Far Cry (360) interview

Maximum detail settings and 1024x768, yes it handled it fine, by fine I mean smoothly. It did bog down in some parts but was still playable and for the most part the game was smooth. Comparable in framerate to Halo on the xbox.

The link I posted proved that the game averages well over 60fps with max settings at 1024x768 and probably higher (since the 6600GT already does).

I personally think the two are about even however COD2 does represent X360 quality graphics so like I said, if you think Farcry its better, then you think its up there with the best X360 games.

I doubt the devs would describe there efforts as a "cheap port".

The age of the game is at least as important as the graphics themselves. Its not better comparing the graphics of Quake 4 to UT2003 and concluding that id is capable of better grahics than Epic. You should be comparing two games which are released in the same time period.

 

Another link to the PC/360 video in case the other one isn't working...

http://www.xboxyde.com/news_2567_en.html

 

From what i know this is not an old engine Vs new engine comparison.
FarCry is still one of the 3 best FPSs for pc (owing to the upgrades of its engine).
Its the Pc upgraded engine vs the xbox engine ,upgraded for the x360 and the 360 version make the pc version looks like the ugly cousin.
Why some people cant face it ?

 

Because they weren't comparing to the latest updated version of Farcry, they were comparing to the original version. Not that it would make a huge difference either way - its still a 2 year old engine whether its had some minor updates or not. Noithing like an almost completely reworked version of Farcry instincts for the X360.

Farcry = 2 years old.
Farcy X360 = doesn't exist yet but probably coming out this year.
Crysis = doesn't exist yet but probably coming out this year.

Anyone wanting to compare Instincts 360 to the original Farcry and look at it as some kind of "Xbox 360 victory" is delluding themselves. Its no more valid than comparing Quake Wars to Halo 2 and calling it a massive victory for PC games over console games.

 

I don't really see why we should compare it to crysis so far, crysis is also developped for x360.
FCIx360 is supposed to be released soon using the Crytech 1 engine, and it's a sequel to FCI on xbox1. ( + the original game resized for x360 )
It looks better than original FC and FCI, and will look worthier than Crysis, that's all , and it is as simple as that.

 

I don't think its been announced that Crysis will be on consoles, currently its onlty slated for PC's although I would be suprised if we didn't see some kind of version for consoles eventually.

Question is that with a DX10 engine which should stress G80/R600, will it look as good on consoles? Doubtful.

Im not sure I understood your final sentence, are you saying Instincts 360 will look better than Crysis? If so I think you need to take a look at this:

http://www.1up.com/do/slideshow?pager.offset=4&mt=0&cId=3147565&mId=2686160

 

that water looks incredible.

 

looks great

lots of good things to come from this gen

I can't wait.

 

You obviously don't understand the extra bandwidth and headroom you have with a console.

Crysis will be for PC/360/PS3 it uses features of WGF2.0 some of which xenos are capable of.

I'm guessing the console version won't be a port and will probably be developed seperate from the PC verison.

 

I don't understand what you mean by "extra bandwidth and headroom"? I have failrly detailed knowledge of all the major graphics architectures and I don't see any major advantages of either console over current gen PC's, never mind next gen PC's (G80/R600 era).

Take PS3 for example - the top 2 PC GPU's have more bandwidth dedicated soley to graphics than it has for its entire system - for both graphics and CPU operations. Yes PS3 has a much larger bandwidth between the CPU and GPU but every byte of that is needed just to give a leg up to the narrow graphics memory bus. Even when using it all (leaving zero left for CPU <-> GPU communication) it still wouldn't equal PC graphics memory bandwidth. G80/R600 could be in the 70+ GB/sec range for the graphics and then another 10+ GB/sec for the CPU. X360 still has them beat on edram bandwidth but thats only 10MB. In the PC we're talking hundreds and thousands.

And as for the headroom, are you talking memory size or sheer processing power? Because again the highest end current gen PC parts match or exceed both next gen consoles in these area's already, G80/R600 should move way out in front.

Anyway, to bring my post back to the topic at hand, I believe its the power I talked about above which will allow Crysis on the PC to look better than its possible console cousins. If there are console versions I doubt the differences will be huge but I do strongly believe they will exist above and beyond mere resolution and framerate differences.

So to conclude, given that both FCI Preditor and Crysis are both spiritual sequals to the original 2 year old Farcry, and are both probably being released in the same year within 6 months of each other targeted at roughly the same generation of hardware, I would say they are a far more valid comparison than Preditor to the original game which could well be two and a half years old by the time it launches, minor engine updates not withstanding.

 

Then just be the only one to compare this with crysis, which should be running on Dx10 cards at 60 fps in october 2006 at full details.

 

No they compare it to the latest version of pc engine.
In X360 version Ubisoft has rewritten some of the shaders used in vegetation and water and probably they improved the HDR.
Farcry = pc upgraded engine
Farcry x360 = xbox engine with quick optimisation to take advantage to some of the 360 cappabilities.
Crysis = A future engine with different level of optimisation for desctops/x360/ps3

Apparently you didnt understand why they released this clip.
The devs wanted to sow to 360 owners that FAR CRY-PREDATOR surpass the graphics quality of the pc version.
So with this way they said to their x360 consumers that there is not reason to believe that buying this game they buy just the high end pc version.
And they did it. Now there are alot more 360 owners that want to buy this game than before.

 

Proof? And if you can provide the proof, tell me what difference it makes in that particular comparison.

Minor updates of a 2 years old game engine. And you have yet to prove if it was updated at all and what difference it would have made.

Lol, "quick" optimisations? Its looks completely different to Instincs on the Xbox and probably uses completely new and far more extensive shaders.

Stop making assumptions, Crysis hasn't been announced for any console. ANd what generation the engine is is irrelivant anyway. What matters is when gamers can play the game. If Crsis comes out 3 months after FCIP, its far more comparable to it than the 2.5 year old Farcry.

I understand perfectly why they released the clip, what I don't understand is why some people claim this as some kind of "PC having its ass handed to it by the X360 event" while ignoring the fact that they are comparing to a 2 year old game which by the time FCIP ships will be way below the current standard of PC games - the most obvious example being the far more advanced sequal to the very game that you are trying to compare to.

 

No you have to proof me the opposite. Why they have to take out the patches and hdr from their engine to make this comparison when the 360 version looks much better than the upgraded pc vesion ?

The difference is that is makes pc gamers feel more insecure.

...Which is one of the best fps that you can find in Desctop systems today.

It called much more powerful hardware

My mistake , i was referring to the different level of optimization of the cry-engine2 for consoles.
I hope that somebody can provide for me the link of the interview with Cevat Yerli speaking about CE2 optimization for NextGen consoles.

Because farcry for pc has its ass handed by the 360 version. And as i said its a quick port or , if you dont like this expression , its a port developed for a small interval of time (some months) .
And this has absolutely nothing to do with a "from the ground" engine.

AFAIK Crysis is not a sequal of Far-Cry

 

Why dont people compare it to the 64bit version of Farcry

http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/DigitalMedia/l-Stones64.jpg

http://www.amdzone.com/pics/gaming/farcry/64bit/waterfall64.jpg

http://www.amdzone.com/pics/gaming/farcry/64bit/boat2.jpg

http://www.amdzone.com/pics/gaming/farcry/64bit/boat3.jpg

http://www.amdzone.com/pics/gaming/farcry/64bit/boatglide.jpg

from here : http://www.amdzone.com/modules.php?...s&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=125&page=1

 

When this FCIR and Crysis supposed to be released ???
I really doubt Crysis will be there for christmas 2006...

 

soon

 

Well the game is version 1.3 but judging from the rocks, abundance of fish in the sea and number of tree's on the distant islands, they are using neither instancing or the 64bit enhancemets. Its also clear that from that video there was zero HDR lighting. Incidentally they failed to use the paradise setting and the image quality was only 1024 + 2xFSAA. Suffice to say FC gets quite a bit better looking than what was shown in that video, especially indoor areas which benefit most from the upgrades. Im not saying it looks better than the 360 version, but then I would be silly to think a 2 year old game should be graphically comparable with an unreleased game.

If thats the biggest "diference" to the image you can come up with had the enhancements been used then it just goes to show they make no difference in a scene like that. As it happens they would, as I described above but since those differences can't be seen in the video, its clear they arn't being used. More likely its the latest version of FC on stock settings, HDR and Instancing have to be turned on through editing the setup files as far as I know.

Yes its still one of the best looking games. Not the best but one of them. But then you can't play FCIP today can you so im not sure how your comments above support your argument.

Yes, far more powerful hardware has allowed them to greatly upgrade the engine, re-writing much if not all of the existing shader code amoungst many other things.

And like I have said, such a comparison is silly since one is 2 years old and one is yet to be released. I may as well say that Microsoft got their ass handed to them because UT2K7 will look far better than Unreal Championship 2. But that would make no more sense.

Its not, but it is a spritual sequal and a sequal in terms of the next PC game from the same developer based on a development of the same engine.

 

PS3 and 360 are closed box'ed system's that is a huge advantage in terms of cryengine 2. Beside's i expect to see grpahics on those machine in the next few years that demolish that engine COMPLETELY.

And on a different note, I dont belive that the game at present has anything to do with DX10, as there is NO DX10 card available that the engine could be showed on. The demo was more than likey running on the DX9 7800 GTX. Maybe it will recive a DX10 patch, simular to the way Far Cry got its SM3.0 mode.

Besides Console's can soft-ware emulate effects like PS2 has been doing for years

 

FCIR is comming at the end of March.
Now for Crysis i dont know . As you said , maybe at Nov-Dec 2006 , maybe later...