Could PS3 and X360 manage the Crytec 2 engine ?

[pc999]

BTW do you want to say WWWWWWWWWWWWOOOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW, if so see this

http://pc.ign.com/articles/698/698600p1.html

The most incredible thing is that this will need to run fine (at low rez) in a X1300 and a P4 at 3.2Ghz or they will not be able to sell many games, so wonder if XB/PS3 will or noe be able to play this is a bit no sense IMO.

 

[!eVo!-X Ant UK]

BTW do you want to say WWWWWWWWWWWWOOOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW, if so see this

http://pc.ign.com/articles/698/698600p1.html

The most incredible thing is that this will need to run fine (at low rez) in a X1300 and a P4 at 3.2Ghz or they will not be able to sell many games, so wonder if XB/PS3 will or noe be able to play this is a bit no sense IMO.

Well thats just lowered things, the tank screens dont look that good.

 

[pjbliverpool]

Why not? If Crytec runs on top-end PCs as it does, and consoles are equivalent, consoles can run Crytec, right? And given their closed-box nature, they'll be competitive for a while longer, so logically will be running games a couple years on from this tech. Okay, this is going into PC vs Console nonsense, but if you disagree with a point you could at least try adding some intelligent reasons why.

"It was the "utterly obliterate" or whatever crazy comment he made that I take issue too. Yes perhaps X360 and PS3 will be able to pull off Crysis at the currently shown quality but there is never going to be anything on either console that "utterly obliterates" the Crytek engine. When its released in all its DX10 glory pushing the abilities of high end DX10 GPU's on max settings its likely to be beyond the limits of either console but to be well below their limits is simply unrealistic.

 

[blakjedi]

Um this engine is running off of todays high end pc cards and todays cards are roughly equivalent to whats in x360/ps3... minus the Ram of course

 

[!eVo!-X Ant UK]

"It was the "utterly obliterate" or whatever crazy comment he made that I take issue too. Yes perhaps X360 and PS3 will be able to pull off Crysis at the currently shown quality but there is never going to be anything on either console that "utterly obliterates" the Crytek engine. When its released in all its DX10 glory pushing the abilities of high end DX10 GPU's on max settings its likely to be beyond the limits of either console but to be well below their limits is simply unrealistic.

I expect consoles them selves to software render alot of DX10 effects. Ps2 has been doing effects that its not suposed to for years now and its all down to software emulation were the Emotion Emotion calculates and does the effects via the software route and i bet PS3 and 360 will the same thing. There's no dout in my mind that DX10 will eventually cripple the console's, but expecting a first generation DX10 piece of software to really show what it can do is wrong, not to mension will the first generation of DX10 gpu's actually have enough power to run DX10 games decently ??? or will they just have that DX10 compatabilty just so that Nvidia/ATI can have the " we did DX10 first " bragging rights.

I expect the second wave of DX10 gpu's to be the real "start" of DX10.

 

[pjbliverpool]

Um this engine is running off of todays high end pc cards and todays cards are roughly equivalent to whats in x360/ps3... minus the Ram of course

The engines also supposed to include DX10 elements and so currently isn't running in its final state on current hardware.

 

[!eVo!-X Ant UK]

The engines also supposed to include DX10 elements and so currently isn't running in its final state on current hardware.

But, and this could actually happen is that Crysis will get a DX10 patch simular to the way Far Cry got its SM3.0 mode.

It could happen that way

 

[SugarCoat]

Is that true? I thought there was simultaneous development on both the PC and the 360, with the the 360 getting a good bit of "fine tuning" in regards to the platform.

I may be confusing this with another title.

DAVEW

you're right, he's wrong. The game is made to take advantage very much of the Xbox360 and hardware within. Its quite a bit more then a simple port.

 

[Dave Baumann]

CryEngine 2 has been coded to support a base of Shader Model 2.0, up to Shader Model 4.0.

 

[Mordecaii]

In response to those debating over Oblivion (yes I know this is OT but I'll get it back on topic later in the post), Oblivion was developed simultaneously on both X360 and PC. This, however, does not mean it was written to take advantage of either system specifically. The X360 runs it well, but I can promise you that if they wrote it ONLY for the X360 then it would look better. Conversely, I can say that if they wrote it ONLY for PC, there would be graphical differences as well to allow for better graphics scaling as people upgraded their systems. The game was written to be able to run on both well.

I looked at the pic on the latest IGN preview of the Crysis engine... IMO it looks rather subpar... The ground textures seem bland as do the objects on the ground... I saw some flat 2d textures being used for foliage... Overall it really wasn't very impressive to me.

 

[pc999]

Here do you have figures about the power of the PPU, or even detail of its architeture?

 

[scooby_dooby]

So stop trolling the Console Talk forums or just leave please.

You come on a PC based graphics site and called PC dev's 'lazy ass developers' and you accuse HIM of trolling? Just stay out of the thread and let people speak who actually know what they're talking about.

 

[Butta]

Now that Crysis is out and people have a good idea of what this engine is capable of, I would like to know what technical aspects of this engine could not be done on current gen consoles (other than texture resolution). Could PS3/360 handle in theory the same game (graphical effects/AI/physics) with a proper LOD model and reduced art assets?

 

[pjbliverpool]

Given how Crysis punishes far more powerful PC hardware, you would have to cut a lot more than LOD and art assets to get it running well.

Besides, what makes you think it doesn't already have a "proper" LOD model? If it was just a case of making that more agressive then Crytek could have implemented it on the PC (in stages) and we could have all been playing on v.high settings!

I don't believe either console has the shader power to pull off what Crysis is doing on anything above medium. The shader effects setting is a serious performance killer even with the other settings at medium or low.

 

[AlNom]

First couple things off the top of my head:

FP16 & alpha blending. On Xenos they would have to resort to FP10, but we already knew that in general.

3Dc: According to the SIGGRAPH 2007 slides, they're using this compression for the normal maps -> on RSX, they would have to use the V8U8/A8L8 format instead to be equivalent, although it uses 2 bytes per texel as opposed to 3Dc's 1 byte per texel.

 

[Neb]

They do have a proper LOD model aswell as streamming of detail/objects. anything above medium I would think of impossible for this current gen consoles.

 

[Heinrich4]

First couple things off the top of my head:

FP16 & alpha blending. On Xenos they would have to resort to FP10, but we already knew that in general.

3Dc: According to the SIGGRAPH 2007 slides, they're using this compression for the normal maps -> on RSX, they would have to use the V8U8/A8L8 format instead to be equivalent, although it uses 2 bytes per texel as opposed to 3Dc's 1 byte per texel.

So this compression goes something like 2:1(same s3tc) instead 4:1 as usual in 3Dc ?

(sorry if my mistake)

 

[Cyan]

They do have a proper LOD model aswell as streamming of detail/objects. anything above medium I would think of impossible for this current gen consoles.

As I already pointed out in a different thread I have a reason to believe Crysis could run perfectly well in current gen consoles if they implement tesselation for both consoles, maybe with great results.

Don't want to get into detail on it because I already did here;

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=45240

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=45315&page=5

Crysis looks amazing and all but consoles could run it with very decent graphics, if not equal sometimes, using smart techniques and not brute force.

RSX and Xenos are GPU designed for some specific purposes, just because they are consolish GPUs.

These GPUs work at 1280x720p all the time so they don't need that extra power PC graphics cards fans like to bloast about.

The raw power of those PC GPUs is unused, and even loyal PC fans would agree with me that they'd rather prefer intelligence over brute force any time of the day.

p.s. I am not a techie person, just using my intuition

 

[Neb]

Err.. first there is more to this game than just polygons. Second having extra rendering power for higher resloution isthe same as having more rendering power for more stuff at lower res. And even if you cant utilize a PC GPU as effiecent as a console GPU they stil lare far ahead in perfomance.

Something funny how a 7900GT manages far better image IQ, resolution on same games as the console versions at better framerate.

But you are free to believe that the consoles will manage Crysis at full/almost full IQ, I'll be the first to link back here when and if the game is released for the consoles!

EDIT: The game is Dead Island from Techland for both PC and xbox360, second it doesn't have much against Crysis (check the screenshots at their homepage!)

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1094275&postcount=109

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/23847.html

 

[pjbliverpool]

As I already pointed out in a different thread I have a reason to believe Crysis could run perfectly well in current gen consoles if they implement tesselation for both consoles, maybe with great results.

Don't want to get into detail on it because I already did here;

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=45240

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=45315&page=5

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that tesselation is some kind of magic bullet. Its not. In fact I don't see how its even particularly applicable to Crysis. Its shaders that sap up all the power in Crysis. How would tesselation help with that? SUre it has a lot of geometry aswell but its doing a ton of other things.

Besides, the R6xx series all have Tesselators. If it could magically make the HD2600 suddenly caable of running Crysis at very high, don't you think it would have happened already?

Crysis looks amazing and all but consoles could run it with very decent graphics, if not equal sometimes, using smart techniques and not brute force.

Without some kind of detailed explanation about what "smart techniiques" could be used and how they would improve performance over the existing techniques then I would have to put that down to wishfull thinking. There are plenty of games on PC and consoles which the GTX creams through at mich higher settings than the console. Why should we believe that all of a sudden the consoles are now capabile of running a game much better than a GTX? Did it happen with Farcry vs the R3xx series?

RSX and Xenos are GPU designed for some specific purposes, just because they are consolish GPUs.

These GPUs work at 1280x720p all the time so they don't need that extra power PC graphics cards fans like to bloast about.

All that extra power "we like to boast about" allows games like Crysis to run at 720p on PC's while the level of visual fidelity would have to be greatly reduced to do so on the consoles. My GTS struggles with Crysis at 720p and high details. Why on Earth would I believe the RSX with about half the power could handle it at higher details with the same resolution?

The raw power of those PC GPUs is unused, and even loyal PC fans would agree with me that they'd rather prefer intelligence over brute force any time of the day.

If the "raw power" of my GTS is going unused when its struggling to run Crysis as 720p would you mind telling me were it is? Because I wouldn't mind going to find it so I can get all those extra frames that my GPU is apparently leaving on the table.