CryEngine 3 'beyond' next-gen console capability

II-zOoLoGy-II

II-zOoLoGy-II

(Banned)
2,713
United States
F YOU
Last edited:
And they are going to be free to play only after their committements.

124435_340.jpg
 
Maybe they need to freaking make consoles that are up to PC level already.
 
^They never are. Between R&D and final product is so much time, and technology doesn't stop
 
E28
Due in 2013, and according to rumours they aren't exactly cutting edge... :indiff:
Click to expand...

If they want to pick up the pace then they need to do it. And now.
 
II-zOoLoGy-II
"Crytek CEO Cevat Yerli has told CVG that the Crysis studio's CryEngine tech is "way beyond next-gen consoles already".

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/352932/crytek-were-already-way-beyond-next-gen-consoles/



Makes me laugh when people say the PS3 and 360 still have so much to give....

Consoles.... slowing down the progression of PC gaming since.... they were created.


Unreal Engine 4 also looks good.

http://kotaku.com/5916859/how-unreal-engine-4-will-change-the-next-games-you-play
Click to expand...

Judging from E3, The Last Of Us specifically, I'd say current consoles still have a lot to give. Sure they may not be up to PC standards, and anyone who expects consoles to be is plain ignorant but PS3 and 360 games keep getting better and better and developers are still finding ways to get more from the systems.

As far as consoles slowing down PC gaming, how exactly do they do that? I'd say it is developers that are slowing down PC gaming, or hell, maybe even PC gamers themselves. From everything I've read (which granted, isn't much) developers prefer consoles due to lower piracy and hence higher profits. So just because Sony decided to release a game console doesn't mean that PC gaming suffered. It's up to developers to make the most of the hardware available and it's up to the gamers themselves to but the software developers release. Your last sentence would make a little more sense if it said something like...

Developers... slowing down the progression of PC gaming since... they decided they wanted more money and consoles generate more sales.


Parker
 
I'd say it's more about the longer life cycles of these consoles than consoles in general. Things would be advancing more if they went back to 5 years between systems. I'm not saying a longer life cycle is bad; it's just not without side effects like this.

But the PC side isn't without blame. Another factor is that more people are switching to laptops and tablets, which (tablets especially) tend to be less powerful than desktops. Some analysts even believe that tablets will be become the primary computing device for the majority of people within the next few years. Granted, the hardcore gamers won't do this, but will they be enough to keep mainstream PC game development viable? I hope so.
 
I hate how they call PS360 next-gen consoles. Next-gen consoles are the consoles which are coming with the next generation (duh), PS360 are current-gen.
 
@bryant:
It's more the Publisher who limit the porting of games in the budget. A good exemple for good porting is Max Payne 3. That was done properly.
Other games are primarily made for PC like Arma or Witcher and it shows.
People say Console slow down PC, because you need to get games working on a 5-10 year old platforme and therefor not able to harness the power of a 2 year old PC.

The way the find new ways to improve the graphics is done by efficent programming (good) and simply cheating on polygones, sprites,.... (bad). So there are two sides of the medal.

and piracy might be an issue of PC, but less than 10 years ago. And just looking at torrent site, shows that games are leaked weeks ahead for consoles, and Pc generally after the release. It's a myth! I believe console, especially Xbox and Wii are pirated in the same way as PC games

@Sir : You know how people predicted the end of books and papers when Pc came out. A office without a papertrail. Rofl.
I think it was even Bill Gates who though Internet would be a fad and would never catch on.
Or Digicams would extinguish top tier camera's for amateurs.

There are so many exemple and the tablet on is also one of them. They sure are a nice thing, but even if they get more powerful, they can never be as powerful as a full sized PC, so they can't kill them off.
 
I was expecting next-gen games to look like the cutscenes in Diablo III. Looks like I'll have to wait a bit.
 
Have you guys seen the Square Enix realtime tech demo? This is a sneak peek on how games on consoles will look like, next-gen.
 
peobryant
Judging from E3, The Last Of Us specifically, I'd say current consoles still have a lot to give. Sure they may not be up to PC standards, and anyone who expects consoles to be is plain ignorant but PS3 and 360 games keep getting better and better and developers are still finding ways to get more from the systems.

As far as consoles slowing down PC gaming, how exactly do they do that? I'd say it is developers that are slowing down PC gaming, or hell, maybe even PC gamers themselves. From everything I've read (which granted, isn't much) developers prefer consoles due to lower piracy and hence higher profits. So just because Sony decided to release a game console doesn't mean that PC gaming suffered. It's up to developers to make the most of the hardware available and it's up to the gamers themselves to but the software developers release. Your last sentence would make a little more sense if it said something like...

Developers... slowing down the progression of PC gaming since... they decided they wanted more money and consoles generate more sales.

Parker
Click to expand...

I will take the word of the CEO of Crytek over your opinion on second hand footage from an E3 demo. If the current high-end engines have already maxed out both consoles (Frostbite 2 limited to 30 FPS at 720p render) how in the world do you think there is still more headroom in almost 10 year hardware? You're giving an example of a game that looks no better than the first Uncharted.... Hmm I wonder why that is?

When developers code for consoles they use a lot of tricks to ensure smooth gameplay. Tessellation, anti-aliasing, particle effects, FOV, and many other graphic tech's are either minimized or removed all together. Why? Because consoles cannot process the information and produce anything near playable frame rates. But hey... The Last of Us looks good so the technology in the PS3 must still have "more to give".... Unless you know what all those numbers and specs mean... Then it's just laughable this conversation even has to occur.

Ya PC gamers are slowing down game development.... Ingenious comment.

Pirating is every bit as popular on consoles as it is on PC. So don't kid yourself.

And yes... Consoles do bring in more money. People are still paying retail for technology from 2005. If they'll do that then why wouldn't these companies milk consumers? Developers don't decide when Microsoft or Sony push new hardware. They develop for what they're given.

If Microsoft or Sony either decreased the life-time of consoles or I don't know... built upgradable consoles I guess you could leave 2005 and join the rest of us in 2012; where processing (gpu or cpu) power increases by 40% or so every year.

Join the rest of us as we prep for 4k.
 
The dated hardware spec of consoles isn’t the only contributing factor to this divergence, either.

“A lot nowadays don’t consider PC a big issue any more; their [sales] expectations are nowhere near what they are for the console versions,” Yerli said. “Until the PC market creates comparable revenues, companies are not going to spend enough on the PC SKU of a game.”

This statement is before the release of Crysis 2. Like a broken record Yerli is.

Message to Crytek: Get over it and focus on creating games that flow well on all aspects, from graphics, control and gameplay. Considering your last outing was a let down to many across all platforms for many reasons, focus on development and not boasting about "My engine can do this, this and this!", "Consoles are holding PC's back!" and repeating yourselves over and over again.
 
II-zOoLoGy-II
I will take the word of the CEO of Crytek over your opinion on second hand footage from an E3 demo. If the current high-end engines have already maxed out both consoles (Frostbite 2 limited to 30 FPS at 720p render) how in the world do you think there is still more headroom in almost 10 year hardware? You're giving an example of a game that looks no better than the first Uncharted.... Hmm I wonder why that is?


Personal opinion I suppose. I think The Last Of Us looks much better than the original Uncharted.

When developers code for consoles they use a lot of tricks to ensure smooth gameplay. Tessellation, anti-aliasing, particle effects, FOV, and many other graphic tech's are either minimized or removed all together. Why? Because consoles cannot process the information and produce anything near playable frame rates. But hey... The Last of Us looks good so the technology in the PS3 must still have "more to give".... Unless you know what all those numbers and specs mean... Then it's just laughable this conversation even has to occur.

I realize developers use tricks to make games on consoles look the way they do. Me saying consoles have more to give isn't an accurate statement I suppose, however what I really meant was developers are still finding new ways to make console games look and play better so while the technology hasn't improved the games certainly have. When someone tells me consoles have no more left to give I get the impression that they believe developers have hit a wall and can't make games any better, and personally I don't believe that to be true with this generation yet.

Ya PC gamers are slowing down game development.... Ingenious comment.

To me it's as valid an excuse as consoles being to blame. If PC games were as profitable as console games than developers would have no reason to develop for consoles and as such could take full advantage of PC hardware. I'm sure piracy is on all platforms but everything I've read points to PC being by far and away number one. Again, I'm not saying that is the reason for game development slowing down, but you can't blame console or their owners for what is ultimately the developer or publishers decision. Sony and Microsoft don't tell developers to use a certain engine or build it for their system (at least to my knowledge) the developer decides what hardware they want to use.

Pirating is every bit as popular on consoles as it is on PC. So don't kid yourself.

I've seen PC gamers say that but all the piracy charts I've seen have shown PC games way ahead of console games in copies pirated.

And yes... Consoles do bring in more money. People are still paying retail for technology from 2005. If they'll do that then why wouldn't these companies milk consumers? Developers don't decide when Microsoft or Sony push new hardware. They develop for what they're given.

Exactly, they decide to develop for Sony or Microsoft. If they wanted they could use the most advanced hardware available and develop a game only super expensive, high end PC's could run. Can't blame PlayStation or Xbox owners for developers not wanting to to that though.

If Microsoft or Sony either decreased the life-time of consoles or I don't know... built upgradable consoles I guess you could leave 2005 and join the rest of us in 2012; where processing (gpu or cpu) power increases by 40% or so every year.

That would defeat the whole purpose of a console though. The reason game consoles are much more popular than a PC is because you never have to worry if a game will perform on your system. When I buy a game for my PS3 or 360 I know when I put it in the disc drive it's going to work. If consoles were upgradeable like PC's than we'd have the same problems many PC owners have which would be low performing games on their systems. I'd rather have "sub-par" graphics that I still think look superb than having to constantly upgrade my console or PC to keep up with technology. Join you in 2012? nah, I'll keep my flip phone and consoles and you can have the other gadgets. :)

Join the rest of us as we prep for 4k.
Click to expand...

Comments in red.


Parker
 
Personal opinion I suppose. I think The Last Of Us looks much better than the original Uncharted.
Click to expand...
Not even a personal opinion, TLoU looks better in every single way.

Without consoles, gaming wouldn't be nearly as popular as it is today, actually videogaming started on consoles. So please stop that nonesense.

And to Crytek: Show something and stop talking.
 
Both ps3 and x360 still are much cheaper than average power PC, and both console gives much fun and are much simple to live with.

So buy two GeForce GTX 690 graphic cards, the most powerful PC processor, 16x GB ramm, and add to that good mother board to raise processor speed. You should be happy now.
 
CryEngine may well be beyond 'next-gen consoles' but isn't it kind of pointless? I know we should be driving things forward and all but surely a good business practice is to aim for the biggest market. By making an engine that wont work in the biggest market seems to go totally against that.
 
G.T.Ace
Have you guys seen the Square Enix realtime tech demo? This is a sneak peek on how games on consoles will look like, next-gen.
Click to expand...
Do you guys remember the teaser trailer for Killzone which was released prior to the PS3 launch?


So, yeah. I'll believe it when I see it.
 
First: This was NOT a realtime demo, if you want to compare the Square Enix video to something from 2005, use the FFVII PS3 tech demo, which looks worse than almost every good PS3 game.

Second: Back when real Killzone 2 footage was shown, I compared it in detail with that old video and it actually surpasses it in many aspects. Weapon detail, geometry, fire dynamics, draw distance and some other stuff are better in the actual game and before you start to discuss this further, yes, I am willing to make the same comparison again just for you, but not now, because I have other stuff to do.
 
Luminis
Do you guys remember the teaser trailer for Killzone which was released prior to the PS3 launch?


So, yeah. I'll believe it when I see it.
Click to expand...


They should be able to get cut scenes to look at least as good as that square tech demo. To me it didn't look as good as the cut scenes from diablo 3 and I am playing it on a laptop that shouldn't have near the hardware of the next consoles.
I was going to link a video of the end of the first act, but it doesn't look near as good on youtube as the actual game does while playing it.
 
Azuremen
It is certainly easier these days, as many PC games are moving to the "must be connected to play" DRM style, while consoles have to still work on the stand alone idea more.
Click to expand...

Pirated PC games have the DRM stripped out. I think consoles are tougher because the hardware has to be modded.
 
G.T.Ace
Not even a personal opinion, TLoU looks better in every single way.

Without consoles, gaming wouldn't be nearly as popular as it is today, actually videogaming started on consoles. So please stop that nonesense.

And to Crytek: Show something and stop talking.
Click to expand...

Yeah, no it didn't.
 
No it didnt start there, but it damn sure flourished there for years and years. With only a very small hardcore group playing on pc. So you may not like consoles, but without them gaming wouldnt be near as far along as it is, without the console money backing alot of development. :)
 
I may not like consoles? Where did I say that?

And if by "hardcore" (good lord do I hate these senseless titles) you actually mean only those who could actually have access to whatever computer hardware was available in the late 40's throughout the 60's, then yes.
 
peobryant
Comments in red.

Parker
Click to expand...

So CryEngine 3 can not fully run on "next-gen" consoles (quoted by the CEO of Crytek) and you're telling me that current consoles haven't hit a wall and consoles are indeed NOT slowing down game-tech development?

That makes no sense.


Consoles have 10 year life spans (actual active development time being a few years less), Moore's law roughly states that processing power doubles every 2 years (18 months respectively). So how far behind are consoles? Keep in mind the next-generation of consoles will not even be close to high-end PC's when there are released.

I never have to worry if a game will play on my PC. I have been building since I was 10 years old. But is everyone tech-savvy enough to play on PC? No. That is (like you said) why consoles are so popular; they are easy and require no troubleshooting. That is until you RROD or hard-lock then you're out of luck and have a $400 paper weight.

Odds are if you know how to operate Windows and can read the "minimum requirements" supplied by every game then there is no excuse for not knowing if a game will play on your system. But that is too much work... Bring out the consoles.

You do not have to upgrade your components every year to be able to play the latest games. The great thing about PC is the ability to upgrade when YOU want; the user has the ability to choose what level of graphics quality they would like to utilize. Low-medium-high-very high-ultra and even custom settings to achieve any level in between any of the pre-determined settings. It's not harder than that. You can have a 5 year old PC and still be able to play the latest games.



ICEYOU
Thank You, Peo. Atleast you haven't been brainwashed.
Click to expand...

Ya, I have been brainwashed because I grasp the concepts that are being discussed. Brilliant.

Have anything else to add or would you rather just continue calling people mindless drones?
 

Latest Posts

Back