"it's not really very appealing to make the anology that we can be like cancer to EA"

hahahahah good one

but more like

"we can be the cure to the cancer that EA is currently suffering from" in other words the shareholders

I don't believe that a Dx11 patch is in the offing. If the pc version was going to support DX11 then it would have been supported from the get go ( like Crysis with DX10).

How many top flight games can you remember receiving a patch of this nature? Extremely few and they were patched when Dx11 was actually released and available.

Lastly Crytek themselves have said that an 'announcement' concerning the Dx11 patch will be made shortly. Now in my eye's if there was going to be an actual patch the above would read like 'the dx11 patch will be released shortly', all we are going to get is an announcement which I believe is corporate speak for damage limitation or as is more commonly known as is ****.

the perception of how well or how bad the company is doing is usually perceived by perception.

Wut?

Nah just kidding mate, there's always one eh?

But then Nvidia steps in with 2 million dollars with a deal regarding this game and I believe this was the real reason for the delay in the first place. EA/Crytek took Nvidia's 2 mil and said we can implement dx11 on the pc side and also optimize the game for FXAA.

So let me get this straight. You think they did all that for the price of may 5 to 8 resedential homes. That about what $2 Million would buy. In the entertainment industry, that isn't a whole lot of money at all. $50 Million, yeah thats money. Dude, face it, your making **** up. Quit acting like you know what your talking about.

But then Nvidia steps in with 2 million dollars with a deal regarding this game and I believe this was the real reason for the delay in the first place. EA/Crytek took Nvidia's 2 mil and said we can implement dx11 on the pc side and also optimize the game for FXAA.

So let me get this straight. You think they did all that for the price of may 5 to 8 resedential homes. That about what $2 Million would buy. In the entertainment industry, that isn't a whole lot of money at all. $50 Million, yeah thats money. Dude, face it, your making **** up. Quit acting like you know what your talking about.


I guess comprehensive reading skills is not one of your strong points. Anyway never mind that. If you look at this article here http://www.kitguru.net/components/graphic-cards/faith/nvidias-2-million-crysis/

it shows where nvidia paid them 2 million dollars regarding crysis 2

If you look at this article here http://www.kitguru.net/components/graphic-cards/faith/crysis-2-being-re-designed-for-gtx580-expect-delays/
dated in november you will see that crysis 2 was being redesigned for the gtx580 but we , know now that it was actually for the gtx590

now if you look at this article that came out yesterday http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-03-30-crysis-2-dx11-fix-in-2-3-months-report

you will clearly see that it says its going to take 2 to 3 months before dx11 patch is ready for crysis 2. Now if you read that article it also states this [/quote]According to an anonymous trusted source, Crytek only started to develop for DirectX 11 in November 2010 and was unable to get it ready in time for the game's launch earlier this month. [/quote]

now what a coincidence !!!!!!! that article says they started developing for direct x11 in nov. around the same time it was announced that the game was being redesigned for the gtx580.

In otherwords Nvidia paid crytek 2 million dollars for the tech demo version of crysis 2 and they were not able to finish it in time for crysis 2 release. I explained earlier as to why . I know reading is hard but unless you try you will never grow

$2 million is a substantial amount of money in the video game industry. Crysis was developed for around $22 million and most of the large AAA games now a days cost around $40-50 million total (development, marketing, production..etc). Also as that grant from Nvidia probably came with contractual obligations Crytek wants to stay on their good side. Nvidia is a much larger company than Crytek and tech manufacturers have a tendency to bring anything that displeases them to court.

Nvidia gave the money to Crytek in order to produce a game that would benefit from buying a 5XX series gpu, but currently most mid-range to lower end cards can max it at a decent framerate. This means that people will not be as likely to update their GPU's to play this game. Also as Nvidia marketed the game as DX 11 and even went so far as to print it on the boxes for the 560ti series; I am sure they were just as surprised as we where (and not in a good way) when it was released as DX 9 only.

There is nothing that benefits Crytek with not releasing a DX 11 patch. At worst Nvidia could sue them for breach of contract, and at best no tech company will offer any funding to Crytek in the future

My point, which I need to get to before I totally derail my train of thought, is that there will never be a united enough community for these sorts of grievances to be solved with purchasing power. The only real way hardcoe gamers as a group will ever be able to truly have our interests in quality trump pure capitalism is if we start becoming shareholders in these companies. That's the real way to vote with your wallet - mainly because shareholders actually vote on company decisions!
So there will never be a united enough community due to numbers to implement change through purchasing power but theres enough people rich enough or in sheer numbers to make an impact at boardroom level ? Flawed logic imo

It appears your theory is is pretty similar to the one that was leaked to Eurogamer.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-03-30-crysis-2-dx11-fix-in-2-3-months-report


So looks like Crytek was not planning on releasing DX11 from the start, but convinced to by a cash payment from nvidia. What PC gamers will be left 3 months from now. Stupid move Crytek.

It could be that EA told Crytek that Crysis 2 couldn't look better on the PC until after six months of its release. This way they could get their console money and after six months nobody would care if the PC looked better.

I really hope that Crytek releases their SDK so that an independent gamer could release a PC only game developed from their SDK with high-res textures and effects that the consoles couldn't handle. This would just show how far advanced the PC is from the consoles.

$2 million is a substantial amount of money in the video game industry. Crysis was developed for around $22 million and most of the large AAA games now a days cost around $40-50 million total (development, marketing, production..etc). Also as that grant from Nvidia probably came with contractual obligations Crytek wants to stay on their good side. Nvidia is a much larger company than Crytek and tech manufacturers have a tendency to bring anything that displeases them to court.

Nvidia gave the money to Crytek in order to produce a game that would benefit from buying a 5XX series gpu, but currently most mid-range to lower end cards can max it at a decent framerate. This means that people will not be as likely to update their GPU's to play this game. Also as Nvidia marketed the game as DX 11 and even went so far as to print it on the boxes for the 560ti series; I am sure they were just as surprised as we where (and not in a good way) when it was released as DX 9 only.

There is nothing that benefits Crytek with not releasing a DX 11 patch. At worst Nvidia could sue them for breach of contract, and at best no tech company will offer any funding to Crytek in the future

Do we know how many copies of the game Nvidia has purchased for it's GPU bundles?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0c3DAZ_O7U&feature=relmfu

Even if the somehow got the games for $20 a pop if Nvidia sells 50,000 of those cards then thats your 2 million right there.

But even if that is it you can bet your ass Nvidia thought it was buying a DX11 game when it placed the order. The question is I guess how was the issue resolved between Crytek and Nvidia? Or, is it resolved?

Maybe Nvidia did pay for DX11 and Crytek paid them off with afew free copies of the game. Who knows.

Just for the curious, what exactly is it, everyone believes DX11 is going to add to the game here?

I remember Warhead had the option to run in the newest DX at the time (i don't even remember which one, probably DX9 or 10) and all it ever did for me: was not look noticeably any better at all and more than halved my framerate on my old 8800GTX SLI setup.

Of the 97 games on my steam list just one (that i can tell) supports DX11, AVP. A FPS so terribly generic crysis 2 looks like half life 2 in terms of amaze in comparison. Suffice to say Ive played AVP with DX 11 and again noticed bugger all difference.

So what are these 'great' features of DX11 that everyones allegedly missing out on and up in arms about?

Just for the curious, what exactly is it, everyone believes DX11 is going to add to the game here?

I remember Warhead had the option to run in the newest DX at the time (i don't even remember which one, probably DX9 or 10) and all it ever did for me: was not look noticeably any better at all and more than halved my framerate on my old 8800GTX SLI setup.

Of the 97 games on my steam list just one (that i can tell) supports DX11, AVP. A FPS so terribly generic crysis 2 looks like half life 2 in terms of amaze in comparison. Suffice to say Ive played AVP with DX 11 and again noticed bugger all difference.

So what are these 'great' features of DX11 that everyones allegedly missing out on and up in arms about?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-6lRteSD2A this shows most peoples favorite DX11 feature toggled on and off. There may be some features that are permanently on in this video. When he says he's toggling between dx10 and dx11 he's wrong he's just switching on and off 1 feature.

since the game is out now, there is no point to make a directx version. Better save it for crysis 3.

since the game is out now, there is no point to make a directx version. Better save it for crysis 3.

I disagree if nothing else they could use the practice.

cool stuff bro.

Now i hate crytek even more

My point, which I need to get to before I totally derail my train of thought, is that there will never be a united enough community for these sorts of grievances to be solved with purchasing power. The only real way hardcoe gamers as a group will ever be able to truly have our interests in quality trump pure capitalism is if we start becoming shareholders in these companies. That's the real way to vote with your wallet - mainly because shareholders actually vote on company decisions!
So there will never be a united enough community due to numbers to implement change through purchasing power but theres enough people rich enough or in sheer numbers to make an impact at boardroom level ? Flawed logic imo
As I said, the impact might be small, or even ultimately negligible, but a small group of gamer shareholders, even if they end up having no impact, still have a far better chance of having their interests adressed than they would if they were simply buying or not buying a game in the hopes that somehow their reason for doing so will be understood by the corporation.

I don't think my logic is flawed unless you take the final paragraph of the post out of context. If the gamers become the shareholders, it doesnt matter as much that they be unified, because the level of input is higher than just adding or subtracting one purchase from the huge aggregate of sales. 10shares of EA won't get you much of a voice at the shareholder meetings, I've got no illusions about that, but what I've been trying to say is that it certainly can't give you LESS of a voice than you'll have as a consumer.

actually the best solution would not be to hold shares in any game company. That would just make you an investor and you would be more concerned about wheter you will make a return on your investment or not.

The best solution for you would be to simply attempt to make the game that you want to play. There are plenty of free dev tools to do it . Find some modders ahd make your own game.

thats the best solution

+!

I'm an avid modder, and there's few things more satisfying then watching your vision come to life.

Money is the corrupter, if I had stock in Crytek, I would probably lose all concern or pride in the quality of the product, so long as kids keep shelling out their cash, I would probably not care.

ea forced crytek to remove dx11 from crysis 2 to let BF3 the one to shine

we will never know whats the real deal.

actually the best solution would not be to hold shares in any game company. That would just make you an investor and you would be more concerned about wheter you will make a return on your investment or not.

The best solution for you would be to simply attempt to make the game that you want to play. There are plenty of free dev tools to do it . Find some modders ahd make your own game.

thats the best solution
Well I guess it's true that would be the best best solution, but it's not really an option for most people. I have little enough time to PLAY games; I certainly don't have time to MAKE them too, considering the additional time investment of learning how.

In response to your first part, though, I'm not really sure how buying stock magically turns you into a profit-obsessed Wall Street drone. It's very easy to set up an online brokerage account and invest as much or as little as you want. I mean, I'm a grad student earning a pretty measly salary, so I was only able to invest a couple hundred bucks across two big gaming companies. I'm obviously not of the illusion that I'm somehow going to get rich off 10 shares in EA or whatever; the only way I'd stand to gain or lose a significant amount would be if I invested a significant amount to begin with... and if that were the case, I would have been the "investor" you described already - buying the stock wouldn't have caused it.

I'm also, of course, not of the illusion that 10 or 100 or even 1000 shares is going to give anybody a significant sway over a corporation's direction. I think it's ridiculous, however, how prevalent views like yours are among people of my generation, especially the "gamers." There's such a tendency to believe stocks and investing are these inscrutable, intangible concepts that are only relevant or attainable for people with millions of dollars, or to your mythological "investors." EA, for example, has roughly 330 million shares outstanding. If each of the 4 million PC gamers who bought Crysis 1 owned 10 shares of EA, 10% of the company's shares would be controlled by people with a direct interest in the quality of the games, and each individual among them would only stand to lose, at most, about 200 dollars if EA were to suddenly die completely.


(I'm already forseeing a "rebuttal" of my example by nit-picking the implausibility of the details. To head that off - it's a thought experiment, not a picture of some plan of mine or something. The numbers are, to my knowledge, accurate, but beyond that it's just an idealized scenario to illustrate my point. There are plenty of arguments against my position, I'm sure, but please don't siderail the discussion with "LOL NUB CRYSIS OWNERS ARNT A UNIFID BLOCK! PWND BY UR OWN ARGUMINT"... )

i would love to see crytek sued by nvidia

2. Is Crytek going to release a DX11 patch?
"- Yes, they are obligated to do it, unless they aren't going to release any other PC game in the future; because if they will, no one will buy that. Crytek is going to lose all its hardcoe fanbase if they don't release a DX11 patch, and they don't want that. "


Fix'd: - yes, they are obligated to do it, unless they aren't going to release any PC game in the future; because if they will no one will buy that, except all the console players. Crytek is going to lose all its hardcoe fanbase if they don't release a DX11 patch, and they don't care because they will make millions selling console games, ported to the pc, with less effort and greater monetary gain.

It appears your theory is is pretty similar to the one that was leaked to Eurogamer.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-03-30-crysis-2-dx11-fix-in-2-3-months-report


So looks like Crytek was not planning on releasing DX11 from the start, but convinced to by a cash payment from nvidia. What PC gamers will be left 3 months from now. Stupid move Crytek.


That's a false information. Crytek NEVER confirmed anything of this. Another cheap website hoping to cause chaos like the other fake german site saying Crytek gonna release dx11 patch tomorrow. You do realize April Fools is tomorrow and i ain't falling for it.

i would love to see crytek sued by nvidia


As much i hate to believe that could happen but they could do that. However.. Crytek is working on dx11 like they are suppose to, that's what the money is for. Updates and fixes. It costs money to develop dx11 on cryengine 3.

they aren't going to release any PC game in the future; because if they will no one will buy that, except all the console players.

@_@