Quake3World

Posted: **Sun Jul 27, 2008 7:11 pm**

tnf wrote:it turns out to be an easy hack I found out. Just edit the cfg files in the cvargroups directory. You can download the edited files here:
http://mrgnome.wordpress.com/2008/01/25 ... ated-hack/

So I am running the game in very high now (minus a few of the dx10 specific things) but the game does look even better this way - not huge differences, but noticeable. I'm running at 8xaa and very high - using r_displayinfo=1 to watch fps and now they are dropping to around 22 when I am in firefights and a few other places, but still playable and very very pretty.

Here's one screenshot - during a cutscene obviously.

[img]pretty%20picture[/img]

if only they'd spent more time on some of character animations, like that black guy in the background who waves his arms around like he's pimpin' in west baltimore or some shit, and the cia chick in the old schoolhouse who has immaculate hair physics but really baad skin and facial expressions. shame because jason statham and dennis haysbert are awesome, as the pretty picture illustrates

Posted: **Sun Jul 27, 2008 7:14 pm**

Geebs wrote:my display's native resolution of 1920x1200

yeah it kind of blows not being able to run at this res. UT3, HL2 Ep2, MoHA, CoD4 all run maxed out and smooth @ 1920x1200 on my 8800GT

though tbh i don't really do firefights; just sneak and headshot

Posted: **Sun Jul 27, 2008 8:48 pm**

once you get to the icey-shit toward the end you'll be turning down the graphics.
I ran it with all the bells and whistles up until that silly mountain where the ice and snow piss the frame rate right down to <10 from 30+

Posted: **Sun Jul 27, 2008 8:57 pm**

Just bought this game yesterday and played for a good 5 hours or so on hard difficulty. Right now I'm at the beginning of "Awakening." Doesn't seem too special minus the graphics but I'll try to finish this as soon as possible.

It plays beautifully on "high" settings with 8x anti-aliasing also (at 1024x768 though because that's all my monitor supports) so far. Always around 20-30 fps atleast which is good enough for me. Specs include ATI Sapphire HD4850, AMD 64 x2 5600+, 2GB DDR2-800, Windows XP.

Posted: **Sun Jul 27, 2008 9:13 pm**

it's a pretty solid shooter. In many ways the graphics kind of distract the player from the fact that the gameplay is generally pretty good - any game where you end up driving a powerboat off a waterfall while running away from a chopper, then sneak into a camp and steal a missile launcher to get your own back is alright by me

Posted: **Sun Jul 27, 2008 11:15 pm**

pro-tip: escape from the excavation site in a jeep, ford the river, jump out, then take down the chopper from the treeline. then make your way on foot to the bridge and steal another jeep and take the road to the cemetary

Posted: **Mon Jul 28, 2008 4:14 am**

Geebs wrote:Crysis is known for being pretty playable even when the frame rate is crawling. I run it with a few of the "very high" features switched on (sunbeams, etc.) and it's pretty fluid on my mac pro with an 8800.... but certainly not at my display's native resolution of 1920x1200. Still looks pretty sweet in 720p on my tv though. 8x AA is a bit excessive, don't you think? I get a pretty large fps hit from any AA

Oh probably, I don't know - just wanted to try everything cranked all the way up. I only play on a 17" monitor. Tomorrow I'll hook up to the HDTV and see how that looks.

Posted: **Wed Jul 30, 2008 4:07 am**

Very high settings seem to really affect the sunlight effects - the rays through the trees, etc., are very cool.
here are some screens from mine at very high.

[lvlshot]http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/7861/waterfallrays3fu6.jpg[/lvlshot]

[lvlshot]http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/1663/forestraysdi3.jpg[/lvlshot]

Posted: **Wed Jul 30, 2008 4:08 am**

[lvlshot]http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/8895/waterfallrayskg2.jpg[/lvlshot]

[lvlshot]http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/9534/sunsetqt2.jpg[/lvlshot]

Posted: **Wed Jul 30, 2008 6:32 am**

What's the deal with the gun, in your pics it looks like it has some kind of offset/curve towards the muzzle.

Posted: **Wed Jul 30, 2008 2:13 pm**

The silencer maybe?

Posted: **Wed Jul 30, 2008 2:22 pm**

I really enjoyed Crysis...but one thing that pissed me off to no end was that for most of the game I was using the fucking AK47 (which worked fine and looked cool with all the attachments). I wish I could have used that spiffy "modern" assault rifle I was given at the start as it's more accurate, more powerful and alot sexier.

Why the fuck give me a cool, unique weapon and keep ammo away from me? It's the same problem with sniper ammo in Far Cry....they go through all this work to make you a cool weapon but don't let you use it.

Posted: **Wed Jul 30, 2008 7:16 pm**

Oh...and not to be a prick...but the "light rays through trees" effect was also in Far Cry. Not as refined, but it was there.

Posted: **Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:05 pm**

... along with the "getting shot through 300 feet of dense foliage" effect

Posted: **Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:09 pm**

i love how the KPA trip over their buddies' dead bodies. non-solid corpses would have been a good idea

Posted: **Wed Jul 30, 2008 10:06 pm**

Geebs wrote:... along with the "getting shot through 300 feet of dense foliage" effect

lol... While true...

Leave FarCry alone. It was amazing back in its day.

Posted: **Wed Jul 30, 2008 10:07 pm**

or perhaps legs that are capable of stepping over objects.

Posted: **Thu Jul 31, 2008 12:08 am**

o'dium wrote:
Geebs wrote:... along with the "getting shot through 300 feet of dense foliage" effect
lol... While true...

Leave FarCry alone. It was amazing back in its day.

Given the enhancements they made to the engine after release it was amazing for a long time after it came out.... as long as you only played the first half. The trigens sucked and the last level was appalling.

Posted: **Thu Jul 31, 2008 12:18 am**

I never got past the part where the zombie dudes are jumping everywhere (The really blue/grey looking level), every level before that though was nothing but win.

Posted: **Thu Jul 31, 2008 7:28 am**

said it before, say it again.
far cry beta was so much better. better use of geomod, less obstruction. oh, and hardly any indoor crap.

Posted: **Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:27 pm**

Geebs wrote: Given the enhancements they made to the engine after release it was amazing for a long time after it came out.... as long as you only played the first half. The trigens sucked and the last level was appalling.

I got that feeling too, the last 3rd of the game is just frustratingly difficult with annoying gameplay and bad map design.

Posted: **Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:48 pm**

After the level "Rebellion" I got this annoying bug with the trigens not dropping to the ground when dead. The fuckers stood there and didn't fight but I wasted ammo on them thinking they were alive. The bug continued throughout the rest of the game.

And yeah....the last level sucked. After fighting 4 huge fuckers and making it to the last room I killed Doyle so quickly that the enemies in the back room had no chance to come out before the last cutscene played. Totally anti-climatic.

Posted: **Thu Jul 31, 2008 5:03 pm**

yeah i got that bug too. i had to go by the radar thingy to tell if they were dead

and yeah, the last map was laughable

Posted: **Thu Jul 31, 2008 5:56 pm**

The first half or so of Far Cry was great. Loved the environments, weapons...then when you started entering the labs with the large trigens it went from epic to phail.

On another note I finished Crysis a couple of days ago...atleast the end wasn't ridiculously hard. It was a satisfying game overall in my opinion.

Posted: **Thu Jul 31, 2008 9:51 pm**

I stopped playing far cry when I had to fight the mutant creature things too.

Quake3World

Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis

Re: Crysis