Crysis Out On November 17
One of the most talked about games for the past 18 months, the gorgeous looking Crysis, has finally received a formal release date. EA has announced that the game will hit the stores on November 17, right in the middle of the hectic holiday 2007 season. You better start saving up for that new PC, because you’ll need some serious high-end gear to run the game at its finest.
The game was originally scheduled for release late December 2006, then in April 2007, and finally September 2007. Now it looks like the game will finally be released on November 16, going head to head with Unreal Tournament 3, Halo 3, Call of Duty 4, and all the others.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:59 am
The Game Cover sure looks intriguing. But hey, it’s a game developed by EA. No surprise it looks so awesome. I think I’ll buy this, unless a better new game comes out till this release.
August 2nd, 2007 at 11:12 am
Not developed by EA, only published. If it was “developed” by EA it would in now way be comparable to the current game developed by Crytek.
August 2nd, 2007 at 12:04 pm
You mean Crytek is better?
August 2nd, 2007 at 12:05 pm
Yes … the Cryengine 2 is awesome and this game is going to be awesome and it is awesome that it is going to be out in November … my b-day month. Man November is going to be like Christmas for me. Mass Effect, Crysis, UT3, Gears of War PC, Assassin’s Creed, An army of two, Timeshift, Conan … can you say gaming overload. And this does not even take into account my Wii …
I think I may end up selling my Wii and upgrading my PC instead and playing Crysis, Gears, and UT3 on a super rig. But then again I am not certain and luckily I still have a few months to decide.
August 2nd, 2007 at 12:11 pm
It’s not worth to upgrade your PC for Windows Vista (anything except games is screwed). XP is much better. But maybe DirectX10 will be released for XP. I heard it will. Does Crysis need DirectX 10?
August 2nd, 2007 at 12:19 pm
Crysis doesn’t need DX10, I don’t plan on upgrading to Vista until the first service pack is out, and that won’t be until next year.
There simply no reason from a gaming perspective to invest in Vista… Crysis, UT3 both run fine on XP. But I do plan on upgrading my rig with the new Intel CPUs, maybe DDR3 as well.
August 2nd, 2007 at 12:24 pm
I have Vista and it is a RAM eater. But then again DX10 will be released for XP… if not by Microsoft… someone else will do it.
August 2nd, 2007 at 12:27 pm
I doubt we’ll ever see DX 10 on XP… should someone else do it MS would sue then, plain and simple. DX 10 was the big hype to move gamers over to Vista.
August 2nd, 2007 at 12:38 pm
If there is ever going to be DX10 for the XP it would have to come from MS themselves and since they insist it is just not feasible then you can kiss that idea goodbye. Plus don’t forget that another OS is coming out from them in just 3 years.
Crysis will run fine on XP if you have a decent rig (at least dual core) and good memory (DDR2) and a good GPU (7900 or better for Nvidia, X1950XT or better for ATI). All I plan on doing is upgrading my CPU, MB, and RAM. I already have a great vid card (7950 GX2) and since I am sticking with XP I don’t have to worry about the 8×00 series from Nvidia.
August 2nd, 2007 at 12:43 pm
Wow, your graphics card beats mine lol. Isn’t it quite enough to handle Crysis? 2 GB of RAM should be enough too.
August 2nd, 2007 at 12:58 pm
Yeah but I do need a better CPU … My FX-57 is the best single core there is but I do need a dual core for this game.
August 2nd, 2007 at 1:03 pm
You can get a top-notch core 2 duo for no money at all these days.
August 2nd, 2007 at 1:39 pm
Thanks James but I am an AMD type of guy so I am going to get either an X2 or most probably an FX class core processor and change to an AM2 motherboard and then use DDR2 RAM. That way I will be ready for the move to the phenoms when they come out.
August 2nd, 2007 at 1:45 pm
I dunno why AMD fans stick with the CPU, when they’re clearly inferior to the new Intel chips. Even the Phenom quad/dual cores won’t match up against Intel’s 45nm counterparts.
I for one don’t care what company it is, I just want the best and the cheapest. I had an AMD Athlon 64 when Intel’s Pentium 4 sucked as hell, now it’s the other way around.
August 2nd, 2007 at 1:50 pm
Well that is your choice … you don’t have to know why we AMD folks stick with it. We like AMD obviously and that should be good enough for you. I don’t tell you what purchases you need to make so please don’t treat me like a kid and use that kind of tone with me. At this point in my life I know what I like and what works for me. AMD is my choice for now and the future as long as they exist. It is really that simple. I respect your choice to go with Intel so please respect my decision … and believe me I have already done lots of research and you are not telling me something I don’t already know.
August 2nd, 2007 at 2:47 pm
See, same with GTA 4.. crysis doesnt need to worry. The difference from crysis and gta 4 is that gta has made like 10 game’s… yeah with add ons and what. So people, will buy gta 4 cuz of the good history of their games. It’s like me going out buygin doom 3 on launch. I already knew it would be good in my heart cuz i loved doom,doom2,final doom.
Where crysis lacks is a solid history. Its a 50 50.. far cry was their only game with a crap load of problems. This can be a good thing. Far Cry was it’s own failure but amazing game too. What made Far cry amazing is that it had a great engine that nobody knew about.
The game was unkown, not popular in reviews. The company was tiny with 13 people, and now is 233 people. Why did the game fail too? The load/save points was retarded, u need to save whenever. The game was really had even on very easy. The AI was good but always seemed to know ur spots, the voice u could tell it was a poor company
August 2nd, 2007 at 2:52 pm
I feel for a poor company, unknown and basically did it on their own will learn from their mistakes. I still play far cry and amazed how graphically the jungle/water effects are. The water effects are stunning, it made me feel I was on vacation playing on a game too. I thought the game was beautiful.
I thought the story was good too. Not the same old same old crap these days. I feel crysis will be the sameway too! I feel they figured out what we want as gamers. Where u can costumize ur gun, they care for the quality about their game. unlike half life 2, u would pick up a boot and see it just in mid air. Where in crysis u pick up a chicken and see ur arms wrapped around it.
I dont mind a game getting delayed, when its delayed u get another doom 3. Where it only need like 3 patches but mainly to add content to MP. I dont want another battlfield 2,battlefield 2142 where im going through like 10 patches and everytime the patches install the game runs crappyer than before.
Crysis will sell, u have far cry fans like me to back it up. You have graphics fan to back it up also. Crysis is our halo for pc. Everyone knows what crysis is and waited way to long. I dont see any shooter passing up this game if they can find it on the self.
August 2nd, 2007 at 4:07 pm
Anuban: what in the world made you think I don’t “respect your choices”?
I merely asked why you chose AMD over Intel, when the logical choice clearly is Intel (at this point, at least)?
August 2nd, 2007 at 5:03 pm
“I dunno why AMD fans stick with the CPU, when they’re clearly inferior to the new Intel chips. Even the Phenom quad/dual cores won’t match up against Intel’s 45nm counterparts.
I for one don’t care what company it is, I just want the best and the cheapest. I had an AMD Athlon 64 when Intel’s Pentium 4 sucked as hell, now it’s the other way around.”
James where in here do you see a question? And I already said that I have had great success with AMD and so I am going to stick with it. What other reason do you need other than I am more than happy with the product and it has always done everything I want and more. And to me the logical choice is the one the consumer is the most comfortable with … so please don’t try and force your logic on me again. Let’s drop it please. You like Intel I like AMD … leave it at that.
August 2nd, 2007 at 5:51 pm
See, u people are eating out of their hands. There’s no difference from nvidia or ATI.Just the company, the company that has a better warranty. I was reading all of the cards have the same technologies and same parts. It’s who ever they sign with.. I never could tell between ati and nvidia.
Why did I say that? Well, I feel the same with amd and intel too. Right now, intel has the better processor. I love my e6850 clocked at 4 ghz droooll, bring it CRYSIS!
Im glad Im not a fan of anyone, lol I dont feel the guilt of when I cross between both.
Okay..
I had a AMD 2800,Intel p4 2.8
I had a Intel p4 3.0 and 3.2 p4
I had a AMD 3500 64 athlon
I had a Intel core 2 duo e6400
Now I have a intel core 2 duo e6850.
I honestly cant tell the difference ATM. IN the past with the amd and the p4 they ran my games just fine. I could never see the difference in quality. I always buy high quality processors/ram/video cards etc.
August 2nd, 2007 at 11:22 pm
No difference between NVIDIA and ATI? Are you sure? Most of the graphic cards differ in brightness or speed.
AMD has always come with something to stand against Intel, so we’ll probably see a new better processor.
August 3rd, 2007 at 2:02 am
Well the advanced technical requirements for Dx10 aren’t even available on the latest batch of “Dx10 compliant” video cards from Nvidia. Microsoft pulled a fast one to get people over to Vista but the truth is that Dx10 would run absolutely perfectly on XP.
August 3rd, 2007 at 8:00 am
Microsoft is the best when it comes to profit from their software.
August 18th, 2007 at 7:33 am
Sasukex, then why do 360 games look so much better than ps3 games? Im not talking about mgs 4 vs halo 3. Im talking about madden vs madden on the ps3 vs 360. Im talking about other ports battling eachother. The thing is the 360 speaks out better(colors) on the textures. I own a nvidia card(card’s) I should say. I had a better history with nvidia card’s.
They have better companie’s like xfx,evga,nvidia(is better than ati),pny,bfg,MSI.. theyre more im just exhausted to name them all. I would rather buy a xfx/evga card over a ati card,hsi card,power color card. I owned my fair share of ati card’s man. ATI has better color, but they overheat like mad. My 2 8800’s score 220 fps in fear on the highest resolution and graphics.
Nvida over ATI yes.. in speed and brightness
ATI over NVidia in color.. ATI does have better color, I will give them that.