Could PS3 and X360 manage the Crytec 2 engine ?

[!eVo!-X Ant UK]

Ive just watched the Video and its awsome, but my PC will NEVER be able to run that game as i never upgrade.

So what i was wondering is if its possible on PS3 and X360 so i can atleast play games powered with that engine

But the only thing that i think is not possible on the Console's is the Soft-Particle's am i wrong in thinking that??

Is there anything that anybody that is more technically blessed can point out that wont be acheiveable on the Next Gen Console's??

 

[Titanio]

Of course they could run it. Whether they could run it as well as a top of the line PC is another matter, perhaps, but there wouldn't be much in the difference. And if the engine was tuned toward the consoles, you'd see their strengths emerge, I think.

The engine is coming to PS3 and X360, by the way. Crytek discussed the consoles in an interview a little while back.

Why do you think the soft particles wouldn't be possible?

 

[3roxor]

Some normal logical thinking should answer the question..you don't even have to be technically blessed for that.

 

[Bad_Boy]

Crytek is already working with x360 and PS3 for their new engine. Infact, they are putting extra work for the cell processor to hopefully use all 7 processor's full power.

http://forums.e-mpire.com/showthread.php?t=39057
orginally posted by Titanio here http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=23293&page=1&pp=25

/GameStar/dev: How does porting work from x86 to X360?

Cevat Yerli: In general the architecture is different of course, but they are quite a bit more similar then Xbox360 and PS3. The cpu's of PC, 360 and PS3 have only one similarity - multi-threading. As a generic cpu the Xbox 360 processor is the most powerful one, if you're taking the 7 Spu's of the PS3 into account things change. Before we had the PS3 devkits we thought PS3 and Xbox 360 were closer in design than PC and console. That's not the case though *laughs*

/GameStar/dev: So you are optimizing your engine for the cell spu's?

Cevat Yerli: Sure. We have to, because we want to utilize PS3's power in full. Accordingly the PS3 will get it's own engine architecture, kind of a sub-architecture of CryEngine 2.

/GameStar/dev: You outsourced the Far Cry Instincts port. Now you have to port yourselves?

Cevat Yerli: Umh ...

/GameStar/dev: ... the graphics interfaces are requiring an extra effort?

Cevat Yerli: Yeah, because of OpenGL ES for the PS3 we have to recode our whole rendering. If you look at it closely, CryEngine 2 will have 2 solutions for each system in total. If a developer abstracts that, the technology is optimized very specifically. Otherwise you cannot utilize the whole power. Alternatively you can abstract it in a way that it is not running on all system, then the strongest platform is losing out the most ...

I bet Crysis ends up coming out for both consoles.

 

[!eVo!-X Ant UK]

Of course they could run it. Whether they could run it as well as a top of the line PC is another matter, perhaps, but there wouldn't be much in the difference. And if the engine was tuned toward the consoles, you'd see their strengths emerge, I think.

The engine is coming to PS3 and X360, by the way. Crytek discussed the consoles in an interview a little while back.

Why do you think the soft particles wouldn't be possible?

I supose its because ive never seen them beofre running in an ACTUAL game enviroment

 

[Npl]

I supose its because ive never seen them beofre running in an ACTUAL game enviroment

Well, I couldnt actually tell they are "soft" particles, because there aint anything I wouldnt expect from "casual" particles.

The most impressive thing to me are the clouds, anything else seems like a natural progression.

 

[Hardknock]

Crytek is already working with x360 and PS3 for their new engine. Infact, they are putting extra work for the cell processor to hopefully use all 7 processor's full power.

http://forums.e-mpire.com/showthread.php?t=39057
orginally posted by Titanio here http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=23293&page=1&pp=25


I bet Crysis ends up coming out for both consoles.

So when does this engine come out?? Looks like UE3 finally has some competition.

 

[weaksauce]

Didn't sony already show ps3 can do soft particles? I mean the gas station demo was a bit cooler than the burning truck.

 

[Titanio]

Lets not get caught up in buzzwords. What exactly makes a particle "soft"? There's nothing about that that PS3 or X360 could not do, I don't think.

That burning truck footage is also a few months old now - I've no doubt it was being shown on DX9-level hardware.

 

[Bad_Boy]

So when does this engine come out?? Looks like UE3 finally has some competition.

Recent scans say the game is planned to come Q4 2006, and is currently around 60% complete.

 

[Griffith]

Recent scans say the game is planned to come Q4 2006, and is currently around 60% complete.

I believe that for Q4 2006 we have better engines, it's whole year apart and the video don't impress me even a bit, what look impressive in photo, in video is nothing of special

maybe for Q4 we get U3Engine on pc (and before on X360) and maybe with some global illumination, I hope

 

[dukmahsik]

going to be fun

 

[Fafalada]

Well, I couldnt actually tell they are "soft" particles, because there aint anything I wouldnt expect from "casual" particles.

If I had to guess based on the video, soft particles is just a cute PR name for particles that don't have hard edges against intersecting background geometry.

IMO it's a misnomer though, just like celshading - there's about a milion and one way to do the said effect, which will inevitably lead to people giving the same label to completely different approaches.

It's indeed almost non-existant thing in games to date - (there's only been a few that tried to do some semblance of "soft particles", and it wasn't very convincing yet).

 

[Farid]

Yes, the X360 and the PS3 can handle the CryEngine 2.
Since Crytek disclosed to the press that they working on the next-gen consoles already (Thing that was under NDA until now), it means that it's obvious that the engine works fine on those consoles.

Also and by the way, you should all be expecting a lot more than the CryEngine 2 from the next-gen consoles.
I was one of the only one to be extremely unimpressed by the demo, contrary to the other guys of the site (And other hardware sites), but I rest my case, you should be expecting more impressive visuals. And you might get them.

I'm not to saying that the Crytek guys won't ramp up the graphical quality of this game, let's be clear. They're not done yet with the game.

 

[tema]

I think Cell have more than enough power to manage this PC engine. You can see the polys in CryEngine2 are very low. The crash physics are not very exciting. CryEnigine is made for duo core x86 "top of the line" PC but its no Cell.

 

[pjbliverpool]

I think Cell have more than enough power to manage this PC engine. You can see the polys in CryEngine2 are very low. The crash physics are not very exciting. CryEnigine is made for duo core x86 "top of the line" PC but its no Cell.

If they do it right it will be made to take advantage of dual core x86 CPU's, physics accelerators and DX10 GPU's. So no, thats no PS3, its far better.

If the engine does stress high end PC components and features of the time (which lets face it, it probably won't) then PS3 will be incapable of running it with the same level of graphical fidelity. No doubt the engine would scale down to PS3 and X360 level though because it will also need to run on older, slower PC's support SM3.0 and even 2.0.

 

[Titanio]

If they do it right it will be made to take advantage of dual core x86 CPU's, physics accelerators and DX10 GPU's. So no, thats no PS3, its far better.

That'd be the key bit. Has Crytek said if they're supporting Physx? It'd be nice if they did.

But either way, as Crytek's CEO pointed out, with PCs you can't often use physics on a large scale in a way which affects gameplay, because you're limited by what your minimum spec dictates - it has to at least run all gameplay smoothly. But with a closed box with more CPU power, you can have more physics impact gameplay.

 

[tema]

Heavenly Sword is more impressive in visuals(polys) and physics. The texture and world memory may need to scale down but that says a lot for your $3000 duo cores.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

If they do it right it will be made to take advantage of dual core x86 CPU's, physics accelerators and DX10 GPU's. So no, thats no PS3, its far better.

If they're only targetting PCs with physics accelerators, they're going to have a very small customer base. And if they're targetting mid-range PCs too, whatever they produce with the Crytek engine will have to run as suitably on a PC without PhysX as with, which means not writing FOR PhysX. Whereas by comparison on PS3 they can target the top end knowing everyone's got it.

 

[pjbliverpool]

If they're only targetting PCs with physics accelerators, they're going to have a very small customer base. And if they're targetting mid-range PCs too, whatever they produce with the Crytek engine will have to run as suitably on a PC without PhysX as with, which means not writing FOR PhysX. Whereas by comparison on PS3 they can target the top end knowing everyone's got it.

They can add physics based eye candy into the game which would scale back if you don't have a PPU or your playing on a console.

Just because a game takes advantage of a PPU doesn't mean it needs one to run. Besides, everyone seems to be assuming that Cell is automatically going to be better than a dual core at Physics (along with all the other CPU work). I think thats a big assumption to make at this stage. John Carmack doesn't seem to hold them in such high regard.