| Thursday, March 13 2008 |
DirectX 10 games have never looked so good. PCGH posted today a story showing the first S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Clear Sky DirectX 10 screenshots, and an exclusive 4:31 minutes long in-game footage from CeBIT 2008. The game is running on Windows Vista and video cards from NVIDIA's 9 series, probably GeForce 9800 GX2. If you ask me, this game puts Crysis to shame, and most important it runs smooth!
Source: PCGH
Source: PCGH
User comments
Oh boy oh boy.. i'm right in the middle of the original game, and i'm already addicted! this game is so immersing :respect:
Clear Sky looks great, and DX10 support is even better news. i can't wait!
I only hope they implement dropped features from the original game, like sleeping and drivable cars.
Clear Sky looks great, and DX10 support is even better news. i can't wait!
I only hope they implement dropped features from the original game, like sleeping and drivable cars.
As for the release date go to Gamespot and click next until April you'll get a pretty specific release date.
Crysis is nice but i do like the old rusty dark creepy feeling that Stalker has more.
This reminds me that I need to go finish the first one (I quit it because I was playing on an X800 GTO...).
Yes, I hope that GSC had learned from mods like AMK, Priboi, etc. I think that without THC they can make STALKER like they want...
Mmmmmm... :twitch: Not good when a few screenies make me want to spend $300 to upgrade to Vista and get a better gfx card. (Ew, vista)
I just have to be patient and prices will go down.
Did anyone else see that Amazon have a 8800gt for $160? :D
I just have to be patient and prices will go down.
Did anyone else see that Amazon have a 8800gt for $160? :D
the screenshots look sweet but when is it coming out?:rockout:
by: Ben ClarkeSTALKER Clear sky better have good fps in DX10.
Yeah, this isn't for Crysis. It's for Windows. As you can see, I run XP. And DX10 is detected.
I don't want another graphics showcase and I hope the plot is alot more solid than Shadow of Chernobyl.
Do you know if DX10 performs better on XP than Vista with this hack?
And also does this mean you don't have DX9 on XP anymore?
These are the guys behind the DX10 for WinXP
http://alkyproject.blogspot.com/2007/04/finally-making-use-of-this-blog-i.html
http://alkyproject.blogspot.com/2007/04/finally-making-use-of-this-blog-i.html
by: AphexDreamerWhoa a 19 probably 20 year old now is behind this hack.:eek:
These are the guys behind the DX10 for WinXP
http://alkyproject.blogspot.com/2007/04/finally-making-use-of-this-blog-i.html
That dude will be raking in the money pretty soon.
by: WidjajaErr have a read... they are defunct :rolleyes:
Whoa a 19 probably 20 year old now is behind this hack.:eek:
That dude will be raking in the money pretty soon.
by: lemonadesodathat was just a misleading thing from crysis.
Isnt there a DX10 hack for XP/2003? I've never tried it mayself... but understand you get (nearly) all features. Of course, u need a DX10 GPU.
Crysis disabled some effects (ultra high mode) in DX9, but you could force them on - people wrongly called it enabling DX10, when the crytek team merely turned it off figuring DX9 rigs wouldnt have the power to use it anyway.
by: bretts31344STALKER will run fine on a X800GTO if you let it select its own default graphics settings. I'm am running it on a Q6600 and X800SE with no probs at all. Very smooth. Only, DO NOT turn on dynamic lighting. But otherwise, other graphics settings, e.g. textures etc. can be turned up, to "high".
This reminds me that I need to go finish the first one (I quit it because I was playing on an X800 GTO...).
I think a lower GPU is OK if you match it with a high end proc, like the Q6600. Perhaps you were runing an X800GTO with a weak single-threaded CPU?
Far Cry 2 will blow this thing out of the water. It's got no chance against the masters of massive outdoor gameplay, trust me on this one. :cool:
by: tkpenaltyI know, I was talking about his age and what he was able to figure out.
Err have a read... they are defunct :rolleyes:
The dude must have some skills = money
by: MusselsYeah right, but there must be something obscure there. They already know that we can run it since they did the hack for the beta. They should know it before that anyway. Since then Crysis SP demo, retail, v1.1 and v1.2 have been released and the option is still unavailable.
that was just a misleading thing from crysis.
Crysis disabled some effects (ultra high mode) in DX9, but you could force them on - people wrongly called it enabling DX10, when the crytek team merely turned it off figuring DX9 rigs wouldnt have the power to use it anyway.
This game looks Half-Life like. Not bad though... it looks half life-like.
by: MusselsWell im so glad someone agrees, well that was what i was sayin you know crysis had some extra features for directx 9 that were similar to directx 10 features.
that was just a misleading thing from crysis.
Crysis disabled some effects (ultra high mode) in DX9, but you could force them on - people wrongly called it enabling DX10, when the crytek team merely turned it off figuring DX9 rigs wouldnt have the power to use it anyway.
ITS IMPOSSIBLE TO GET DIRECTX 10 ON WINDOWS XP!
Anyway it does kinda look like half life but thats nice i liked half life, now half life with destructible environments and cod 4 style effects like shooting through materials would be great.
About the pics: anybody else noticed its the Army Warehouses (Freedom's base) from the original game? as i'm familiar with this scene ingame these pics does look alot better than the original. :cool:
by: lemonadesodaYes, a P4... it was my old rig.
STALKER will run fine on a X800GTO if you let it select its own default graphics settings. I'm am running it on a Q6600 and X800SE with no probs at all. Very smooth. Only, DO NOT turn on dynamic lighting. But otherwise, other graphics settings, e.g. textures etc. can be turned up, to "high".
I think a lower GPU is OK if you match it with a high end proc, like the Q6600. Perhaps you were runing an X800GTO with a weak single-threaded CPU?
by: kieran_fletch
Well im so glad someone agrees, well that was what i was sayin you know crysis had some extra features for directx 9 that were similar to directx 10 features.
ITS IMPOSSIBLE TO GET DIRECTX 10 ON WINDOWS XP!
Anyway it does kinda look like half life but thats nice i liked half life, now half life with destructible environments and cod 4 style effects like shooting through materials would be great.
its not IMPOSSIBLE ben did it! and he is proof!
by: X-TeNDeRyea it does look like their base but i dont remember the tracks the towers i remember lighting looks better
About the pics: anybody else noticed its the Army Warehouses (Freedom's base) from the original game? as i'm familiar with this scene ingame these pics does look alot better than the original. :cool:
by: Morgothi have it and will install it as soon as my 8600GTS shows up (should be today :D)
its not IMPOSSIBLE ben did it! and he is proof!
While screenshots can be misleading, in both a positive and negative way, I don't see anything too impressive here.
It's just more polished photo imaging. We've seen good lighting and shading for quite a while now. What we haven't seen, is flora, grass, leaves etc that have a natural high quality to them. They may be textured in high resolution, but they're majorily 2d, often high in aliasing and noticeably '2d,' as their clipping levels are still seemingly archaeic.
Since the 'shader' trend has begun, we've seen more developers attempting to use shaders to mask the low quality of the 2d objects, rather than use a higher quality object natively.
A good example is Crysis. The videos and screenshots we saw that boasted Crysis' 'amazing' graphics, were testbed situations, where the hardware was able to manage the shader level required to make these inadequate 2d texture ends (and some 3d) to seem better than they are. However, the Crysis that was released to consumers, is obviously different. Crytek has stated that a 'patch' of sorts to give players the same level of visual quality will be made available in the future, WHEN GPUs are able to manage the workload needed to render these shaders.
Personally, while I support the advancements in lighting and shading, as it has made leaps and bounds for the visual quality of 3d applications (DOOM III comes to mind..bump mapping was a new world wonder!), it seems it's becoming overkill.
Maybe they fear that in order to provide good quality and interactive flora, grass, leaves etc, that they need to use more texture RAM, something that also began to spiral out of control, with GPUs needing up to 1gig of dedicated on board RAM.
Now we have two issues facing developers.
It's just more polished photo imaging. We've seen good lighting and shading for quite a while now. What we haven't seen, is flora, grass, leaves etc that have a natural high quality to them. They may be textured in high resolution, but they're majorily 2d, often high in aliasing and noticeably '2d,' as their clipping levels are still seemingly archaeic.
Since the 'shader' trend has begun, we've seen more developers attempting to use shaders to mask the low quality of the 2d objects, rather than use a higher quality object natively.
A good example is Crysis. The videos and screenshots we saw that boasted Crysis' 'amazing' graphics, were testbed situations, where the hardware was able to manage the shader level required to make these inadequate 2d texture ends (and some 3d) to seem better than they are. However, the Crysis that was released to consumers, is obviously different. Crytek has stated that a 'patch' of sorts to give players the same level of visual quality will be made available in the future, WHEN GPUs are able to manage the workload needed to render these shaders.
Personally, while I support the advancements in lighting and shading, as it has made leaps and bounds for the visual quality of 3d applications (DOOM III comes to mind..bump mapping was a new world wonder!), it seems it's becoming overkill.
Maybe they fear that in order to provide good quality and interactive flora, grass, leaves etc, that they need to use more texture RAM, something that also began to spiral out of control, with GPUs needing up to 1gig of dedicated on board RAM.
Now we have two issues facing developers.
by: DarkMatter
Yeah right, but there must be something obscure there. They already know that we can run it since they did the hack for the beta. They should know it before that anyway. Since then Crysis SP demo, retail, v1.1 and v1.2 have been released and the option is still unavailable.
they wanted to advertise DX10. oh noes. Its just like how multiplayer only has physics if its DX10 only (no DX9 players AT ALL) - someone at crytek made stupid decisions. Doesnt change the fact that you cant get DX10 in XP, like some claim.
by: Morgoth
its not IMPOSSIBLE ben did it! and he is proof!
yes, yes it is impossible. you can copy dll files, you can hack crysis all you want - neither lets you run DX10 programs in DX10 mode under XP.