I just watched their video review for the PC version. They mention that "there's a fair amount of screen tearing" - LOL
No mention of the Physx either.
They obviously tested this on one of the consoles, then copy/pasted the review.
I didn't say it's not a great game. But using it as proof of graphical superiority is pretty ridiculous.
Super Stardust? LOL
They gave the first Mafia a 4/10 as well. Anything they say can be safely ignored.
No more outdated than the PS3 and 360. The 8800 runs all those ports without effort.
The 6000+ should be fine. Just get a new graphics card, and you're set for Crysis 2.
Edit: Actually, I have no idea how good the 4850 is (don't keep up with ATI much). It may not even need to be replaced.
It's gotta run on the same consoles as Fallout 3, so obviously it's going to look almost the same.
You turn Vsync off? Seriously? It doesn't cost that much performance, and a game without Vsync is just nasty.
If you disable the clothing effects, Physx on High runs butter smooth on a single GTX 260 with no additional card.
And let's face it, the thousands of pieces of debris are what's so awesome about the Physx, not the clothing.
Aliasing always shows up, no matter how high the screen resolution.
I recommend you try running a lower resolution but turn on 4xAA. It tends to look better than 1080p with no AA.
How many games can you think of that allowed you to influence their sequel's storyline?
<<Crytek said that unless your running on a 1000 dollar pc then all versions will look the same.>>
For $900 you can build an AMD 6-core with two GTX 460 in SLI and 6 GB of RAM. Crytek is trying to tell me that this system won't run Crysis 2 way, way, way better than the consoles? That's beyond hilarious.
Only 2 people watch the show and yet they've produced 17 seasons? Tell me more. You seem to be very smart and knowledgable.
Uh-huh, and you just proved that you didn't read this "dumb article."
The author argues that choices made in ME1 may not carry over to ME3 anymore so that PS3 gamers aren't left out. Now please explain how your comment about Uncharted 2 is even remotely related.
Mass Effect 2 has way too many chance encounters. Whichever random planet you travel to, you end up meeting someone you know from the first game.
I do like meeting these old friends and acquaintances again, but the way these encounters happen is just too contrived and hard to believe.
So tell me, what took place? Which main characters died? What happened to the council? Which personal relationships is Shepard in? Does "Cerberus" ring any bell for Shepard or has he/she never heard of it prior to ME2?
Oh wait, you can't tell me that because it depends entirely on how you play Mass Effect 1.
It's not just about knowing what happened.
For one thing, Mass Effect 1 is an awesome experience (I like it more than the second game actually). But also, what happens in the storyline depends on how you play the game. That's half the fun of this franchise.
It's not just got better graphics, little texture pop-in and faster loading times. The entire inventory system was reworked for very convenient use, as was the HUD, the squad control and the Mako control.
I can't play a game without Vsync. The tearing in this was atrocious.
You do realize that DLC is part of the reason why games are getting shorter? Why give customers a long and complete gaming experience when it can be sold piece by piece via DLC, making more money?
As long as so many people are willing to pay for DLC, the situation will only get worse.
Who knows, maybe at some point the main game will stop half-way through (after 4 hours), and to play the second half we'll need to buy two DLC segments of 2 hours each.