I just found out what Engine they're using. Crytek3 SRSLY?? Crytek engines are known for being the worst strain on PC systems. Unstable. Low frames. NOT as excited now............. ><

I watched a coworker playing it.. it was pretty smooth. Dying to get into it myself..

--Micah

I think by now if you have a modern gaming rig the crytek engine will run well. Crytek was so awful to use a few years ago because most people's computers weren't as good as they are now. Still probably going to need a quad core to run a crytek game with any decent frame rate. But we'll see.

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

Whoa, just had memories of running around in a shadow cat, largest motor, lots of machine guns/ammo and jump jets. People hated me a lot for my famous pop and headshot =/ Hope this gets supported!!

Things went from single core to quad core minimums a little too fast for me to believe in... Shouldn't be that bad but if any engine does it it would have to be Crytek. Sux... I really am hoping this one's running well as even on their site/forums the Devs are claiming a lot of testing is going on in regards to tuning the game for dual cores. Quads may just be 'icing' but I think it's time I got mine............ Got a lot going on this summer so we'll see

The use of additional cores isn't really something you should be paranoid about - the technology is far from "new" - The Core Duo was out in like 2006. So people have had a solid 5-6 years to figure out how to develop their applications to run in parallel and milk a system's performance.

Beyond that you have Intel and Microsoft (among others) who have a group of developers that engage gaming companies to figure out HOW to best leverage multicore environments in their gaming clients. But it does take an absolutely different approach to how you develop your game - which often means your developers have to be agile enough to learn to code differently.

Still once you have developed your code to be able to take care of additional cores, it doesn't matter if your system has 2- 4- 6- or 8-cores, it will be able to leverage those additional cores properly to improve game performance.

Now the hardware side of it.. commercial/enterprise needs/use of it has far exceeded home computing use. I'd argue that better than 95% of your internet experience is spent touching equipment that not only has multiple cores, but is actively using it as you surf around - in fact, all of your Cloud/Hosted providers thrive on multicore environments and virtualized environments to maximize the hardware utilization they have.

Because of the proliferation of multicore processors being produced for the commercial market (which destroys the home market), the home market's processors have followed step because it's more convenient for AMD/INTEL to just keep them similar instead of handling separate product lines.

Don't fear it.. it's real, it's good and eventually the marketplace will catch up

--Micah

Regardless, Crytek is notorious for being a turd engine, taxing every system of even advanced machines to barely get playable fps. I'm not the only one that sees the flicker in anything under 85 fps. Simply worthless gameplay and gives us headaches. Devs think we'll accept 65 fps or lower! As a map maker for 3d games I cannot stand this stuff like in Black Ops or CoD maps with huge frame drops depending on what you're looking at, all cuz the Devs are lazy mappers! I'll be watching this title for BETA access and online play but again, not getting my hopes up because Crytek isn't a very good engine. Wish they'd have gone with something more solid like Unreal 3 or HL2 Engines...

What are you using for a monitor?

--Micah

I think he's still using a CRT. I'm just wondering how I'll fare playing a game with that engine at 1920x1080. I might need a video card upgrade. Something with more than a 1 gb frame buffer.

Just watched a Crysis benchmark at Very High settings with identical hardware to mine. Min FPS - 51 fps, max FPS - 93. Pretty sure any Crytek game will get similar results. That's decent for me but I worry about the people with dual core's and older video cards. And actually for me having fairly new hardware and only getting around a 60-70 average FPS. That's pretty bad IMO. The engine is 4 years old now. It really shouldn't have taken that long to get decent FPS out of that game with higher end hardware. Hopefully the people making MWO really tore apart the engine and optimized it better.

I'm using a CRT that supports 120 fps vsync'd I've had freakishly high fps in games when unsync'd like over 500 fps. A monitor isn't going to help the Crytek engine perform better lol

Fact remains it was perhaps the worst choice for an engine to develop upon. Especially something that isn't a single player. MMO with more sync going on... Doesn't look good from here.

I shouldn't have to suffer bad fps with my system. I know it's not 'uber' any more but it's no slouch either. Bet I'll see 50 average fps. Again, it's the Crytek engine. All other games I have played or mapped for are so much better performers.

Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit OS
EVGA 790i Ultra mobo
8 gigs DDR3 @ 1600Mhz
C2D CPU OC'd to 3.6Ghz
Nvidia 280 GTX in SLI