Crysis could be on consoles from Cevart.

[morlock]

OT -

Funny thing about scaleability and Far Cry, was playing this game offline deathmatch with a few mates and one of them was luring in a dense bush. Problem was that he was "hiding" in plaine sight on my machine...

I had a clear advantage with my low-end machine compared to his setting on his more powerful one.

Hopefully they have thought of this in Crysis...

 

[Albuquerque]

OT -

Funny thing about scaleability and Far Cry, was playing this game offline deathmatch with a few mates and one of them was luring in a dense bush. Problem was that he was "hiding" in plaine sight on my machine...

I had a clear advantage with my low-end machine compared to his setting on his more powerful one.

Hopefully they have thought of this in Crysis...

HAHAHA! That is pretty funny, I guess I never thought to try something like that... Next time my brother and I duke it out in FarCry, I'll have to turn all my settings down and see what happens.

Unfortunately FarCry's multiplayer really never caught on, maybe for reasons exactly as you describe. I too am curious how they might make it all work -- either by forcing a common "minimum level" of vegitation in all multiplayer maps, or maybe some other method? I'm sure it's resolvable, the trick will be to make it acceptable on multiple levels of hardware.

That's still pretty funny!

 

[Scott_Arm]

OT -

Funny thing about scaleability and Far Cry, was playing this game offline deathmatch with a few mates and one of them was luring in a dense bush. Problem was that he was "hiding" in plaine sight on my machine...

I had a clear advantage with my low-end machine compared to his setting on his more powerful one.

Hopefully they have thought of this in Crysis...

It's not really all that "off topic" and is one of the reasons why Crysis will hopefully make its way to the consoles. There are reasons why consoles can provide a better experience, in some aspects, and a common hardware platform is one of them. Everyone plays with the same hardware and no one can turn off the vegetation and ruin the "stealth" aspect of the game.

 

[Albuquerque]

Very true Scott. A closed-box gives you the luxury of fine-tuning to the specific console, which helps to provide a much more consistent presentation to the user -- both in terms of gameplay and visual fidelity.

Well, so long as the developer chooses to spend the time I'm sure that Crysis will get the proper attention when it's ported, and I'd be willing to bet at least one of the three consoles does get a ported version. I'd also be willing to bet that the port will perform well and look fantastic...

 

[Fu3lFr3nzy]

I'd be willing to bet at least one of the three consoles does get a ported version.

Wii?

 

[DuckThor Evil]

Now again with FarCry, you could even drag an x800xtpe (brand-new, top-end at the time) into the dirt with the game at full capacity -- full water reflection and refraction, object density at 100%, all 3D models and no sprites, zero terrain LOD, flocking birds and schooling fish and fully dynamic shadows. And again, we aren't even talking about AA and AF yet. (I can provide samples of this too)

Yep there was a huge difference between ti4200 and X800Xt, but the difference between X800XT and 9800pro was quite small actually. Lower res and less AA, but I was able to keep pretty much maximum details with 9800 pro if I remember correctly, then I bought X800 and modded it to XT PE and was able to increase the res and AA.

I basically agree with most of what you said though. good post.

 

[Albuquerque]

Yep there was a huge difference between ti4200 and X800Xt, but the difference between X800XT and 9800pro was quite small actually. Lower res and less AA, but I was able to keep pretty much maximum details with 9800 pro if I remember correctly, then I bought X800 and modded it to XT PE and was able to increase the res and AA.

I basically agree with most of what you said though. good post.

Well, even without the AA and AF you could suck an x800 into the ground. Not via the menu options, but by the console variables:

e_obj_dist_lod_ratio
e_terrain_lod_ratio
e_vegetitation_min_sprites_distance and ratio

There were others for water reflection calculation frequency, reflection map resolution, shadow map resolution, et al. You could make a "standard scene" in FarCry go from an average of about 250k polys/sec to over a million polys/sec with just a few console options.

And then of course later, with the HDR options that came, the distance between lowest-common-denominator and highest-capability got even wider.

 

[NovemberMike]

I did not say there wouldn't be any tradeoffs, I just found the reasoning used by NovemberMike to be somewhat off the mark. I believe the new HD consoles could produce Crysis to a degree where the end result could be viewed to be better than just "looking like shit with tons of loading screens"

Let's get this down to features, ok.

http://static.computergames.ro/cg/assassin/images2/crysis/crysis067.jpg

This picture shows what I talking about pretty well, so I'm going to use it.

First off, character detail in this game is easily as high or higher than anything I have seen on consoles. Look at the suit, look at the gun, look at the self shadowing and even look at the details on the enemy model. This alone makes it hard to see on consoles (but not impossible).

Second, we have all of the effects. In that shot we have self shadowing, motion blur, Depth of Field, dynamic lighting, everything. It looks like somebody just took the whole laundry list and dumped it in there. Much more impressive than anything I have seen on either console.

And finally, this isn't some corridor shooter. One of the primary tenets of the game is that you have an island/chain of islands, and you can run/drive/swim anywhere you need to to complete your objectives.

Together, those things make me believe we won't see it anytime soon on a console with the full feature list. We have games that look similar, like Haze or Killzone 2, but they are essentially corridor shooters with limited draw distance and a small number of enemies one screen. We have games that are on the same scale like GTA4 and Saint's Row, but they are nowhere near the same visual level.

The fact is that the games coming out on the PS3/360 don't make me think this is possible at the level of fidelity we are seeing.

 

[Albuquerque]

Well, again, I will say that there are ways around a lot of the issues you bring up. Intelligent dynamic streaming of data into memory versus static load states, decreased texture resolution in "non-key" areas like tree foliage, ground textures and the like. Decreased shadow resolution, increased dependance on mipmap boundaries, increased dependance on object / model / terrain LOD scaling.

There are a LOT of things you could tweak at to make it still look "next gen" on a console, but the reality will still be that a PC simply has more resources to allocate. Is that a bad thing? I don't think so. The consoles do have other things to offer, such as guaranteed feature set and (hopefully) guaranteed performance with that feature set. They also have far more room for optimization, if only because it's a closed box and you can squeeze things into every nook and cranny of the unit's capabilities.

That is, so long as the developer is able to spend the time -- and the publisher allows them to have that time. Business doesn't always permit such schedules; we should keep our fingers crossed...

 

[NovemberMike]

Of course there are things you can do. And quite frankly, a good art team could probably create lower detail models that would still look quite pleasing. All I am saying is that they won't be able to port over the same detail and scale that is found on the PC. The overall experience might be similar, but it will still be worse in a lot of ways.

 

[Nesh]

Let's get this down to features, ok.

http://static.computergames.ro/cg/assassin/images2/crysis/crysis067.jpg

This picture shows what I talking about pretty well, so I'm going to use it.

First off, character detail in this game is easily as high or higher than anything I have seen on consoles. Look at the suit, look at the gun, look at the self shadowing and even look at the details on the enemy model. This alone makes it hard to see on consoles (but not impossible).

Second, we have all of the effects. In that shot we have self shadowing, motion blur, Depth of Field, dynamic lighting, everything. It looks like somebody just took the whole laundry list and dumped it in there. Much more impressive than anything I have seen on either console.

And finally, this isn't some corridor shooter. One of the primary tenets of the game is that you have an island/chain of islands, and you can run/drive/swim anywhere you need to to complete your objectives.

Together, those things make me believe we won't see it anytime soon on a console with the full feature list. We have games that look similar, like Haze or Killzone 2, but they are essentially corridor shooters with limited draw distance and a small number of enemies one screen. We have games that are on the same scale like GTA4 and Saint's Row, but they are nowhere near the same visual level.

The fact is that the games coming out on the PS3/360 don't make me think this is possible at the level of fidelity we are seeing.

I dont think the image you chose show what you are trying to prove although I agree with you. GoW is just as impressive as that image and has all the effects you mentioned.

There are other more impressive images of Crysis that show what you are trying to say though. They also show the huge scale of the game and the extremely detailed foliage with complex self shadowing.

 

[NovemberMike]

I dont think the image you chose show what you are trying to prove although I agree with you. GoW is just as impressive as that image and has all the effects you mentioned.

There are other more impressive images of Crysis that show what you are trying to say though. They also show the huge scale of the game and the extremely detailed foliage with complex self shadowing.

I think I originally meant to post a picture of the guy looking over the island, but forgot. But yeah, the point is that it has the same detail as any of the top end console games (I personally think that looks better than Gears, but whatever) while maintaining a scope that rivals GTA or Oblivion.

 

[ultragpu]

Let's get this down to features, ok.

http://static.computergames.ro/cg/assassin/images2/crysis/crysis067.jpg

This picture shows what I talking about pretty well, so I'm going to use it.

First off, character detail in this game is easily as high or higher than anything I have seen on consoles. Look at the suit, look at the gun, look at the self shadowing and even look at the details on the enemy model. This alone makes it hard to see on consoles (but not impossible).

Second, we have all of the effects. In that shot we have self shadowing, motion blur, Depth of Field, dynamic lighting, everything. It looks like somebody just took the whole laundry list and dumped it in there. Much more impressive than anything I have seen on either console.

And finally, this isn't some corridor shooter. One of the primary tenets of the game is that you have an island/chain of islands, and you can run/drive/swim anywhere you need to to complete your objectives.

Together, those things make me believe we won't see it anytime soon on a console with the full feature list. We have games that look similar, like Haze or Killzone 2, but they are essentially corridor shooters with limited draw distance and a small number of enemies one screen. We have games that are on the same scale like GTA4 and Saint's Row, but they are nowhere near the same visual level.

The fact is that the games coming out on the PS3/360 don't make me think this is possible at the level of fidelity we are seeing.

i disagree to either killzone2 or haze being corridor shooters. killzone2 has large open battlefield full of details. haze offers lush jungle and foliage too. last time i checked they have 20 enemies on screen at once in killzone2 according to a GG dev "motherH". now im not trying to derail here but i personally think judging by some of the great looking titles on the consoles like Gears, killzone2, resident evil5, perhapse the gap isnt so great for achieving crysis level visual. just because a console game has yet to reach that level, doenst mean crysis wont b achieved by that particular console.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

i disagree to either killzone2 or haze being corridor shooters. killzone2 has large open battlefield full of details. haze offers lush jungle and foliage too. last time i checked they have 20 enemies on screen at once in killzone2 according to a GG dev "motherH"

You don't understand, both Haze and Killzone 2 are linear games (haze doesn't look even remotely close to what Crysis achieves tho), yes they do sometimes have some big scenes, but they are linear, your limited by unmovable objects, you have a fenced in place where you can be.

Crysis does not, you can be anywhere on the entire island.

 

[Albuquerque]

Agreed, KZ2 and Haze work pretty much like STALKER on the PC insofar as the "open" areas. Nothing is movable or breakable, and while it looks like you've got a nice wide open space, in reality you're fenced in either by physical fences, terrain or "killer radiation" (in STALKER anyway).

Now granted, FarCry and Crysis both will have some sort of outer limit as to how far you can get off the island (FarCry did it with instant-death sniping helicopters). However, what was actually funny was if you changed one of the game files, you could walk / drive / boat to anyplace you wanted. If there was an island at the extreme-far-edge of what your binoculars could see, then you could actually get there if you wanted.

Can't do that in KZ or Haze, or STALKER. You actually could do it in oblivion though, albeit with a hack and also without the same dynamic objects (destructable environment, dense foliage, etc) as in Crysis.

 

[ultragpu]

You don't understand, both Haze and Killzone 2 are linear games (haze doesn't look even remotely close to what Crysis achieves tho), yes they do sometimes have some big scenes, but they are linear, your limited by unmovable objects, you have a fenced in place where you can be.

Crysis does not, you can be anywhere on the entire island.

seems i forgot to put Lair in there. the dragon flick actaully matched quite alot of features presented in crysis and some new one too. dare i say at times, it looked more impressive than the jungle flick. but of course, crysis would probably take the cake overall in the end.

 

[archangelmorph]

I just love the way you guys so vehemently discuss the features of games you CLEARLY have never played.. Heck nobody has!!

How can you say Killzone is a corridor shooter as is Haze when all you've seen are a few vid clips?

Heck by that logic I could watch a clip of one of the underground bunker areas of Far Cry and conclude that the game is also a corridor shooter, only has upto 2 enemies on screen at once and provides the player with limited freedoms of movement..

Obviously this is bollocks but hopefully you'll see where i'm coming in saying that you shouldn't rant on about what a game does and doesn't have when in actuality you have no clue whatsoever..

 

[Cheezdoodles]

I just love the way you guys so vehemently discuss the features of games you CLEARLY have never played.. Heck nobody has!!

How can you say Killzone is a corridor shooter as is Haze when all you've seen are a few vid clips?

There has been nothing from the developers OR the gameplay vids that would indicate otherwize. For example, with haze, you clearly see that the map is limited and that it has set paths for you in the vids i have seen, rather than a freeworld roaming scheme.

Nothin we have seen from Killzone would imply that in reality its one huge city your fighting in, and you can go anywhere you want at any given time (and that there is a gazillion different paths to get there)

Its more logical to assume that because the developers and the video's doesn't imply anything remotely similar to the freedom in crysis, that it doesn't have it, rather than assuming it will because we don't know 100% of all facts of the game yet.

Of course we all base our comments on the information that has been made avaliable. If we didn't, there would be no point in ever discussing games before their release.

 

[archangelmorph]

There has been nothing from the developers OR the gameplay vids that would indicate otherwize. For example, with haze, you clearly see that the map is limited and that it has set paths for you in the vids i have seen, rather than a freeworld roaming scheme.

Its more logical to assume that because the developers AND the video's doesn't imply anything remotely similar to the freedom in crysis, that it doesn't have it, rather than assuming it will because we don't know 100% of all facts of the game yet.

Of course we all base our comments on the information that has been made avaliable. If we didn't, we might as well just do random guesses.

Well maybe i'm just arguing semantics but if you believe this to be the case then don't directly infer that it is because the truth is you don't know full stop..

So far you've seen one clip of KZ2 and a handful from one part of one level of Haze.. I don't think that's enough to make any kind of such inferences on ANY game regardless..

Didn't everyone think Heavenly Sword was an Arena brawler?

I rest my case..

Anyway at the end of the day these consoles have shown their capacity to imagine vast open and expansive worlds however the limits of "freedom" are often factors of the "design" over any limitation of the hardware..

& personally I wouldn't imagine a game like crysis would suffer on a console like the PS3 or the Xbox360 in any other area besides possibly texture capacity and mapped detail fidelity (and maybe lighting but work arounds can be made too account for this, i.e. clever use of precomputation to provide the same specific effect that a much more dynamic system could do, albeit alot slower/more complicated to implement..)
You only have to look at a game like Lair, with it's vast open landscapes, high density of animated/articulated actors on screen (1000s of ground troops, 100s of dragons etc..) and high fidelity visuals to imagine that a game like crysis (which exhibits much less going on at any one time..) could definitely be done.. The real question is at what cost to visual fidelity (which is argueably the only area that would need to be re-balanced to any noticable degree)..?

 

[ultragpu]

woudlnt it b easier to break some trees and some small warehouses on an island than a huge Helghast civilization?