but Im certain a crysis2 dx11 bench would be better on the eyes

This is a game, not a benchmark. People who was expecting a benchmark, I suggest you to buy a 3D Mark 2011 license. Games are made to be played, not to benchmark hardware. Who cares.
Another game to play in three years like the first Crysis? No, thank you.

but if it ran at 30fps it would push card makers to make better hardware, stop being a **** fool man.

Ive got a 3dmark11 professional key that I won on guru3d's comp

Thats my biggest concern, Ive never owned a computer game that limited you to only 3 preset choices for graphics.... My comp can run the game fine by motion blur makes the game unbearable to play for more then about 10 minutes...

If you've never played a game that limited you to only 3 preset choices, it means you have played very few games in your life. That also means you're not eligible to make comparison comments. As a consequence, you don't have the skills to judge a game like this.

Really? And what PC games have you played that only gave you 3 preset choices? I too have not encontered this in playing PC games for the last 8 years (and yes I have played a lot). Your reply is absolutely ridiculous!

I think we shouldn't cry as hell about the pc-version. Instead of we should say thanks to EA for the time Crytek would have needed to develop a good PC adaption. //sv_sarcasm 0

Don't think we should blame Crytek...

Crytek.. please, make fast!!! Can't wait much longer but I'm trying xD .

PC gamers biched endlessly about the high requirements of the first game, and now they’re biching about the lack of them for this one.
Too true... I have 6 gigs of ram and an Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU P8700 @ 2.53GHz (2 CPUs), and I still play on advanced graphics becaues i get the best framerate (35 fps as opposed to 14)
mjordan is right about people treating this GAME like a benchmark.
It's still way ahead of its time and at least they compressed it so people without 3000$ PCs can play them.

-Unfortunately the multiplayer has been down for 2 days in a row...

Really? And what PC games have you played that only gave you 3 preset choices? I too have not encontered this in playing PC games for the last 8 years (and yes I have played a lot). Your reply is absolutely ridiculous!

From 2007 to today, I have bought more than 50 games. Many of them give more than 3 options but with the classical illusion for the typical brain dead PC gamer: "Very high" that is completely equivalent to "High", with no increase in overall quality but with big performance hits.
I can list you a bunch of games with just few settings: Stranglehold (you can change only the resolution), Darksiders (you can change only the resolution), Street Fighter IV (useless settings with no difference), Devil May Cry 4 (again, fake settings), the first edition of Unreal Tournament III (few settings, you need to use the INI to obtain a performance loss without increasing anything in quality), Split/Second (two settings without differences). The first Assassin's Creed gave no advantage when running under DirectX 10 compared to DirectX 9. Far Cry 2, instead, was a joke: DirectX 9 quality was even better than DirectX 10. Even the first Crysis have few advantages in the highest settings compared to the performance loss. Does this sound ridicolous? Ridicolous is someone who asks for things he doesn't even understand. Exactly like you. Try to play at least 10 games per year before trying to judge a blockbuster like this. I repeat. If you have not encountered such games in 8 years, try to spend more money in games and less in hardware. You haven't played sufficient games to be able to judge a game like Crysis 2. Now, tell me. Which game you have played in 8 years that you can compare to Crysis 2, graphically speaking? Come on, don't be ridiculous.

but if it ran at 30fps it would push card makers to make better hardware, stop being a **** fool man.

Ive got a 3dmark11 professional key that I won on guru3d's comp

So, basically, you're asking for a game to play in the next three years with the hardware available in three years? Basically you want to buy expensive hardware NOW to play three years old games?
Let's make games that runs at 30 fps on a current 500$ card to advance the technology behind graphic cards?
I don't know if I have to cry or laugh at such stupidity.

Really, the game looks good, anyway. It's just a little disappointing when it's known as the title that is supposed to truly push the limits of high end rigs.

I don't know you, but when I buy an high end system, I buy it to obtain high end performance. Not to kill it with stupid unoptimized games. Surely I don't spend 3000€ to push its limits with a game that runs at 30 fps.
I own an high end system and all I want is to be able to play at 60fps. Crysis 2 delivers this kind of performance with amazing graphics. All that I want.

I'd love to play at 60fps, but that's a little difficult when the game requires me to disable one of two GPUs so I'm not staring at a 30" strobe-light. Or, alternatively, to play at lower than desired or non-native (2560x1600) resolutions.

I'm not sure where you're making a differentiation here. Do you not want the most incredible experience that your equipment can provide? Nobody is saying that unoptimized and slow (but resource-pegging none-the-less) is the preferred option to optimized and under-utilizing of resources.

What people want is something that really pushes the limits. That sets a standard of "this is why we play PC games". Ideally, that means optimized and therefore capable of achieving great results if you throw more power at it. Crysis 2 may provide amazing graphics, but it also provides ridiculous hurdles. You know, like disabling your entire second GPU to overcome major flickering problems, which therefore reduces overall performance. I don't think asking to be able to utilize your entire card to it's limit is asking for too much.

but if it ran at 30fps it would push card makers to make better hardware, stop being a **** fool man.

Ive got a 3dmark11 professional key that I won on guru3d's comp

So, basically, you're asking for a game to play in the next three years with the hardware available in three years? Basically you want to buy expensive hardware NOW to play three years old games?
Let's make games that runs at 30 fps on a current 500$ card to advance the technology behind graphic cards?
I don't know if I have to cry or laugh at such stupidity.

Why are you going to cry or laugh at such "stupidity"? What you've just described is how the PC gaming industry has been for almost thirty years. Software expands to increase the demands which are answered by an increase in hardware. It's what drives hardware sales. Not the other way around. This is nothing new. You can laugh or cry at it, but it is the historic behavior of the market for nearly my entire life.

I'd love to play at 60fps, but that's a little difficult when the game requires me to disable one of two GPUs so I'm not staring at a 30" strobe-light. Or, alternatively, to play at lower than desired or non-native (2560x1600) resolutions.

I'm not sure where you're making a differentiation here. Do you not want the most incredible experience that your equipment can provide? Nobody is saying that unoptimized and slow (but resource-pegging none-the-less) is the preferred option to optimized and under-utilizing of resources.

What people want is something that really pushes the limits. That sets a standard of "this is why we play PC games". Ideally, that means optimized and therefore capable of achieving great results if you throw more power at it. Crysis 2 may provide amazing graphics, but it also provides ridiculous hurdles. You know, like disabling your entire second GPU to overcome major flickering problems, which therefore reduces overall performance. I don't think asking to be able to utilize your entire card to it's limit is asking for too much.


Flickering with SLI systems is a bug. A bug that will be addressed in the next patch. It has nothing to do with asking for DirectX 11. And it has nothing to do with people saying Crysis 2 is a dumbed down game. Crysis 2 already push my GTX 580 to the limit: it plays at 60 fps on a 1920x1200 monitor, it is the only game that consumes 380W while playing, it is the only game that has such graphics. None of my 50+ games (apart Crysis 1) can compare to this game, graphically. So the game implements now all the things you're asking. All you have to do is playing it instead of wasting time on useless complaints.

Why are you going to cry or laugh at such "stupidity"? What you've just described is how the PC gaming industry has been for almost thirty years. Software expands to increase the demands which are answered by an increase in hardware. It's what drives hardware sales. Not the other way around. This is nothing new. You can laugh or cry at it, but it is the historic behavior of the market for nearly my entire life.

I've been a PC gamer for about 20+ years (and still I am). Many years ago the PC gaming worked like this: you buy an high end card only to discover it's not high end at all. I was a "proud" owner of a Geforce TI 500. Top of the line card.
At that times, I bought that card, paying it something like the equivalent of todays 600$, to discover it can't play Doom 3 at the highest settings possible. In reality, that card struggled to play it at medium settings. Doom 3 is a game released in 2004. At its full settings, it requires something like 1GB of video memory. It's abysmal for the times the game has been released. Is this the "good" PC history?
I don't want to change my hardware every 4 months to play old games, like before in the PC history. Ask to someone who have bought a modern (for the times) 486DX2 at 66Mhz to play the first Quake. Ask what he tought after he discovered that game needed a Pentium class processor, three months after his purchase.
This is the PC history I don't want to repeat. This is the PC history that killed PC gaming. It was a suicide. And this the history that explains why people moved in mass to the console world.
I buy high end hardware to have high end performances.
This is not only my wish. It's the wish of the industry. When PC games are more "human", people have more money to buy games. That's why the industry has taken this road: because they noticed people buy more games if they make games that can run on the majority of hardware already installed on the planet. Asking to buy a new card (when you've bought yours last year) to play a game leads to nothing. People won't buy new cards and won't buy new games. In practice, it seems you don't know PC history very well. Games, today, must be much more incremental in hardware requirements. This is the right path. Without this approach, PC gaming will definitely die.