This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

If Crisis is so hard to run

#11KabtheMentatPosted 3/26/2014 5:54:04 PM
Orestes417 posted...
Lootman posted...
Orestes417 posted...
You want something that'll blow your mind? Think about how new processor architectures are designed and tested on current tech.


how does that become mind blowing?


You're designing tech on the very machines that tech makes obsolete. They're by definition incapable of running it at full speed yet they're used to build and test it.


Eventually robots will build themselves and kill us all!!!!!!
---
Yeeaah...Somebody must've killed Darryl. Cuz that's what the guy had said.
#12LordSeiferPosted 3/26/2014 5:54:11 PM
they dont produce the game in real time 60fps
---
^ this
#13ConkerPosted 3/26/2014 8:46:12 PM
KabtheMentat posted...
1337toothbrush posted...
KabtheMentat posted...
Workstations are considerably more powerful than most gaming PCs. Also, like most PC games, it was probably terribly optimized.


Yeah, it was so terribly optimized that it stayed at the top of the graphics game years after its release, doing things that a lot of games still don't do to this day (many rigid bodies, lots of cloth physics, huge draw distance, global illumination, parallax occlusion mapping, per-object motion blur, etc).


None of that has any bearing on it being poorly optimized though. There's tons of pretty games that still run like **** on hardware that's more than able to do it.


You're mistaking "optimized" for "running on low-end hardware." That is not the case. A game that runs on a Pentium 4 and a Radeon 9800 pro but is released today doesn't make it well optimized.

Regardless, Crysis could run on a wide range of hardware by lowering settings and it still looked damn good compared to almost any other game at the time because it made effective use of hardware. The internet (and the marketing) just made it to be one of those games hyped for the graphics and needing to upgrade to run it.

Compare it to something like Diablo 3 that looks like a 10 year old game but can run on old hardware...is it well optimized? No, not at all. It being designed with lower-end graphics does not mean it's the most effective use of the hardware of today. If anything it's NOT optimized and scales like s***.
---
Lets Go: Lions, Red Wings, Tigers, Pistons!
#14drinkPosted 3/26/2014 9:04:04 PM
Orestes417 posted...
Lootman posted...
Orestes417 posted...
You want something that'll blow your mind? Think about how new processor architectures are designed and tested on current tech.


how does that become mind blowing?


You're designing tech on the very machines that tech makes obsolete. They're by definition incapable of running it at full speed yet they're used to build and test it.


Don't think it works like that.
---
You didn't try google, you made that up...
Twist those dirty bags - Shake
#15SilentHawk29Posted 3/26/2014 10:01:26 PM
KabtheMentat posted...
None of that has any bearing on it being poorly optimized though. There's tons of pretty games that still run like **** on hardware that's more than able to do it.


What are you comparing Crysis to to come to the conclusion that it is unoptimized?
---
PSN - Srikar || Steam - SilentHawk29
My car: http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/8583/86coupe.jpg
#16DarkZV2BetaPosted 3/26/2014 10:14:09 PM
The best hardware available at the time. Likely SLI 8800GTX machines with high end Core 2 Quad or Core 2 Duo processors.
---
god invented extension cords. -elchris79
Starcraft 2 has no depth or challenge -GoreGross
#17KarnRX78Posted 3/26/2014 10:20:57 PM
Orestes417 posted...
The word "optimized" needs to die before it becomes completely meaningless. The Crysis engine was one of the more scalable ones to date.

---
21B64R09E14A35K92T29H45E17W43A82L95L19S57D36O18W39N8Y2J
(V)0-0(V) This is Mudcrab. Copy and paste him into your signature to help him achieve world Domination.
#18Silver Shadow XPosted 3/26/2014 10:22:42 PM
It's weird, you spelled it Crisis and it actually took me 5 seconds to figure out what on earth you were referring to.
---
I suppose I should probably update this signature soon.
#19FlyinTonitePosted 3/26/2014 11:07:47 PM
crysis was optimized just fine, but like crysis 3 (and 2) it needs top of the line machines to max out at 60fps. Metro: Last Light, on the other hand, is an example of a game that is optimized fairly poorly.
---
Sony fanboys are the most annoying, Nintendo fanboys are the most ignorant and Microsoft fanboys are adorable because they think they're people.
#20Lemur_HPosted 3/26/2014 11:18:42 PM
FlyinTonite posted...
crysis was optimized just fine, but like crysis 3 (and 2) it needs top of the line machines to max out at 60fps


Except for the sections of Crysis that would drop you from 60, no matter what. I doubt it has gotten any better with our 2013, or later, hardware. No matter how much money you spent, you would inevitably hit that CPU bottleneck in Crysis.

Good thing they were much more common in the sucky half of the game. xD