Crysis 2 DX11 ‘Ultra Upgrade’ arrives

Right on schedule, Crytek has let loose the long-awaited patch that brings DirectX 11 eye candy to Crysis 2. Actually, there’s more to it than a single patch. The update procedure described by EA involves letting the game auto-update to version 1.9, then downloading a couple of additional patches:

According to EA, this “Ultra Upgrade” makes wide-ranging improvements to Crysis 2‘s graphics, including “tessellation, water rendering improvements, high quality HDR motion blur, and many other special effects and higher quality texture formats.” The video below showcases some of the new goodness:

I’ll have to reserve judgment until I get a chance to test the update first-hand, but based on the video, it certainly looks like Crytek went all-out with this update. Too bad the game didn’t ship with those kinds of graphical options to begin with. I expect the system requirements for the Ultra Upgrade are steep, though. (For what it’s worth, based on our testing, the non-DX11 version of Crysis 2 pretty much requires a GeForce GTX 460 1GB or Radeon HD 6850 to reach playable frame rates at the “Extreme” graphical setting.)

Comments closed
    • ThorAxe
    • 8 years ago

    I’m playing through it again in DX11 with the HRT Patch on Post-Human Warrior and I’m actually enjoying it even more this time around. Without DX11 I would have given the game an 8.5/10 now I give it a 9.5/10. For comparison I would give CoD:MW1 8/10.

    As far as graphics go, other than the original Crysis, it’s in a class of it’s own. Maxed out at 2560×1440 it is just jaw-dropping.

    For some bizarre reason it seems to be hip to bash Crytek even when they fix their mistakes (though I reckon EA made them release it early).

    • kamikaziechameleon
    • 8 years ago

    The levels are still impressive compared to other games but not compared to crysis 1. They don’t capitalize on destruction in the environment. Graphics don’t feed into gameplay in the same fashion.

    • Suspenders
    • 8 years ago

    This whole Crysis 2 episode is a good example of why knowing your brand is important. Crytek’s brand, and even more so the Crysis brand, were all about catering to the highest end of gaming and being a “premium” brand. Despite what many might think, the reason why the original Crysis sold so well (and it did sell well, 3 million units + 1.5 million for Warhead) was precisely because it was so innaccessible and required the absolute best hardware available to play it on max settings. That was its main differentiator in a sea of shooters, and that was the reason why Crysis was plastered over every hardware review and every performance forum thread out there. “Can it run Crysis?” became almost legendary among PC gamers, and that was as much a part of the brand as the nanosuit was.

    For Crysis 2, Crytek basically ruined one of the hallmarks of their brand by trying to appeal to console gamers and dumbing down the PC version to do it. This DX11 patch, far from being a “gift” to the community, is being done to bring some sex appeal back to Crysis 2, and get it back on all the forum posts and hardware reviews again.

    • Krogoth
    • 8 years ago

    Ultra Upgrade = “tech demo”/”epenis benchmark” patch

    Enough said.

      • Silus
      • 8 years ago

      So first people bitch that it doesn’t look as good so it sucks. Then they make it look better and “Ultra upgrade = tech demo” ?…

      People (especially PC Gamers) really love to hate on Crytek for the stupidest reasons.

        • Krogoth
        • 8 years ago

        Graphics =! Gameplay

        Crytek doesn’t know how to make a decent FPS, let alone an “enjoyable” game. They certainly know how to make pretty tech demos.

          • stupido
          • 8 years ago

          I wish something like Half-Life story but with graphics on Crysis level.

          Actually I would buy again HL series again if they are reworked with latest tech… The same goes for the original Far Cry

          • Silus
          • 8 years ago

          No, that’s your opinion. Their FPS are pretty decent, better than most of the crap out there and they also offer great graphics.

          As for graphics != gameplay we are in agreement, but what’s wrong with the gameplay in Crysis 2 ? Especially in regards to the nanosuit it was much improved when compared to Crysis 1, so what exactly is wrong ?

          I will wait for the typical “it’s on rails” argument and will then reply with a few games that are more on rails than Crysis 2, yet are praised to high heaven…

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            I thought the suit was slightly improved, but dumbed down, and I thought i would have preferred to play the first one through, with an improved engine, and maybe the improved suit. 2 had lots of strange issues, like the super expensive “see invisible guys’ upgrade that only did something for the last 4 enemies, which i just beat to death with my gun anyway, AND you could see them with nanovision. that was pretty dumb, imo. plus, bad AI, bugs, etc. were rampant. they might be sorted out now though.

            did like far cry a ton, did like crysis one, when it was new too.

          • NeXus 6
          • 8 years ago

          Far Cry was actually a decent FPS and I found it very enjoyable. It never felt like a tech demo to me. Crysis did feel like a tech demo while Warhead attempted to have a story and the gameplay was more fun.

            • CaptTomato
            • 8 years ago

            Far Cry was one of the great shooters, “and” it had good GFX+environments, though it’s a more gamey game than Cryis1, but some people want more than quality shooting, ie, they’ll prefer HL2 which was relatively dull from the shooting POV, but strong on story/atmosphere.

            I strongly suspect the people who like Far Cry also like Crysis to some degree, and may even hate COD, but like tactical shooters{proper ones}…….some people want the game to constantly entertain them rather than they entertain themselves via the difficulty of completing a tough combat style shooter/s.

    • 2x4
    • 8 years ago

    where is f5/quick save patch?

    • DarkUltra
    • 8 years ago

    Is Crysis 2 DX11 limited to 60hz like Crysis 1 DX10 64bit was? CRT and “3d ready” 120hz lcd monitors can use more than 60hz.

    • HisDivineOrder
    • 8 years ago

    Nice for the benchmarkers and the people who want to be able to see how awesome their video card is. Too bad for those that already beat the game and just wanted it to look nice on their high end rig while they played through it… months ago.

    I doubted they were going to actually release the DX11 patch, so I’m glad they did. Keep the PC gaming dream alive. I love my PC’s for gaming, but man waiting this long after and pulling it from Steam just before you release this new patch, well that’s an odd combo.

      • CaptTomato
      • 8 years ago

      The whole thing put me off, ie, I was never going to buy a dumbed down crysis, so they’ve lost my launch day money, and now that I’ve waited, I can wait some more, and will buy it as a tech demo later on.
      I cannot believe how bad consoles are ruining gaming for those who appreciate the subtlety and power of the PC.

    • kamikaziechameleon
    • 8 years ago

    looks like a very notable improvement making it seem silly that it launched in dx9. hmmm…

    • ish718
    • 8 years ago

    Crysis 2 still seems somewhat disappointing.
    Cryengine 3 appears to be capable of a lot more O_O
    [url<]http://m.youtube.com/watch?gl=US&hl=en&client=mv-google&v=Oaioo9iwbeM[/url<] Not to mention the buggy AI.

      • stupido
      • 8 years ago

      Maybe some things will be released later?

        • kamikaziechameleon
        • 8 years ago

        not a point of speculation that strengthens the defense of this game and its tech.

        • ish718
        • 8 years ago

        Certain core mechanics can’t be changed with updates. They rushed crysis 2 somewhat, most of that time was spent working on cryengine 3…

    • VinnyC
    • 8 years ago

    Steam or GTFO.

      • kamikaziechameleon
      • 8 years ago

      yeah now that its pulled from steam I’m doubtful I’ll buy it.

      • ClickClick5
      • 8 years ago

      $39.99 at BestBuy. Does not use any Orgin crap with the retail disc.

      I finally cracked and bought it.

        • indeego
        • 8 years ago

        [quote<]I finally cracked and bought it.[/quote<] Does not make sense.... πŸ˜‰

          • CaptTomato
          • 8 years ago

          I got it, lol.

          • ClickClick5
          • 8 years ago

          Hardy Har Har.

    • ThorAxe
    • 8 years ago

    Playing at all Ultra settings 2560×1440 and everything looks stunning.

    Welcome back Crysis. πŸ™‚

    • maroon1
    • 8 years ago

    Here is DX11 benchmark
    [url<]http://gamegpu.ru/plugins/content/jumultithumb/img.php?src=Li4vLi4vLi4vaW1hZ2VzL3N0b3JpZXMvVGVzdF9HUFUvQWN0aW9uL0NyeXNpc18yX19fRGlyZWN0WF8xMS90ZXN0L0NyeXNpczJfMTE5LnBuZyZhbXA7dz05MzAmYW1wO2g9MCZhbXA7cT0yMDAmYW1wO3pjPTA=[/url<]

    • Meadows
    • 8 years ago

    Based on the screenshots, I am actually impressed. They also brought back everything that they cut out since Crysis.

    But have they fixed the textures people were *actually* complaining about?

    • Arclight
    • 8 years ago

    And somehow i’m not impressed. The only thing i really liked in the improvement of textures, specially when they show that dirt road. The rest, like HDR, motion blurr..seen them before and i think (atleast for HDR) long before DX 11.

    I’m certain DX11 is capable of alot more, i mean just look at DX 9.0c games today they look incredible compared to the first DX 9 games. In time i’m sure things will get better but how much longer do we have to wait? Oh, silly me, i think i know…

    • cybot_x1024
    • 8 years ago

    Now to wait for an AI patch. How soon is that coming?

      • CaptTomato
      • 8 years ago

      As soon as you rip the code from Crysis1 my boy!!

        • Kaleid
        • 8 years ago

        Crysis 1 had horrible AI. Warhead was better though.

          • CaptTomato
          • 8 years ago

          How are you justifying that…cause my memory is that they were about the same, but WH was more action orientated.
          U want bad AI, try OFPDragon Rising.

    • danny e.
    • 8 years ago

    Is there a patch to undo the console suck?
    .. or is this one not as bad as some of the other console ports?

    I haven’t tried it yet.. maybe when it gets to $5 on Steam. yes, yes, i’ve given in to the dark side.

    • RtFusion
    • 8 years ago

    Does that mean I have to re-install the game again?

    • lilbuddhaman
    • 8 years ago

    The train wreck scene was pretty amazing. I’ll be happy to try the game come time it hits the $20 mark.

    • south side sammy
    • 8 years ago

    “Too bad the game didn’t ship with those kinds of graphical options to begin with”

    probably because a lot of people with lower end and mid range DX11 rendering cards would have complained about how badly the game played and they’d lose money in sales………. look at all the complaints about the first one………. there were all kinds of complaints blaming everything but the real reason was the fact that the lull in processor speed and the lack of real upgrades by the manufacturers of graphics cards really hurt.
    How many times can you re-brand a card ? they still make an 8800gtx but call it a gts250, c’mon already.

      • Sargent Duck
      • 8 years ago

      I think it was to appease the console crowd. Wouldn’t they feel gyped if the PC version looked this nice on launch date? Instead, release it as a patch a few weeks down the road when the console boys won’t notice…

        • derFunkenstein
        • 8 years ago

        No, I don’t think so. Most PC games with console ports look better (edit: on the PC) but console players don’t care because most of the time they don’t have a PC that could make it look like it should.

      • LiquidSpace
      • 8 years ago

      Or maybe, because the game was badly coded, and was made using a customized DX10 by Nvidia,so ita ran like shit on most cards back in 2007, and of course Crytek never tried to release a DX10.1 patch on AMD cards,which would’ve made the game run much better on AMD cards, and even look better.

        • UltimateImperative
        • 8 years ago

        What do you base this theory of yours on? Have you looked at Crysis’s code?

    • BobbinThreadbare
    • 8 years ago

    Why is everything so much brighter in DX11? Can they not turn up the gamma in DX9?

      • Meadows
      • 8 years ago

      …It isn’t brighter.

        • BobbinThreadbare
        • 8 years ago

        When they did the wipes it sure looked brighter to me.

          • Meadows
          • 8 years ago

          Look at the screenshots.
          Better yet, some effects actually make scenes dimmer/darker, but normally only in a realistic way.

      • kamikaziechameleon
      • 8 years ago

      that’s something of a gross over simplification of the HDR lighting effect but ultimately it just makes me question why they didn’t release this game in this fashion to begin with? why the bastardized console release.

    • DancinJack
    • 8 years ago

    motion blur for the loss.

      • indeego
      • 8 years ago

      HDR for the loss. Mostly gimicky for almost a decade now.

      But I welcome texture improvements, those almost always are welcome. The [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZgt4hA4-pc&feature=player_detailpage#t=45s<]trellis[/url<] looked whack though.

        • KilgoreTrout
        • 8 years ago

        I disagree. I think HDR, when done right, adds a lot to the immersion by mimicking how the human eye functions. I’m playing Far Cry 2 at the moment and I think it’s done right there. If you walk into a dark hut from the bright sunshine it takes a couple of seconds for the eye to settle, and vice versa when you step out again.

          • indeego
          • 8 years ago

          My eye doesn’t work like this. I close them and squint until I am adjusted. I’m not looking for [flawed] optical representation with the “flaws” of human biology present.

            • SPOOFE
            • 8 years ago

            How about the simple reality that the Sun is really, really bright?

            • indeego
            • 8 years ago

            And how about the simple reality that if you walk from a bright day outside to going inside(or vice versa) the darkness doesn’t just cause this gradual darkening/brightening effect?

            If I’m in a pitch black room like a theater, to full bright day I squint until adjusted about 2 minutes later, but again there isn’t this overused HDR effect, ever. It’s a gimmick, and has little basis in reality.

          • kamikaziechameleon
          • 8 years ago

          farcry 2 fails epic-ally to represent low light, the whole night time scenes lack any deep shadows or true blacks, strange for nightime to be so well lit. That being said I agree walking in and out of bright/dim areas is a very cool effect.

      • l33t-g4m3r
      • 8 years ago

      DOF for the loss. When you combine DOF, blur, HDR, and all that other crap together, the cumulative effect is that you can’t see anything and your framerate is unplayable. It’s like swimming underwater with cataracts. Moderation is key Crytek.
      Edit: Almost forgot film grain. Boy does that effect annoy the hell out of me.

        • Meadows
        • 8 years ago

        I like all of those listed.

          • indeego
          • 8 years ago

          You like DOF even when reticles aren’t used? We’re supposed to imagine ourselves living our lives through flawed camera lenses compared to a vastly superior optic system?

            • Meadows
            • 8 years ago

            It’s a cinematic effect, you see DOF on a constant basis in movies, and I doubt you complain that they should’ve used a different lens.

            Using it in non-cinematic scenes (i.e. in real time, and when I’m not aiming down the sights) is unwarranted however, for example on the faraway backgrounds in Duke Nukem Forever.

      • Bensam123
      • 8 years ago

      A lot of the post-processing now days is just makeup to cover up the shitty art.

    • donkeycrock
    • 8 years ago

    i wouldnt mind buying it, but now that they dont have it on steam. it’s a No

      • sweatshopking
      • 8 years ago

      what youre saying makes no sense. steam doesn’t “sell” anything, so you can’t “buy” anything. they do rent games however.

        • RMSe17
        • 8 years ago

        Steam sells games. I bought plenty of them there. They *might* also rent them, not sure about that, but they definitely sell games.

          • sweatshopking
          • 8 years ago

          nope. they license a service. you don’t OWN any of it. it’s in the terms and agreements. they can take them away any time. they’ve taken mine 2 or 3 times now, then restored at a later date:

          “You become a subscriber of Steam (“Subscriber”) by installing the Steam client software and completing the Steam registration. Additionally, as a Subscriber you may obtain access to certain services, software and content (“Subscriptions”) available to Subscribers. Conclusion of this contract between Valve and you takes place as soon as you access the Steam service after accepting this Agreement.”

          THE BIG ONE, THAT’S VERY VERY CLEAR YOU OWN NOTHING: “Valve hereby grants, and you accept, a limited, [i<] terminable [/i<], non-exclusive license and right to use the Software for your personal use in accordance with this Agreement and the Subscription Terms. The Software is licensed, not sold. Your license confers no title or ownership in the Software" steam sells nothing. they only rent games.

            • Xenolith
            • 8 years ago

            If you buy the box version, you will find similar wording. You are licensing the software.

            • l33t-g4m3r
            • 8 years ago

            You’re renting a license. I’d say SSK is correct, since he’s quoting steam’s Eula/TOS directly. Boy is this argument Orwellian. “Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.” If that’s what the TOS says, then that’s what it is. You’re renting your games, and if you weren’t, then you wouldn’t need to run the steam service in the background. Even if steam isn’t abusing you directly, there’s always bugs, hacks, and activation server downtime that will stop you from accessing your collection, and that happens way more frequently than most people want to admit.

            • CaptTomato
            • 8 years ago

            “””If that’s what the TOS says, then that’s what it is””””

            I hate the games industry more than the used car dealers I’ve associated with over the yrs……pretty ridiculous.

            • kamikaziechameleon
            • 8 years ago

            A license is a rental, not indefinite by definition its a permit with upkeep. Actually I’m surprised we don’t have to pay upkeep on intellectual property as is.

            • GrimDanfango
            • 8 years ago

            If you checked the agreements on any piece of software, you’d find that you have in fact purchased a “limited, terminable, non-exclusive” license to use that software, or words to that effect.
            You do not own *any* of the software you’ve ever bought. That would imply that you possessed the source code, and full legal rights to alter it and distribute it.

            The only difference with Steam is that they have more direct control over administering that license, and you have to rely on their platform for distribution and copy-protection rather than physical media.

            It’s up to you how much issue you take with that, but don’t keep raving on about all this “renting” nonsense. It’s nothing of the sort, it’s a standard software license the same as practically every game ever sold.

            • kamikaziechameleon
            • 8 years ago

            I’m pretty sure the EULA says you don’t own the game but a license of the game. You can never really own a intellectual property. Software, like OS’s and photoshop, solid works, etc. are all sold as licenses.

            • deruberhanyok
            • 8 years ago

            That’s nice and all, but, donkey’s point still stands. He could have said “I wouldn’t mind renting it, but now that they don’t have it on steam, it’s a no.”

            Alternately, you can keep on raging about steam and miss his point entirely, which is that by pulling the availability of the title from an extremely popular game delivery service, he will not purchase (or “rent” or “license” or whatever you feel it should be called) said game.

            Neither will I. If I can’t get it through Steam I’m not interested in signing up for some other store (or “digital distribution and licensing service” or whatever) just to pick up one game.

            • kamikaziechameleon
            • 8 years ago

            my thoughts exactly. I like steam, I finally trust it. My friends are on steam… Its like xbox live without the stupid.

            • CaptTomato
            • 8 years ago

            I must admit I don’t have a huge game library on steam, but it’s pretty good from a technical POV…..also maxed out my dl speed when I was dling the Duke demo.

        • SPOOFE
        • 8 years ago

        How long can you rent them?

          • Skrying
          • 8 years ago

          Until Steam shuts down.

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 8 years ago

            You mean “until Steam shuts down, maybe.”

            Valve has promised to patch games to not need Steam, if they shut the service down. You might not believe them, but the possibility exists.

            • CaptTomato
            • 8 years ago

            So they go broke, but will have money to patch hundreds if not 1000’s of games….LOL, yeah right!!!!!!!

            • kamikaziechameleon
            • 8 years ago

            Actually all you would have to do is patch steam not the game. If you patch steam your set.

            • Silus
            • 8 years ago

            LOL the question is actually if you believe in that crap ?

            • SPOOFE
            • 8 years ago

            Why is that “the question”?

            • SPOOFE
            • 8 years ago

            Long enough for me. Thanks!

          • rechicero
          • 8 years ago

          Until they shut down. Or until they are bought out by MS or Sony. Or until you have some trouble with your ISP… Or until you want to do something as odd as “give it away”, “sell it”, “lend it” or whatever. You know, all those things normal people do with things they buy (like books, console games, movies, etc). In Steam you “buy” a limited usufruct, that’s all. You doesn’t own a thing.

            • d0g_p00p
            • 8 years ago

            There is something called “offline mode” and you can backup your games you idiot. You don’t need Steam to play the games you bought. Yes some require Steam and a internet connection but most don’t. I am also sure that if Valve were to shutdown Steam there would be a way to play your games without it.

            If you have such a issue with it, but a retail boxed version.

            Edit: I apologize for calling you a idiot, had a couple too many beers but my point still stands.

            • cygnus1
            • 8 years ago

            This is factually incorrect. You cannot restore your game backups without an active internet connection. I tried last month when I got to Afghanistan. Had to wait until our commercial (non-army) internet was setup before I could restore any of my games. Also, you can’t remain in offline mode indefinitely. Steam will occasionally bitch about wanting to connect to the internet. I’m still a fan of steam for the convenience factor, but all the guys saying you haven’t bought anything are absolutely correct. You rented access to the game, plain and simple. And they demand verification on install no matter what and occasionally check for revocation.

            • kamikaziechameleon
            • 8 years ago

            They are right but only in that intellectual property law exists to basically say you don’t own anything. If you buy a disk you have no right to the contents of the disk. You aren’t privileged to backups. you have no right to copy or backup any file. EULA that you get with any game states, hey sucker thanks for buying this game you have no rights to the content whatsoever. Music, and movies are the same. The only reason you don’t see all kinds of lawsuits flying is because its a perceived consumer right (not protected by any law) No business wants there consumers to feel that the company they are doing business with is out to get them, bad press that is.

            • cygnus1
            • 8 years ago

            Actually much of what you mention is covered under fair use. Most companies don’t sue their customers because they don’t want to test the legality of what they put in the EULA. They’d just rather use it as a stick to shake at customers and if the shady parts are tested in court and lose, then no more stick.

            You absolutely do have a right to backup media that you purchase. They even have exemptions to the DMCA for that purpose. Any software vendor that tells you otherwise is simply giving you bad advice that’s in their best interest.

            Corporations have bastardized what copyright means to benefit themselves. They have overreached for decades and lobbied government for more and more protection. Their real targets of expanding copyright protections aren’t what they say they are. They don’t really worry about organized pirates. They’ll always exist and they’ll always be able to sick the government on them. The real target of expanded copyright protections are the group with which they lose the most money to, paying customers. Current DRM schemes aren’t designed to thwart organized piracy/theft, as they will always be able to break it. They are designed to stop the casual copying by actual customers. Companies of all sorts used to lose much more money to their paying customers through casual copying than any underground pirating.

            • kamikaziechameleon
            • 8 years ago

            Fair use is a subjective flimsy defense. Ultimately we have to realize we can’t legally own media. That laws don’t really give us much in the way of firm rights regarding that.

            • cygnus1
            • 8 years ago

            You are still absolutely wrong. One of the points of copyright is to allow someone to sell a single copy of an intellectual work to another individual without conferring the right to sell copies. The crucial point is that you have been sold a copy. You can do anything you want with it under the sun, EXCEPT sell copies of it.

            Copyright is also not an inherent right. It is actually a socially excepted infringement on the rights of individuals, because it is believed that it ultimately benefits everyone. But taken too far and copyright begins to change from benefit to burden. Current copyright laws (at least in the US) are absurd and not anywhere near fully enforced. By law it is technically copyright infringement to forward an original email without the consent of the author. The laws are this way because our government has been beholden to moneyed interests for about 225 years.

            • kamikaziechameleon
            • 8 years ago

            gifting is a step in the right direction.

        • Mentawl
        • 8 years ago

        No-where “sells” games, they “sell” a license to install and play the game. At no point do you “own” the software.

          • sweatshopking
          • 8 years ago

          that’s not quite true. they sell you a license to the game. You have additional rights you don’t get with steam.

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 8 years ago

            You didn’t dispute anything Mentawl said.

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            when you purchase a game, you OWN the license. When you buy on steam, steam owns the license. i can give away my purchased games, trade, etc. i can’t do that with steam.

            I am a steam user, and i don’t really mind it, too much anyway. i’ve been locked out a number of times, all due to valve’s errors, which they’ve rectified. my issue lies in that i has taken weeks sometimes for them to fix it. I don’t dislike steam. I don’t think it’s ‘SAVING PC GAMING!!!!!!!’, because that’s silly, but i subscribe to a number of games on the service.

            there is NO question, when you purchase games on steam you have less rights than if you buy a typical boxed version of the game.

            • kamikaziechameleon
            • 8 years ago

            Basically your complaint lies in the fact that while general law says consumers of intellectual properties have next to no rights with regards to their purchase beyond the fact that if you have physical media you own the plastic, not the contents. You are bent out of shape because steam can enforce that law, and kinda does. I never realized that the function of copy and past is kinda illegal, ha lol. but here we are all tech nerds replicating code and IPs without owner consent as proposed by law? There are rights, and there are laws. I think yes steam might infringe on my rights a little bit, but not any more, or even as much as the laws that it is based in and around. Again these consumer rights I write of are perceived so I might just be a little liberal to have such a sense of entitlement but here I am.

          • kamikaziechameleon
          • 8 years ago

          amen!

        • Sargent Duck
        • 8 years ago

        I’m looking at my boxed copy of Star Craft II and Blizzard has made it pretty clear to me that I can only play when I have an Internet connection. That, and since I can’t resell it, I don’t really “own” my retail copy of SCII.

          • DeadOfKnight
          • 8 years ago

          You can play in offline mode, just no achievements.

            • cygnus1
            • 8 years ago

            Can you install it in offline mode?

            • kamikaziechameleon
            • 8 years ago

            I can play half life 2 in offline mode, just no mp.

          • sweatshopking
          • 8 years ago

          you’re right. it’s the same thing πŸ™

        • lilbuddhaman
        • 8 years ago

        not the place/time for a discussion on that imo….

        • kamikaziechameleon
        • 8 years ago

        you can’t buy games anymore, DRM has made it so!!!

      • Silus
      • 8 years ago

      Such a ridiculous argument…

        • kamikaziechameleon
        • 8 years ago

        Its not a ridiculous argument. The consumer values the steam experience, why is that ridiculous. Some people like giving there money to gamestop, why I don’t know but they do.

          • Silus
          • 8 years ago

          It’s ridiculous because there are other options. If there wasn’t any other option I could understand it, but there are…

          And I like how you question people giving money to gamestop, but don’t question them giving money to Steam. Partial much ?

      • ish718
      • 8 years ago

      Or you could get off your lazy ass and pick it up at gamestop.

        • kamikaziechameleon
        • 8 years ago

        I buy my pc games at walmart or target, the ones near me have huge sections.

    • jjj
    • 8 years ago

    VR-Zone already did some testing.

      • SomeOtherGeek
      • 8 years ago

      BTW, the link is [url<]http://vr-zone.com/articles/crysis-2-world-s-first-directx-11-video-benchmarks--screenshots/12763.html[/url<]

    • PrincipalSkinner
    • 8 years ago

    They could “patch” the protagonist and let him talk. I bet he has a lot to say since Crysis 2 was launched.

    • juampa_valve_rde
    • 8 years ago

    Now it can be called “Crysis”…
    The question since now will be: but will run “Crysis 2 1.9 DX11 with HRT patch”?

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This