Crysis 2 is a 'Solved Challenge' for Consoles
Your PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360? Yes, they can play Crysis 2.
When the original Crysis hit the PC years ago, it was almost a given that such amazing graphics weren't touchable by the Xbox 360 or the PlayStation 3. While most of that is still true, Crytek has tapped deeper into the Microsoft and Sony consoles than realistically possible years back and now promise to deliver the "best graphics you've ever seen" on your machine, regardless of platform. But achieving this hasn't been easy.
"The decision to enter the console market for engines was first driven by our desire to make console games. That's what we always wanted to do," Crytek CEO Cevat Yerli explained in an interview with Game Reactor. "The big challenge during the development of CryENGINE3 has been scaling the engine whilst maintaining the visual quality and performance. This is always challenging; problems occurred of course, but we're really proud that our teams have managed to solve them as we proved in line with several engine presentations and will prove with Crysis 2."
Yerli thinks that console gamers will be getting a fresh new game paradigm with Crysis 2. He said, "I think for console gamers especially the freedom of Crysis 2 gameplay is very interesting. Crysis gameplay is not about 'go anywhere', it is about looking at a situation from a great vantage point and then formulating a plan which you proactively initiate and defeat your foes."
Those with the keyboard and mouse, however, going to Crysis will be like revisiting an old friend after he's had a makeover. "For PC gamers, I think, Crysis 2 is more fun, looks amazing, and runs well on all platforms, and no one will feel cheated by their respective experience," Yerli added.
- Marvel Wants the iPad to Be Your Comic Book
- Xbox 360 Dipped in 24kt Gold is for Goldmember
- Microsoft Sues Datel Over Xbox 360 Controllers
- Wacky Samurai Robot Serves Food, Dances
- Social Network Gamers Prime Targets for Spam
- Microsoft Not Making Office for iPad
- Sharp Announces Mobile 3D/2D Touchscreen
- Long-Awaited Droid Update Causes Slowdown
- Firefox Nears 30% of Worldwide Market Share
- Apple's iPad: Initial Hands On Impressions
- How Our Favorite Websites Look on the iPad
- Mac Fan's Imagination Makes MacBook 3D Concept
- Japanese Scientist Makes Robotic Clone
- iPad Gets Smashed With a Baseball Bat
- Finally: Netflix Confirmed for iPhone, iPod Touch
- Star Wars: Dark Forces Heading to PSN
- Apple to Reveal iPhone OS 4.0 This Week
- Two Early iPad Problems: Weak Wi-Fi, Overheating
- Watch the iPad Get Destroyed Inside a Blender
In English: "We sacrificed graphics on the consoles so console fanboys can pay $10 dollars more for the same game with worse graphics than the PC. Brilliant!"
So, does this mean that they basically dumbed down the graphics in order to suit the outdated needs of console gamers? How is that progress? It had better have a good storyline, if that's the case.
I seriously doubt that the graphics on the PC version will be worse than crysis 1. Crysis 2 is a different story.
Whoops. I hit the submit button before I was done typing. What I meant to say was: "I seriously doubt that the graphics on the PC version will be worse than crysis 1. Crysis 2 on consoles is a different story..."
Either
a. Console version looks like crap, and so does PC.
b. Console version looks like crap, PC version looks great.
Either way, Console will still look like crap.
I think the console version will come out Okay, and according to Crytek should mark a visual singularity within the console community (meaning better visuals then any games currently out for the consoles)
On a side note, Stupid Wii.
ahhh.... as hitler said .... farmville is all i need
Yeah the console version will look a lot worse than what's possible on a PC... duh
But what I got out of this is that crytek has really been able to optimize cryengine3 (UNLIKE cryengine2). If they're comfortable with it on a console, I'd assume they're able to get it to run really well on a PC.
Unless this is a port from consoles, of course the console versions will look worse! Their generations behind current PC hardware! I have a quad core at 4ghz,8Gb DDR3,a DX11 5870 and 2560 x 1600 res on 30 inches and the console games run at 720p no AA or AF even on the best HDTV it wont compare. And I have a PS3 also on a Samsung 46" LED HDTV 240htz but use it only for media/Blu Ray.
Graphics aren't everything. I was impressed with Crysis' graphics, but the gameplay was dull and disappointing. It didn't appeal to me like Far Cry did. It's not the kind of game I'd ever want to play again except maybe to test drive a new system to see how it handles the game. I expect Crysis 2 to be more of the same.
In English: "We sacrificed graphics on the consoles so console fanboys can pay $10 dollars more for the same game with worse graphics than the PC. Brilliant!"
That's not what they said at all
that's the reason why my ps3 and my xbox360 is nothing more than the purpose of decoration. PC rocks. I mean pc shooting game rocks.
ahhh.... as hitler said .... farmville is all i need
No Hitler is still playing World at War 2 Allied Zombies.....
ahhh.... as hitler said .... farmville is all i need
I dunno why people keep voting you down. They must not've seen this video.
"My Fuhrer- Fermi- Has a 20% clock rate miss. It's hot, buggy, and unfixable."
the console games run at 720p no AA or AF even on the best HDTV it wont compare.
To correct things a little... The Xbox 360 does mandate x2 or x4 (x4 preferable) AA on all their games. Granted, it's an older algorithm, that appears to miss a lot, (as well as not even HANDLING transparency textures) so it's not as good as modern AA on modern cards. The PS3 CAN do AA, but because its "RSX" is simply a cut-rate G71, it can't do AA+HDR, and the developers have always chosen HDR. Also, the Wii (yes, the Wii!) DOES do x4 AF on its games. 'course, that might be kinda overkill for 480p.
Lastly, not all 360/PS3 games are 720p. On the former, a lot are LESS than that, including the MAJORITY of "top-shelf" titles; Halo 3 is 640p, and Oblivion and Fallout 3 are actually at 576p; closer to standard-def than high-def. (the ONLY 360 games I know that hit 1080i/p are arena sports games, like Madden NFL) It's a frequent joke that the next Xbox will be called the "Xbox 720" on the grounds that unlike the 360, it'll actually be able to handle all games at 720p.
It's not the kind of game I'd ever want to play again except maybe to test drive a new system to see how it handles the game.
Indeed; Crysis wasn't so much a game as a benchmarking tool. Which is worrying for consoles, since it's kind of a moot point for them; obviously they'll look infinitely worse; by now, it'll be a BIGGER gap than comparing the PS3 to the Wii.
That's not what they said at all
It's what it translated to; Sony and Microsoft charge a $10US extra fee to release games on their consoles, hence why a PC version typically costs $50US, vs. $60US for an otherwise identical console version. (minus the console version typically including lower-res textures, some removed shader effects, etc.)
I really enjoyed Crysis 1, and can't wait to play Crysis 2 no matter what the graphics. Ofcourse I'd like them to be better then 1, but even if its the same or slightly cut back, the city setting should be so radically different that we won't be able to compare to the extent of another jungle game...
Not that I have dx11 hardware, I'm curious to know if it is going to support dx11 effects.
Obviously some butthurt console fag.
Come on guys/gals, seriously?. whats with all the hate on consoles, they bring us awesome games really, god of war 3 just to name 1 of hundreds, dont get me wrong i am not biased, and i love pc games, but it seems people are more interested in " crysis looks like crap on consoles" than any actual gameplay. and for the most part i bet the ones saying those things are LARGELY pc gamers, very biased, and NON open minded. consoles have serious firepower. and the main reason they do is because none of the hardware changes. what i mean by this is, in pc gaming, everything is relative to the system running it, drivers, resolution, fps,etc etc. some games are better optimized for nvidia others like call of duty are best suited on ati. and the gear we all have is largely untapped in terms of potential. Console on the other hand does not exhibit these problems, sure there tech is autdated. but it has also been mastered unlike our graphics cards and mult-core cpus, where everything is constantly changing, it doesnt allow developers to truly understand and utilize the tech to its full potential.
whew.
that said. I do not think console will look as good as pc.
BUT.
i think the comparison would be like
console graphics: High PC : Very High
and thats still awesome considering crysis warhead manages what? probably only 30 fps on a pc setup that costs roughly 199 ( XBOX 360).
Obviously some butthurt console fag.
well somebody gets it. boy, too bad crysis wasnt for you, but you are totally right graphics is not everything, not by a long shot.
Quote :Graphics aren't everything. I was impressed with Crysis' graphics, but the gameplay was dull and disappointing. It didn't appeal to me like Far Cry did. It's not the kind of game I'd ever want to play again except maybe to test drive a new system to see how it handles the game. I expect Crysis 2 to be more of the same.
yes, obviously grahpics aren't everthing, but eyecandy is just most important for almost everyone here. I never enjoy playing RPG games with my gameboy.
I really could care less about Crysis 2. The other game developers... Blizzard... need to release Diablo III and aside from the DRM issue with PC's, Console games are a waste.
I really enjoyed Crysis 1, and can't wait to play Crysis 2 no matter what the graphics. Ofcourse I'd like them to be better then 1, but even if its the same or slightly cut back, the city setting should be so radically different that we won't be able to compare to the extent of another jungle game...
Oh man you liked Far Cry 2 more than Crysis? I got bored of Far Cry 2 after the 100th jeep I was driving was destroyed at the same checkpoint that respawned 2 minutes after I drove past and cleared it out. It had potential, but man, checkpoints repopping too quickly and the sheer number of jeeps I lost was getting sooo redundant I eventually turned it off and never went back.
I found Crysis far more fun.
Either a. Console version looks like crap, and so does PC.b. Console version looks like crap, PC version looks great.Either way, Console will still look like crap.
Crysis is the best company out there coming up with best grafic results for pc and consoles. I can't wait to put my hands on crysis 2
Fixed that sentence for you Cevat.
And for those that are questioning the quality on consoles if you run crysis 1 on your pc in dx9 mode no you wont notice much of a difference... but if you run it in dx10 on your pc you will notice a huge difference on consoles. Consoles are currently running dx9 cards (7800 in the ps3 and x1900 in the haxb0x) so if you wanted any eye candy above what dx9 provides ... sorry.
this is great news. i don't like taking my computer every where i go. laptops just never cut it for me. i enjoy the portability of consoles...
PC. It's the way it's meant to be played.
this is great news. i don't like taking my computer every where i go. laptops just never cut it for me. i enjoy the portability of consoles...
Have you heard of mATX?
In English: "We sacrificed graphics on the consoles so console fanboys can pay $10 dollars more for the same game with worse graphics than the PC. Brilliant!"
You forgot "We want more money and will in the end switch to a console company who ports to the PC."
Judging by the console screenshots posted only a few days ago on this site, I have only one thing to say: Lolno. Uncharted 2 is still on top.
Why I dont like console. Ok it costs 200$ so what. I cant do anything more with it , only play. It is designed only for playing games. Console grafics is on stand still because hardware is always the same.Maybe I want to make a mod for my game or something like that ,I cant do that. Main reason I dont like consoles is because of limitations they have. Instead of console I would rather buy 500$PC which can be upgraded if I want to (and I bet has more firepower then console). Grafical quality is at level that I want to. And I can do some other stuff not related to gaming.
Quote :Graphics aren't everything. I was impressed with Crysis' graphics, but the gameplay was dull and disappointing. It didn't appeal to me like Far Cry did. It's not the kind of game I'd ever want to play again except maybe to test drive a new system to see how it handles the game. I expect Crysis 2 to be more of the same.yes, obviously grahpics aren't everthing, but eyecandy is just most important for almost everyone here. I never enjoy playing RPG games with my gameboy.
If that's really your opinion, you've identified yourself as a complete idiot. But, at least, you're open about it.
People with a brain prefer the mental stimulation of an intriguing game, not "eye-candy", to use your gay term. It can be pretty, but ultimately, if it's not stimulating in any other way, it's just not going to keep people interested. Ms. Pacman was played a lot more than any of the much more visually advanced games made now (although I never liked it), so game play is pretty important.
For the people whining about PC games and whatnot, just keep in mind that a company that can also sell their product on the much more lucrative consoles makes it more plausible for them to keep making games for the PC. By creating separate engines for the consoles, it means a lot of their development costs for the PC are shared, making it more profitable to keep making PC games. The only issue would be if they started on the consoles and did a simple port, but it sounds like they have separate development teams for each platform, so presently is probably not a concern.