The New "Can it run Crysis" Standard...

[sepheronx]

They were never going to re write the whole game to remove some of the performance limitations, though for 30 bucks I sure would have expected them to in a sane world.

Also, the art style was butchered, many cut scenes make me cringe.

Yeah, when playing I could tell it just didn't look right.

The cutscene I showed above with one of the scientists you rescue, it looks rather sad especially how poor the performance is.

 

[Vayra86]

Crytek is just looking for easy money, as they have been since things went sour for them. This is not how to do it. They've now confirmed CryEngine is just about the same or even weaker than other current engines. Even while it can do so much more than this POS. They've created major brand damage for themselves more than anything.

I'll reiterate, check those GR Wildlands screens and put em next to this so-called generational leap. There is just no other explanation than ultra lazy or very bad coding skills here. How can you get thát to run like this, coming from an original product that ran better on much weaker hardware? And more interestingly perhaps... how does this pass QC?

 

[drewpts]

There is just no other explanation than ultra lazy or very bad coding skills here

Cmon, good programmers under shitty management could create shitty software.

how does this pass QC?

It is simple - looks like it does not

PS. my Ryzen7/5700XT did not manage at 4K even on Very High (got 20-30 fps). But at 2.5K having RT set to just High it was barely ok (30-40 fps).

 

[Vayra86]

Cmon, good programmers under shitty management could create shitty software.


It is simple - looks like it does not

PS. my Ryzen7/5700XT did not manage at 4K even on Very High (got 20-30 fps). But at 2.5K having RT set to just High it was barely ok (30-40 fps).

True but if it really was about cost cutting, why not just put a new box around the original, add some modding love and push it out. I just can't follow the logic in any way with this release as it is now.

 

[drewpts]

True but if it really was about cost cutting, why not just put a new box around the original, add some modding love and push it out. I just can't follow the logic in any way with this release as it is now.

it is business-all-about-money the way it is, imho. There is no place for some love.

 

[Splinterdog]

No manual save is very disappointing

 

[lexluthermiester]

No manual save is very disappointing

Wait, they took it out? WTH?

 

[drewpts]

No manual save is very disappointing

for example, Metro 1 & 2 do not have such function also, though...

anyhow, here is a good article:

Crysis Remastered PC tech review: brutal performance limits can't be overlooked

Digital Foundry's love of Crysis is well documented and the announcement of its remastering remains one of our highligh…

www.eurogamer.net

 

[Splinterdog]

Wait, they took it out? WTH?

It's all checkpoints now and I'm a save-monkey wherever possible

 

[Tomgang]

Buy can it run Crysis. Oh god, it has returned from the coffin of dead memes

But frankly. While shaders, texture and such has been enhanced. The game still suffering from the same problem as the original game dit. Bad use of cpu core/threads. That means low fps at high settings because cpu/gpu simply aren't used sufficiently.

 

[Apocalypsee]

No manual save is very disappointing

That's what you got when you wanted to remaster a PC game but using the console port to port it back to PC.

 

[lexluthermiester]

but using the console port to port it back to PC.

You don't and can't know that. It's also very doubtful as the console version never had the configurability of the PC version and it would be easier to port the PC version rather than try to add all the functionality into a console port. Sheer nonsense..

 

[Apocalypsee]

You don't and can't know that. It's also very doubtful as the console version never had the configurability of the PC version and it would be easier to port the PC version rather than try to add all the functionality into a console port. Sheer nonsense..

When it have the same bugs and missing level as console version you know it's ported from the consoles. If they updated the OG game it shouldnt have that.

 

[Vya Domus]

You don't and can't know that. It's also very doubtful as the console version never had the configurability of the PC version and it would be easier to port the PC version rather than try to add all the functionality into a console port. Sheer nonsense..

Digital Foundry talked extensively to Crytek and confirmed it is indeed using the PS3/360 branch of the CryEngine 3 at core. In fact they did a comprehensive analysis and found that it's missing some of the exact same effects that were removed back when that port was made.

You really think they would have ported this from the original CryEngine 2 to current gen consoles when there was already an existing port to 3 with many tools already made ? How could have that being easier ?

 

[kayjay010101]

You don't and can't know that. It's also very doubtful as the console version never had the configurability of the PC version and it would be easier to port the PC version rather than try to add all the functionality into a console port. Sheer nonsense..

Port CryEngine2 game to CryEngine3 (again!) or
Port CryEngine3 game from console to PC and add some configurability
Seems the latter is easier to me, and the fact they already did it (Crysis on console was ported to CryEngine3) makes it all the more likely.
Then add the bugs from the console port remaining in this version.. and the missing levels.. yeah, it's pretty obvious it's the console port.

 

[lexluthermiester]

When it have the same bugs and missing level as console version you know it's ported from the consoles. If they updated the OG game it shouldnt have that.

Digital Foundry talked extensively to Crytek and confirmed it is indeed using the PS3/360 branch of the CryEngine 3 at core. In fact they did a comprehensive analysis and found that it's missing some of the exact same effects that were removed back when that port was made.

You really think they would have ported this from the original CryEngine 2 to current gen consoles when there was already an existing port to 3 with many tools already made ? How could have that being easier ?

Port CryEngine2 game to CryEngine3 (again!) or
Port CryEngine3 game from console to PC and add some configurability
Seems the latter is easier to me, and the fact they already did it (Crysis on console was ported to CryEngine3) makes it all the more likely.
Then add the bugs from the console port remaining in this version.. and the missing levels.. yeah, it's pretty obvious it's the console port.

Ok, lets see a citation. Let's see a statement from the Crytek devs that clearly states they are using the port. Let me help you out there, none of you will be able to. Why? Simple, they didn't. Makes no sense on any level. Using a port compiled for risc based PPC CPU's to make a PC remaster instead of just using the PC version as a base is just stupid. Screen door on a submarine kind of stupid.

 

[FinneousPJ]

Ok, lets see a citation. Let's see a statement from the Crytek devs that clearly states they are using the port. Let me help you out there, none of you will be able to. Why? Simple, they didn't. Makes no sense on any level. Using a port compiled for risc based PPC CPU's to make a PC remaster instead of just using the PC version as a base is just stupid. Screen door on a submarine kind of stupid.

Let's see a statement they ported the PC version, which was your claim. Let me help you there, you won't be able to

 

[lexluthermiester]

Let's see a statement they ported the PC version, which was your claim. Let me help you there, you won't be able to

Aww, that's adorable, you trying to troll like that. Put a cork in your pie-hole.

 

[kayjay010101]

Ok, lets see a citation. Let's see a statement from the Crytek devs that clearly states they are using the port. Let me help you out there, none of you will be able to. Why? Simple, they didn't. Makes no sense on any level. Using a port compiled for risc based PPC CPU's to make a PC remaster instead of just using the PC version as a base is just stupid. Screen door on a submarine kind of stupid.

The burden of proof is on you. All evidence points to the fact that they are using the console ports. Eurogamer (who got early access to the game and spoke to the developers in a series of videos and articles...) seems to think the same, and the rest of the internet does. The exact same missions are missing (why would they intentionally remove them from the port if it used the original?). The exact same bugs are present:
"The Xbox 360/PS3 foundation affects other areas of the game, like the occasional low frame-rate animations you see in the vegetation, or how grenades and explosions no longer cause vegetation to move and sway. It's also seen in how the fences and physics objects break in more simplified ways and into bigger chunks than Crysis 2007, or how there are missing shadows from certain lights, or missing shadows from certain objects, or just reduced quality shading in many areas. Alternatively, consider the way that clouds are rendered: the original Crysis used ray marched volumetric clouds at times, but these are missing in the remaster, replaced by inferior alpha transparencies".

The fact that the original mostly leveraged a single core while the remaster is able to use more is also indicative of it being from the console port:
"Thankfully, the developers did have access to the last-gen console ports, which moved a game that operated mostly on a single core to leverage six available hardware threads (or SPUs in the case of PS3). Regardless, this still required extensive optimisation on Switch to deliver the same workloads using just three CPU cores"

I still think it would have been easier overall and better in the end to port the original from Cryengine2 to Cryengine3, so we're in agreement there, it's just not the route Crytek went with for this one.

 

[londiste]

Crysis Remastered PC tech review: brutal performance limits can't be overlooked

Digital Foundry's love of Crysis is well documented and the announcement of its remastering remains one of our highligh…

www.eurogamer.net

Examples in video start at 15:17:

 

[Super XP]

Crysis is a terribly designed game. In comparison, DOOM & DOOM Eternal run like a dream on any gaming PC and looks better. Crysis sucks the resources out of your system and gives you back nothing in return.

 

[londiste]

Crysis is a terribly designed game. In comparison, DOOM & DOOM Eternal run like a dream on any gaming PC and looks better. Crysis sucks the resources out of your system and gives you back nothing in return.

Crysis is from 2007 when dual core CPUs were a pretty newfangled thing. DOOM is from 2016, almost 10 years newer. The part where DOOM makes better use of conptemporary hardware really should not come as a surprise

 

[Frick]

Crysis is a terribly designed game. In comparison, DOOM & DOOM Eternal run like a dream on any gaming PC and looks better. Crysis sucks the resources out of your system and gives you back nothing in return.

Crysis is one of the very few shooters I have actually finished, because the game was just good (when playing on the the highest difficulty).

 

[pantherx12]

The included benchmark is 32bit which is why it crashes at higher settings and stutters crazily.

This port is atrocious and epic won't refund me.

 

[Apocalypsee]

Crysis Remastered PC tech review: brutal performance limits can't be overlooked

Digital Foundry's love of Crysis is well documented and the announcement of its remastering remains one of our highligh…

www.eurogamer.net

Examples in video start at 15:17:

Yep that's a great comparison between version. I don't know why people defending this remastered like it's the best thing happen to Crysis franchise.