Crysis Remastered's top graphics setting is called "Can it Run Crysis?" Crytek releases...

[midian182]

Something to look forward to: Crysis maker Crytek is acknowledging the original game’s infamously demanding nature and the resulting memes by naming the remastered version’s highest graphical setting “Can it Run Crysis?”

Must read: Can It Run Crysis? An Analysis of Why a 13-Year-Old Game Is Still Talked About

As most PC owners know, “Can it Run Crysis?” came about following the first game’s release in 2007. Few PCs at the time could handle the FPS, especially at higher settings, and hardware right up until a few years ago still struggled.

Today's post is dedicated to our PC community!

We want to show you, for the very first time, an in-game screenshot using the new "Can it Run Crysis?" Graphic mode, which is designed to demand every last bit of your hardware with unlimited settings - exclusively on PC! pic.twitter.com/kVHEf63oWe

— Crysis (@Crysis) September 6, 2020

In the upcoming Crysis Remastered, the game’s highest graphics setting is named after the famous phrase. Crytek says it is “designed to demand every last bit of your hardware with unlimited settings - exclusively on PC!” The company tweeted a 4K screenshot of the option, and while it does appear pretty impressive, it will doubtlessly look better in-game than on Twitter.

Redditor Filipi_7 has posted a few screenshots of the original title for comparison, including some with mods. You can see how the remaster has improved the draw distance, shadows, foliage, and more.

Crysis Remastered, check out the level of detail on far-away objects

The original Crysis, still looking good after 13 years.

The remaster also has support for textures up to 8K in resolution, temporal anti-aliasing, Screen Space Directional Occlusion (SSDO), Global Illumination (SVOGI), particle effects, and much more. Moreover, even non-RTX owners can experience software-based ray-tracing effects, thanks to the CryEngine’s “API-agnostic ray tracing solution.”

Crytek recently revealed the minimum and recommended PC specs for Crysis Remastered. With the most powerful graphics card recommendation being a humble GTX 1660 Ti, it seems there won’t be any “Can it Run Crysis Remastered?” memes this year.

Crysis Remastered lands on the Epic Games Store this September 18.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/86655-crysis-remastered-top-graphics-setting-called-can-run.html

 

[R00sT3R]

Who'd have thought back in 2007 that you'd still need to buy a top end GPU to run this game at max settings, in 2020.

..the more things change, the more they stay the same.

It would also be quite funny if before they've even installed their shiny new 10GB VRAM 3080's in their rigs, People find that 10GB VRAM is already to low an amount to run at least one game without framerates tanking...due to lack of VRAM. Followed shortly afterwards by 3090 owners showing 16-20GB VRAM being utilised in 8K texture mode.

 

[nonamepew]

This game got me into computer gaming. The graphics alone were so far ahead of its time. Since then, the graphics improvement in games is more evolutionary than revolutionary. No other game since the original Crysis had the wow factor in terms of graphics IMO.

 

[y6Tq2RGXEejb]

This game got me into computer gaming. The graphics alone were so far ahead of its time. Since then, the graphics improvement in games is more evolutionary than revolutionary. No other game since the original Crysis had the wow factor in terms of graphics IMO.

Mirror's Edge, both The Division games with their attention to detail and beautiful weather effects, Control, Death Stranding, and the new Flight Simulator - all of them are visually stunning, technologically innovative, and all of them felt to me like a major leap in scale and/or fidelity compared to anything that existed before.
Crysis was amazing, sure, but the aforementioned Division felt a lot further ahead of its time, and that is despite the apparent graphical downgrade compared to the initial E3 trailer (and it remains looking awesome without any remasters).

 

[winjer]

The colors of the vegetation on the original Crysis look much better.Much more realistic.
This remaster looks a bit cartoonish.

 

[Arbie]

"Few PCs at the time could handle the FPS, especially at higher settings."

WRONG. Crysis would run on any decent PC. I first ran it on a meek 2GHz Pentium with Geforce 4 256MB graphics card. This was at lowest possible settings but still gave a great experience. Any better PC did fine. All the hoopla then and now about it being "unplayable" was just so much clickbait / forum hate / journo BS.

Crytek made the tragic error of labeling their highest graphics settings - which were almost unusable then - "Ultra" instead of "Experimental". That gave haters the hook they needed, and the unending negative press helped divert Crytek from PCs to consoles. Sad, Sad, Sad.

 

[Arbie]

The colors of the vegetation on the original Crysis look much better.Much more realistic. This remaster looks a bit cartoonish.

And Reshade will probably make that even worse.

 

[loki1944]

Too bad the game itself is meh.

 

[Arbie]

Too bad the game itself is meh.

The Crysis quad is the best series of FPS games ever released - for about a dozen reasons. If you didn't play them enough to realize that, it's your loss. But don't think you can dismiss them with a throwaway phrase which, I hope, will not mislead those who have actually never experienced the games..

 

[Cyberdnutz]

This game was and still is a tech demo

 

[Cyberdnutz]

Evan farcry was tech demoish with hardly any game to it

 

[Arbie]

This game was and still is a tech demo

The Crysis quad is the best series of FPS games ever released - for about a dozen reasons. If you didn't play them enough to realize that, it's your loss. But don't think you can dismiss them with a throwaway phrase which, I hope, will not mislead those who have actually never experienced the games.

 

[Trackr]

"Few PCs at the time could handle the FPS, especially at higher settings."

WRONG. Crysis would run on any decent PC. I first ran it on a meek 2GHz Pentium with Geforce 4 256MB graphics card. This was at lowest possible settings but still gave a great experience. Any better PC did fine. All the hoopla then and now about it being "unplayable" was just so much clickbait / forum hate / journo BS.

Crytek made the tragic error of labeling their highest graphics settings - which were almost unusable then - "Ultra" instead of "Experimental". That gave haters the hook they needed, and the unending negative press helped divert Crytek from PCs to consoles. Sad, Sad, Sad.

I'm sorry, man, but this is completely and utterly wrong.

There was an "Ultra" setting that was, arguably, overkill.. but the other settings - "High" and "Medium" were not far off. "High" was maybe 20-30% easier to run (meaning more frames for the same hardware) and "Medium" was 50-60%.

"Low" was basically a joke setting; it made the game look worse than Far Cry (their first title from 2004). But even with that, there is NO WAY you managed to get 60 fps with a Geforce 4.

Geforce 4 (and Geforce 5) were heavily criticized, gimped GPUs that did alright in DirectX 8.0 and absolutely horrible in DirectX 9.0, which was the minimum requirement for Crysis.

I myself had a Geforce FX 5200 when Crysis came out and then immediately upgraded to a Geforce 8800 GTS - which was several orders of magnitude more powerful - like comparing a Ferrari to a tricycle, and I couldn't even play on "High" settings with a Q6600 quad-core CPU.

You must have played it at 640x480 and gotten like 20-30 fps - an absolute joke to call that "playable."

So, no, the "Can it run Crysis?" question is and was always relevant until, I'd say, 2012 when a reasonably-priced GPU could run it on "High" at 60 fps 1080p.

 

[Arbie]

You must have played it at 640x480 and gotten like 20-30 fps - an absolute joke to call that "playable."

800x600 sticks in my mind, and about 22fps. Even at that, the game was a revelation. I loved it, and moved up to a better system as soon as I could, largely to enjoy it more.

Anyway, my point was that Crysis was highly scalable and would run enjoyably on a wide range of machines. That was ignored then in order to carp on the game, and is generally unknown today.

To me, the affectation that games are not "playable" below 60 FPS is just PC Master Race BS. Limit yourself to that, or 120 FPS or whatever, if you want - it's your loss if so. I'm willing to take games of this quality at just about any settings. The graphics - superb though they were - were hardly the only amazing thing about Crysis.

 

[loki1944]

The Crysis quad is the best series of FPS games ever released - for about a dozen reasons. If you didn't play them enough to realize that, it's your loss. But don't think you can dismiss them with a throwaway phrase which, I hope, will not mislead those who have actually never experienced the games.

Hardly, it was good looking, but in terms of FPS it was mediocre, as were its descendants. I'd rather play original Doom, Marathon, RTCW, Quake I, Quake II, OFP, HL 1, Opposing force, Far Cry 2 than any of the Crysis games. Hell, even Wolf 3D and DN3D had a more interesting backdrop of characters and badassery.