Crysis 2 delayed until early 2011, dated GPUs rejoice

By on August 4, 2010, 9:30 AM
If you were expecting to find a copy of Crysis 2 under the Christmas tree, we have some tough news to break: it's not happening -- at least not this Christmas. Previously set to debut during the holidays, EA announced yesterday during its earnings report that the sequel won't ship until the publisher's fiscal fourth quarter, or early next year.

EA didn't give a detailed reason for moving the title to a launch sometime between January and March. Besides saying the title was bumped to a "better marketing window," the company said it would provide the Crytek team with more time to polish the forthcoming sequel. Speculation suggests the delay is related the addition of 3D graphics.


Assuming there are no more delays, the gaming scene will be rather chaotic come early 2011. EA itself plans to release Dead Space 2, Bulletstorm, Darkspore, Fight Night Champion, and Need for Speed: Shift 2. In the meantime, we're here if you need a shoulder to cry on. And hey, on the bright side StarCraft 2 has launched -- in case that hasn't sunk in yet.




User Comments: 47

Got something to say? Post a comment
TomSEA TomSEA, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

GOOD! That'll give me some extra time to finish off the other 50 games I've bought through Steam sales over the last year. ;-)

Guest said:

Not to mention the next round of GPUs may appear around this time, and the current round will be cheaper. Although waiting longer sucks, there are benefits!

Wagan8r Wagan8r said:

Well, here's to hoping they put that extra time to good use and polish the heck out of it. I really, really want Crysis 2 to do well so that it can squash all of the haters. Crytek, keep up the good work, and don't forget your loyal PC fans.

Alster37 Alster37 said:

I suppose its a good thing in a way, as it does give people extra time to spruce up thier pc's. and the game will no doubt be better of course.

Burty117 Burty117, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!

I upgraded my PC with better stuff a few days back in prep for this!

Not a joke, i'm going to have a little cry when I go to bed tonight ;(

Please Crytek make this the best game i have ever played

RuskiSnajper said:

Heheh , I skipped Radeons 5000 series and will jump to 6000 , good for crysis 2 , new cod , doom 4 , rage , and just maybe Duke Nukem Forever

princeton princeton said:

Hopefully by then we'll have some PC trailers. Every trailer out is on an xbox or ps3 and looks piss poor compared to the first game.

Relic Relic, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

A little sad by this news since I was looking forward to playing it this holiday season, but as most of you point out this gives everyone more time with other games and to hold off on a GPU upgrade.

princeton said:

Hopefully by then we'll have some PC trailers. Every trailer out is on an xbox or ps3 and looks piss poor compared to the first game.

My understanding is they've been intentionally demoing the game on the worst platform graphically speaking /shurg. My biggest concern however is the game play changes and that it might be to corridor like since they are in NYC rather then open world.

Modena said:

Good news to me I should have my new system and hopefully 2 460GTXs in SLI by then.

Leeky Leeky said:

Everyone talks about this Crysis game so much, it almost makes me want to see what the fuss is all about...

Except my PC would likely melt under strain if everything I've read about how demanding it is, is true!

Wagan8r Wagan8r said:

Leeky said:

Everyone talks about this Crysis game so much, it almost makes me want to see what the fuss is all about...

Except my PC would likely melt under strain if everything I've read about how demanding it is, is true!

Everything you've read is probably overblown due to fanboyism. Back in 2007, it was crazy demanding, but in 2010, you don't have to break the bank to play it. What are your system specs, including make and model (assuming you didn't build your PC)? Chances are, you can just add a GTX 460 and be on easy street for the next few years, which includes being able to play Crysis 2.

ansarimikail said:

I am sooooo disappointed, I mean I spec my machines with the highest standards (within budget) to run crysis at the lowest quality and then they go and do this. Now I'll have to upgrade again :-(, when it comes out just to barely be able to run it, Again.

princeton princeton said:

Relic said:

A little sad by this news since I was looking forward to playing it this holiday season, but as most of you point out this gives everyone more time with other games and to hold off on a GPU upgrade.

princeton said:

Hopefully by then we'll have some PC trailers. Every trailer out is on an xbox or ps3 and looks piss poor compared to the first game.

My understanding is they've been intentionally demoing the game on the worst platform graphically speaking /shurg. My biggest concern however is the game play changes and that it might be to corridor like since they are in NYC rather then open world.

It's just a fact they chose new york to get it to run on consoles. The game has buildings blocking things and you going in corridors so it doesn't have to render as much. If people think they could have it "Surpass the first game" in a jungle environment they are very mistaken.

EXCellR8 EXCellR8, The Conservative, said:

called it, everything is getting pushed to next year...

now i think i will wait on a new graphics card for sure, or maybe a nice xmas gift at least

Richy2k9 said:

hello ...

OK, with the lots of games i have on console & PC, it will indeed give me some time to finish them & also to build a new machine, sure hope they do a very good PC version.

cheers!

Leeky Leeky said:

Everything you've read is probably overblown due to fanboyism. Back in 2007, it was crazy demanding, but in 2010, you don't have to break the bank to play it. What are your system specs, including make and model (assuming you didn't build your PC)? Chances are, you can just add a GTX 460 and be on easy street for the next few years, which includes being able to play Crysis 2.

I have:

Dell Vostro 420 PC

2x 22" Viewsonics

Foxconn Mobo (Dell supplied)

Intel Core2Quad Q8200 2.33ghz

4GB DDR2 800mhz RAM

(I can't remember the name but its aftermarket replacement) Ati Radeon HD 4670 with 1GB DDR3

Oh and a rather expensive 256GB Crucial SSD.

EXCellR8 EXCellR8, The Conservative, said:

4870 > gtx 260

princeton princeton said:

EXCellR8 said:

4870 > gtx 260

That is a complete and utter lie. The gtx 260 and hd 4870 go back and forth between better performance in different games. And as we all know Cryengine favors nvidia GPUs. So your comment is complete rubbish.

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

With regards the HD 4870 v GTX 260 debate...I think you'll find that there are only a couple of sites that retest each card using the newer drivers. TPU's test suite has 90 benchmarks of which 46 favour the 4870 , and 44 favour the GTX. Neither is what you would call a runaway winner.

Point to note that the HD 4870 in the test evaluation is a 512Mb, not a 1Gb model, although there's not much difference between the two.

The charts over at Tom's tell the same story

dcrosenthal said:

WAIT WAIT WAIT!!!!!!!!! HOLD ON>>>>> I just found this website today and think it great but.....Crysis delayed? says who? Go on there website and it still says holiday 2010! http://www.ea.com/games/crysis-2 so I do not think it will be delayed but anything is possible... this is my thinking.... crysis has A LOT of people working on the game so if it got delayed at least one person could change the website! Its not like its hard.... So how factual is this?

AND PS.... how could the holiday season not be a good time to release a game? that way everyone could ask for it as a Christmas gift. January is the worse time to release a game due to no one having money and February is right around that area to. March is tax time so that would be an ok month but still...

princeton princeton said:

dcrosenthal said:

WAIT WAIT WAIT!!!!!!!!! HOLD ON>>>>> I just found this website today and think it great but.....Crysis delayed? says who? Go on there website and it still says holiday 2010! http://www.ea.com/games/crysis-2 so I do not think it will be delayed but anything is possible... this is my thinking.... crysis has A LOT of people working on the game so if it got delayed at least one person could change the website! Its not like its hard.... So how factual is this?

AND PS.... how could the holiday season not be a good time to release a game? that way everyone could ask for it as a Christmas gift. January is the worse time to release a game due to no one having money and February is right around that area to. March is tax time so that would be an ok month but still...

Guess what. This is OFFICIAL INFO. It's delayed. End of story.

princeton princeton said:

dividebyzero said:

With regards the HD 4870 v GTX 260 debate...I think you'll find that there are only a couple of sites that retest each card using the newer drivers. TPU's test suite has 90 benchmarks of which 46 favour the 4870 , and 44 favour the GTX. Neither is what you would call a runaway winner.

Point to note that the HD 4870 in the test evaluation is a 512Mb, not a 1Gb model, although there's not much difference between the two.

The charts over at Tom's tell the same story

God you contribute so much to this site. You deserve your own section. Thanks for the links.

Relic Relic, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

@Leeky That system should be more then capable of running Crysis, just mess around with the settings to see what works best and preferably run the game in DX9. If you're into shooters you really should check it out and I'd recommend the maximum edition since you get both Crysis & Warhead.

princeton said:

It's just a fact they chose new york to get it to run on consoles. The game has buildings blocking things and you going in corridors so it doesn't have to render as much. If people think they could have it "Surpass the first game" in a jungle environment they are very mistaken.

Of course but that doesn't mean it has to be all linear which is what I was trying to get at. While Crysis did have its linear moments like all FPS games it still felt open and I hope they can achieve this as well in Crysis 2. Articles I've read so far do indicate that it's smaller then the original but compared to other FPS games quite large. I guess we'll see when it comes out if they "dumbed" down the game or adapted it well for multiplatform.

Leeky Leeky said:

@Relic

I'm somewhat suprised actually. I didn't really consider my PC capable of playing the latest games! Maybe I'll consider it, the more time I spend on here the more curious I'm getting about trying games out on my PC - If anything to see the difference between our games consoles and a PC.

One question though; Whats DX9? And DX10/11 for that matter. lol.

grvalderrama said:

Leeky said:

@Relic

I'm somewhat suprised actually. I didn't really consider my PC capable of playing the latest games! Maybe I'll consider it, the more time I spend on here the more curious I'm getting about trying games out on my PC - If anything to see the difference between our games consoles and a PC.

One question though; Whats DX9? And DX10/11 for that matter. lol.

Directx 9/10/11 are graphic and sound drivers used by Windows.The greater the number the greater the experience of sound and graphic quality (specially graphic)... also, greater consuption of resources (GPU, CPU, RAM).

Look up for it in youtube, there are videos about the difference between one and the other!

Cheers!

Leeky Leeky said:

Thanks for the explanation. I'll be sure to hunt it down on youtube shortly.

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

Directx 9/10/11 are graphic and sound drivers used by Windows.

Not really.

DirectX is a graphics API (Application Programming Interface) for Microsoft. OpenGL soon to be joined by OpenCL, are open source equivalents.

Relic Relic, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

@Leeky

While the GPU you have may be entry level it still should play most games on a lower resolution with some sacrificed eye candy. And DBZ is right about DX, if you care to know more read up here too.

But the basics you need to understand is that Windows XP supports DX9 or lower and only Vista/7 supports DX10/11 or lower. And your GPU needs to support the proper DX as well, a 4670 supports up to DX10.1 but I don't recommend using it since its entry level. Stick with DX9 and you should be good to go. I've used a 4670 in another system for several DX9 games just fine but can't comment on Crysis. Just don't expect night and day differences from console to PC with your setup.

teklord teklord said:

It still takes a hella powerful system to run Crysis @ constant 60 FPS which is my goal for all games. You need like two HD 5970's in CF to achieve that @ 1920X1200 rez. At my res, 1280x1024, you could probably do it with a powerful single GPU like GTX 480 and a powerful dual core at least like E8600. Crysis doesn't recognize more than two core CPU's.

red1776 red1776, Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe, said:

teklord said:

It still takes a hella powerful system to run Crysis @ constant 60 FPS which is my goal for all games. You need like two HD 5970's in CF to achieve that @ 1920X1200 rez. At my res, 1280x1024, you could probably do it with a powerful single GPU like GTX 480 and a powerful dual core at least like E8600. Crysis doesn't recognize more than two core CPU's.

I don't think that is true Tek, I logged CPU activity while playing Crysis yesterday and found significant activity on 4 of my six cores.

I have no idea about the validity of this, but I am reading that the next gen of games are going to be able to use any and all cores available on any given system, weather it will be a meaningful use of them remains to be seen. stay tuned I guess.

EXCellR8 EXCellR8, The Conservative, said:

Crysis 1 can utilize 4 cores... and i was able to play the game 1080p with a single 512MB 4870 (with reasonable frames) so I doubt dual 5970s is required to play @ 1920x1200. Of course there's more to be said if you are using DX9 or DX10 but the visual quality isn't too much different. There's a few DX10 effects that look nice, but you don't need them to enjoy and play the game

red1776 red1776, Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe, said:

I think that the delay has to do more with the late incorporation of DX11. I dont think they were going to originally use it, but then they made the promise of "the best looking graphics of all time" and then Metro 2033 set the bar. I think they need more time to code it to include heavy tessellation and ambient occlussion lighting, depth of field, etc...just a theory

EXCellR8 EXCellR8, The Conservative, said:

lol Metro 2033 looked like garbage... i really hope they were joking. maybe you are thinking of Stalker?

red1776 red1776, Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe, said:

lol Metro 2033 looked like garbage... i really hope they were joking. maybe you are thinking of Stalker?

Really?, I didn't think so. It was not 'refined' and maybe released a little prematurely, but it had some amazing effects like the depth of field was spectacular: Have you got to play it in DX11 yet?

[link]

But yes, I am a big fan of the STALKER series. I use the Artistpavel Mods, ( The Complete) series they are incredible.

http://artistpavel.blogspot.com/

[link]

Leeky Leeky said:

@Leeky

While the GPU you have may be entry level it still should play most games on a lower resolution with some sacrificed eye candy. And DBZ is right about DX, if you care to know more read up here too.

But the basics you need to understand is that Windows XP supports DX9 or lower and only Vista/7 supports DX10/11 or lower. And your GPU needs to support the proper DX as well, a 4670 supports up to DX10.1 but I don't recommend using it since its entry level. Stick with DX9 and you should be good to go. I've used a 4670 in another system for several DX9 games just fine but can't comment on Crysis. Just don't expect night and day differences from console to PC with your setup.

I think I'll give it a try and see what happens. I don't even own a copy of Crysis anyway, so would need to purchase it yet.

I've been thinking about getting a i5 750 for a few days now anyway, as I could really do with support for VT-x - My Q8300 doesn't support it, and I could really do with having Windows 2008 R2 on my Virtualbox. I

f I go ahead, I think I'll be changing to DDR3 RAM, and I'll even consider a Radeon 5xxx GPU. I'm kind of attached to this Dell though, so who knows! lol.

Thank you for the DX link above, I'll be sure to add this to my shortcut's to check out later on.

Is there any demo's of Crysis that are legal and free to download? So I can see how it reacts to the game?

EXCellR8 EXCellR8, The Conservative, said:

@red

I've tried both Metro and Call of Pripyat in DX11 (not my own setup though) and I have to say I think Stalker walks all over 2033. Maybe I'm just a Stalker fanboy (most likely) but Metro just seemed thrown together and graphically confusing. There were some nice effects and all but at the end of the day I didn't think it looked as nice as Stalker and wasn't nearly as fun

That Artistpavel stuff looks intense though, now I'm really exited that I never got around to finishing Call of Pripyat. Hopefully that one gets released soon as the only mod I used for the first two games was that lame Float32 stuff. I will definitely be looking into that when it's released, and especially since I'm using a 5870 now. Thanks for the link!

red1776 red1776, Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe, said:

@red

I've tried both Metro and Call of Pripyat in DX11 (not my own setup though) and I have to say I think Stalker walks all over 2033. Maybe I'm just a Stalker fanboy (most likely) but Metro just seemed thrown together and graphically confusing. There were some nice effects and all but at the end of the day I didn't think it looked as nice as Stalker and wasn't nearly as fun

That Artistpavel stuff looks intense though, now I'm really exited that I never got around to finishing Call of Pripyat. Hopefully that one gets released soon as the only mod I used for the first two games was that lame Float32 stuff. I will definitely be looking into that when it's released, and especially since I'm using a 5870 now. Thanks for the link!

I agree completely, about Metro, it was more of a DX11 "teaser" cool effects to look at, but was not put together very well. by the way, I am a STALKER 'fanboy as well...all three of them. If you use the Artistpavel mods on SOC and CS its like a different game and well worth playing the game again! They are also very stable mods, and compatible with Steam as well. If you do try them, let me know what you think.

EXCellR8 EXCellR8, The Conservative, said:

yea i was reading up on all the bug fixes, which is huge for me, because it seemed like i was always running into something while playing. this was an unfortunate hurdle because the games were really quite stunning imo but lacked engine optimizations and was riddled with bugs upon launch. from the screenshots on the Artistpavel site, I can already see the improvements. i can't wait to see them in realtime! i may have to reinstall Clear Sky while I'm waiting for the DX11 mod to launch, because i've played SoC a few too many times. CoP was great but i had problems with CF enabled; never figured out why. needless to say i will be picking it up again with the 5870.

red1776 red1776, Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe, said:

It does fix all the bugs i found, i was really impressed. I had good luck with 3x and 4x crossfire with the Stalker series, so if I can help, let me know ECX

EXCellR8 EXCellR8, The Conservative, said:

yea it doesn't matter much now, i'm down to one 4870 and my 5870 arrives tomorrow, so I think I'm set haha. thanks though, i will probably jump back into playing it once i rebuild my entire system next month; may need your help then. i haven't played the game since March, and i was playing without CF because it kept locking up my system in under 5 minutes--which really irritated me. CF worked great with most other games so i just sort of let it go.

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

I've been thinking about getting a i5 750 for a few days now anyway, as I could really do with support for VT-x - My Q8300 doesn't support it, and I could really do with having Windows 2008 R2 on my Virtualbox.

If you're reluctant to break up your relationship with the Dell...a crysis of conscience perhaps?...You could swap out the Q8300 for any Q or QX9xxx series CPU- all of which are VT-x enabled.

If I go ahead, I think I'll be changing to DDR3 RAM, and I'll even consider a Radeon 5xxx GPU. I'm kind of attached to this Dell though, so who knows! lol.

If you decide on a Core i5/i7 based system then DDR3 is your only option. Memory bandwidth benchmarks aside, there isn't a great deal of difference in real world performance between DDR2 and DDR3 until you start pushing the RAM past 1800-2000 (which of course means an overclocked CPU)

Is there any demo's of Crysis that are legal and free to download? So I can see how it reacts to the game?

I'm not sure if the demo is still valid, but it's still listed as a download. The game should be also reasonably inexpensive at such places as eBay if you find the game appealing. Be sure to optimise the game to get the best possible gameplay and graphics. A tweaked DX9 path is virtually indistinguishable to the stock DX10.

Leeky Leeky said:

@DBZ

I have another Dell here, with a Q8300 - Mine is actually a Q8200 - Intel's site doesn't really tell me if VT-x is enabled though, just says see below and doesn't really explain itself. lol.

The other issue with this is, even if the CPU supports it, there is no guarantee my BIOS/motherboard will - So I might have to bite the bullet - I'll have a look on my Dell Studio Q8300 at some point and see if that will let it run.

If I'm going to have to get another motherboard, then I'm just going to go the i5 route personally. For now though, I'm just going to live with it - The expense its a tad much to justify when my PC(s) are still working. lol.

I did kind of get the impression my DDR2 would be useless. I still don't think it would make any difference with day to day running, which is why I never went the DDR3 route in the beginning.

I'll download the game now. I'll give an excuse to boot into Windows.

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

Crafty ol' Intel.

Long story short. No Q8200 has VT-x, if it's a low-voltage Q8200S then there are two models. sSpec number SLG9T doesn't have VT-x, while sSpec number SLGSS does.

The story is much the same for the Q8300.

SLB5W -no VT-x

SLGUR does have VT-x

If the system came as a pre-built with no CPU box etc. Then the easiest way to find out would be to download a small program called CPU-Z . Run it and it will tell you in the "instructions" box. I have posted a screenshot here: (News and comments threads don't allow me to post an image directly)

Leeky Leeky said:

@DBZ

I've attached a screenshot. It's as I expected to be honest!

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

Well that leaves the upgrade- Q8300 (SLGUR), Q8400, Q9300, Q9400, Q9450 and Q9550. All of these CPU's were introduced prior (or in the case of the 8300/8400 at the same time) to the Q8200, so should most likely will be supported by your motherboard, The 8xxx series were introduced as the entry level quad (2x2Mb L2 cache) to supplement the mainstream 9x00 (2x3Mb cache) and high end 9x50 CPU's (2x6Mb cache) that were introduced early in 2008. The low-power (65w as opposed to 95w) versions (Q8200S, 8400S, 9400S and 9550S) are more recent so that would require a bit more info regarding system model/board/revision - nothing to difficult. It all depends on pricing of the upgrade CPU and whether the virtualization is worth the time, effort and expense to undertake.

Leeky Leeky said:

If I have to go down that route I'll just get a new motherboard and i5 CPU. I don't see the point in purchasing another CPU and running the risk my motherboard won't support VT-x. I might as well get hardware I know will definitely support it. I'll just use this Dell as a media centre in a smaller case or something - It'll be more than up to the task.

Let's see how I get on with this Crysis demo first! You never know, I might enjoy it!

EDIT: just tried Crysis... Its actually pretty good, though I'm still trying to get my head around the idea of using a keyboard and mouse to game!

I checked the graphics, and it seemed happy with 1024x800 (I think its 800), 2x anti-aliasing, and in the advanced menu everything set to high. The video intro's gave a few lines as it played, but the game ran perfectly fine, no ghosting, or slowdown of any kind. I did the optimal settings thing where it chooses the best settings, except I added 2x anti-alisaing.

My CPU wasn't really running even 40% load most of the time, and temps (using HWMonitor) were around 50-55'C on the 4 cores, and GPU maxed out at 67'C. The GPU load is 100% all the time though - Is that normal?

Overall, I'm actually pretty impressed my PC handled it so well!

EDIT EDIT: I've just spent the last couple of hours playing it at 1680x1050 without a single glitch whatsoever (CPU was nudging 60'C and GPU 71'C by then). I'm actually stunned, I see what everyone means by PC's having good graphics now. P.S. Time to order Crysis I think!

Relic Relic, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

Gratz Leeky enjoy the game! And those temps seem fine to me, my 4670 would reach into the 70s during intense gameplay too. Really depends on your case fans and the cards fan.

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.