Crytek CEO Cevat Yerli is so confident that Crysis 3 will be the most technically accomplished game ever released on Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 that he's offered to wage a technological war against current-gen showstoppers Gears of War and Halo.
But how? I thought Crysis 2 maxed out consoles http://www.gamasutra.com/ph... More developer talk I suppose, I think there games are over rated in my opinion, Crysis 2 was extremely boring, played it on the PS3, even if I was to play it on a high end PC it wouldnt change that fact that the gameplay was boring, the enemies where all the same I have no expectations of Crysis 3, I doubt ill even rent it
Because his maximum troll suit is engaged.
hahahaha... super mate..!! :P
Typical Crysis news. Maxes out everything except the enjoyment you get from playing it.
Crytek needs to play Farcry3 before they start running their mouths off.
"maxing out" means nothing. You could max out hardware by rendering enough pictures of a willy, too. I'm sure that overall, Crysis 3 won't be very impressive on consoles, just like Crysis 2. Framerate issues, lack of real AA, etc. I'm sure they'll stiff-arm PC gamers and give an iffy experience to console gamers, just like Crysis 2. They've ultimately left no one completely satisfied with their recent approach.
I hate this "maxed out" BS. The console couldn't run a launch title at 60fps. The GPU was thus maxed out. All they're doing is reducing the rendering quality and image quality further to put more things on the screen. On a PC the rendering quality remains exactly the same no matter what you add.
Nice one zebramocha... first time I smiled today. I don't like the "max out" statements, because unless it is built perfectly (which no game is), it means there will be flaws causing pop-in, framerate issues etc, because they "maxed out" the hardware. I know it's just a PR statement, but in reality XBOX and PS3 have different processors therefor different caps at what would max them out. So the "max out" statement is just PR BS to get attention... and apparently it worked.
lmao omg i can just picture that voice coming on as he activates it "MAXIMUM TROLL ACTIVATED"
Lol okay I'm officially a nerd because that made me laugh out loud.
"he's offered to wage a technological war against current-gen showstoppers Gears of War and Halo" Yeah... because I was totally thinking about Gears and Halo when we're talking about heavyweights in the graphics department....... rofl
If they were so confident, they would have challenged TLoU, Killzone, and other games. Gears is a heavy-hitter, but Halo isn't very advanced except in gameplay.
there is no particular maximum.. it depends on the game when maximum is reached... in the end we understand that crysis 3 developers maxed ps3 out and cant do any better... while others still make some tweaks learning better ways to deal with things.... EDIT: overall have to agree, developers can make better graphics, but this gen consoles are starting to need for more power.. and its totally normal thing in the end.. need to wait for the next gen...
Crysis 2 definitely had the potential to blow every console game out of the water graphically, but they rushed it out and didn't polish it at all. it played like something you'd probably get if you played the version after alpha but before beta, this being the PS3 version. the last 2-3 minutes of Crysis 2 where Alcatraz enters the Ceph ship and crawls through that red stuff inside the ship is the most impressive 2-3 minutes of gameplay I've see on any console game, better than Kratos vs. Poseidon, better than Drake tripping and walking through sand dunes. giving credit where credit's due.
How about Snake crawling through that microwave filled chamber at the end of MGS4?
oh, oh torchid... u had it coming. I've played the game, a few minutes of beauty polingons in a screen doesn't make a game. go back to uncharted or halo, u may learn something abaut beautiful poligons from the very beginning, to the very end. not trying to troll you bro, just my opinion.
Without graphics there'd be no gameplay. The two go hand in hand. Gameplay = Graphics
You can't ignore performance. "Graphics" mean a lot more than just aesthetics. It means draw distances, clarity, smoothness of gameplay, etc.
@SilentNegotiator All of which consoles fail miserably at. Rendering and image quality is garbage on console. The exact same code when running on nVidia or AMD drivers on a PC will produce pristing sharp flawless images.
Shame this 100% true post gets disagreed. Shows the state of modern gaming, full of pixel counting morons. Give me Super Mario World over almost anything made today by ANYONE. Give me Super Smash Bros. over any fighter. Sad facts. Now graphics that LOOK good are needed. But having the number of textures or polygons affect that? Childish. You shouldn't be gaming, you should be trading graphics cards like they're Pokemon, really, as that's apparently what gets you off.
whats the point of pretty graphics if the gameplay is boring crysis has one of the best graphics out there but gameplay is just playing boring i think we all have played super mario bros or the majority of us at least since nes days and its still fun to this day the psp had greater graphics than the ds but it lacked in the gaming department not every game i picked up for psp was fun but there were many to choose from, from the ds with inferior graphics where i could play repetitively for months
"Give me Super Mario World over almost anything made today by ANYONE" LOL sorry we aren't going back to the 90s hipster, deal with it.
Hipster? I've been collecting NES/SNES games for 12 years now, sue me for naming the best Mario game that just so happens to beat out half the games this generation. There's not much compared to the older games in quality at all. Single player is a lost art. Chrono Trigger smashes most of what Square has made the last 7 or so years.
you know the community is shitty on a webby when they care more about graphics then gameplay.
You know the community is crap when people can't scroll 2 comments down to see the very sensible reason why a comment is being disagreed with.
dark souls is not exactly a beauty queen... yet, the game is impressively addictive and entertaining. crisys 2 is a visually attractive game, but the gameplay is borring. gameplay is not equal to graphics. some games can achieve both, but if I have to choose, gameplay is far more important. @somebody above chrono trigger is an awesome game! but many young gamers out there doesn't even know about it. such a shame... the game is on the android market (and I think is on the apple store too), so, for anyone who haven't played it yet, download it and give it a try. enjoy!
They figure out how to re-route power or whatever to different areas to gain all they can out of these machines. They are smart.
Crysis 2 weren't nothing special on consoles. I remember being quite underwhelmed by it after all the hype. There are far better looking games than crysis. I'm not knocking the engine because on PC it's unbelievable but on consoles it was below par.
Until halo 4,crysis 2 was the best looking xbox 360 game grafics wise. There was nothing else that looked that good. I'm not saying that to tick anyone off because theres alot of great xbox games. I think uncharted 2 really set a high bench mark which IMO wasn't turned over until halo 4.
Does it matter? Even if they maxed out consoles it won't look like this. http://www.youtube.com/watc... Even if Naughty Dog pushes ps3 150% it won't look that good. The guys who you do expect to max out console still can't reach that quality so why does it even matter to anyone?
im trying not to troll here, but in my opinion this is graphically supirior
that video tech demo is amazing. now I wonder... when they talk about pushing consoles @100%, they mean the end product will look anywhere close to this? if the answer is NO, then they are trolling. and no, in my opinion, it doesn't matter. :)
Observe as Crysis 3 would resort to sub-hd and low frame rate to compensate. Does he really think we can get impressed if his game runs like dogshit even if he pushes the most "advanced" tech on consoles? At least Gears/Halo/Uncharted run WELL!
Agree. This is typical for trying to get players all hyped for the game. Using 99% of the Xbox's capabilities doesn't mean much. If the system remained relevant for the next 3 years, someone else would find ways to compress and use the hardware more efficiently. It could be argued that first generation releases probably used just as much of the system. Just not as well.
Exactly! Hell, the reason Crysis 1 started the whole, "Can it run Crysis?" meme for PC rigs, is because people THOUGHT Crysis was too powerful for anyone's machine, when in reality, Crysis 1 was just horribly optimized. I mean, why else would Crysis 2 run better maxed out than Crysis 1 maxed out? Exactly, lol.
agreed i don't like crytek since i think they making very boring games but instead focuses on making their games look good but even then i think the last of us looks better in terms of graphics then crysis 3
If you're comparing TLoU to the console version, then yes, but to the pc version? Not even close lol.
Cause Peter Molineux was feeling so loneley. Cervat and his previous statement: "we maxed out the consoles (this time for realz)" and his Crytek studio are just talking bullshit as usual. Would you just shut up and work harder, we saw what maxing out the consoles meant for crysis 2.
Another problem of theres... NO ONE even cares if their graphics look PERFECT on consoles! If people REALLY cared about nothing but graphics, they'd spend a ton of money on a good gaming PC. Consoles are designed for convenience, and when it comes down to the average gamer, graphics really don't mean much. Just look at freaking Call of Duty... The graphics haven't improved in YEARS, and people still buy that crap up simply because of how smooth, addicting, and accessible it is. I'm not even a fan of CoD, but it's easy to see that the next CoD game will sell literally millions upon millions more than Crysis 3.
same here, played on ps3 and got bored maybe two 3rds the way in, plus the framerate felt like it was in the low 20's most the time, online had worse p2p servers them cod.. yep the enemies were all the same just like in KZ1, bs expecting to keep someones attention with the same sht from start to finish..
@ hllsvacancy, I totally agree. They did say the same thing about Crysis 2. Crysis 2 looked great, but nowhere near as good as some other games that released around the same time (or even before) Crsis 2.. For what it'sworth, I think both Far Cry 2 and Far Cry 3 look better graphically than Crysis 2.. The downloadable console port of the original Crysis looked better than Crysis 2 imo!
but same thing was said for crysis 2? developers always talk about maxing out systems only when sequels are released everything is improved upon so in a way there is never 100% max getting out of system because over time developers learn new tricks
agreed. In all of these current FPS games, Halo excluded, you fight the same one guy over and over and over again. I bought Black Ops 2 and it's extremely boring. you just enter a room shoot 10 generic guys, proceed to the next room, shoot another 10 generic enemy soldiers, there's a set piece explosion, then you shoot 10 more generic guys, rinse and repeat. I used to play Medal of Honor on the original PlayStation, and I revisited the game a few months ago and that almost 15 year old first person shooter has more fun enemies to fight than the majority of current gen shooters. You can shoot a guy in the leg and he'll stumble around for a bit and look at you and slowly raise his gun at you. It's pretty funny and entertaining to watch, because there's like 10 different ways to kill the enemy in that game. they'll even throw grenades back at you, they'll shoot at you even when they're down on the ground. in most big current FPS games like CoD and Crysis, you just shoot an enemy a few rounds to the torso, and they're dead.
ROFL!!! They better work on optimizing & using the PS3 more effiently (cuz the Xbox been maxed LOL..., sorry it was just so EZ!) I organize my demos in a demo folder on my PS3. What's funny is the PS3 Crysis 2 demo (which barely worked & only for 24hrs. before getting shut down by Crytek cuz they wouldn't fix it) is in a seperate folder titled "FAIL!" It's also the only demo in that folder. I keep it as a reminder to be wary of buying games from dev's that run their mouth, when they got work to do (and don't get done= fail'd!). I'm not say don't check for Crysis 3, just wait til the reviews AT LEAST! before dropping your loot on this game. I picked up Crysis 2 used for cheap & while it was fun, there was not many ppl playing online just 4 months later. Not to mention overpriced DLC (with nobody playing it!? WTF!?) & a bunch of problems that weren't fixed in singleplayer... I love the best parts of the Crysis series but Crytek makes sure to include plenty of crappy parts also. The more this view spreads they more likely they are to get it right & assure us these issues are addressed... (fingers crossed while preparing for the worst here based on Yerli still shoveling hype, ppl DON'T EAT IT!!!)
Crysis 3 will be definitely better than Crysis 1 and Crysis 2!
I gotta agree, Crysis 2 was average as hell.
Crytek are really the worst developer when it comes to spewing out garbage. We get it year in year out. I wasn't even all that impressed with Crysis 2, looked good but just another shooter. If they are so whiny about the consoles then why don't they just develop for PC?
the link u put out there only references the ps3. i can see how it would max it out and there still be room on the xbox. i mean look at halo 4 and forza horizon. hands down the best looking fps and racing games yet!! Ps3 could never host a game like those....the ram and the rsx are the problem. Now the games are really pushing to the limit and ps3's limited ability is really beginning to, as developers stop catering to the lowest common denominator ps3.
Why is it then, that when a game is lead developed on PS3 is it either on par with the 360 version, or it looks/runs better on PS3?
BLAH BLAH BLAH still sub 720 and a jag fest. Like thats anything to talk about, oh we maxed out 7 year old hardware lol!!! losers.
That probably means frame rates will suffer too.
This game will have shit framerate performance most likely in the 18 to 20fps and this developers come and say they max the hardware what a stupidity!I still perfer to play a smooth game than a graphic show piece that runs like crap!Uncharted,Halo 4,Gears,looks good and run at least at 30fps;smooth!Just like FAr cry 3 it look wonderfull even on consoles but runs like crap,i have played this 20minutes and stop playing it because for me its unbearable to play with that horrible screen tearing and low framerates!
bla bla bla
Great. Is it going to be crap like 2 was?
Watch out those of you with the early Xbox 360s.
I forgot the new 360 had much better hardware. My newer xbox freezes and has just as many issues as my old one
Dont have any issues on mine except for freezing on bf3 on the crap operation metro map. Thats just the game though, and most likely the same situation for you.
And there goes Cevat talking too much... again.
I don't know Crytek, you said the same thing about Crysis 2, but other games easily topped it. I don't trust you anymore, but we will see.
Maybe art wise, but tech wise? Not many...Crysis 2 still has some of the best lighting on consoles. Post processing is extremely impressive as well, you even have parallax occlusion mapping so I don't know about that.
I actually found KZ3 to beast Crysis 2 in that department obviously on the PC nothing Comes close to Crysis 1-3 but as far as consoles go KZ3 is graphically better imo
None of that matters when the AA and frame rate were complete ass.
KZ3 looks worse and actually plays worse too. It got turned into a bad COD clone with too many dumb turret segments and that hide in the grass grotto/jungle gameplay was terrible too. The KZ3 AI was poor too. Oh look a sniper giving you three seconds to shoot him so he can fall off of a ledge. Meh. Crysis 2 was a mixed bag. A lot of the subway parts were disappointing and the end in central park barely made any sense. But it was a much better single player experience than Killzone 3.
@Shaman Funny how you have so many people who disagree with you but yet you are 100% correct. One thing that pure console gamers do not get is that Crytek's engines are designed for Computers not consoles if you look back at when Crysis 1 came out that was around the same time as the 8800 ultra and even then you needed 2 of them to run the game maxed out. So not only have Crytek looked at the console market and tryed to get into it(and failed) they have also had to downgrade there engines so they can run on these consoles. Yes killzone looks good and uc3 and Last of us and God of war 3 but they ARE MADE JUST FOR THE Ps3
CRYTEK SORRY But Killzone 2 is the best looking game this generation, end of Story
No crysis 1 and 2 are your shooter probably does not even run in 720p
Check your facts son, Killzone 2 runs on 720p.
I don't think so.