*Confirmed* Original Crysis Bound for *PS360
- Thread starter fellix
- Start date
In my opinion they should build a C3 as fast as they can and improve the engine in whatever ways its possible on that schedule. They should also introduce another franchise to further capitalize on their investments and get into a 2-year release cycle on both with a 1 year offset.
They should also do their best to find out why C2 did not live up to their sales expectations (and got <90 scores everywhere)
Aiming for a high end PC game won't help them as much - too little, too late.
They should also do their best to find out why C2 did not live up to their sales expectations (and got <90 scores everywhere)
Aiming for a high end PC game won't help them as much - too little, too late.
Blazkowicz
Legend
far cry was actually amazing for showing so much and not dropping framerate. it did a pretty solid 20 fps if your PC wasn't that great instead of dipping in single digit numbers.
if you remember what lots of trees and/or grass was like on the quake 3 engine, it meant levels that ran like a dog. Jungle in soldier of fortune 2, snowy forest in medal of honor : the engine couldn't keep up, and that was "corridor forest", comparatively.
As a PC gamer, I'm just hoping it sells well on the console because it might give an argument to Crytek that there still is a profitable market in making FPS that arent linear trigger happy Michael Bay Explosions everywhere style COD MW games.
(I do actually enjoy the COD games but I enjoy "openish" (sandbox) world variety more. Crysis/FarCry gave me that option and it would be nice to have that back in future Crytek titles)
(I do actually enjoy the COD games but I enjoy "openish" (sandbox) world variety more. Crysis/FarCry gave me that option and it would be nice to have that back in future Crytek titles)
Couldn't agree more. I lurked here for a good while before joining and even in the short time I can see what Laa-Yosh is referring to. There are still many great members here (Al, Shifty, Laa-Yosh, Joker, anyone with a bolded name, etc.) but lately there has been a flux of people too focused on their personal bias or agenda, and that has no place here. No longer is it about discussing the tech at hand, or the various ways of implimenting it across different hardware, instead it's about pissing contests, what's best and what's not.
It's gotten to the point where I don't even visit this place anymore, and while I'm no one special, I can see how others feel the same. I learned a lot here and hoped to contribute more to tech discussions in the future, but I can't stand the school yard mentality that pops up too often for my taste. Go figure I haven't visited here in a few days and when I do, I read Laa's post, which reflects perfectly to what I've seen lately.
/vent
Nothing says that you have to do that when leading on PC.
I feel a bit sorry for Crytek in this case.
They're still pretty new to consoles, and while they do have Free Radical it'll take time to build up company wide experience and mature a development process that makes the best of all platforms simultaneously. At the same time they're porting Crysis - a very ambitious game made with absolutely no regard for console weaknesses at all - and doing it on the budget of a .. well, budget re-release.
Any changes or rebalancing of graphics will be called cutbacks, dumbing down, lols or whatever by the PC zealots, regardless of anything they improve or refine along the way. At the same time, anything they achieve will be rubbished by the combined forces of the console zealots.
If on their first gen engine they can, for example, do a relatively cheap port that mixes "medium or high" quality assets with tweaked, "high or better" quality shaders then that's really not a bad achievement, especially if they manage a mostly stable 30fps.
They're still pretty new to consoles, and while they do have Free Radical it'll take time to build up company wide experience and mature a development process that makes the best of all platforms simultaneously. At the same time they're porting Crysis - a very ambitious game made with absolutely no regard for console weaknesses at all - and doing it on the budget of a .. well, budget re-release.
Any changes or rebalancing of graphics will be called cutbacks, dumbing down, lols or whatever by the PC zealots, regardless of anything they improve or refine along the way. At the same time, anything they achieve will be rubbished by the combined forces of the console zealots.
If on their first gen engine they can, for example, do a relatively cheap port that mixes "medium or high" quality assets with tweaked, "high or better" quality shaders then that's really not a bad achievement, especially if they manage a mostly stable 30fps.
Sigfried1977
Legend
But Crysis 2 wasn't a linear trigger happy COD clone at all. It wasn't quite as wide open, but on the other hand it made great use of its more vertical level design.
Couldn't agree more. I lurked here for a good while before joining and even in the short time I can see what Laa-Yosh is referring to. There are still many great members here (Al, Shifty, Laa-Yosh, Joker, anyone with a bolded name, etc.) but lately there has been a flux of people too focused on their personal bias or agenda, and that has no place here. No longer is it about discussing the tech at hand, or the various ways of implimenting it across different hardware, instead it's about pissing contests, what's best and what's not.
It's gotten to the point where I don't even visit this place anymore, and while I'm no one special, I can see how others feel the same. I learned a lot here and hoped to contribute more to tech discussions in the future, but I can't stand the school yard mentality that pops up too often for my taste. Go figure I haven't visited here in a few days and when I do, I read Laa's post, which reflects perfectly to what I've seen lately.
/vent
Welcome to the internet!
B3D is much better than most places, but we get the fanboy nerdragers occasionally just like everywhere else. I came here from Tom's Hardware and let me assure you B3D is nothing to complain about
Except that with better engineering, the same results could have been achieved without needing people to invest in monster rigs. Luckily for CryTek they became a reference point which helped sales, I'm sure.
I'm not sure they'd get away with it any more. Perhaps aiming beyond the current targets is a good business strategy, but then other devs who achieve more with less will be able to sell to the existing install base more effectively. eg. If Frostbite 2 produces similar results on less expensive, more common hardware, they'll likely get more sales.
Never really said it didn't, and it was a business decision that worked for CryTek. However, it means they aren't good at using the consoles which offer their own financial returns on good products, and it puts CryTek at a disadvantage if the PC space hots up with more AAA titles that make better use of the hardware. Using the over-used car analogy, CryTek are akin to a company that gets more speed by putting in bigger and bigger engines, versus others who tune their smaller engines to generate more power. The console space needs high tuning, and CryTek need to change their ways IMO to be cleverer, while still targeting the future techs so people can buy a 'futureproof' game that rewards them with Pc upgrades the same way Crysis did.
You know you can run Crysis pretty well on a GF7800 or X1900. Ive done it, and ive run it on the sad early DX10 cards like 8600GT. Medium detail and reduced Res still looks better than any other games back then. It's scalable but low detail does look awful.
I think to make mega huge sales a game must capture the masses of multiplayer junkies. No Crysis is really designed for what those people are after. Crysis gameplay seems to be a smaller niche than the corridor shooter.
I think to make mega huge sales a game must capture the masses of multiplayer junkies. No Crysis is really designed for what those people are after. Crysis gameplay seems to be a smaller niche than the corridor shooter.
Except that with better engineering, the same results could have been achieved without needing people to invest in monster rigs. Luckily for CryTek they became a reference point which helped sales, I'm sure.
I suppose you'd complain about the Wright Brothers having crap engineering as well, or Henry Ford. Crytek were the first to implement a lot of new techniques in a shipping game, all in one game. Stuff which has benefited the whole industry. How could they possibly be expected to have the best method first time? IIRC they were the first to do HDR and iris simulation/tonemapping (in Farcry) too.
These actions should be applauded, not scolded for being unoptimized. At least they looked absolutely great. Only people who wanted to experience the future needed to upgrade to monster rigs, and you know what? We loved it. Finally there was a reason to look beyond the 8800GTX.
PC gamers have already been saying, in this thread - "Wouldn't it be great if they made these new optimizations available to PC?" There's no real bitterness at them not having future knowledge of all this stuff at the time, because it's not reasonable.
Last edited by a moderator:
Not necessarily, although Ford is famous for mass-production, not pioneering autombile tech or design.
But I wasn't accusing CryTek of being 'crap' - only grossly inefficient, because they didn't care to invest in optimisations, only features. And I've said, that's a valid business choice for them, so I'm not sure what you're complaining at. That attitude, "let's throw in this amazing feature whether the hardware can handle it not," doesn't map well to the console space and thus they trail behind and miss out somewhat on the console market. As well as pioneering tech and looking to the future (their GI approximations), they also have to work on optimising their tech to run more efficiently. Or, they can remain as pioneers of techniques using brute-force methods and leave it to others to optimise them into more practical solutions, which is a legitimate option. If that's their plan (as you suggest) then they should probably give up on consoles.
http://www.mycrysis.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=39362
heh.. so the trailer was just old footage.
heh.. so the trailer was just old footage.
Those improvements over the trailer are marked. I wonder how they're tackling the consoles on this? Their port of CryEngine 3 to PS3 was certainly a suboptimal approach. Are CryTek refactoring their engine to make it more console friendly (and improve its licensability)?
Wow, that's the improvement. You should post those screens ;p
[OLD] TAKEN FROM TRAILER:
ACTUAL CONSOLE IMAGE:
Ps. I said it before that this scene could be bugged.
Yeah, some scenes in the trailer looked really out of place compared to the rest.
WRT CryTek now admitting PC Crysis was unoptimised.
Before release: http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/11651/Crytek-Next-Gen-Consoles-Are-Too-Weak-for-Crysis/
After release: http://incrysis.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=18017 (The Crysis Hardware Experiment)
Before Crysis Warhead: http://crysiswarhead.net/?m=200806&paged=2 (Crysis Warhead is the first title [...] built on a new, enhanced and optimized version of Crytek’s CryENGINE 2 technology)
So basically, at any given time just say whatever is necessary to make your upcoming product look better. Will we have to wait until Crysis 3 so they also admit their DX11 patch for Crysis 2 has nasty tesselation issues?
More importantly, if they are remastering the game, not just the engine, they could put it up for download on Steam in case they absolutely don't want to release a 4 year old patch. Unless of course their talk of CE3 being multiplatform happy and very easy to deploy a game on all three platforms was just spin ramping up to the release of Crysis 2 right.
WRT CryTek now admitting PC Crysis was unoptimised.
Before release: http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/11651/Crytek-Next-Gen-Consoles-Are-Too-Weak-for-Crysis/
After release: http://incrysis.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=18017 (The Crysis Hardware Experiment)
Before Crysis Warhead: http://crysiswarhead.net/?m=200806&paged=2 (Crysis Warhead is the first title [...] built on a new, enhanced and optimized version of Crytek’s CryENGINE 2 technology)
So basically, at any given time just say whatever is necessary to make your upcoming product look better.
Will we have to wait until Crysis 3 so they also admit their DX11 patch for Crysis 2 has nasty tesselation issues? More importantly, if they are remastering the game, not just the engine, they could put it up for download on Steam in case they absolutely don't want to release a 4 year old patch. Unless of course their talk of CE3 being multiplatform happy and very easy to deploy a game on all three platforms was just spin ramping up to the release of Crysis 2 right.
