Remastered Crysis Heading to Xbox 360 and PS3
Crytek has revamped the original Crysis game using its CryEngine 3 game engine, and will release the revised shooter next month on the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3.
In the PC gaming sector, Crysis has served as a benchmark since its debut back in 2007 thanks to the game's “Ultra” settings mode. Many consider it as the ultimate test in measuring the peak CPU and GPU capabilities of a system. Even more, the game's stature has become so embedded within the industry that -- when someone typically asks but can it play Crysis? -- they're either (1) sarcastic and poking fun at a system's lack of performance hardware, or (2) seriously questioning if the system's impressive contents can take the graphical punishment lovingly offered by Crysis.
That said, there's no question that the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 can't really play Crysis optimally in its former state given the engine's advanced tech (CryEngine 2). Crysis was developed back in the day when Crytek's main platform of choice was the PC – the company hadn't fully defected over to the console sector – thus the game was outfitted for the PC platform's superior hardware.
But that changed with the new CryEngine 3 and Crysis 2. Citing rampant piracy and the industry's financial shift over to the console sector as a whole, Crytek chose to develop an engine with the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 in mind. The resulting Crysis sequel is a game that runs incredibly smooth on both products while performing just as grand on the PC platform. Heck, even stereoscopic 3D has been thrown into the mix.
Now comes the arrival of the original Crysis game Xbox Live Arcade and the PlayStation Network, remastered using Crytek's new CryEngine 3. According to gameplay footage over on GameTrailers, it features “all new lighting, all new effects, and all new Nanosuit controls.” And like Crysis 2, the revised original also includes stereoscopic 3D support.
But ultimately we have to ask: will this console version even look half as good as the game running in “Ultra” mode on the PC? Based on the trailer (embedded below), the console-oriented Crysis actually looks rather awesome.
"We are extremely proud of what we were able to accomplish with Crysis," said Cevat Yerli, CEO of Crytek. "We set out to create a next generation FPS and delivered a PC experience that became a benchmark for quality -- and still is for many gamers even four years later. By bringing the single player campaign to console, we believe we are again setting a new standard for quality in downloadable gaming."
Crytek's remastered Crysis game will arrive on October 21 for 1600 Microsoft Points on XBLA, or $20 on PSN.
- HTC Sues Apple with Patents it Received from Google
- Google Says Gmail is Eco-Friendly, Greens Your IT
- Apple Sues Samsung in Japan, Seeks $1.3M in Damages
- Ebook Inventor Michael Stern Hart Dies
- Is This the iPhone 5's First Photo?
- Control This TV With Your Brain
- Rice University Claims It Can Double Wireless Capacity
- Google May Have Killed Tethering in Android 2.3.6
- $199 ViewPad Ready for Pre-Orders on Amazon
- Sprint Selling iPhone 5 with Unlimited Data in October
- Google Releases HTML5 App for Music Beta on iOS
- Breathalyzer Jacket Lets You Know How Drunk You Are
- Netflix Now Supports All Froyo, Gingerbread Phones
- BMW May Replace LED Headlights With Lasers
- Sony Ericsson: Dual Core Doesn't Mean Faster
- Nike's Back to the Future Shoes Aren't Self-Fastening
- Jamming Tech Bocks Hackers from Pacemakers
- Augmented Reality Mirror Helps You Stay Fashionable
- Skydrops Concept Collects Water From the Sky
Yeah, but can it run Crysis?
HA it looks like garbage.
Yeah, but what is the max resolution of the ports. Obviously, 2560x1200 isn't feasible, so, there has to be a hit in that sense.
As much as I hate consoles, it really doesn't look too bad. If you had a PC with similar hardware, ATI 1950 XT/ 7800GTX, it would not look that good running Crysis.
At least they did it correctly, make said game for PC, THEN port it to console. Too bad all future games will be destroyed on the PC because of consoles. And I fear the blasphemy that BF3 will be no exception Remember how much Crytek said that Crysis 2 was not a port, but it really was.
Meh, it's no ultra, but that's not exactly surprising considering the outdated crap running in every current console.
So remastered now means toned down graphically?
You have to remember that even if you play it on a big screen, we're talking 720p aka 1280x720 resolution so yeah, i'm not surprised that it look good and runs smooth on the consoles.
Come on, people. We have to admit, it looks pretty good. Not bad at all for hardware that is 5 years old. quite impressive, actually.
Just goes to show how well consoles run without Microsoft Bloatware dragging down performance. It's hard to imagine what type of performance games would have if a company released an OS designed primarily for games on the PC. Windows NT was never made for games, and is Microsoft, so slow.
Rumor is Google is working on something. If true, it would be like moving up a couple of generations at no cost. The gaming industry is big enough that a company could charge a couple of dollars per copy of a game sold, and make a lot of money on a clean, purposeful OS.
Without it, PCs are going to be an afterthought for gaming. Not surprising since gaming was an afterthought for Microsoft when creating NT. Without DOS/Win 95/98/ME to service that crowd anymore, they should think of creating a slim version too (they'd probably have to hire a company to do it, since they don't understand "fast" or "light"). If Google goes after the market, they may have no choice but to make an effort there. First you start with games, and then discover you don't need to boot into Windows to surf, etc..., and before you know it, you're using the new OS more and more. It's a potential danger for Microsoft if Google goes after the market.
Come on, people. We have to admit, it looks pretty good. Not bad at all for hardware that is 5 years old. quite impressive, actually.
I could run Crysis on an 8800GTS 320MB at 1280x720 with that visual quality or better, can't really apreciate fine detail in that short YouTube clip, stressing it's a YouTube clip.
Just goes to show how well consoles run without Microsoft Bloatware dragging down performance. It's hard to imagine what type of performance games would have if a company released an OS designed primarily for games on the PC. Windows NT was never made for games, and is Microsoft, so slow. Rumor is Google is working on something. If true, it would be like moving up a couple of generations at no cost. The gaming industry is big enough that a company could charge a couple of dollars per copy of a game sold, and make a lot of money on a clean, purposeful OS. Without it, PCs are going to be an afterthought for gaming. Not surprising since gaming was an afterthought for Microsoft when creating NT. Without DOS/Win 95/98/ME to service that crowd anymore, they should think of creating a slim version too (they'd probably have to hire a company to do it, since they don't understand "fast" or "light"). If Google goes after the market, they may have no choice but to make an effort there. First you start with games, and then discover you don't need to boot into Windows to surf, etc..., and before you know it, you're using the new OS more and more. It's a potential danger for Microsoft if Google goes after the market.
except that will never happen, not with google taking the reins like you suggested. remember google already has chrome os and android, I don't see them being interested in something like this.
People are judging picture quality based off of crappy compressed YouTube videos? Idiots....
This will look as good as any other game on PS3/Xbox 360. I am a die-hard PC gaming fan but am actually pretty excited for this as my brother has a PS3 and thought Crysis was pretty awesome when watching me play it on my desktop.
Long Quote
It's not that windows is bloated or unoptimized. It's simply not possible to bypass the OS entirely on PC, because then companies would need to make another version of the game for every single possible hardware combination. And that obviously isn't feasible.
There's simply no way to reach the same performance on equivalent hardware in a PC and a console, because without the abstraction created by the OS it's impossible to make a game that would run on more than one hardware configuration. No matter how well optimized the OS is, that won't ever change. How optimized windows is is up for debate, but it isn't the fault of the OS that consoles are faster on the same hardware. I'd be suprised if even an OS built for speed would be any faster than what we have anyway, as games would still have to run through some sort of API.
Great, hope console owners enjoy it.
Now, can I have uncharted, halo, killzone, gears of war, heavy rain.....etc on my pc please?
Blah blah, some inane nonsense about a "gaming OS".
You may be the only person who doesn't realise you have no idea what you're talking about. They've already made a "gaming" OS, it's called a console.
The gaming industry is big, but in no way could it support the development and life cycle of this gaming OS you speak of for personal computers. You realize most of the money these days for the gaming industry comes from consoles? You know, that piece of hardware with the gaming OS you're crying about.
Don't get me wrong, Games are made with computers and I'd rather they stay there, but if you think for one sane second that a company that has any interest in profit would abandon the business sector and move stricly to gaming for a negligible increase in performance then you have no grasp on reality.
It's not that windows is bloated or unoptimized. It's simply not possible to bypass the OS entirely on PC, because then companies would need to make another version of the game for every single possible hardware combination. And that obviously isn't feasible.There's simply no way to reach the same performance on equivalent hardware in a PC and a console, because without the abstraction created by the OS it's impossible to make a game that would run on more than one hardware configuration. No matter how well optimized the OS is, that won't ever change. How optimized windows is is up for debate, but it isn't the fault of the OS that consoles are faster on the same hardware. I'd be suprised if even an OS built for speed would be any faster than what we have anyway, as games would still have to run through some sort of API.
I'd hate to be "that guy," but here we go:
This is exactly why the single core iPhone can compete with dual core Android phones. More optimization, less fragmentation, etc etc. When dev's create a game for consoles, they are usually only targeting the 360 and PS3. This allows them to code their games 99.9% efficiently. Send it over to the PC, the game is less efficient with it's given resources. Luckily PC's have evolved leaps and bounds over console hardware, which makes it easy to ignore this inefficiency.
Wtf is with the blue underlined keywords? Oh, Tom's... Not you too. Everytime someone hovers over a keyword you guys make $0.002, don't you?
Didn't expect this from you, Tom's...
Crytek are so dumb, why reboot the story in crysis 2 when you ARE going to release the original one on consoles ?!
Love Crysis 2!! I don't care what anyone says, it's an awesome game. Even better with the patches. Amazed they can even get the original to run on the consoles. But I would not call the game play on the consoles "smooth". Look up any PC vs. Console video comparison and you will see the console versions are both stuttering and of lower quality. Can't really compare without the proper equipment though. Love to see how one of those consoles look and perform compared to a pc with one of the new Ultra HD t.v.'s...
I love it! Explosions after explosions after explosions and at the end Psycho is like "now that's what I'd like to see"- hilarious, actually one of the better trailers I've seen in a while. The only thing bad about all of this is that some console players think that the XBOX 360 and PS3 are top-of-the-line hardware (morons I know). Whenever we PC gamers bring up Crysis now they will think they know what Crysis in its full glory looks like. We will still have to drag them to our systems and show them "the way it's meant to be played" (no pun intended, I actually run ATI). I will say that it is amazing how much power developers have been able to get out of consoles (ex. Halo: Reach and Crysis 2). I hope though that console-players keep in mind while playing that Crysis will still look better on a PC and that they respect that fact that Crysis is like the top of Mount Everest for PC gamers (add a couple classics like HL2 and I guess Doom and you're there). I'm also glad they aren't giving console players the ability to play online (that would probably make the game unplayable for them anyway
)
Release it to the pc too.
Does not look as good as PC, just saying. You can tell the textures are not as high res. But it does look REALLY good for a console game.
The thing with Crysis is that the game itself is not really that great. The graphics far exceed the actual gameplay. I played them both several times, and while they are fun games, there are much better games out there. The sad thing is that becuase of consoles, no game has exceeded Crysis since, graphically. I love Xbox 360, but it's a shame there is no focus on PC's anymore ... we could be seeing life-like graphics by now.
I don't think console gamers were missing out on much, but hey now everyone WITHOUT a good pc can check out Crysis too. I'm amazed at how much they can crank out of the old hardware in cosnoles.
I just realized that everything in that trailer was explosions- they didn't focus on one scene for more than about two seconds- probably because with motion blur and a constantly changing image it would be borderline impossible to actually tell how good the quality was.
The optimization done on fixed hardware can work wonder. From the video the distant mountain and textures at close range is blurry but I think they've done pretty good job. I am surprised how well the consoles CPU can push games, it seems they are more limited by memory and GPU.
This allows them to code their games 99.9% efficiently.
Pff, yeah. Keep telling yourself that. I can name several examples of stupid-ass ports. They made ONE version and ported it over with very little (if any) testing at all.
Assassin's Creed 1 on the PS3.
Mafia 2 on the PS3.
Prince of Persia:WW on the PSP.
http://www.videogamer.com/ps3/pes7 [...] ports.html
^These, along Bayonetta on the PS3, which had "ocular-offending frame rate troubles" and "ludicrous loading times" and Splinter Cell Essentials on the PSP, for which "quick" loading meant waiting around for 30 seconds or so.
I don't have an Xbox (and probably never will, I'm not a fan of Microsoft), so I'm sorry if I can't name Xbox games that suffer from fucked up issues. I'm sure there are quite a few. Hmph. You seem to be under the impression that console games run like butter. They don't. They also suffer from occasional slow downs, choppy framerates and bugs. A console is still basically a computer.
ROFLMAO! I guess now we all have to find another game to troll the console fanboys with... "Yes, but can it run Crysis?" doesn't work as good anymore =( Metro 2033? High-detail, but ugly. Any suggestions? You can't troll them with things like "Crysis 2 WITH a DX11 pack", they're console players, they know nothing of DX11 or resolutions...
The only thing bad about all of this is that some console players think that the XBOX 360 and PS3 are top-of-the-line hardware (morons I know). Whenever we PC gamers bring up Crysis now they will think they know what Crysis in its full glory looks like. We will still have to drag them to our systems and show them "the way it's meant to be played"
+1; I've seen way too many morons who're convinced that consoles use top-of-the-line hardware and nothing can ever look better.
the most realistic and demanding graphics quality available to date is still 3dmark11. i want that quality of graphics used in games for pcs. can someone do that? (i dont stare at crytek, they are crap now).
Great, hope console owners enjoy it.Now, can I have uncharted, halo, killzone, gears of war, heavy rain.....etc on my pc please?
Not going to happen buddy. Seeing that Crytek is going the console way now (Yeah, Crysis 2 wasn't that good as the first one), I think that this is where the wind is blowing for now. Some PC developers are realizing that PC is generations ahead of consoles, but that doesn't change the bottom line that console games sell more these days.
A good game from level 9 to the end.
"I could run Crysis on an 8800GTS 320MB at 1280x720 with that visual quality or better, can't really apreciate fine detail in that short YouTube clip, stressing it's a YouTube clip."
As well you should...the 8800GT(S/X) series is more powerful than RSX or Xenos. And assuming you had at least 512MB ram in that system, you had more total memory than either 360 or PS3 even with the OS overhead.
hey guys..just so you know..the YOUTUBE VIDEO is 720P. This does not mean the xbox isn't running it under 1080P. Some things look crappy, but other features such as the shades i noticed make it look really nice in comparison to other xbox games..But i think an xbox 720 would definitely suit us all well in the near future