that article is retarded, anyone who has enough experience in the industry wouldn't spit such bullshit simply because it's too presumptuous on one's part.
It took FarCry 2 years (2 Graphics card revisions) to make the game playable at highest settings with highest level of AA and AF (7800GTX) why do people expect Crysis to give 60fps at 2560x1600 with 16x SSAA and 16x AF? why? just because you own 8800 Series you expect nothing but the best? well, I have little news for those people and that news is that they should stop leaving in dreams. GF8 series is 1 year old and while that may not sound that long, in PC Gaming industry, which evolves rapidly, that's an eternity. one needs to understand that
Crysis wasn't developed to be played on current gen hardware at max settings, hell, even Cevat Yerli said that (screw the naysayers)
Crysis will be playable at high settings on current cards
and it certainly is. Crysis gives 25fps at High Settings (DX10) upto 1600x1200 resolution. anything more than that and you NEED a SLI Setup. because Crysis is that demanding and for damn good reason too; PS3/X360 or previous PC titles don't hold a candle to what Crysis delivers graphics wise. another interesting thing is all the people saying how Crysis will be the death of PC gaming...why? just because it revolutionizes and sets a new standard for graphics? two years from now, people will be playing Crysis at 60-70fps and will look back and laugh when Crysis killed PC systems. when Quake came-out, it did the same thing, so did Doom 3, then F.E.A.R, then Oblivion and now Crysis. seems like whenever a great title comes out, you've got a handful of people putting it in the ground simply because they fail to understand how the industry works. as for missing SLI/Quad Core support, I'll wait for the patch. Crytek was already under pressure thanks to the delaying of the demo and pushed release date. if they pushed the release date any more, they would've gotten hell from the online community. now that it's finally shipped, they can focus on smoothing the rough edges and adding/tweaking support for various technologies. if they fail to deliver that, then one has every right to be pissed at them. but before that, I suggest everyone to hold back their hatred for few days (assuming you really do have problems and not ripping Crysis just for the sake of it)
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?
I find it hard to believe that any sane hardware enthusiast/gamer would say something this retarded. PC games always force upgrades, Crysis just forces it more. what's the difference?
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?
well, yeah. EA's Cookie cutter SIMS comes to mind. Gaming Industry afterall, is a business. people see profits and not emotions and/or personal taste. why is so hard for you to understand? atleast Crysis doesn't disappoint on the gameplay front.
I assume money has exchanged hands more than once behind the scenes, and who the suspects are need not even be mentioned.
that statement is so retarded that I refuse to dignify it with a response.
As a true gamer and hardware enthusias i declare that Crysis makes me
sick.
as a real gamer and a Practical person, I declare you [swedish author] a dimwit. you have no idea what you're talking about so kindly stop polluting interweb with your retarded bullshit. if you're going to run something down, atleast have enough sources and/or solid statements to compliment that.
Does that mean the game is too EARLY? Then why release it early if current hardware is too "limp" to support it?
