Crysis dated

By Patrick Garratt Published 3 August, 2007

This year, upgrade fans.

Crytek's beautiful sci-fi shooter Crysis will release for PC on November 16th, publisher EA has confirmed.

The game has become a benchmark for those looking to upgrade PC hardware ("Will it play Crysis?") and leads the way in terms of full DX10 support. Demand for the title is very high, and news of a definite 2007 release will delight those looking for that next gen PC experience in time for Christmas.

A new trailer was released last night in celebration of the release date, bringing Hollywood styling - Marlboro VO and all - to what is sure to be one of the most talked about games of the year. See here.

The announcement will greatly relieve PC gamers, especially given that Crytek has constantly been coy on a date throughout the game's development, telling Eurogamer at CES in January that it'll be finished "as soon as possible. We're hoping this year, but we're not making any commitments or promises at this time."

Much, much more soon. Expect a full showing of the game at this month's Games Convention in Leipzig, Germany.

Comments (56) Latest comment 5 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Killerbee #1 5 years ago

    If this plays as good as Far Cry (PC version, natch), then it's definitely towards the top of my most wanted list.

    Sadly, a new PC probably needs to be up there too...

    What are my chances of playing this at a decent frame rate on a 128MB 6600GT?

  • A/V #2 5 years ago

    Any news at all on a console port? (360 or ps3)
    Surely M$ and $ony have approched Crytek on the matter, any news?

  • t8yman #3 5 years ago

    how big is this game going to be? I really arent gonna spend big bucks on an upgrade to play one game!

  • mkreku #4 5 years ago

    No chance at all. Crysis is DX10, is it not? If it is, it'l ldemand a generation eight GPU, as in X2X00 from ATI or 8X00 from Nvidia. And with Crysis, I assume only the best is good enough.. in SLI/CrossFire..

  • mkreku #5 5 years ago

    Oh, and by "best" I mean X2900XT (ATI) and 8800GTX or Ultra (Nvidia).

  • Fernando #6 5 years ago

    Cant wait for the PS3/360 versions

  • dog2_99 #7 5 years ago

    I think it will be DX9 as well? There are rumours of Console versions but only once PC is released and they can afford the time to get it running on them (there are enough FPS anyways this xmas for the consoles)

  • StormRider #8 5 years ago

    I've only got an AMD Athlon 64 3200+ with 1.5 gb ram.
    Graphics card is 7600GT.

    Think I can play Crysis on medium graphics, or will I have to tone it down?

    Can't really afford to upgrade pc. Well I could, but my wife wouldn't let me. :(

  • PearOfAnguish #9 5 years ago

    There is a DX9 version of Crysis. Wouldn't bank on running it in DX10 even with the very latest cards, the DX10 benchmarks seen so far have been mostly disappointing.

  • BobsYourUncle #10 5 years ago

    It'll run on DX9 machines and even if you can't run it on Ultra High, I'm sure it'll still look like teh sex on Medium.

  • Zomoniac #11 5 years ago

    I've got a 2.4GHz C2D, 2GB RAM and a 320MB 8800GTS. I'm not expecting 60fps, but if I can get a moderate res with medium settings then I'll be happy. Any chance of that? My Windows Experience Index scores range from a low of 5.3 (CPU) to 5.9 (Gfx).

  • mkreku #12 5 years ago

    Oh good, I didn't know about the DX9 version. Maybe my old X1950XTX will run it after all :)

  • ZuluHero #13 5 years ago

    I think its got quite good tech scaling so i think a few of you will be pleasantly surprised...
    Edited by ZuluHero at 03/08/07 @ 09:56

  • Darren #14 5 years ago

    I've a feeling this game will prove too much for my PC and there's no way I'm upgrading just for one game nor am I playing it on low settings so it looks I won't be buying the game until I get a brand new PC sometime next year.

  • Rafeage #15 5 years ago

    TBH I think it'll be like Farcry ie only playable with everything maxed out on systems that come out 2 years after release. Unless it's outstanding I'm going to get this when the next generation of GFX cards come out.

  • DB2k #16 5 years ago

    if they have half a brain they will team up with a gfx card manufacturer and use the game launch to pimp a new mega card

  • Dunneh #17 5 years ago

    Will my PC run this?

  • matrim83 #18 5 years ago

    Demand for the title is very high, and news of a definite 2007 release will delight those looking for that next gen PC experience in time for Christmas.

    You knuckle-dragging-console-playing-troglodyte PC's have been "next gen" since birth. :D

  • skillian #19 5 years ago

    I think its got quite good tech scaling so i think a few of you will be pleasantly surprised...

    Agreed. People are definitely overestimating the hardware needed to play Crysis. Any 8 series GPU, along with 7600/7900 and their ATI equivalents will play this game fine.

    Even a 6600GT will run it if you don't mind whacking the settings right down I reckon.

  • Talha #20 5 years ago

    Well in connection with the scalability hopes, I have a 2GB rig with 1.86 GHz Core 2 Duo, and a 640 MB 8800 GTS. I dont know, but I absolutely DEMAND that this game run on a resolution of 1440x900 at max settings on my system. At most I am willing to buy more RAM.

    If it does not, I am going to sue the pants off NVidia, MS and EA. Is it my fault their stupid fancy pants graphics card (which I bought on launch) and the new fancy pants graphics API has been lying idle since half a year and suddenly the card has started to look mid-range given the requirements of this game?

    Somehow I expect better of Crytek. After all, how many sales they hope to have if they shut out a majority of DX 10 card and Vista holders? That pie is already small enough as it is.

    Yes I know, dialing down the graphics is one option. But why the heck? The rig I mentioned has already cost me an arm and a leg and is now threatening my marriage! ;-)
    Edited by Talha at 03/08/07 @ 10:38

  • Talha #21 5 years ago

    Well I am not after 60 FPS - thats not possible on my rig I know. For me, 25-30 will do.

  • PearOfAnguish #22 5 years ago

    "I absolutely DEMAND that this game run on a resolution of 1440x900 at max settings on my system."

    If you take the current DX10 benchmarks as a guide, this isn't going to happen. You'll have to use DX9 if that's what you expect.

  • lost_soul #23 5 years ago

    Far Cry ran surprisingly well on mid spec PCs when it came out - I'm hopeful that Crysis will do the same.

  • ruttyboy #24 5 years ago

    Is it Vista only? I forget.

  • PearOfAnguish #25 5 years ago

    "Is it Vista only? I forget."

    No, DX9 mode for XP.

  • ruttyboy #26 5 years ago

    Hurrah \o/

  • Darren #27 5 years ago

    What are the recommended specs for this game (they're a better guide than the typically useless minimum ones!)? I have a 2GB Athlon64 X2 4200+ with 512MB GeForce 7900 GT graphics (running both XP and Vista) so will that run the game at around 25-30 fps @ 1680x1050 on reasonably high settings with at least 2X AA do you think?

  • Talha #28 5 years ago

    Better news is that it looks fantastic in DX9 as well.

  • PearOfAnguish #29 5 years ago

    Darren, nobody knows minimum specs yet so we don't know. If I took a rough guess I'd say you'd be able to run it at that res, but probably with AA disabled.

  • Hunam #30 5 years ago

    Yay!

    /pc meltsdown

    Nooooooooooo!

  • Barkotron #31 5 years ago

    @A/V - "Any news at all on a console port? (360 or ps3)
    Surely M$ and $ony have approched Crytek on the matter, any news? "

    Crytek have stated it won't happen, is as many words. Xbox360/PS3 aren't up to it, in their opinion.

  • squeakyg #32 5 years ago

    What about if you have Vista and a DX10 card... but you know you'd get faster performance running it in DX9... would the game have the ability to run in DX9? Or would I be stuck with DX10 mode?

  • ZuluHero #33 5 years ago

    People really don’t need to worry - yes it is designed as "teh next gen" of PC games to showcase on uber rigs, but they aren’t going to alienate nearly 80% of the pc user-base with their mid-range rigs, just to pander to those lucky few :)

    That would be financial suicide - given the production costs of this title.

  • Talha #34 5 years ago

    @ZuluHero: I would love to share your hope, but remember Far Cry? Back in 2004, it was the first 'next gen' PC game and not many titles since have touched those graphics three years on. It was a nightmare to run on most PCs back in the day - well it DID run but only if you turned down the graphics. You got the gameplay, but the real piece de resistance (graphics at the highest quality) was still beyond the reach of most gamers.

    But the game had legs. Most Far Cry players I know still ahve it on their hard drives, and they have installed all the patches, myself included. It still enjoys massive goodwill and community support.

    I am afraid Crysis will go the same way - those of us with ordinary means of sustenance will have to wait several months before we can get most out of it.

  • skillian #35 5 years ago

    What about if you have Vista and a DX10 card... but you know you'd get faster performance running it in DX9

    I'm sure you would be able to set the game to run in DX9 mode if you like. Crytek will do all they can to let people tweak the game to run as well as it can on various systems.

  • mcmonkeyplc #36 5 years ago

    This could be the first game my PC wont play!

  • Talha #37 5 years ago


    "who doesn't have an nVidia 8800-based GPU "

    For one, ATI owners ;-)
    For another, pretty much most gamers.

  • Darren #38 5 years ago

    I don't own a GeForce 8800 graphics card either. For one thing, it was intended for DirectX 10 games but they're rarer than rocking horse shite despite having been out over a year and secondly, they cost around £400 when they came out last year. Instead I opted for a mid-range GeForce 7900 GT with 512MB of RAM which cost me around £250 and has served me very well, with only Colin McRae DiRT proving a bit too much for it at 1680x1050.

  • Zomoniac #39 5 years ago

    My local component place now has Q6600 4x2.4GHz Core2Quads for £150+VAT. The temptation...

  • mkreku #40 5 years ago

    I prefer ATI because of the drivers, but I haven't been impressed by their DirectX10 showing so far. Maybe they'll release a better version of the X2900 by the time November comes?

  • Talha #41 5 years ago

    @Darren: You can easily trade your card for a 8600 series card - the 8 series is better card for card even for DX9 games.

  • PearOfAnguish #42 5 years ago

    "@Darren: You can easily trade your card for a 8600 series card - the 8 series is better card for card even for DX9 games."

    That would be a mistake. The 7900GT is faster than, or as fast as, an 8600 in DX9 and the DX10 performance on 8500 and 8600 cards is beyond awful. Anyone who expects to run Crysis in DX10 mode with one of those is in for a shock.
    Edited by PearOfAnguish at 03/08/07 @ 13:05

  • Talha #43 5 years ago

    @Pear and Darren: My bad. I thought I had read it was a 7600 GT, not 7900 GT. With 7600 GT situation would have been different, but here I stand corrected by Pear.

  • redneon Verified Programmer, SUMO Digital #44 5 years ago

    I find it incredibly funny that whenever Crysis is mentioned all anyone ever talks about is the PC required to play it and not the game itself. It makes me glad I'm not a PC gamer.

  • Talha #45 5 years ago

    @redneon: Don't you know when we PC gamers discuss a game, teh actual game is least of our worries? Because that would come AFTER the we get the damn thing to run! ;-)

  • bad #46 5 years ago

    So, Crysis: If your graphics card didn't cost £300+ don't bother?

    I'm still waiting for a DX10 card that doesn't require a 600W+ PSU or sound like a dustbuster.

  • Zomoniac #47 5 years ago

    @Bad, I've got an 8800GTS running off a 430W PSU, runs just fine, is all very quiet and the card cost me £195.

  • PearOfAnguish #48 5 years ago

    "I find it incredibly funny that whenever Crysis is mentioned all anyone ever talks about is the PC required to play it and not the game itself"

    That's half the fun!

  • Darren #49 5 years ago

    The other half is getting the bloody thing to work properly! LOL

  • Derblington #50 5 years ago

    I'd worry about whether the game is worth upgrading in the first place tbh.

  • wayn3h #51 5 years ago

    @redneon;

    And isn't it funny how whenever any console game is mentioned all people talk about is their stupidly misguided loyalty to some multinational corporation. :)
    Edited by wayn3h at 03/08/07 @ 17:34

  • LonesomeRoad #52 5 years ago

    I'll wait for the 360/ps3 version.

  • Pablo2k5 #53 5 years ago

    Cant. Wait. For. This.

  • Scimarad #54 5 years ago

    I'm definitely going to be giving this a go if it still supports the 360 pad.

  • dryden555 #55 5 years ago

    Waiting for the 360 or ps3 version is not the best solution though. Those consoles will have to scale the graphics back and also reduce the framerate versus what a fast PC can do. The gameplay videos for Crysis strongly suggest it will be a winner as a single player game.

  • gmmonkey #56 5 years ago

    I read an interview with crytek somewhere that it's not possible on the 360 and ps3 because of lack of ram in the systems. It's something to do with everything being distructible and the way the engine is designed. I'll see if I can find the article. It's a bastard because I loved farcry and I can't afford a pc upgrade. I'd imagine we would see a crysis, in some form on the consoles, but they'd probably be bastardised pc versions.