Top
340°

No Crysis For You, Console Gamers! - A Look at What Cryengine 3 Means for Gaming

GDC was packed with many announcements like Onlive, Stardock's Goo, and the next Zelda DS game. However, some would argue that the commercialization of the Game Developer's Conference is leading to less effective dialogues between developers and actual developments that change and positively influence their work.

Fortunately, Crytek came to the rescue and announced Cryengine 3, the next iteration of their award-winning game development platform. This turned many heads at the conference, as it was the first time that we saw Crytek's tech running on consoles since the first Cryengine was used for the Instincts spin-offs of Far Cry.

What does it mean for developers and us gamers?

FantasyStar2591d ago (Edited 2591d ago )

-CryEngine 3 will compete with Unreal Engine 3 by lowering licensing costs. Forcing Epic to saddle up or be destroyed by Crytek. A precedent towards a cheaper, faster development times.

-CryEngine 3 will allow on-the-fly optimizations to consoles from the PC Environment to cut down on porting times, thus allowing for more consistent presentations across the PS3/360 Platform. Something that UE3 has a problem doing, aka "Bad Ports".

-Crysis is not possible on Consoles because of purely RAM limitations. It renders everything real-time and 1GB is minimum for hosting kilometers of virtual land, assets, and AI.

-The CPU/GPU on both the 360/PS3 are very capable of scaling Crysis, it's assets, AIs, and Physics.

-Far Cry 2/Grand Theft Auto IV loads data in chunks to simulate the open-world feeling. If you leave one area after doing damage, and go back, everything will have been reset.

-In Crysis, all data is real-time and streamlined directly from RAM. If you shoot a rocket, kilometers away, an enemy AI will notice that(creating a sense of realism).

-Crytek's Cevat Yerli- "Crysis as we have seen is impossible. Crysis would have to be largely changed to bring it to Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3. Crysis is designed to be PC exclusive. Our internal focus is not linked to bring Crysis to consoles."

FantasyStar2591d ago

Personally, I'm content with Far Cry 2 for my "Crysis console" experience already. This is why I never picked up Far Cry 2 for the PC.

M337ING2591d ago

I thought Far Cry 2 was ok. I liked the environments and characters, but Crysis simply offered more tools to approach combat scenarios. That, and the game didn't drag on for 40 hours with repetitious environments and missions.

dragunrising2591d ago

Crysis could still be done. The article talks about real time AI and everything you do as having an effect on the world. So...if you removed this aspect and only focused on a a few square miles at a time (within eye shot distance) you should be able to pull it off. After Killzone 2, I'm convinced consoles could pull it off just fine. Maybe not at 1080p or with fancy AI, but something that looks great. Not sure why Cryteck doesn't want to make money on console ports...

M337ING2591d ago (Edited 2591d ago )

But then the game would lose what makes it unique and would essentially become an Instincts-like spin-off.

cruckel2591d ago

maybe you didn't read the article, but eye shot Is the whole level. The first level is a Giant U shaped gulf. From the start, you can see the whole Level.

Which makes this game soooo Beautiful and at the same time Breath taking and Awesome

Hydrolex2591d ago SpamShow
Amanosenpai2591d ago

who needs crysis when i can do some halo 3 on 360

dragunrising2591d ago

I read the article. Are you trying to tell me that you can see through trees and the whole island is flat and barren? Thats what you implied. Sorry to say, but Crysis isn't set in Kansas. There are trees, hills/mountains, and buildings which obstruct your vision. If you climb a mountain, thats a different situation all together. Perhaps the terrain might have a more limited draw distance in a port. Also, did YOU read the article? The limiting factor of a console port is the dynamic AI and cause/effect game world. Like the article said, Farcry 2 would take a chunk of the map at a time and your actions never had a lasting effect (soldiers would go about specific AI routines like nothing happened). I don't remember Far Cry 2 being a bad game do you? You can retain most of what makes Crysis good. There are millions of people that would like to play Crysis but don't have the rig to play it on.

Ju2591d ago

BS. Memory is not an issue. Draw distance does not define the size of the world. What you can't get into the VMem/XDRAM you can stream from disk. Has been proven before. Open world works well on consoles.

Danja2591d ago

Do we even need Crysis on Consoles ? I played it on PC it wasn't that great of game it was good but not great , really good graphics but it was really nothing spectacular...

FantasyStar2590d ago (Edited 2590d ago )

Ju, do you have any scripts you can provide to back up your statement? Everytime I try to code for X number of assets in a virtual box, I always run into buffer overflow. I don't have much of an idea on how to render all the stuff the CryEngine 2 does with only 512MB RAM total. (both RAM/VRAM combined)

Don't misjudge me, I'm just curious because you seem to know your stuff. From what I understand based on my own techniques, it's always easier to write memory scripts from HDD to RAM, then to VRAM and stream the data from RAM to VRAM because I won't run into any bottleneck with the HDD. With the limited experience that I have with the PS3 SDK: I can't seem to find a way achieve the same effect with the PS3 because the BR Drive is very limiting in how much data I can pull at a time. I try to avoid using the HDD as a crutch like most developer do, but it's so hard. I can't possibly imagine how a draw distance as great as Crysis be achievable on the consoles without at least some form of a technical nightmare.

So if you have a solution, I'd love to hear it. So far, the only solution I can think of is reflected well in the article and Crysis actually does this too on the High/Gamer setting. It dumps textures and streams in new ones when the player is X distance away from X textures, so that I can avoid memory overflow and at the same time, fake a wide-LOD. -IIRC, Uncharted did this too and did it well. However a criticism is that Uncharted isn't on a wide-scale like Crysis. And that even with 2GB of RAM: Crysis still had to stream textures the same way. How Crysis could achieve the same results with only 512MB of RAM and no noticeable drop in assets on-screen on that giant of a scale is simply beyond me. Just from what I know already about consoles, I know that the limited data rate and RAM will limit how many assets I can have on screen at one point before the player starts to notice performance drops, and I would love to avoid any "obvious" texture pop-ins for the sake of presentation.

Again, if you know a way. Let me know. PM me even.

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 2590d ago
M337ING2591d ago

The second part is true.

The engine is too early in development to argue about which one runs it better.

geth1gh2591d ago

lol, this is completely false, because onlive, the new console will be offering crysis warhead.

-GoD_-oF-_WaR-2591d ago

I'm pretty sure he was talking about consoles that are out now

M337ING2591d ago

Onlive isn't a console. It's a video of the game running on a PC streaming to your house.

geth1gh2591d ago (Edited 2591d ago )

yea, he might of been, but he said that it was to stay on pcs and as of yet there is no announcement for a project to work on anything else other than pcs, and they already have crysis warhead running on onlive.

and yes onlive runs in a different way, but it is defiantly still a console. The definition of a console is a mass marketed video game device/computer correct? So does onlive not fall into that category?

M337ING2591d ago

Considering we don't even know if Onlive is going to succeed or even make it launch, we really shouldn't be considering it when discussing the current state of the gaming industry.

billybob24682591d ago

OnLive is (will be) a bunch of really powerful servers that are, in fact, PCs, so yeah... even counting OnLive Crysis is still only on the PC.

Nihilism2591d ago

on live is bs, good luck streaming hundreds of megs of textures etc every few seconds and keeping it playable

UltimateIdiot9112591d ago (Edited 2591d ago )

Have fun playing your games on onlive when your internet goes out, onlive servers crashing and/or when bandwidth cap moves into your area. As for me, I'll continue to enjoy playing games I OWN offline when I am not playing multiplayer.

gregory2472591d ago

hey dumbass... it doesn't stream the textures just the video of the gameplay

no_more_trolling2590d ago

i think onlive will use the same protocol as remote desktop.

geth1gh2590d ago (Edited 2590d ago )

lol, like i said, what the hell do you think a console is? its a god damn pc. what makes you call it a console? because it is mass marketed. Onlive runs differently, but it is still in the console category.

and as for relying on my internet for gaming, lol, I never touch the single player part of games these days, they are just boring to play against ai these days compared to single player, so im already always playing through the internet whenever I am gaming, lol.

And my internet here on campus is very fast, and pretty much never down.

Yipee Bog2590d ago

regards to onlive, will I be able to use that service on my 3 mbps internet speed? onlive will fail outside of high bandwidth areas (at least 15 mbps or better), unless the developers know some kind of ultra compression methods, in which case they shouldn't be making games, but figuring out how to get my butt halfway across the universe for a couple hundred bucks.

Tiberium2590d ago

actually it works fine on a 5mb internet connection. You can play any game in 720p with minimum hitches. If you want 1080p 10 or 15mb would make sense. So with 3mb you probably could get 640p upscaled to 720p.

Yipee Bog2590d ago

is working good for you? I didn't know it was mainstream already. I guess at least you have it, since you're so knowledgeable(and Google search doesn't count). To be honest, my internet cant even stream HD from youtube, so I highly doubt I'll be able to use this service

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 2590d ago
Sanhlami2591d ago

better multiplatform graphics, cheaper development cost, more variety, and equal results on consoles.

+1 for gamers

cleanhealthy122591d ago

sure it looks good. but it plays like shîte. multiplayer in it = garbage aswell.

Ju2591d ago

Crysis won't work on a console anyway. Mainly because they have no console experience and that shows as soon as you try to play that game with a controller. If it wouldn't produce these screen shots on high end gaming rigs it would be mediocre at best.