DSOGaming writes: "Ah, Gamescom. One of the best gaming events in which developers and publishers share their ideas and plans about their upcoming games. Naturally, Crytek is one of them and this time around, the company’s CEO, Cevat Yerli, decided to answer some crucial questions for both PC and console gamers."
110°
70°
70°
100°
Ad 
150°
30°
40°
10°
30°
40°
I always remember some idiot dev saying he once got the PS3 to smoke. Covering up the vents will do that for you.
Haven't seen anything in CRYSIS3 that looks that much better then 2.
No i haven't played it, but seen plenty of PC footage.
Anyway.. Next gen starts on pc 2013!!
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
Link at the bottom of the page , right click + save as = maximum quality :)
http://www.crydev.net/newsp...
From then consoles have been a limiting factor for developers.
thanks alot that looks great. +bubs
i always love checking out new tech in game industry even though im not a much of pc gamer. that looked great
BTW, u appear to be just another frostcrap 2 fan.
CRYSIS 3 does looks way better than ANY other game ever released thanks to its use of DirectX 11 and many other superior features which no other game engine can compete with one of them its the amazing tessellation.
The game didnt have a locked FPS on the main menu when it first launched causing A large amount of PC's to overheat, destroying their graphics cards.
i remember when the mod for GTA IV icehancer was in its beta stages, there was a warning by the mod creators which they said if you owned a GTX4xx cards it will overheat them and kill them(melt) unless you had an aftermarket cooler O.o
i didnt believed it at first, i tried the mod anyways, the temps on my GTX460 went from 35c to 98c even though i had an aftermarket cooler (artic cooling accelero)
Unless you count S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat
Anyway, I doubt my machine will even whimper playing another console-centric Crysis. Just make the game good and stop drumming up the elitist hype crap.
Obviously you don't know what you're talking about. He is talking about the previous PC eras, before the 360 launched and MS stopped making games for PC.
We are talking about games like DooM III, Half-Life 2, Star Wars big titles like Jedi Outcast, Max Payne 1, Battlefield 2, Unreal games and more.
The last games that pushed systems to its end that I can think of are Crysis 1 and Oblivion. They were very demanding games -at their launch time- that required latest graphics card, multi-core CPUs and high amount of RAM.
Now, buying the latest graphic tech & intel CPUs is irrelevant because no game push your system to the end unless you play it at crazy resolution, maximize the AA multiplier, and maybe throw in some 3D and you still at 40 frames per seconds. With Crysis 3 latest PC showcase trailer, we have hope and faith in Crytek and I hope newer games showcase that too.
-Yeah Ok, somehow I doubt that... -But you have to give him credit for this -
Yerli has also admitted "that Crysis 2 PC was compromised by the console versions." -Finally the truth
I respect him for being honest with gamers.. I hope they do something amazing and knock it out the park with Crysis 3
____........___...____
.____||......||.......____||
||.........___||.......____||
If you drive to their offices you will see a guy run outside every ten minutes and stick a wet finger in the air.
I on the other hand want to see excellent looking games that can run nearly maxed on older hardware (like Battlefield 3 for instance). I don't want to spend a whole lot of money to enjoy a game.
It's not all about the technology behind a game you know. Art style also matters. I find that even Half Life 2 still looks good.
Obviously art direction is important too, but nothing irks me more than seeing a game with good art and crappy technology behind it.
Crysis 2 and 3 on the CryEngine 3 is the Next Gen Unreal Engine. Although it renders nicely, everything seems to be made from the same material. That Play-Doh / Plastic look that everything has TO ME is not impressive.
Make no bones about it the CryEngine 3 is a console game engine with DX11 slapped on top of it. Yes it has some nice features, scales well, and you can Slap DX11 on top of it but it's NOT A true PC DX11 Engine!!
I'll take Virtual Reality Engine 3 (Arma 3) Frostbite 2 (Battlefield 3) and the 4A Engine (Metro 2033) over the CryEngine 3 any day of the week but that is just my Graphical preference.
I think Arma 3 is gonna put a hurting on many PC's especially when they release the ACE MOD 3 which gives Arma some very high detailed photo-like graphics.
Crysis 3 not so much! Metro 2033 is still the beast to judge a GPU's power by. Most benchmarks are run with D.O.F. (Depth of Field) turned off cause GPU's can't handle it.
Also the Witcher 2 on Max settings with Uber sampling on is a GPU killer.
How did Crysis 2 work out....oh yeah you had your head too far up MS arse to notice.
NO game came close to the beauty of Crysis 1 when it was released.
Warhead a crytek game ran better with less hardware than Crysis 1. either the original engine or the first game wasnt not optimized.
Crytek seems to pride themselves on cramming the most graphical features and effects they possibly can into their engine--as many as they can find or think of--including any of the newest techniques that can be even remotely feasibly run in a realtime game. Mostly, they do this for hype value and bragging rights for their engine. But many of these shaders and effects are either highly unoptimized (partly because they're such new and experimental techniques), or they don't necessarily enhance the visual fidelity of the game by a margin that is worth the penalty in GPU framerate.
Just for example, Crysis 1's SSAO code back in 2007 was probably EXTREMELY unoptimized and power-hungry compared to more recent implementations of SSAO (e.g., compared to the SSAO in Gears 2 (2008) or Uncharted 2 in 2009).
You can crank up the "SSAO Samples" option in Amnesia to ~128x or something ridiculous like that, and it won't yield ANY improvement in quality, yet it will slow down nearly every gaming PC out there to a crawl.
And yet, the game will still run on "consoles". I find it hard to believe with that as a placeholder could bring current gen PC's to it's knees. Unless of course they're admitting it's serverely unoptimized. That or they've introduced stupid graphical shit options like "intense shadows per pixel quality" and "64x MSAA".
It runs great on my i5, and a GTX570.
Its a great rig, but not perfect. and yet i run Crysis 2 maxed out with 50-60 FPS. And it looks amazing.
And if you have seen the Cryengine 3 tech demos (especially the Cryengine 3+ one), you will see that Crytek aint kidding around
i7 makes use of Hyper Threating. Which only works on the OS itself. not on games because they only support 4 CPU Cores (most of the time).
And yes, i5 with a 570 is a great rig. You dont have to spend $1000 in order to do good at gaming.
I run BF3 multiplayer with 60FPS solid. maxed out.
@ Vandal, i play with 1440x900 resolution
Yes, I did. I still came away unimpressed. Crysis 1 texture/realitic mods blow the shit out of Crysis 2.
I have been running an overclocked i5 @4.0 plus an overclocked 5850 @900/1200 for more than 3 years now. I have been able to play everything maxed out until recent games (in BF3 I get an average of 40 FPS with a combination of high & ultra settings)
@MRMagoo123: you are such an spoiled brat
Gamers and fans of Crysis do care about more than graphics you know Crytek...
Warhead was much better, and shows how optimization can really change how a game runs.
As for buying mid to high range components... why? The game itself isn't changed by upgrading the visuals. I've been gaming since before the Atari 2600. Graphics mean very little to me next to gameplay and story. Smooth animations and decent AI are waaay more important than high rez visuals. The current consoles have reached a "good enough" level of graphics, but most of the games themselves could have been done last gen. I want advances in gaming, not graphics. Pile on with the disagrees all you want. I'm not trolling, just giving my opinion.
No, but seriously.
cryis1 was boring, crysis2 was as generic as they come. Crysis3? Not getting my hopes up. More excited for the mods that will come.
And while they're at it, make the game run some hidden benchmark programs in the background.
Tada! Melt PC
what makes it worse is the multiplayer aspect of crysis2 was made by free radical which are now Crytek UK......
It was such a let down and not even as fun as timesplinters2 or 3 in the slightest bit.
and another thing we need improved A.I in this game.
I could not give a damn about how many shaders that game will display.
Gameplay>graphics always