Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 41

Thread: Far Cry Demo




  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    4,246

    Default

    someone call tech support?
    I've gone too far and need to move on!

  2. #12

    Default

    Heh, nice screenshot.

    I've noticed something...while the game has some very nice graphics, in other places, they're really bad. For instance, those monitors...they could actually show bullet holes where you hit them.

    Shadows also like to massively lag up the game as well, which is annoying...there also seem to be some annoying loading pauses in there...

    Hopefully these will be smoothed out in the final.
    This is where my signature would go had my host not been such a Bandwidth Nazi.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    4,246

    Default

    actually, some of the holes in the monitors are from me, like the one in the back of the chair ;) I could show you a similar screenshot that has granade damage for comparison

    although, yes, some things could be much better as far as the minor graphical details, but overall it is very eye-candy friendly.

    I havn't noticed any loading pauses personally, but I do find it annoying that I have to keep the shadows at medium to avoid the lag.

    This is probably one of the best FPS demos I've played in a long time and I'm looking forward to the full game.
    I've gone too far and need to move on!

  4. #14

    Default

    Grr, I have my shadows set to Low and I still get the occasional performance drop (i.e. below 40 fps). It still isn't that bad, but it could be better. Hopefully they'll add in some engine optimizations before release, because I'm seriously considering buying this game.
    This is where my signature would go had my host not been such a Bandwidth Nazi.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,790

    Default

    I think I might try this and see how it runs on my card.

    FX5900 - 3DMark2001 [20,566] - 3DMark2003 [7,281] - Aquamark3 [56,694]
    Ti4400 - 3DMark2001 [16,028]

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    72

    Default

    has anyone been able to play this game at max performance without any FPS drop?
    if everything is set on very high I play with an FPS of about 15

    also, you can change the mousespeed in the menu, but in the game it isn't changed

    the rocks are glitched (already mentioned)

    the game crashed when entering the building with the sattelite, might be a one time thing...dunno
    Tomorrow today will be yesterday.

    http://members.chello.nl/~m.mulder1/Neokicking.gif

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Canberra, Australia
    Posts
    1,158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dawizza
    has anyone been able to play this game at max performance without any FPS drop?
    if everything is set on very high I play with an FPS of about 15
    Yes, running it at 1280x1024 with everything maximum, except Shadows to medium (huge performance hit using higher shadows) and Texture Filtering seems stuck at Medium (Trilinear) too. Using EAX as well.

    Smooth FPS indoors and outdoors (around 35+), no problems. The big hit was shadows as I've mentioned, plus turn AA/AF off to remove glitches.

    I've had a couple of crashes when trying to take screenshots (F12), but after several hours of play the demo is relatively stable. Any crashes usually point to system instabilities on your machine, since this is an intensive DX9 game.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    3,141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PersianImmortal
    Yes, running it at 1280x1024 with everything maximum, except Shadows to medium (huge performance hit using higher shadows) and Texture Filtering seems stuck at Medium (Trilinear) too.
    It runs quite well for me at your settings, yes the texture filtering is stuck on middle.

  9. #19

    Default

    Gah, see, there we go again. That's the same kind of framerate that I'm getting, except that it drops perhaps just a bit lower than that at times. When people here talk, smooth can mean either 60 fps, or something else...which it was in this case.

    I'm surprised that High shadows would chop up the game so much, considering that the boost in quality is rather negligable, and not even noticable in many cases.
    This is where my signature would go had my host not been such a Bandwidth Nazi.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Canberra, Australia
    Posts
    1,158

    Default

    Smooth does not mean 60fps, smooth means it appears smooth to play. Usually this is around 25-30fps and higher. While playing with my 35-40fps, I don't notice any slowdowns, lag, loading pauses or anything to generally ruin the illusion of smoothness. Expecting 60fps at 1280x1024 with everything max is next to impossible on current machines. People with 3.3Ghz CPUs and 9800XTs are getting 45fps at those settings, and that's without AA/AF.

    Of course this is a demo and the final may well be optimized to run that bit faster, but let's be honest, the next generation of games are designed to push existing hardware, not run comfortably with everything max on it.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •