Crytek-Next-Gen-Consoles-Are-Too-Weak-for-Crysis

dam

man so what kind of form then

ha ha, they brought far cry to the xbox and Wii. Crysis can be put on the next gen console if they where willing to work at it.

Change is inevitable. Except from a vending machine.

Viva La Revolution! erm, I mean Viva La Wii!

Crysis are being stupid. Technically Doom 3 and Half Life 2 should naver have been possible on Xbox. Crysis will end up on a console eventually, you mark my words!

Doom 3 and HL2 on xbox suck ass though compared to a the PC version running on a decent PC.

Not enough is know about programmining efficiencies for next gen consoles yet, these are far too sweeping statements when we simply havent seen what these consoles are capable of yet.

Gears of war for example maybe doesnt support the high end physics, but looks just as good.

I expect a full technical breakdown of why it would not be possible, it' s just nonsense at the mo. I suppose it is our fault for taking everything devs say literally and publishing it.

Crytek will look like shit comparing to some console games in 2008/2009.

ORIGINAL: mikayd2

dam

man so what kind of form then

I read it too... it' s bullsh*t. They just want people to stop bugging them about a console release. They' ve already said the technology is running on next gen consoles and that the game will run on DirectX 9 graphics cards. The next gen consoles have more than enough power to run the game. again, they are just sick of constantly ebing asked about a console port.

XBL Gamertag: Rampage99

" Basically, pollute the air all you want, your just speeding up the inevitable. Our future generations are f*cked as it is and there' s really nothing we can do about it. Have a nice day "

My name is Rampage99 and I am a double agent...

I think companies should just come out sometimes and just say it' s coming out.
They don' t have to give specific details, but if they told everyone that a console
release was due, it would settle people' s minds.

There are two rules to success:

1. Never tell all you know.

They said that there are DX10 specific features that both 360 and PS3 can' t do - while I think both next gen system will eventually surpass crytek , that' s what they say. I think they believe it - their roots are in PC development and they don' t understand how to make it on consoles.They' re not the first and not the last to miss a golden oportunity.

Ps3 isnt even out yet and there are games that are ' too powerfull for it' ?

I am going to bet, we will see this on the Wii.

Change is inevitable. Except from a vending machine.

Viva La Revolution! erm, I mean Viva La Wii!

I just think they dont really know how to program such games for the next-gens yet. It cant be that they already know that the next gens arent powerful enough -.-

ORIGINAL: ]GaNgStA[

They said that there are DX10 specific features that both 360 and PS3 can' t do ..

Errr.. But isnt the 360 goin to be Dx 10 compliant ...

For god sake people calm down.

What Crytec are saying is...


The way they want this game to run on the cnew ' next wave' PC specs will not happen on these current (and soon to come consoles).

Yeah, you may see cut-down conversions, running at half the framerate.. But when you see a fully kitted Next Gen PC run the same game, the 360 / Ps3 efforts are gonna really show their weakness.


I mean, if the 360 still cant run current-gen titles like ' Prey' as good as my current PC how on earth will it even come close to my next gen PC running a Next gen title..


Makes perfect sense to me.

I mean, if the 360 still cant run current-gen titles like ' Prey' as good as my current PC how on earth will it even come close to my next gen PC running a Next gen title..

Most likely a combination of deadlines and lack of skill overall.

I have a Athlon 64 3200+ and a Radieon x850 Pro overclocked via ATI tool, with a gig of ram. I can run prey at 1024x768 with everything on maximum (anti-aliasing 4x, like 360 games), and get 60fps and beyond easily. There' s only split second slowdown when things explode etc.

Both the 360 and PS3 are considerably more powerful than my PC if you look at the specs of the individual components, and their intergration together as a whole in the design of the machines. Plus consoles have a streamlined, reduced bottleneck design. There' s not reason why prey shouldn' t have done 60fps on 360.

The Doom 3 engine wasn' t optimized properly, but in general f3hunter is right. PC' s that can run Crysis on the very highest settings (as it' s meant to be played) will be capable of more than both next gen consoles and a diluted port is the most we will get.

That' s not to say that games built specifically with PS3 and 360 architecture in mind will be any less stunning though.

I would like to know where the are getting their blu-ray specs from. 9mbps is what they are saying but on the blu-ray site a 2x bluray is supposed to be 72mbps. A minimal speed of 54mbps is needed for movies. So what are they talking about?

That' s not to say that games built specifically with PS3 and 360 architecture in mind will be any less stunning though.

Virtua Fighter 5 alone proves that. However if Resi 5 and DMC 4 match the in-game demos shown at E3 then I' d expect a PS3 or 360 version of Crysis to look as good as the build shown at this years E3, running off Direct X9. 60fps is not too much to expect, although the most of the game engine would have to be re-written and fully optimised for the console' s specs, plus changes to how certain effects are done etc, rather than just ported basically to achieve those results. I' d imagine a drop in quality at around the standards seen in Resi 4 from GCN to PS2.

Ultimately, it just takes too much time, effort and money to do that these days. I still think it' s the way to go though, even if it takes a over a year for the game to come out, a truly stunning conversion would be worth it.

...f*ck ' em....

....real console gamers don' t give a flying f*ck about 5 year old, half-a$$ed PC ports anyway... ...i' d rather spend my hard earned cash on a real console game like Halo 3...

...to weak?... ...more like " we don' t know how" ...

...crytec can go and f*ck themselves....

Currently accepting Article & Review requests

ORIGINAL: Bishonen

...f*ck ' em....

....real console gamers don' t give a flying f*ck about 5 year old, half-a$$ed PC ports anyway... ...i' d rather spend my hard earned cash on a real console game like Halo 3...

...to weak?... ...more like " we don' t know how" ...

...crytec can go and f*ck themselves....

Wow. You make it sound like Crytek smothered your baby or something. People need to get over the fact that PC games will always have the potential to have superior graphics. It' s simply due to the nature of constantly evolving technology and software.

I' m not suprised at all by this. In its fully fledged state, Crysis will not be feasible on the consoles - mainly due to DX10. But there' s no doubt in my mind that we' ll see a slightly stripped down/modified version for consoles in the next year or two.

People need to get over the fact that PC games will always have the potential to have superior graphics.

That' s BS - Console games look more impressive than PC games on PC twice as good in specs - it' s always been like that.

Doom3 on Xbox - tell me what PC you need to have to run it in equally looking settings on PC and then check specs for Xbox.

Consoles need console specific games to show their potential and PC devs aren' t the ones known for high quality optimisation - " if it' s choppy get a new CPU , we did our thing" - that' s their motto.

Consoles need console specific games to show their potential and PC devs aren' t the ones known for high quality optimisation - " if it' s choppy get a new CPU , we did our thing" - that' s their motto.

...Amen....

Currently accepting Article & Review requests

Console games look more impressive than PC games on PC twice as good in specs - it' s always been like that.

LoL, actually Now that consoles are more bult like PC' s thats not the case..

I' ll love to have a PC twice the power of a 360. 6 cores running @ 6.4Ghz and a GPU twice then speed and mem bandwidth of the Xenos.. lol

People need to get over the fact that PC games will always have the potential to have superior graphics.

Soo true.

" if it' s choppy get a new CPU , we did our thing" - that' s their motto.

...Amen....

Oh dear

lets look at the Console perspectives ..

That' s BS - Console games look more impressive than PC games on PC twice as good in specs - it' s always been like that.

Doom3 on Xbox - tell me what PC you need to have to run it in equally looking settings on PC and then check specs for Xbox.

i used to think exactly like you but one important thing you should really remember, the resolution on xbox is only 640*480. while if you want to run doom 3 on a pc that look in resolution as good as the xbox, you should push it to 1027*768.

well it' s still impressive from xbox (only 733 mhz and very old graphic card 64mb) to run doom 3 but you know with what i said in mind, it' s not that impressive!

this generation things are different ... console now run on HD which is i guess more than 1028*768 Thus both PC' s and consoles are now getting very close to each other.

Yeah,the standard for 360 is 720p and its ofc higher then 1024' 768.

Even if you break 2 legs from a crab it still runs!
What you gotta do is find its weak spot and do massive damage at it.

But isn' t PS3 the only console that does True HD?

That means f*ck all for games though, and it' s mostly for movies..

There are two rules to success:

1. Never tell all you know.

ORIGINAL: ]GaNgStA[

People need to get over the fact that PC games will always have the potential to have superior graphics.

That' s BS - Console games look more impressive than PC games on PC twice as good in specs - it' s always been like that.

Doom3 on Xbox - tell me what PC you need to have to run it in equally looking settings on PC and then check specs for Xbox.

Consoles need console specific games to show their potential and PC devs aren' t the ones known for high quality optimisation - " if it' s choppy get a new CPU , we did our thing" - that' s their motto.

You obviously didn' t read my post properly. I said PC games will always have the potential to have superior graphics due to their evolutionary designs. It' s not about system overhead, price vs performance or direct hardware comparisons. That' s a different argument. It' s not what I' m arguing. The fact is (and it may be painful for you to hear) the latest PC games will always be ahead of consoles graphically due to the fact that they can take advantage of the latest tech. This is of course provided that the developers employ an engine that utilizes it.

Case in point DX10. Once you start to see true DX10 PC games running on DX10 hardware, you' ll see PC games start to pull away from console games - just like it' s done every other generation. You' ll start to see more dual GPU solutions. Quad SLI (four GPU' s) and dedicated physics cards have made their first tentative steps into PC' s and no doubt they' ll become more supported over time. Intel' s Quad core CPU' s (Kentsfield) will make their debut in 2007 right after Vista. DDR2 RAM is ramping up its speed to keep up with the increasing FSB speeds of CPU' s and HDD' s are also increasing in speed/capacity.

So now lets take all of that latest tech, get a DX10 game like Crysis, run it at max settings, 8xAA 16XAF, on a 30" widescreen monitor at 2560x1600. You now have something that will graphically kick the shit out of any console on the market. Period.

Sure, it may cost you $5000+ and it' s extreme overkill, but it doesn' t change the fact that PC' s have graphical capacity beyond that of consoles. I' m not saying that console games will have poor visuals either. They will still be stunning.

Mister unluckyone, when people talk about pc' s, they surely don' t talk about 5000$ rigs. and even if you have a quad GPU or whatever, it is useless by now or even in 2 years from now , since you need much less to run games that will be released in two years or three, and i mean much less.

the latest PC games will always be ahead of consoles graphically due to the fact that they can take advantage of the latest tech

that' s absolutly faulse, when developers release a pc game, they always and always tae into consideration pc' s with low specs, therefore, they never use the latest technology at its fullest, that' s why we still don' t see graphics in pc like those in PGR3, kameo, saints row , or fight night 3...

so technicaly yes a powerful pc might be more powerful than a last gen console, but developers don' t use that high tech 100% until 4 years from its release, the same thing cannot be said about consoles.

console developers have fixed specs, and when they program a game (that is not multiplatform) well it is for that specific console , and it is meant usualy to take advantage of its power.

Avarage PC developer can make you a high res texture and high poly model , but he can' t dazzle you with artistic values.(There are exceptions like Blizzard and others)

Okami walks all over any Photorealistic PC game I' ve seen lately.

It' s how it actually looks , not how high res it is.Resident Evil 4 - another great example.

Okami is the work of art in graphics, animation and SFX - I haven' t played it myself so I can' t say how the gameplay is.It' s what consoles have always been - Artists over technicians.

Hopefully Xbox brand will get some of this console artistry onboard , cause it' s all about PC games right now.

Okami, RE4 = Capcom
Need I say more?

yes, I can' t tell what though, cause I promised I won' t write it anymore...

" if it' s choppy get a new CPU , we did our thing" - that' s their motto.

...Amen....

Oh dear

lets look at the Console perspectives ..

...wtf?..

.....


...anyway..

*ahem*

....this isn' t really a problem for real console-gamers... ...the ones who are getting butt-f*cked are the poor fools who bought a 360 in place of a high end PC...

......

Currently accepting Article & Review requests

this isn' t really a problem for real console-gamers... ...the ones who are getting butt-f*cked are the poor fools who bought a 360 in place of a high end PC...

Yer, thats what that was really aimed for.

ORIGINAL: Abasoufiane

Mister unluckyone, when people talk about pc' s, they surely don' t talk about 5000$ rigs. and even if you have a quad GPU or whatever, it is useless by now or even in 2 years from now , since you need much less to run games that will be released in two years or three, and i mean much less.

Once again, price/feasibility is irrelevant. The fact is that with enough resources, a PC can run games at higher resolutions, more detailed textures and greater filtering.

the latest PC games will always be ahead of consoles graphically due to the fact that they can take advantage of the latest tech

that' s absolutly faulse, when developers release a pc game, they always and always tae into consideration pc' s with low specs, therefore, they never use the latest technology at its fullest, that' s why we still don' t see graphics in pc like those in PGR3, kameo, saints row , or fight night 3...

If you actually bothered to read the sentence after the one you quoted, you' ll see that I wrote " provided that the developers employ an engine that utilizes it" . I know that PC developers use scalable engines and that they cannot use the hardware 100% efficiently because a PC has massive amounts of overhead. Of course PGR3, FNR3 look sweet, but looking at Crysis in its current state, it' s painfully obvious that they' ll soon be surpassed graphically. And that' s only the beginning.

so technicaly yes a powerful pc might be more powerful than a last gen console, but developers don' t use that high tech 100% until 4 years from its release, the same thing cannot be said about consoles.

console developers have fixed specs, and when they program a game (that is not multiplatform) well it is for that specific console , and it is meant usualy to take advantage of its power.

It happens every generation. Consoles evolve in hops while PC' s take a more linear evolution. Every new generation console that comes out is usually better than most PC' s on the market, but it never takes long for the PC to catch up. Certainly not the four years you imply. I' d say within the next 12-18 months, you' ll see PC games start to really pull away from consoles. I enjoy my X360 a lot. It' ll give me great games for many years to come and probably an overall better gaming experience IMO. But I' m not so naiive to think that it' ll give me superior graphics to a PC throughout it' s lifecycle.

the sepration of markets will start with crysis. a game, you cant play maxed out on next gen consoles.

Change is inevitable. Except from a vending machine.

Viva La Revolution! erm, I mean Viva La Wii!

The separation is based on hardware specific titles - since those PC devs don' t want to make their games from scratch for the new system.Every 360 game that has PC roots is more or less a PC PORT.

And these will always look worse.

Think of the money. Won' t somebody please think of the money! The good thing about consles is that you plunk down a few hundred dollars for the hardware and you' re set for five to six years (ten year life-span my ass Sony). Developers will always learn to optimize coding and performance for a specific console. On the other hand, you could spend well over 5000 bucks on a new pc, and in five months it will be obsolete. Why go though all the trouble? And yes Bishonen, the " fools" are the ones who bought a 360 for the price of a new graphics card. Oh how I wish we could all live in your fairytale world where money doesn' t matter. Maybe there are unicorns there too. Yeah, unicorns...

5000 bucks on a new pc, and in five months it will be obsolete

if you buy a five thousand dollar pc NOW, it will not go obsolete in 5 months that' s a lot of exageration man , it' ll last at least three years in good shape. and man if it wasn' t for the new jump to direct x 10, i would say it' ll last 5 years as well.

You can save a lot of money by building a PC from scratch. They want you to buy a Dell with Vista pre-loaded on it, and a lot of people will. But it' ll cost you at least an extra grand.

Just built my new ' Crysis' PC with room to upgrade to dx10. Cost me £1200 for sure, but it' s worth £3000 in Dell/Alienware money!

Btw did you guys catch this interview? It' s a good read for those that didn' t.

http://www.gameinformer.com/News/Story/200608/N06.0830.2058.31148.htm