Crysis looks Orgasmic on editted ULTRA high settings(looks like '06 footage)

[PCXL-Fan]

Its seem someone has editted The crysis setting to unlock the the higher settings that weren't enabled by the developers. THis is exactly as Crytec had said in the past, and is what they showed in the original 2006 footage. The main improvement seems to be with the shaders and HDR. These settings were locked because very few computers now days could run this high, but will be unlocked by the developers in the future as technology improves.
And yes!Crysis now looks better than Killer Instinct 3 or Galson's swollen member.







Videos
Gametrailers.com - Crysis Demo can look like 2006 vid. by NeoDarkness
Gametrailers.com - Crysis Sandbox Jungle Design by khenaz

[Thanakil]

Looks waaaaaay too good.

No way I could run that with my current PC, but I'd still like to know how just to do it and test, even if I get 5fps.

[runawayprisoner]

Wowzaz... now this proves one point: current DX10 hardwares are not even enough for DX10. Just lookit the FPS of this thing... it's among the very low to almost unplayable range. I say we need some ultra-clocked GPUs and some quad-core CPUs, both of which need to run at 4GHz clockspeed or so... Raw power and bandwidth FTW!

[Thanakil]

We don't know the resolution used for this tho, and if there was AA or not.

It looks like some very hi-res shots resized to smaller, so if we were to play with that quality but with a reso of only 1024 or 1280, with no AA or only x2, we could probably get playable FPS with a DX10 card.

[Xtreme2damax]

It'd be nice to see some shots near the Korean base in the beginning, along with some vehicle shots and shots overlooking the lake in the beginning for reference.

Keep the shots coming for what I can only dream of until I build my new PC soon.

[jonc2006]

jesus that looks good.

[PCXL-Fan]

[Thanakil]

Is that really at Very high? I mean, it looks more like High than Very High, and theres quite a difference between the two.

Other than that, the part about ''8-15 fps" is wrong, a high PC would get 30+ fps at very high, a 8800 will let you play at very high and 1024 reso with a very good fps, 1280 + very high is possible too.

But that shot still looks more like High than Very high.

[runawayprisoner]

Originally Posted by Thanakil

Is that really at Very high? I mean, it looks more like High than Very High, and theres quite a difference between the two.

Other than that, the part about ''8-15 fps" is wrong, a high PC would get 30+ fps at very high, a 8800 will let you play at very high and 1024 reso with a very good fps, 1280 + very high is possible too.

But that shot still looks more like High than Very high.

Maximum means that you make the game look like the alpha shot. It's to be expected, though. The lighting in the alpha shot is so friggin' intense. 8 to 15fps on very high-end systems is not exactly what our developers are looking for... so as the last resort, they have to dumb everything down quite a lot... just to get the acceptable performance on most systems.

P.S.: And ya, that's how very high (or highest) looks like on DX10. On DX9, you don't even get that kind of vegetation... anything too far away is reduced to a shapeless blob, which does not justify sacrificing 1 or 2fps...

[PCXL-Fan]

Here's a different guy messing around with hdr and lighting to get these results:
Not quite as good as the photos above but at least the guy provides the method of achieving these results


ImageShack - Hosting :: crysis41pp6.jpg

ouch...4.4fps

You can try this yourself by cutting and pasting this into the console on the sandbox editor or creating an empty system.cfg file in your root crysis folder and inserting this code:
con_restricted=0
e_detail_materials_view_dist_xy 4096
e_vegetation_sprites_distance_ratio 2
e_view_dist_ratio_vegetation 50
e_lod_ratio 8
e_max_entity_lights 20
r_EnvTexUpdateInterval 0.025
r_beams 1
r_beamsDistfactor 0.01
r_beamsmaxslices 300
e_vegetation_bending 1
r_HDRlevel 1.25
r_useedgeAA 2
r_ssao_quality 4
r_ssao_amount 2
r_ssao_radius 15
r_TerrainAO_FadeDist 0
r_SSAO_darkening 0.15
r_eyeadaptationfactor 0.25

[Thanakil]

Originally Posted by runawayprisoner

P.S.: And ya, that's how very high (or highest) looks like on DX10. On DX9, you don't even get that kind of vegetation... anything too far away is reduced to a shapeless blob, which does not justify sacrificing 1 or 2fps...

That may be very high for like objects, but the shaders, the textures, ect don't look higher than High from what I've seen.

And let me tell you, you would lose way more than only 1 or 2 fps if all vegetation kept the same quality far from you it would probably be more like 5-10 fps depending on the situation. You can still temper with the gfx options if you want them to show tho.

[Paratech]

I'd hate to imagine the cost of the hardware to pull that off, It'd make a PS3 look dirt cheap!

[PCXL-Fan]

hilarious

Crysis Requires Cyberdine CPU, T-1000 and Sky-Net plugin

[Thanakil]

I like futureshop, they usually have a good service, even if they have the average price for hardware (not cheap, not costy, simply average).

And now they have a sense of humour, good thing.

[PCXL-Fan]

This is from future shop canada
canada > usa
wait till the corperate bigwigs see this and make the administrator take it down.

[SCHUMI-4-EVA]

How on earth are you supposed to shoot anything in that?

I love graphics as much as the next guy, but I struggle to keep focus more and more in games these days. HDR makes it especially hard to keep focus, the lighting is just so....I don't know perfect, I keep staring at it, instead of what I should be doing and lose focus.
I would perfer more emphasis to be placed on 3D and propper collision detection, than lighting. I mean look at shot 4, that one leaf spine or whatever it's called is broken in 3 places and then joined at a very sharp angle each time. Totally unrealistic and that stuff has been around since DX7. That's what should be worked on. Instead the smooth everything over and cofuse us with all those photorealistic shadows and lighting, whereby most graphical oddities like that end up ebing smudged/smoothed out.
On post 7, the top part of the shot, I can't imagine me ever playing a game looking like that, it's all smudgy and blurry and dream visiony.

And then on the shot below that it hardly looks better than Far Cry maxed. Looks at the sharp awfull 1D leaves, once again that stuff has been around since DX7, that's what should be improving, not the lighting.

They should improve all the textures and meshes close up, and only worry about the lighting later. It's things like leaves and trees like those that ruin immersion in a game for me, not the lighting, the better lighting just distracts you.

Close Up I have yet to see a game which actually looks good, hopefully DX10, does mean that those things will eventually improved but they certainly have not from DX7 to DX9 (and judgeing by those Crysis shots, not yet in DX10 either). I was shocked to run into a sign in Oblivion and have everything revert back to a shoddy pixelised DX7 look. And the grass shots look awesome with HDR on and from far away...but don't you dare go look at it closeup with HDR off.

Heh...well rant over....and I might just be jealous that I cant play a game looking like that, and sure I look st the screenshots like everyone else and drool, but I can't ever really see me playing a game like that...even if the money and the hardware were not a problem....maybe I am just getting too old for gaming, it's not meant for those of us who still remember black and white DOS games, or things like Hover on the Win95 CD, maybe it's only for the new guys who don't really know any worse so their eyes are perfectly accustomed ot it. Who knows...

[jonc2006]

Originally Posted by SCHUMI-4-EVA

How on earth are you supposed to shoot anything in that?

I love graphics as much as the next guy, but I struggle to keep focus more and more in games these days. HDR makes it especially hard to keep focus, the lighting is just so....I don't know perfect, I keep staring at it, instead of what I should be doing and lose focus.
I would perfer more emphasis to be placed on 3D and propper collision detection, than lighting. I mean look at shot 4, that one leaf spine or whatever it's called is broken in 3 places and then joined at a very sharp angle each time. Totally unrealistic and that stuff has been around since DX7. That's what should be worked on. Instead the smooth everything over and cofuse us with all those photorealistic shadows and lighting, whereby most graphical oddities like that end up ebing smudged/smoothed out.
On post 7, the top part of the shot, I can't imagine me ever playing a game looking like that, it's all smudgy and blurry and dream visiony.

And then on the shot below that it hardly looks better than Far Cry maxed. Looks at the sharp awfull 1D leaves, once again that stuff has been around since DX7, that's what should be improving, not the lighting.

They should improve all the textures and meshes close up, and only worry about the lighting later. It's things like leaves and trees like those that ruin immersion in a game for me, not the lighting, the better lighting just distracts you.

Close Up I have yet to see a game which actually looks good, hopefully DX10, does mean that those things will eventually improved but they certainly have not from DX7 to DX9 (and judgeing by those Crysis shots, not yet in DX10 either). I was shocked to run into a sign in Oblivion and have everything revert back to a shoddy pixelised DX7 look. And the grass shots look awesome with HDR on and from far away...but don't you dare go look at it closeup with HDR off.

Heh...well rant over....and I might just be jealous that I cant play a game looking like that, and sure I look st the screenshots like everyone else and drool, but I can't ever really see me playing a game like that...even if the money and the hardware were not a problem....maybe I am just getting too old for gaming, it's not meant for those of us who still remember black and white DOS games, or things like Hover on the Win95 CD, maybe it's only for the new guys who don't really know any worse so their eyes are perfectly accustomed ot it. Who knows...

personally i feel that developers are putting way to much emphasis on graphics and not enough on gameplay nowadays but thats just me. crysis is a really beautiful game and a landmark in gaming graphics, no doubt. but other than the graphics, what are people really buying it for? all the hype that has built up around it hasnt been for anything else but the graphics really.

[SCHUMI-4-EVA]

That is true aswell...although it's not only the fault of developers, stupid n00b gamers just care how things look and won't buy it if it looks worse than another game, even if the worse looking game is infinitely better.

[@ruantec]

Originally Posted by PCXL-Fan

That´s a great comparation and just like you i was very dissapointed when i first saw the game running at maximum settings....

i even started to doubt if the first picture is realtime or just pre-rendered... in fact they showed something to the people and deliver a different thing..

i mean the graphics are great no doubt about it... but is nowhere near to what they showed in the past... and that sucks... even if they activate those functions in the future is just stupid to show those screenshots and make people believe they will get those graphics... forcing them to buy very expensive hardware and at the end we don´t get what we espect.

here are few old shoots so that you can understand what i mean....