FarCry64, FarCry64 Options

[Electronic Punk]

I reinstalled the CD version yesterday, took ages.
Would much prefer a cd version, but at the end of the day once it is installed its done.

Games are released on DVD over here all the time.

[fother2]

I'm pretty sure that far cry 64 will be released at the same time as the 1.4 patch, there will be a lot of improvements like HDR but the x64 version also has a lot of extra content added. Like max said it will be the same game, think of it as far cry deluxe.

The main reason we have been needing far cry 64 so badly is benchmarking, and the fact it will be built from the ground up as a native x64 game. So far there have been no native x64 games released, patches to handle more memory are ok but unless you have more memory than the 32bit game can handle there will be no improvement apart from memory management.

[basher]

Riddick is the second 64bit gaming title out.......Shadow Ops, Red mercury is 64bit also

[fother2]

They support x64 but are not native, when doing our upcoming review i looked inside shadow ops x64 update and it's just a few .dll's, it was said last year by someone that most games only need 1% of the code to be altered to support 64bit. It doesn't mean you will get any improvement just the game won't crash when running on a 64bit os.

Far cry x64 on the other hand is a complete from the ground up conversion so it's 100% 64bit and not just a few files to make it compatible :)

[Electronic Punk]

just a bin64 dir.

[shuflie]

just a bin64 dir.

Not necessarily, there was talk of improved textures that would only be possible with a 64bit OS, that would mean an update of the game graphics too.

[fother2]

That could be the fabled pixel shader 3.0 graphics update shuflie, that's why I guessed it would be released at the same time of the next patch. The leaked video I saw last year was showing great lighting (HDR- now included in 1.3 to a lesser degree) and had volcanic rock instead of sand.

There should be extra content too, head over to the steam forums to check out a great review doug thingymajig did on techtv, it explains loads of really cool effects possible with HDR. The 1.3 patch's HDR doesn't even touch the tip of the iceberg compared to what can be achived. The vid clip i saw of far cry x64 had your eyes reacting to the sun which blew me away. Most of that stuff has been released in previous patches except HDR and the ps 3.0 graphics update.

Can't wait to play it but they are being really tight on giving away review coppies (just ask phat about that)

[TristanK]

They support x64 but are not native, when doing our upcoming review i looked inside shadow ops x64 update and it's just a few .dll's, it was said last year by someone that most games only need 1% of the code to be altered to support 64bit. It doesn't mean you will get any improvement just the game won't crash when running on a 64bit os.

Far cry x64 on the other hand is a complete from the ground up conversion so it's 100% 64bit and not just a few files to make it compatible  :)

I think there's a bunch of stuff in this thread that needs to be clarified:

First up: Riddick should qualify as a native x64 game, at least Filever thinks so:

G:\games\Riddick\System\Win64_AMD64>filever *.*
g:\games\riddick\system\win64_amd64\MCCDyn.dll
--a-- Wx64 - - - - 910,336 04-05-2005 mccdyn.dll
g:\games\riddick\system\win64_amd64\MSystem.dll
--a-- Wx64 - - - - 3,863,040 04-05-2005 msystem.dll
g:\games\riddick\system\win64_amd64\MXR.dll
--a-- Wx64 - - - - 2,728,448 04-05-2005 mxr.dll
g:\games\riddick\system\win64_amd64\ped.txt
--a-- - - - - - 75,724 04-12-2005 ped.txt
g:\games\riddick\system\win64_amd64\RndrGL.dll
--a-- Wx64 - - - - 783,360 04-05-2005 rndrgl.dll
g:\games\riddick\system\win64_amd64\SbzEngine.exe
--a-- Wx64 APP ENU 1.0.0.1 shp 948,736 04-05-2005 sbzengine.exe

So, it looks like most if not all of the game engine is made up of x64 binaries, which makes it an x64 game.

Most games are 90-99% content (levels, artwork, sound), and 1% code, by volume, so that's where the 1% figure comes from.

Next up: I don't think it's fair to call a "crash fix" an x64 version. Supporting x64 does not mean "will run under x64 as a 32 bit executable". That's called "supporting WOW64" or "will run under x64 as a 32 bit game", or in other words - "nothing special".

To say a game supports x64 typically means that the code is 64-bit aware, is marked as a 64-bit binary (filever above), and knows about the cool new registers and memory model of x64. Even if it isn't necessarily taking advantage of it at the code level, the compiler might have dropped in an optimization or two (or three, or eight) for the expanded set of registers.

Far Cry x64 being a complete ground-up version wouldn't help us from a benchmarking perspective. If the content is different from the 32 bit version, it invalidates comparisons with the 32 bit edition.

Riddick definitely has a 64-bit enhanced (eg, "native") version (compare frame rates) and a 32 bit regular version (actually, three - they went nuts with their compiler).

It might be an idea to agree on some terms for future use and publicize them:

x64 enhanced (add your own logo :) ) - aka native - the best option, where it's available. Runs on x64 because it's compiled to

32bit x64 compatible - runs under WOW64, not x64 optimized

x64 incompatible - doesn't run under Winx64, for whatever reason (crash, driver incompatibility, so on)

By these definitions, Riddick and the upcoming Far Cry 64 would be x64 enhanced, Unreal Tournament would be x64 compatible (no patch/version yet), Splinter Cell Chaos Theory would be x64 incompatible.

Cheers!

[vertual]

How about:

x64 - aka native - the best option, where it's available. Runs on x64 because it's compiled to, patched or not - Add your own logo :D [Riddick, upcoming Photoshop CS2, etc.]

x64 compatible - runs under WOW64 "out of the box", not x64 optimized - Add your own logo :) [Current Photoshop, SWAT 4, etc.]

x64 incompatible - doesn't run under Winx64, for whatever reason (crash, driver incompatibility, so on) - Add your own logo

This post has been edited by vertual: Apr 13 2005, 05:02 AM

[TristanK]

I like it (though I like the word enhanced cos it sounds like there's a reason to like it! :) )

Another set of suggestions:

x64 ; WOW64 ; UNWOW64 (or TRASH32 ?) :)

[Grumpy]

I was under the impression Far Cry 64 was going to be a surprise from AMD on the launch day of XP 64..It would benice if the rumour is true that when M$ has its launch party for XP64 Far Cry 64 appears running on the demo pc

[MinorTthreat]

I have been hearing for months FarCry64 would be launched with x64 but it is so close and not a word from Crytek or AMDZONE. Not even speculation on INQ... getting worried.

[fother2]

Far Cry x64 being a complete ground-up version wouldn't help us from a benchmarking perspective. If the content is different from the 32 bit version, it invalidates comparisons with the 32 bit edition.

Riddick definitely has a 64-bit enhanced (eg, "native") version (compare frame rates) and a 32 bit regular version (actually, three - they went nuts with their compiler).

1) I found riddick to run worse under x64 than media center for frame rates, you're just repeating what i wrote in post #22 about memory management.

2) When i said far cry x64 would have extra content i did say most graphical improvements would also be included in most likely patch 1.4. There may be extra level design (from what the amd page says) but it wouldn't add up to a level so benchmarking would be possible.

3) Although load times will increase from what's been said it seems the main advantage of x64 is the fact we can have more on the screen at any given time. This should improve games like doom3 but for framerates it's going to be pretty limited to your gpu.

Thanks for your imput though TristanK especially the bit about Filever

Cheers!

[MinorTthreat]

1) I found riddick to run worse under x64 than media center for frame rates, you're just repeating what i wrote in post #22 about memory management.

2) When i said far cry x64 would have extra content i did say most graphical improvements would also be included in most likely patch 1.4. There may be extra level design (from what the amd page says) but it wouldn't add up to a level so benchmarking would be possible.
Cheers!

Yea I would agree there is a worthy comparison anyways while the code itself would be "apples to oranges" you can get a good idea of the advantages of a 64bit environment compared to 32bit on the same hardware. If you can make the same game play the same or better and look better by virtue of more particle effects and lighting effects on the same hardware I would see that as a real comparison worthy of benchmark results.

[GSG-9]

Yea I would agree there is a worthy comparison anyways while the code itself would be "apples to oranges" you can get a good idea of the advantages of a 64bit environment compared to 32bit on the same hardware. If you can make the same game play the same or better and look better by virtue of more particle effects and lighting effects on the same hardware I would see that as a real comparison worthy of benchmark results.

I kinda disagree... I got better DPS in 32-bit I admit but I got MUCH smother gamplay and load times in 64bit...I never say the screen jump even with Vsynk off

[MinorTthreat]

How dare you disagree with me!!!! I am always right!!!

J/k Yea most games do seem to run smoother in x64. I noticed that FarCry even ran smother on my FX5950ultra at higher settings than WinXP 32bit. I was just saying that there is a worthy comparison to be made of how well a game runs in a 32bit version and when it is coded to be 64bit native. Someone earlier said it was not worth benching because it is "apples to oranges" or 32bit code against 64bit code. It just seems to me that if you can make a great 32bit game run as fast and as "smooth" while adding better and more effects and textures then I would like to see the benches. I would favour a benchmark have the not onlt the avg. FPS but also the highest and lowest FPS so you can really see just how playable (smooth) a game is (much as you noticed when playing 32bit FarCry x64). :D

[GSG-9]

How dare you disagree with me!!!! I am always right!!!

  J/k  Yea most games do seem to run smoother in x64. I noticed that FarCry even ran smother on my FX5950ultra at higher settings than WinXP 32bit. I was just saying that there is a worthy comparison to be made of how well a game runs in a 32bit version and when it is coded to be 64bit native. Someone earlier said it was not worth benching because it is "apples to oranges" or 32bit code against 64bit code. It just seems to me that if you can make a great 32bit game run as fast and as "smooth" while adding better and more effects and textures then I would like to see the benches. I would favour a benchmark have the not onlt the avg. FPS but also the highest and lowest FPS so you can really see just how playable (smooth) a game is (much as you noticed when playing 32bit FarCry x64). :D

______________________________________________________________________________
hehehe, ya 32-bit was not 'bad' and it might just be prejeduse but i think 64-bit did run smoother. I agree with you there...i think your saying 64-bit has a more stable fps than 32-bit, but 32-bit might get slightly higher fps eventhough all around its more choppy?
did I get that right

[MinorTthreat]

Yea, that's what I was try to say lol. I ramble a lot!

The avg. FPS is sometimes a little misleading if you have some big spikes in framerates. That is why it is always good when people include the lowest FPS speed in benchmarks.

This post has been edited by MinorTthreat: Apr 24 2005, 01:47 PM

[trashcanglam]

A guy I know was the producer for Far Cry. I asked him about this a week or two ago and he says there is currently no ETA. This was all off the record, of course.

[MinorTthreat]

They gave out copies of FarCry64 at the x64 launch party last night! Guru has some pics of it linked on this thread ---> http://www.planetamd64.com/index.php?showtopic=5974&hl=

I hope it doesnt take too long for a downloadable version to emerge at AMDZONE.

[Ad Bot]