Crysis 2 Tessellation Article

[nemesismk2]

And have you actually complained? Has anyone? Maybe shot a email or two to Crytek?

I've said it before and agree with you 100%. If your not happy with what Crytek did with Crysis 2 and Tesselation then complain to them via email etc so atleast your voice will be heard.

 

[Pantalaimon]

There's been a couple of articles on relatively well-known websites about their tessallation implementation now in Crysis 2 with many comments accompanying those articles. I'd be surprised if they haven't heard the customers' voice yet.

 

[Genx87]

I've said it before and agree with you 100%. If your not happy with what Crytek did with Crysis 2 and Tesselation then complain to them via email etc so atleast your voice will be heard.

My guess probably has a lot to do with this picture


http://gameaxis.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/mw2-boycott-fail.jpg

 

[Red Hawk]

Compared to what - show me a game that looks as good and that runs better?

Witcher 2. Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (and probably Battlefield 3). Deus Ex: Human Revolution.

Now, in some respects Crysis 2 may be visually superior to some of these games. However, each maintains a nice level of IQ at a better performance level -- without pointless tessellation.

As for high end hardware - I'd hardly call a GTX 570 very high end and that can run it maxed at 1920p.

Proof?

 

[ocre]

You don't have to believe it. Give me a better reason to tessellate flat objects? The only possible reason is to increase the tessellation workload. You get zero IQ improvement. You surely don't conserve any resources, which is what tessellation is supposed to accomplish. It's completely counter productive.

But with the patch the performance suffers on my nvidia card. So you guys are saying nvidia wrote this patch for crytek to make AMD cards suffer, just to win out on published benchmarks. It sounds ridiculous considering my performance suffers on my 460 to, its made by nvidia, this means me nvidia sabotaged me and their own customers to. So basically nvidia hurt themselves as well as amd to win out on some benchmarks, but only on their flagships???

Where, again i am asking, where are these published benchmarks of crysis2 with the patch that is the basis of all your claims?

I am asking because i have yet to see it, and being at the heart of all these claims it should be everywhere.

Please show me the core of the claims, i am not asking for a confession. Just to see these alleged benchmarks of crysis 2 that are patched with tessellation.

I mean if you cant show up these benchmarks then this whole thing is completely made up poo stacked high to the sky.

waiting........

 

[SirPauly]

Guru3d, HardwareFr/BeHardware and Tom's did some articles that have performance metrics, there may be others. Curious about the macros on tessellation my self and installing a retail copy of Crysis 2.

 

[sontin]

I'm only a silent reader on this board because of my englisch. But i see that nobody mentions the investigation by maldo (a crysis 2 modder) who seperated Tessellation and POM. He is now able to show the perfomance impact of Tessellation or POM. Very informative and it shows a litte more than the techreport and hardware.fr report.

http://maldotex.blogspot.com/2011/09/tesselation-myth-in-crysis-2-el-mito-de.html

 

[SirPauly]

In that screen shot with the Jersey Barrier there is more noticeable macro detail.

 

[ocre]

Guru3d, HardwareFr/BeHardware and Tom's did some articles that have performance metrics, there may be others. Curious about the macros on tessellation my self and installing a retail copy of Crysis 2.

This patch really drops my performance badly. I just find it hard to believe nvidia sabotaged their own card owner to. I do think though if i wanted all the bells and whistles i shouldve bought the most powerful GPUs, but then i am not new to PC gaming and i accept the trade offs as i have intelligence enough to make a decision based on knowledge and to no complain when my budget 460 -mid range card cant do everything the most expensive cards can.

 

[SirPauly]

Thanks Sontin.

More data is welcomed -- nice breakdowns there.

 

[sontin]

My problem with the two articles is that they only show the worst side of the implementation. But Crysis 2 has many objects which look so much better with Tessellation. I think it's the best Tessellation implementation in a game right now.

2 Examples:
#1 with Tessellation:


#1 without Tessellation


#2 with Tessellation


#2 without Tessellation

 

[3DVagabond]

But with the patch the performance suffers on my nvidia card. So you guys are saying nvidia wrote this patch for crytek to make AMD cards suffer, just to win out on published benchmarks. It sounds ridiculous considering my performance suffers on my 460 to, its made by nvidia, this means me nvidia sabotaged me and their own customers to. So basically nvidia hurt themselves as well as amd to win out on some benchmarks, but only on their flagships???

The results speak for themselves. Look at the before patch performance and the post patch performance. Before AMD and nVidia were on par with each other. After the nVidia cards, overall, enjoy a nice advantage. A 560ti, for example, is not ~20% faster a card overall than a 6950. It's actually ~5% slower (overall not in Crysis II Again, they are about on par in Crysis 2). Post patch though, it is. When sites include Crysis 2 post patch it's going to shift the overall performance and give an inaccurate representation.

It doesn't hurt them at all. They did sabotage you, their customer, so they could win some benchmarks. In the long run it will sell them more cards and more expensive cards.

Where, again i am asking, where are these published benchmarks of crysis2 with the patch that is the basis of all your claims?

I am asking because i have yet to see it, and being at the heart of all these claims it should be everywhere.

Please show me the core of the claims, i am not asking for a confession. Just to see these alleged benchmarks of crysis 2 that are patched with tessellation.

I mean if you cant show up these benchmarks then this whole thing is completely made up poo stacked high to the sky.


waiting........

Mate, I didn't take you serious, since we wouldn't be having this discussion if nobody had run benches. Did you think the OP just made it up and started a thread? I already provided a link to this article on the 1st page.

http://www.behardware.com/articles/...ser-look-at-performance-and-tessellation.html

So, now we have a 2nd site review it. They didn't come to the conclusion to accept it and move on. Excessive tessellation was their conclusion.

Here's a 3rd article. They think the tessellation is excessive too.

http://www.behardware.com/articles/...ser-look-at-performance-and-tessellation.html

How many more does it take before some people will call it like it is?

 

[3DVagabond]

My problem with the two articles is that they only show the worst side of the implementation. But Crysis 2 has many objects which look so much better with Tessellation. I think it's the best Tessellation implementation in a game right now.

That's because nobody is complaining about the added tessellation where it makes a noticeable and positive impact on the game.

 

[ocre]

The results speak for themselves. Look at the before patch performance and the post patch performance. Before AMD and nVidia were on par with each other. After the nVidia cards, overall, enjoy a nice advantage. A 560ti, for example, is not ~20% faster a card overall than a 6950. It's actually ~5% slower. Post patch though, it is. When sites include Crysis 2 post patch it's going to shift the overall performance and give an inaccurate representation.

It doesn't hurt them at all. They did sabotage you, their customer, so they could win some benchmarks. In the long run it will sell them more cards and more expensive cards.



Mate, I didn't take you serious, since we wouldn't be having this discussion if nobody had run benches. Did you think the OP just made it up and started a thread? I already provided a link to this article on the 1st page.

http://www.behardware.com/articles/...ser-look-at-performance-and-tessellation.html

thanks, I really didnt see them.

So you really think they sabotaged me? I mean i think its nice to see what PC gaming can do, it separates us from the consoles. I dont have to run the patch and i still get a beautiful game. Really in the pic comparison above it appears it does add alot to the game, much more than 8x over 4x AA.

I just dont think nvidia sabotaged me, i am not buying it. I do see where the performance could have been improved to not use tessellation on objects not seen, that is obvious. Could it actually be Nvidias fault? Could there not be any other reason? Perhaps it was rushed, or not enough cash to work out better techniques? Could not AMD have put some cash into it and the extra money/support helped any at all?

Another question, even if they had spent the extra time/cost in developing tessellation for crysis2 so as not to tessellate objects not seen would the results still not be better for nvidia cards vs amd?

 

[sontin]

That's because nobody is complaining about the added tessellation where it makes a noticeable and positive impact on the game.

And who is deciding if there is a "noticeable and positive impact"?

There are a lot of features or effects which cost a lot fps. Look at the performance impact of every DX11 setting in Crysis 2: http://www.behardware.com/articles/...ser-look-at-performance-and-tessellation.html

Tessellation + POM has nearly the same fps impact like Extreme Shading on a GTX560TI. Does this mean that Extreme Shading is to much, too?

 

[tijag]

My problem with the two articles is that they only show the worst side of the implementation. But Crysis 2 has many objects which look so much better with Tessellation. I think it's the best Tessellation implementation in a game right now.

2 Examples:
#1 with Tessellation:


#1 without Tessellation


#2 with Tessellation


#2 without Tessellation

First picture... I can't even tell why it looks better. I see the tessleation, but thats not making it 'look better' to me.

Second example is a great way to use tessellation. I think what people are compliaining about, is that in addition to this, there is obviously a bunch of tessellation in the game which doesn't improve the graphics at all. Take those tessellated parts out, and the game will run MUCH better, no doubt providing the graphics improvements that you are noticing, with far less of the slowdown which is caused the water being tessellated all the time, even when you aren't looking at the water, and things like concrete barriers etc, which have absurdly high levels of tessellation going on, but don't improve image quality at all.

 

[ocre]

First picture... I can't even tell why it looks better. I see the tessleation, but thats not making it 'look better' to me.

Second example is a great way to use tessellation. I think what people are compliaining about, is that in addition to this, there is obviously a bunch of tessellation in the game which doesn't improve the graphics at all. Take those tessellated parts out, and the game will run MUCH better, no doubt providing the graphics improvements that you are noticing, with far less of the slowdown which is caused the water being tessellated all the time, even when you aren't looking at the water, and things like concrete barriers etc, which have absurdly high levels of tessellation going on, but don't improve image quality at all.

So i will ask the same questions to you.

what if it was rushed, limited by cash? What if AMD would have put some cash into it. Why didnt they? would it have helped?

But then we are faced with if they had spent the extra time/cost in tessellation techniques that would ignore objects not seen at the time, wouldnt the results of nvidia cards still be be more favorable compared to AMD?

 

[SirPauly]

That's because nobody is complaining about the added tessellation where it makes a noticeable and positive impact on the game.

Nah, it seems there is cherry picking on negatives to me. Even the jersey barrier has noticeable macro detail on it.

 

[3DVagabond]

thanks, I really didnt see them.

OK. Fair enough. I apologize then. Next time I'll take you at face value.

So you really think they sabotaged me? I mean i think its nice to see what PC gaming can do, it separates us from the consoles. I dont have to run the patch and i still get a beautiful game. Really in the pic comparison above it appears it does add alot to the game, much more than 8x over 4x AA.

Unless you own a 6990, 580, or 590 they sabotaged you. What good is a patch that makes the game unplayable for 90%+ (If someone has statistics that shows those cards make up 10% or more of the market feel free to provide them. I'm taking a guess on the percentages.) of the people out there? The only use is to make nVidia cards look better in comparison.

I just dont think nvidia sabotaged me, i am not buying it. I do see where the performance could have been improved to not use tessellation on objects not seen, that is obvious. Could it actually be Nvidias fault? Could there not be any other reason? Perhaps it was rushed, or not enough cash to work out better techniques? Could not AMD have put some cash into it and the extra money/support helped any at all?

nVidia supported Crytek with the patch. In the end we got a patch that is pretty useless for almost everyone. I blame nVidia for accepting it as it is and Crytek for putting it out. I think expecting somehow that both companies could work together to support a game mutually is pretty pie in the sky. I don't think Henry Kissinger could pull that off.

Another question, even if they had spent the extra time/cost in developing tessellation for crysis2 so as not to tessellate objects not seen would the results still not be better for nvidia cards vs amd?

Probably, but not +20% difference. It would have been more difficult, more costly, and in the end, while it would have been better for all gamers, it wouldn't have served the purpose of skewing benchmarks as well.

 

[SirPauly]

. In the end we got a patch that is pretty useless for almost everyone.

I don't understand this at all - there is an Ultra, Extreme, very high, high, quality settings for DirectX 11 or DirectX 9 -- never mind the texture upgrade.

 

[3DVagabond]

I don't understand this at all - there is an Ultra, Extreme, very high, high, quality settings for DirectX 11 or DirectX 9 -- never mind the texture upgrade.

Maybe I've misunderstood, but I thought Ultra was the only one that offered all of the Dx11 features?

 

[SirPauly]

Yeah, that is why it is the Ultra setting and why would anyone expect to run Ultra on mid to lower range GPU's? Even DirectX 9 Ultra is tough on GPU's.

I've been fooling around with tessellation and over-all, there is micro detail but it's all subtle, even the bricks. All steps forward and very welcomed but subtle over-all. What I enjoyed most of all was the water; it looked very real, very similar to the water in Just Cause 2. My view is very subjective.

 

[3DVagabond]

Yeah, that is why it is the Ultra setting and why would anyone expect to run Ultra on mid to lower range GPU's? Even DirectX 9 Ultra is tough on GPU's.

I've been fooling around with tessellation and over-all, there is micro detail but it's all subtle, even the bricks. All steps forward and very welcomed but subtle over-all. What I enjoyed most of all was the water; it looked very real, very similar to the water in Just Cause 2. My view is very subjective.

Who said anything about mid-range cards? There's 3 current cards that give you playable framerates (~40fps) @1080, the 590, 580 and 6990. What percentage of gamers use those cards? That's why I said useless for almost everyone.

 

[badb0y]

I don't think nVidia forced Crytek to make AMD cards perform worse. I think they paid Crytek to implement DX 11 features and Crytek just did a lousy job by going nuts with the tessellation. Unfortunately for AMD their tessellation isn't as strong as nVidia's and that showed when the patch was released.

I feel that Crytek as a whole though let me down, they made me believe that consolization wasn't going to affect the games graphic quality for the PC and they clearly lied. This Mega texture pack and DX 11 pack was just to pocket some money from nVidia and say "Hey, we released a patch for you PC guys! Y U NO BUY CRYSIS 2!!!11! PIRACY11!!!"

 

[3DVagabond]

I don't think nVidia forced Crytek to make AMD cards perform worse. I think they paid Crytek to implement DX 11 features and Crytek just did a lousy job by going nuts with the tessellation. Unfortunately for AMD their tessellation isn't as strong as nVidia's and that showed when the patch was released.

I feel that Crytek as a whole though let me down, they made me believe that consolization wasn't going to affect the games graphic quality for the PC and they clearly lied. This Mega texture pack and DX 11 pack was just to pocket some money from nVidia and say "Hey, we released a patch for you PC guys! Y U NO BUY CRYSIS 2!!!11! PIRACY11!!!"

Well, it was supposed to be to boost PC sales. If that's what they were really trying to accomplish, they failed miserably. Unless they only wanted to sell the game to those few who own the 3 cards I mentioned above. On the other hand, if it was to exaggerate the difference between nVidia and AMD cards in benches, they succeeded marvelously. So, who do you think really benefits from this patch? Looks like nVidia got what's good for them out of it, to me.