Crytek: It's impossible for next-gen consoles to match the power of gaming PCs

Ahead of Sony and Microsoft's next PlayStation and Xbox announcements, which are expected to herald a significant leap in graphics power for home console gaming, one developer with knowledge of what's to come from both machines has said PC gaming will remain the place to be for the best possible visuals.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
decrypt1643d ago (Edited 1643d ago )

Well they will be lucky to match even Midrange PCs, its not just high end PCs. Mid range PCs costing 600-800usds will walk all over the next gen consoles.

Next gen consoles are rumored to sport GPUs comparable to 7870, which by todays standard is essentially mid range. By the time the consoles do launch 7870 will be closer to low end model.

Hence consoles will just be locked down branded PCs, charging royalties on every game sold, lacking any sort of BC or modding options.


Hardware is useless without the software. Console makers can sell hardware at a loss, however they will rip you off with the software. I would think paying a bit more for the hardware initially then paying a lot less on the software is economic in the long run, specially for real gamers who want to be buying 2-3 games a month.

Btw Wii U is pretty out dated to begin with, PS4 or Xbox 720 wont be selling less than 400usd, might even be 500usd so thats not too far behind a mid range PC.


I am sure playing the handful of exclusives is amazing :) its not hard owing a console for those.

"We buy consoles for exclusive games, cheap cost, knowing every game will play the same"

Cheap cost... What?

Paying more on every game isnt cheap.

Kamikaze1351643d ago

PC price =/= console price.

I'm primarily a PC gamer, so don't go thinking I'm against PC gaming! However, I'm sure it would cost over $300 to get a PC can run games on par with the Wii U - graphically and at a decent framerate.

shutUpAndTakeMyMoney1643d ago (Edited 1643d ago )


lol I can't control my caps.. My keyboard is over powered somehow.

Seeing how the new consoles are like pc then scaling pc games up should be much easier. Pc gamers will get the extra high rez textures maybe every time.

I must say though crytek are one of the few fps devs who encourage brain cell usage.

JsonHenry1643d ago

The new APU from AMD in a cheap motherboard, 8 gigs of ram could be had for around ~$300 and run things at the same low rez textures and low to mid settings that the WiiU runs its games at easy. Top that off with the fact that PCs are not subsidized in price like a console and that is really telling.

one2thr1643d ago (Edited 1643d ago )


But adding the cost for: system case, psu, OS, hard drive, case fans (proper ventilation), controller/keyboard, and your looking at a PCthat cost more than the wii u, that cannot/will not do what the wii u can do...

Heck a pc that's capable of running a game that plays better than GOW: Ascension isnt/aint/can't cost $250 and that's pretty much a fact... Not saying what you said is wrong, but you did kind of forget a few minor details...

reynod1643d ago


When you build a PC you tend to look at as a long term investment.

For example when one builds a machine and later upgrades it. They no longer have to bare the cost of Casing, OS, HDs, Fans etc.

I bought a casing (HAF932) back in 2009, till date i am using the same casing and intend to be doing so for a very long time.

Same goes for my Keyboard Mouse. My Keyboard is atleast 5 years old, i dont intend to change that even if i do upgrade.

Hence for people that already own PCs upgrading can be rather cheap. Most of the time now a days people need not even change the Motherboard, CPU etc. Just upgrade the GPU thats it.

Hence PC gaming is a long term investment, its darn cheap in the long term.

Not to mention all the games can be had for much cheaper prices than console versions. You could easily build an insanely large library over a Steam discount. It would be impossible to create such libraries on console at a reasonable price.

Lets not for get you can actually keep those games over the years, Its not like when you upgrade you wont be able to play old games. With console you cant build a library. Every time a gen is about to end, the thousands of usd worth of games you bought might not run on the next machine.

From a cost perspective PC in the long term is cheaper than console.

MikeMyers1643d ago

Not sure why we need arguments over the PC versus consoles. Do people that watch DVD's argue with those who watch movies on bluray?

PC gaming to me offers more freedom and trying to get the best possible experience. With that comes a little more work and could cost a little to a lot more money. Consoles have many advantages as well, namely their own exclusives and ease of use.

I play games on both and I think both can co-exist with one another.

Qrphe1643d ago (Edited 1643d ago )

You can get a rig that can run 1080p (going by the latest cheapest GPUs) for around $300-$400 depending on where you look.
Of course I'm not taking into account stuff like a kb+m or monitor (but I guess no one counts TV price when talking about consoles either).

Autodidactdystopia1643d ago

I wish that I had the patience to sit here and intelligently answer all this pseudo information.

But im gonna just give you a little juicy fact.

Since consoles have been primarily full 3D roughly psx era. there has only been one chip that has shipped with a console that had any real performance advantage over existing pc hardware.

That was the x360 with its x1600 equivalent xenos gpu, who's major performance enhancing feature was; amd's new "unified shader" architecture. which has gone on and been in every subsequent release of a gpu from either amd or nvidia.

that hardware advantage didnt get it far looking at the ps3/360 argument over the years. many would argue that there are many more high quality looking games on ps3 than 360 despite its gpu advantage. cpu is the sole reason for that difference.

the cpus that come out in consoles are always completely destroyed by their x86 counterparts, yes even the allmighty cell was outdated the moment it came out vs many of the proc's of the day, that is a perception that has waited over 5 years to die.

Pcs may be more expensive at times depending on how the fanboy in you decides to look at it.

BUT AS CEVAT Y. stated regardless of price which is adressed in the article

"So, given consumer pricing, and given the cost of production of a gamer PC and the amount of watt of power it needs, which is like a fridge, it's impossible."

"It's very difficult to compete with that. People have these massive nuclear power plants standing in their rooms that will run your games really fast. It's hard to compete with."

I feel that what he said is absolutely correct.

regardless of price. he said nothing about value.

oh well off to work now :)

darthv721643d ago

have far more overhead to have to deal with than a console. So why cant it be that a game optimized for a console cant reach parity with that of a gaming PC?

I think it can but then again, its been since 2008 since I built a gaming PC. I been out of the loop for too long to go back. I prefer my games on console now.

I may not ever see the fully realized vision of a title as played on a high end PC and I'm okay with that. I will choose the path of lower cost of ownership. I can still get the core of the experience out of the game and that matters most to me.

Knight_Crawler1643d ago (Edited 1643d ago )

@Kam but unlike consoles PC's can be used for more than gaming.

Say you own a console, you would still need to buy a PC / Laptop to do other stuff that arent gaming you will be paying for a console and and PC but if your a PC gamer you are only paying for a PC.

Braid1643d ago

I'd say "I hope he's wrong" but how can he be wrong if he had seen the next-gen development kits already? I'm going to have to trust their word on this one, they relaesed three visually unmatched PC games after all.

It's obvious that Sony and MS need to stay within a reasonable price limit which means that you can not expect them to put something like a montstrous GTX 690 in the box, but hearing that they'll be behind current gaming PCs right at the start of a generation is kind of depressing when you think about visual development of video games.

I think we could have played Watch Dogs three years ago in those graphic settings already, and who's to blame is up to you to consider. At least devs like Crytek always try to push the industry forward in terms of visuals, and for that alone I have mad, mad respect for them.

AsimLeonheart1643d ago

There is no denying that PC graphics are superior to consoles but graphics are nothing without appealing games. I buy consoles for the console exclusive which appeal personally to me and I cannot get on the PCs. I cannot play Final Fantasy, Uncharted, Ni No Kuni, Last of Us and God of War on the PC. Moreover, generally I do not like the PC games which are mostly RTS, FPS and TPS. PC gaming also always leaves a person dissatisfied because of varying levels of game performance depending on your hardware. There will always be someone who will have a better rig than you and there will always be the latest GPUs arriving giving you an inferiority complex. Finally I enjoy playing games on my TV while sitting in front of it on my bed or my couch so that I can relax. Playing on the PC is always a chore for me as I cannot move or stretch as easily as on my bed or couch. For all the above reasons I prefer playing on consoles even though the graphics may be inferior.

awi59511643d ago

Console gamers dont get it alot of PC parts can be sold for crazy prices after they get old. I ebay all my pc parts to pay for my upgrades outright. I sold my graphics cards for like 300 dollars. Sold my motherboard for 90 bucks. My cpu i got 90 bucks out of that. I sold my memory for 75 bucks sold my power supply for 75 bucks and my system was just mid range and 3 years old.

Also some parts that are discontinued sale for alot when there are people who dont want to fully upgrade yet. Alot of graphics cards are discontinued but are still powerful that sale for 300 bucks that's the cost they originally sold for. Cpu's that are discontinued as well go for good prices because people have outdated motherboards. By parting out your PC you can cover all you cost. I usually make money or break even on parting out my pc after building my new one.

Mounce1643d ago


The very brain cells that you clearly lack? Thus making your 'opinion' completely invalid?

morganfell1643d ago

Crytek and it's owners (the 3 brothers) all need to adjust their aim. They need to stop concerning themselves with Console vs PC and be more worried about the numerous companies that can make games far better than they can.

Crytek need to be focused on hiring developers than create characters who feel alive rather than seeming more like moving cardboard cutouts with cliche' driven personalities.

Crytek need to learn that graphics are not the end all be all of gaming achievements (of which they are not the champion either) and instead they need to give up the overdone super suit business and get to the business of making something else that includes depth beyond the kiddie pool level.

Crytek make this huge stink near announcement times for their games and then at launch. People can disagree all they want but the truth is the stink raised by Crytek about their titles last far far longer than any fan raving about the same games.

Here today, gone tomorrow in a cloud of forgettable smoke.

Crytek just do not make the games that people rave about over long periods nor do their titles stand that same test of time. Until they can match such a feat all of their words about power this and capability that are just a lot of horse dump, completely hollow, and no better than a column by Pachter.

subtenko1642d ago

All PC gamers talk about is graphics. I know PlayStation gamers talk about both graphics and games. I mean seriously, do you see Uncharted, GOW, LBP, Last of Us, etc. on PC? No, you dont even see WiiU games on PC either.

The thing is, everyone has a PC (or Mac, w/e) they just have to upgrade the parts to experience games at max level.

SkyGamer1642d ago

Amy i the only one who thinks nexgen will suck? Aside from the 8 GB RAM, kudos MS, the rest really does suck. When they first mentioned the word AMD, I knew right then it is not going to be a powerhouse. Don't get me wrong, I have AMD gaming machines but compared to other offerings, it is weaker. That is a fact. Of course using AMD means cheaper price which is good. Using laptop parts? In a console? Are you kidding? Cmon people and wake up and smell the bs!!!

slayorofgods1640d ago (Edited 1640d ago )


AMD still has the best bang for your buck with their products. From a console perspective they actually are the powerhouse of form factor (low power) gpu's.. Do you really expect to fit a giant modern day gpu in a console?

Why do you think every single console goes with AMD?

slayorofgods1640d ago

I actually think the next generation is above my expectations in comparison with pc's. The PS4 has 8GB of memory (one of the downfalls of the PS3 is finally fixed) and 8 core cpu (this could push a lot of pc gamers to upgrade to stay modern). The only downfall is the gpu, and even this has exceeded my expectations, I don't know a lot of pc games that this card couldn't handle at high or ultra.

Sure, the pc is still ahead.. I think we all knew that for a while going into this generation. I actually, thought the pc would be way ahead.. But after seeing the PS4 specs, I really think Sony (at least) did a nice job staying as competitive as possible and is probably making the best gaming machine possible as far as a console goes.

+ Show (15) more repliesLast reply 1640d ago
The_Infected1643d ago


I'm glad you only have 1 bubble so I don't have to listen to you PC is better blah blah!! We don't care go play it. We buy consoles for exclusive games, cheap cost, knowing every game will play the same, and the community behind the consoles etc.

bicfitness1643d ago (Edited 1643d ago )

@ decrypt

The price>performance ratio always weighs heavily in favour of consoles. Most consumers will never invest what it takes to get a "high end" PC and a console offers pretty spectacular performance for its $. My custom Sager (which gives SLI desktop level performance) cost about 3 grand. I only invested in it because I write, game and travel quite a bit.

But that sort of cost for the average consumer is absurd. Your argument that console games themselves cost more is somewhat true (though even new releases on Steam are only $10 cheaper and you don't get a physical copy). However you are assuming that consumers are purchasing many games at once, when in reality, people purchase a game and maybe a downloadable title each month. They spend what they can afford.

I game on all platforms, but consoles definitely have their advantages. And we haven't even gotten into the complexities with hardware configurations, editing .ini files or half the hoops that one has to jump through for proper PC gaming.

Edit: And as others have stated, closed-system is ALWAYS an advantage when it comes to performance. PC software is never optimized for the myriad configurations it runs on.

kevnb1643d ago

Consoles use the Razer blade model. Pay less for entry (they even take losses on hardware) but find ways to charge more for games or Xbox live.

OcelotRigz1643d ago (Edited 1643d ago )

I own both, PC & PS3, and love them both.
Each has their own strengths and weaknesses, of course.
One strong point for consoles is the convenience, the comfort of popping in your game and knowing its going to work, that its not going to crash and you don't have tweak certain settings and edit certain files etc.. with that being said, its not like all PC games have this hassle, its just the odd one here and there but still frustrating nonetheless.

Anyway, a recent example of this "convenience" was when i got BF3 on the PC to see what it looks like. Oh it looks great alright but man, trying to get into a game thru Battlelog is some load of crap, its slow as hell, i only got into a game around 1 in every 10 tries, then when you do there seems to be way more lag and such, like emptying a round into a guy only for him to turn around and kill you instantly. It just turned me off the game.

I know not everyone will have such problems with that game as frequent as i did, but when i popped on my PS3 and just got into a game in a matter of seconds, i didn't mind at all about sacrificing player count and graphics for a smoother, or more importantly, consistent experience.

Either way, im getting the best of both worlds here, not loyal to either, thats just stupid, gamers love good games, regardless of platform.

EDIT: Oh and Crytek are shitheads, if they put more time into gameplay and story instead of "melting pcs" with their graphics, they would be much better devs and make much better games.

one2thr1643d ago


Yeah I have had similar problems with BF3 on PC and whats funny is that I can hop on the PS3 version, and jump right into a game within 40 seconds. The Pc version on the other hand, I barely find a game thats worth playing seeing that theres not that many people on at once compared to the PS3 ver. and it takes me a few minutes (2 the most) to scramble through battle log to find one...

And then theres the lag issue, my ping usually registers between 15-50ms depending on what server region Im playing on and then there would be random lag spikes that annoy the h$ll out of me...

But all in all, I do agree with your statement about them having strengths and weaknesses, and in certain games it definitely show for example:

I had a difficult time trying to play Sonic Generations on Steam, until I connected my DS controller then it was all gravy from there on out...

Ripsta7th1643d ago

"And we haven't even gotten into the complexities with hardware configurations, editing .ini files or half the hoops that one has to jump through for proper PC gaming."
THIS right here, i dont want to go through all the trouble of learning this, id rather just pop the disk in, sit, and PLAY :)

_-EDMIX-_1643d ago

@Ocelot- battlelog was Clunky... at launch. Battlelog has done various updates and if your having lag problems that actually might be your end they have a filter for ping....

all my favorites I have on that game all have low ping and all have max games at 64 or 32. to say no ones playing on there is an absolute joke! Lol. I apologize that you don't know how to work out filters from country/ region/ ping. by far Battlefield 3's best version is the PC version.

what you're saying is wrong with the game is actually a user error by your own fault.

( well over 300 hours in battlefield 3 on PC and I actually have well over 500 hours in Battlefield Bad Company 2 on PlayStation 3 in about 200 hours on the PC version, take it from a battlefield fan Battlelog has its flaws, weather it's constant updates, having to reinstall punkbuster etc. I wish to God battlefield 4 doesn't have battle log! that being said the previous users complaints on battlefield 3 are user made error I play the game long enough to know that, that hasn't been an issue for me since the game launched because I know how to use a filter. disregard their complaints and if you don't believe me look up the name and stats

a lot of pcs users issues could be solved by simply having a separate hard drive just for games and no other applications.

OcelotRigz1643d ago


I know how to use filters and have used them, its not rocket science at the end of the day. Also, i only entered games with good pings and still had issues. You can say its my own fault all you want, but thats pure speculation since you dont know anything about my PC, my experience with this stuff or anything like that.

Im not saying Battlefield on the PC is terrible, or that Battlelog doesn't work, i simply stated that my experience wasn't a good one and i prefer the simplicity of the console version. I even stated that not everyone will have such experiences.

I also never said anything about "nobody is playing on it", so i dont who that was pointed at.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1643d ago
nirwanda1643d ago

If you make an optimized game that runs at 30fps at 720p just think how good you could make the graphics.
There isnt a single game on the pc market that is optimized for high end gameing rig.
How many games can you name that are dx11 only for instance built with the lowest spec 7870+

N0S3LFESTEEM1643d ago

It's takes 2-3 years for the industry to catch up with the Tech... If the new consoles do come out with a 7870 it'll antiquate a lot of older cards because I'm sure the minimal specs for gaming on PC will shoot up 2 generations after maybe the first or second year of it them being out.

nirwanda1643d ago

@ NOS3LFESTEEM Dev kits for PS4/720 have been kicking around for a year building games from the ground up for dx11 with no messing about getting it to run on lesser spec machines which is needed to take advantage of dx11 as games need to be programmed different to take advantage of things like tessalation scaling, my arguement is that crysis 3 and all its assets will support older forms of direct x.
So all of a sudden bang there are games out on the pc that will do this with no waiting to catch up.
I think what MS is doin with its gpu is making the footprint for dx12 and sony will combat lack of new hardware trick with raw power and as for the pc it will get a big kick up the ass

Irishguy951643d ago (Edited 1643d ago )

Price - performace
Console > PC

Price of games
Pc > Console

Quality of PC
PC > Console

Overall value of Gaming
PC >>> Console
Steam >>> Psn
Steam >>>>> Xbox live
PC >>>>>>> Nintendo

Yeah Templar doesn't mean ****
Looks at Battlefield 3 PC versus Ps3

DA_SHREDDER1643d ago

PC > Nintendo? What cause you pirate all your crap? Nintendo is by far a better software company than most out there.