New Crysis Warhead Details Emerge

[malware]

Some early details about Crytek's Crysis Warhead game have been revealed today by the PC Gamer magazine. Here are all the new key points at a glance:

• Begins when the original game's Nomad character parts ways with Warhead's new hero, Psycho, and follows him all the way until the two are to reunite again on board the aircraft carrier.
• Mostly located on the other side of the island.
• Less linear approach and more sandbox type of gameplay, as opposed to the original.
• Same nanosuit and the same functions, with more likely to be revealed later (definitely a "surprise" in that matter is promised).
• Singleplayer campaign to last 8-10 hours.
• At least two new weapons, the granade launcher and double SMG.
• Improved enemy AI, betterily able to organize itself and follow tactics.
• New vehicles incl. Armored Scout Recon (about the size of a jeep with a mounted gun) and a hovercraft, both playable in multiplayer as well.
• New team-based MP mode and less complex than the original two.
• Betterily optimized to run faster than the original game on the same hardware.
• Won't require DX10 for maximum details and full effects.
• Dialogues done by Bioshock's Susanna O'Connor.
• Completely stand-alone and as noted by developers, not an add-on but a full title.
• The possibility of Crysis 2 to rely heavily on Warhead's sales.

Source: Tiscali Games

[HTC]

As long as it's WAY better coded then the original crysis ...

@ malware: you might want to edit the quoted text as it's a bit harder to read like it is right now.

[Darknova]

8-10 hours for a single player is pathetic.

There better had be optimisations right across the board, and the last bit is hilarious "The possibility of Crysis 2 to rely heavily on Warhead's sales." That's a guilt trip if ever I heard one "Don't pirate this game or we won't give you a sequel".

[johnnyfiive]

As long as it runs better then the original, there will be a Crysis 2.

Everybody complains about how Crysis was coded when in fact they just don't understand how far ahead Crysis is compared to every other game (in terms of engine design and capability) - basically it's just too far ahead of its time.

[malware]

Originally Posted by HTC

@ malware: you might want to edit the quoted text as it's a bit harder to read like it is right now.

Sorry mate, it's fixed now.

[HTC]

Originally Posted by v-zero

Everybody complains about how Crysis was coded when in fact they just don't understand how far ahead Crysis is compared to every other game (in terms of engine design and capability) - basically it's just too far ahead of its time.

Personally, i don't agree.

To illustrate my point (previous post): how much of a drop does a move from DX9 to DX10 causes in Crysis?

The fact that even a GTX280 with all it's power can't get decent FPS (60+ FPS) with everything on very high speaks volumes, IMO.

Originally Posted by malware

Sorry mate, it's fixed now.

Thanks, dude!

Yes, it speaks volumes about how taxing the game is! Plus, using custom configurations you can get fantastic visuals and performance...

[chron]

Originally Posted by HTC

Personally, i don't agree.

To illustrate my point (previous post): how much of a drop does a move from DX9 to DX10 causes in Crysis?

The fact that even a GTX280 with all it's power can't get decent FPS (60+ FPS) with everything on very high speaks volumes, IMO.



Thanks, dude!

You're just getting caught up in the hype that is NEW TECHNOLOGY! I mean, whenever ati or nvidia comes out with a new card, they act as if it's God's gift to mankind. Crysis really is ahead of it's time and I don't think a single card will be able to play it until next year honestly. I remember when the x850xt came out with ATI, the huge thing was it got above 50fps in css. Pshh.

[newconroer]

"Singleplayer campaign to last 8-10 hours."

You know when they boast something like that as a 'feature,' then something's definatley wrong with modern games.

"DUDE what's Warhead gonna be like!?!?" "I heard it's gonna have eight to ten hours of single player action!" "WOAH ten hours...awesome man!"


heh

[candle_86]

well honestly how much can they cover in that time span ya know, if we take crysis at face value for the time its not terribly long from when psyco leaves after getting CIA chick to when they're on the boat again

[zithe]

Originally Posted by v-zero

Everybody complains about how Crysis was coded when in fact they just don't understand how far ahead Crysis is compared to every other game (in terms of engine design and capability) - basically it's just too far ahead of its time.

Meaning they're using technology incorrectly that will suck by the time they get it right?
I think Crysis is just a thing to get you to buy copies of Vista. I also feel it lies about frame rates since it's "surprisingly playable" even at frames you couldn't deal with in world of warcraft. XD

[vaperstylz]

Originally Posted by Darknova

8-10 hours for a single player is pathetic.

There better had be optimisations right across the board, and the last bit is hilarious "The possibility of Crysis 2 to rely heavily on Warhead's sales." That's a guilt trip if ever I heard one "Don't pirate this game or we won't give you a sequel".

I know right! Does this mean that this game is some sort of stop gap between the next two "real" installments to the trillogy? Cause this 10hr single campaign crap is a serious jip!
I hope since they are just re-releasing a better optimized version of the 1st game just from another viewpoint that will mean a lower price at the checkout.
Coming out with a version that performs the way the 1st one should've, and making a minor shift in the story-telling doesn't impress me. They're still trying to sell me the same game twice! But time will tell. PLEASE NO ONE PIRATE WARHEAD SO THAT CRYTEK CAN GET PAID & WE CAN ALL CONTINUE WITH ALL THIS CRYSIS GOODNESS!!!!!!...... pathetic.

[imperialreign]

Originally Posted by malware

Some early details about Crytek's Crysis Warhead game have been revealed today by the PC Gamer magazine. Here are all the new key points at a glance:

• Begins when the original game's Nomad character parts ways with Warhead's new hero, Psycho, and follows him all the way until the two are to reunite again on board the aircraft carrier.
• Mostly located on the other side of the island.
• Less linear approach and more sandbox type of gameplay, as opposed to the original.
• Same nanosuit and the same functions, with more likely to be revealed later (definitely a "surprise" in that matter is promised).
• Singleplayer campaign to last 8-10 hours.
• At least two new weapons, the granade launcher and double SMG.
• Improved enemy AI, betterily able to organize itself and follow tactics.
• New vehicles incl. Armored Scout Recon (about the size of a jeep with a mounted gun) and a hovercraft, both playable in multiplayer as well.
• New team-based MP mode and less complex than the original two.
• Betterily optimized to run faster than the original game on the same hardware.
• Won't require DX10 for maximum details and full effects.
• Dialogues done by Bioshock's Susanna O'Connor.
• Completely stand-alone and as noted by developers, not an add-on but a full title.
• The possibility of Crysis 2 to rely heavily on Warhead's sales.

Source: Tiscali Games

That is to say . . . Crytek do not currently plan on making Crysis 2, unless we all get off our ass and buy Warhead, because sales of Crysis itself sucked.

How about . . . make a game worth the $70 brand-new-to-the-shelf price, and we might just purchase a copy.

Or, how about @EA: back off your ridiculous current, 6-month-after-release shelf prices of $45-$55, and people might be willing to pick up a copy as well, knowing their system might struggle with it.

[h4343]

Originally Posted by Darknova

That's a guilt trip if ever I heard one "Don't pirate this game or we won't give you a sequel".

Crytek: PC Gamers Pirating 20x the Games They Buy
http://gizmodo.com/5020195/pc-gamers...games-they-buy

[Wile E]

Originally Posted by h4343

Crytek: PC Gamers Pirating 20x the Games They Buy
http://gizmodo.com/5020195/pc-gamers...games-they-buy

I don't even begin to believe those numbers. They're just trying to work the guilt-trip angle. The game is Platinum for god's sake. Since when is 1,000,000 a bad sales figure for a game?

I still haven't bought or played Crysis, and I won't until I can run it all Very High 1920x1200 or the price drops to $30 or less. They want far too much money for a game that is so poorly optimized.

And lets not fool ourselves. Crysis isn't slow because it's "ahead of it's time". It's slow because it wasn't optimized at all. Look how terribly it scales to higher resolutions. The performance hits you take by changing resolutions are a dead giveaway as to how well a game has been optimized.

Anyway, back on-topic, 10 hours of gameplay is at least better than most FPS's that have been coming out in recent times. Now, they need to release in the $45 range if they want great sales. $60+ is just unacceptable.

[imperialreign]

Originally Posted by Wile E

I don't even begin to believe those numbers. They're just trying to work the guilt-trip angle. The game is Platinum for god's sake. Since when is 1,000,000 a bad sales figure for a game?

I still haven't bought or played Crysis, and I won't until I can run it all Very High 1920x1200 or the price drops to $30 or less. They want far too much money for a game that is so poorly optimized.

And lets not fool ourselves. Crysis isn't slow because it's "ahead of it's time". It's slow because it wasn't optimized at all. Look how terribly it scales to higher resolutions. The performance hits you take by changing resolutions are a dead giveaway as to how well a game has been optimized.

Anyway, back on-topic, 10 hours of gameplay is at least better than most FPS's that have been coming out in recent times. Now, they need to release in the $45 range if they want great sales. $60+ is just unacceptable.

I completely agree . . .


as to the notion that Crysis is "advanced" like everyone wants to believe; these two marketing points listed for Warhead:

*Better optimized to run faster than the original game on the same hardware.

*Won't require DX10 for maximum details and full effects.

if true, will completely piss all over the glamorized ideal that Crysis is a game ahead of it's time, and will only cement the fact that the original was poorly optimized, poorly coded and that DX10 support was a marketing-hyped afterthought than a note worthy achievment.

[PVTCaboose1337]

Originally Posted by HTC

As long as it's WAY better coded then the original crysis ...

@ malware: you might want to edit the quoted text as it's a bit harder to read like it is right now.

+1. Single Player gameplay was bad...

[Bjorn_Of_Iceland]

The possibility of Crysis 2 to rely heavily on Warhead's sales.

Theyre out of dough. THey need yours

[HTC]

Originally Posted by imperialreign

as to the notion that Crysis is "advanced" like everyone wants to believe; these two marketing points listed for Warhead:

*Better optimized to run faster than the original game on the same hardware.

*Won't require DX10 for maximum details and full effects.

if true, will completely piss all over the glamorized ideal that Crysis is a game ahead of it's time, and will only cement the fact that the original was poorly optimized, poorly coded and that DX10 support was a marketing-hyped afterthought than a note worthy achievment.

Thank you for illustrating my point, dude!

[Morgoth]

The code of Crysis is fine has nothing to do with weak gpu
its the way of the map is designed if its optimized

[DarkMatter]

Originally Posted by Wile E

I don't even begin to believe those numbers. They're just trying to work the guilt-trip angle. The game is Platinum for god's sake. Since when is 1,000,000 a bad sales figure for a game?

I still haven't bought or played Crysis, and I won't until I can run it all Very High 1920x1200 or the price drops to $30 or less. They want far too much money for a game that is so poorly optimized.

And lets not fool ourselves. Crysis isn't slow because it's "ahead of it's time". It's slow because it wasn't optimized at all. Look how terribly it scales to higher resolutions. The performance hits you take by changing resolutions are a dead giveaway as to how well a game has been optimized.

Anyway, back on-topic, 10 hours of gameplay is at least better than most FPS's that have been coming out in recent times. Now, they need to release in the $45 range if they want great sales. $60+ is just unacceptable.

No true at all. How a game scales to higher resolutions has nothing to do with how optimized it is. It depends on which side of the graphics card is taxing. If the game is texture or geometry heavy, upping the resolution won't stress the card a lot because textures and geometry are the same in all resolutions (for some reason that I don't understand, this is the case with COD4). If the game is taxing on pixel operations upping the resolution will stress the card a lot. Crysis does everything on a per-pixel basis and it does a lot of things that other engines don't do.

1024x768 > 1280x960 > 1600x1200 > 2048x1536 each of these resolutions has 60% more pixels than the precedent one, or looking in the contrary order each resolution has 37.5% less pixels than the bigger one. A totally pixel dependant engine would take that same hit from every jump in the resolution. Now if we look at COD4 it only takes a hit of around 20%, but if you look at Crysis the hit is close to that 37%. It's not optimization is how the engine works.

If you don't like that kind of performance scaling, be prepared for when ray-tracing finally comes to games, you will hate it.

@imperialreign

They will just make the engine do a lot less things and say they did a better optimization, and most of you will believe it is better optimized, because from what I read very few know what it really is to optimize.

Optimize is to make the same program utilize less power, but most people think it is to "fit" the game to the hardware relaxing or removing features. It's not.

[Zubasa]

Originally Posted by v-zero

Everybody complains about how Crysis was coded when in fact they just don't understand how far ahead Crysis is compared to every other game (in terms of engine design and capability) - basically it's just too far ahead of its time.

Its so far ahead that it couldn't even implant DX10.1

[Morgoth]

probaly nvidia is sponering them again

[imperialreign]

Originally Posted by DarkMatter

@imperialreign

They will just make the engine do a lot less things and say they did a better optimization, and most of you will believe it is better optimized, because from what I read very few know what it really is to optimize.

Optimize is to make the same program utilize less power, but most people think it is to "fit" the game to the hardware relaxing or removing features. It's not.

I've always taken it to mean optimization is relative to how much work the game engine has to perform


I'll definitely give crytek the fact that everything was written from the ground up - and that *it appears* that a lot of "specialty" aspects of the game are handled by the cry engine itself . . . i.e. audio occlusion and mapping, physics . . . instead of relying on a hand full of 3rd party routine calls

but sometimes, in game, it just felt like there was too much workload for the system . . .