Minimum PC system requirements revealed for Crysis 2

[Guest]

Forget you guys. While you're worrying about whether your hardware will slag trying to run the game at 1920x1080 max details, I'll be laughing while I own you online at 1280x720 med/high.

 

[princeton]

Guest said:
Forget you guys. While you're worrying about whether your hardware will slag trying to run the game at 1920x1080 max details, I'll be laughing while I own you online at 1280x720 med/high.

No you wont. We'll get a higher viewdistance and FOV then you will.

 

[captaincranky]

Forget you guys. While you're worrying about whether your hardware will slag trying to run the game at 1920x1080 max details, I'll be laughing while I own you online at 1280x720 med/high.

This is actually a good point. At some level the computer is only the play field, the players determine the outcome.

So then, let the man who is better at toggling his joystick, be victorious!

(Sorry, I just don't have the character to pass up an opportunity for an opening that large... "Whoops, I did it again", (Britney Spears))

 

[Guest]

1. I thought crysis was to poorly coded and that is why it ran so poorly. 2. all three games of crysis 2 are not ported and being made separately.

 

[edison5do]

Guest said:
Forget you guys. While you're worrying about whether your hardware will slag trying to run the game at 1920x1080 max details, I'll be laughing while I own you online at 1280x720 med/high.

Im with you dude.!!

I Think that my HD 5770 VapX + Athlon II X3 are ready for some overclock in order to gain some performace...IF the game look bad at 1600xXXX at med, if it looks good at med there's no nedd to worry about the high S#i%.

 

[Sarcasm]

Minimum requirements, I remember when those mattered. Wait a minute, they still don't matter. People need to have at least two or three steps higher than that to actually enjoy what it was meant for. Recommended specs is more important IMO. Even then, that still doesn't mean max settings.

For Crysis 2 I'm guessing recommended would be:

OS: Vista/Windows 7
CPU: Intel Core i5 or AMD Equivalent
4 GB RAM
HDD: 20 GB
GPU: NVIDIA GTX 460 768MB or Radeon 5850 HD

Also I remember when they said they were developing with the GTX 580 in mind, so I'm wondering what the hell does that really mean?

 

[SNGX1275]

The PC games are so great these days you can't rely on minimum specs to enjoy them!

I was mostly with you until that statement. I remember the days when you didn't have to rely on great visuals to have an enjoyable game.

 

[red1776]

I was mostly with you until that statement. I remember the days when you didn't have to rely on great visuals to have an enjoyable game.

That is true, however its kind of tough to put the kitty back in the burlap after the great graphics are put in front of you. Or are you saying that story-lines are suffering in place of graphics?

 

[Route44]

Or are you saying that story-lines are suffering in place of graphics?

Can't and won't speak for SNGX1275, but I say yes, story-line has taken, not always but often, a distant second to eye candy. The Gothic series is a good example. Compare G4 to the others, especially, G1 and 2, and G4 has beautiful graphics but a shallow plot and characters.

Thief 1 and Morrowind can't compare to today's graphics but the plot and characterization out shine most of today's releases.

 

[Lokalaskurar]

Guest said:
These requirements are surprisingly low. I mean, ATI 3850 or better? Come on.

My thoughts exactly! (Well, from the looks of it: more or less all of our thoughts exactly...)

You can put a wheel from a 1970's Toyota on a modern Ford - and it'll still run, the real question is: how far? And: how fast?

And it's sure as bacon going to look *very* bad...

 

[Relic]

Not to surprised by this considering the developers wanted a game with boarder reach when it first came out and it looks like they might have achieved this. However I'm more worried about how the gameplay changes will affect the overall game. Playing the demo I really felt weak in comparison to the original, and not all super-soldier. But this could just be a 360 thing and I'll wait and see what the PC demo brings to the table.

 

[Guest]

i will play it with my ati 4350. hope 1024x768. i will oc it.

 

[red1776]

Guest said:
i will play it with my ati 4350. hope 1024x768. i will oc it.

I think you were kidding, but I was interested if you could get off the starting line with 80 SPU's

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2630/5

 

[compu4]

TomSEA said:
BTW - I'm playing the original Crysis again and on my new rig and man, is that one sweet looking game. Nothing else comes close to it. If you haven't played it in a while and done an upgrade since the last release, I'd highly recommend giving it a 2nd run-through.

You seem to have forgotten Metro 2033, which actually looks better than Crysis does.

 

[captaincranky]

i will play it with my ati 4350. hope 1024x768. i will oc it.

I think you were kidding, but I was interested if you could get off the starting line with 80 SPU's

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2630/5

Thanx for the link. At last I have someone I can feel superior to, what with me being the proud owner of a 9500GT. (And my card is is a GDDR3 version, so there)!

 

[SNGX1275]

That is true, however its kind of tough to put the kitty back in the burlap after the great graphics are put in front of you. Or are you saying that story-lines are suffering in place of graphics?

I actually don't game much. Route44's post below yours though is pretty much what I was saying. I'm not saying that good graphics don't make games great. I played Crysis 1 on medium to high settings at 1680x1050 on my 8800GTS 320 even and I thought it looked great. I also played CoD4 on the same setup at maxed everything and it also looked great. So I guess that just proves that Crysis had better graphics at the max

I was really just replying to the one guy who said that the games today are so great you can't rely on minimum specs to enjoy them. I just thought the way that was phrased was a fundamental mistake in how to look at games. You shouldn't require insane graphics to have a good game, and in the past that didn't seem to be a big issue. There were plenty of great games without great graphics.

 

[captaincranky]

I was really just replying to the one guy who said that the games today are so great you can't rely on minimum specs to enjoy them. I just thought the way that was phrased was a fundamental mistake in how to look at games. You shouldn't require insane graphics to have a good game, and in the past that didn't seem to be a big issue. There were plenty of great games without great graphics.

Yeah BUT....it seems that modern expectations of a great game have become a Zen paradigm, where the baby and the bathwater are all one.

If that metaphor is too obtuse, I dare you to tell me so, since I'll be forced to elaborate....

 

[Sarcasm]

compu4 said:

TomSEA said:
BTW - I'm playing the original Crysis again and on my new rig and man, is that one sweet looking game. Nothing else comes close to it. If you haven't played it in a while and done an upgrade since the last release, I'd highly recommend giving it a 2nd run-through.

You seem to have forgotten Metro 2033, which actually looks better than Crysis does.

IMO Metro 2033 does have more effects, but it doesn't look better. It looks too generic to me actually. The character models all look the same, the guns shoots like ***, and overall it's a boring game.

 

[captaincranky]

IMO Metro 2033 does have more effects, but it doesn't look better. It looks too generic to me actually. The character models all look the same, the guns shoots like ***, and overall it's a boring game.

I think you forgot to salt the wounds by mentioning that "Metro 2033", actually may have higher hardware requirements than "Crysis".

 

[red1776]

Yeah BUT....it seems that modern expectations of a great game have become a Zen paradigm, where the baby and the bathwater are all one.

If that metaphor is too obtuse, I dare you to tell me so, since I'll be forced to elaborate....

...Why.... what an insanely obtuse metaphor! ....and 3,2,1...

I think you forgot to salt the wounds by mentioning that "Metro 2033", actually may have higher hardware requirements than "Crysis".

It does..much higher. The recommended req's are a i7 920 and a GTX 480.

Originally Posted by Sarcasm View Post
IMO Metro 2033 does have more effects, but it doesn't look better. It looks too generic to me actually

well that's a subjective matter, but there is not anything in Crysis that looks like this
https://www.techspot.com/gallery/member-galleries/p3900-metro-2033.html
https://www.techspot.com/gallery/member-galleries/p4007-requested-metro-2033-screens.html

 

[captaincranky]

...Why.... what an insanely obtuse metaphor! ....and 3,2,1...

OH...KAY... then... the "game content" is the baby, and the "game graphics", are the bathwater. I sincerely hope we've clarified that to the further betterment of this thread in general.

 

[T77]

well i have a 9500gt.what say!?!
perhaps i should buy a ps3

 

[Guest]

Crysis has better texture quality than any other game i tried (it has 1GB of texture data!!), what does it mean? ok if you look at any objects (weapons, vehicles, trees etc.) in the game much closer then you will see more detailed fine, sharp pixels instead of boxy and blurred pixels that you usually see in most of the games out there with few exceptions. So the minimum req is a pinch of salt and should not be taken so serious because these morons never going to mention the resolution tested in which quality settings while maintaining the minimum playable 30 fps or an average obtained?

My guess is: (overall medium settings with 2x AA, guaranteed min 30 fps or above)

1024*768 (HD 4670/9600 GT or higher)
1280*960, 1360*768 & 1440*900 (HD4850/9800GT/X or higher)
1600*900 (GTX 260/275/HD 4870/90 or higher)

i didn't mention any new generation gfx for above resolution just replace with relevant new cards and they do better with some upped image quality settings.

(Overall high quality settings with 2xAA, guaranteed min 30 fps or above)

1920*1080/1200 (GTX 560Ti/ HD 6870 or higher) (OCed can play at Enthusiastic settings)
2560*1600 (GTX 580/HD 6970/5970 or SLI/CF of GTX 560/HD 6870 or higher) (dual gfx config can able to play Enthu settings)

this is how it gonna work.

 

[Sarcasm]

red1776 said:

Yeah BUT....it seems that modern expectations of a great game have become a Zen paradigm, where the baby and the bathwater are all one.

If that metaphor is too obtuse, I dare you to tell me so, since I'll be forced to elaborate....

...Why.... what an insanely obtuse metaphor! ....and 3,2,1...

I think you forgot to salt the wounds by mentioning that "Metro 2033", actually may have higher hardware requirements than "Crysis".

It does..much higher. The recommended req's are a i7 920 and a GTX 480.

Originally Posted by Sarcasm View Post
IMO Metro 2033 does have more effects, but it doesn't look better. It looks too generic to me actually

well that's a subjective matter, but there is not anything in Crysis that looks like this
https://www.techspot.com/gallery/member-galleries/p3900-metro-2033.html
https://www.techspot.com/gallery/member-galleries/p4007-requested-metro-2033-screens.html

Yes nothing in Crysis looks like those Metro 2033 screenshots... because it looks literally miles better. In Metro, there are a lot of closed corridors and small linear paths, but Crysis is an open world feast filled with lighting, water, tons and tons of vegetation and even animals. Coupled that with insanely high res character models, I'm sorry Metro doesn't compare.

Now of course I did say Metro has more "effects" such as HDR, Tessellation, DoF, etc. etc. but the overall look TO ME doesn't look that great.

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/screenshots/original/2009/07/Crysis_Downsampling_6400x4000___2560.jpg
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/screenshots/original/2009/07/Crysis_Downsampling_6400x4000_8.jpg

 

[Guest]

Nice fail links there :|