Console Crysis 2 a "breakthrough" Writes:

Crytek boss Cevat Yerli has explained why it's taken the developer so long to commit to making its games for consoles, as it will with its next, Crysis 2: it's perfectionism.

There was 2 to 3 years of technical research and development into consoles before development on Crysis 2 started," Yerli told Gamespot. "We had to make a technological breakthrough before we could commit to those quality bars."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Gun_Senshi3392d ago

bet its watered down version compared to PC

Pistolero3392d ago

Of course the consoles aren't going to be able to do what a high end PC can do, but the game can still be one of the best looking shooters on consoles.

Rhythmattic3392d ago (Edited 3392d ago )

"They're not competing versus each other; they're competing within PS3, within 360, within PC."

Give everyone what they can get.... No prejudice...

This will hopefully make the industry step back and think.

Rainstorm813392d ago (Edited 3392d ago )

More devs need to be like this, use the power of each platform as best you can everyone Wins

Reminds me of the SNES Genesis days.

commodore643392d ago

"If we want to be successful, our game has to be the best game that can exist on Xbox 360 and PS3... They're not competing versus each other; they're competing within PS3, within 360, within PC. That means we will try to maximize whatever PC gives us, whatever 360 gives us, whatever PS3 gives us."

The above quote means this will be THE definitive multiplat comparison.

Given that each platform will be maximised,
if the PS3 doesn't measure up, then no excuse will hold up either.

Can't wait for this one!

All-33392d ago (Edited 3392d ago )

At the end of the day, it depends on... time = money.

With EA or any outside publisher, there's only so much time/money that any game project will receive. Very few games outside of 1st/2nd party development teams will get a green light for the - 'however long it takes' - or 'when it's done' treatment... and even then, there's usually a limit at some point.

Crytech talk ideally... and it all sounds great - but should development begin to run over budget or out of time for the release schedule/s that their publisher has planned... the publisher will step in and start putting its foot down. In the end - it's still a business, and money still rules, regardless of any game developer's intentions. If they aren't self-funded... the publishers paying the bills have a bigger say.

Pistolero3392d ago (Edited 3392d ago )

Actually, Commodore64, they already said that they are maxing out the PS3 and they also said that the PS3 and 360 versions will look the same...which tells us that the PS3 is not more powerful than the 360. In fact, I bet the PS3 version will end up looking worse, despite the best intentions of the developer. So, I completely agree with you that "if the PS3 doesn't measure up, then no excuse will hold up either".

Syronicus3392d ago

Don't fall into the trap of believing developers when they say that they have maxed out a console. You would be setting yourself up for a day when you look silly. Trust the proof in the pudding rather than words from somebody trying to sell you something.

What a dev means when they say they have maxed out a console is this, they mean they have maxed out the console using their current code. Later, they will trim down the code and make it more efficient and then make the claim again. Int he end, it is not about the console power but about how the devs use it. Today they will say they maxed it out but then next year come out with a game that looks and plays better. Now, if they can make a game better a year later, how is it that they maxed it out today?

Truth is, they never know what the future will bring and to fall into the trap of who maxed out what console only makes you, the gamer look silly.

SuperM3392d ago

Actually this totally depends on how Crytek are utilizing the machines. From what i heard they said the PS3 version would be better with physics while the 360 version would have a slight advantage on shaders, which leads me to believe that they are not utilizing the cell for rendering and which again means that they can probably push more graphics out of the PS3 if they did, but this would affect its performance abit on physics etc. So if the graphics actually look the same or a tad better on 360 then i blame crytek for not utilizing the cells rendering capabilities.

commodore643392d ago

wow look ^^^^

the excuses have already begun!

Claudinho693392d ago

except that the ps3 exclusives looks better than all multiplats...

3392d ago
LCF3392d ago (Edited 3392d ago )

It's funny that Crytek really pushed the GPU on PCs and yet all that experience on PC is not going to help them if they think the Cell+RSX acts like your high-end CPU and GPU. Parallel processing is still new to game developers and the only groups that has show that they have had the best hand IS Sony and her 1st and 2nd parties.

I hope it's not pure ignorance (turn 10) that they can master the Cell+RSX in one try. I'm sorry Crytek but I have more faith in Sony's developers pushing the system with years of experience (plus Sony help make the Cell+RSX) behind them, then some PC developer that pushed PC's GPU to its limits 2 years ago.

Consoldtobots3392d ago (Edited 3392d ago )


you accuse others of making excuses when they are just trying to shed proper light on this scenario. I accuse you of trying to frame the argument and conclusion before we have ANY idea of what this engine will do in a real game. Some of you chucksters try to get one over everytime but there are those of us here who don't fall for that crap. I wouldn't say the cry-engine is the definitive anything until we see how it runs and exactly what processing power it utilizes in the PS3. Like the other poster said if the rendering pipeline doesn't start in the SPUs then this conversation is a waste of time.

DaTruth3392d ago

Funny cause I just said this!

What PS3 can do: Infamous

What multiplats lowest common denominator can do: Prototype

Any question?

Definitive multiplat will still be 1/2 what PS3 exclusives can do. What is your excuse for Prototype?

rockleex3392d ago

Will be divided among PC, 360, and PS3. That's THREE platforms that they're dividing their resources on.

In the end, it will never be as good as if they FULLY focused on just ONE of those platforms. Especially if you consider development costs, resources, etc.

commodore643391d ago (Edited 3391d ago )

problem is, the ps3 has set a plethora of precedents with inferior multiplats.

In each case that the ps3 didn't measure up, the excuses were plenty.

In the comment above, BEFORE THE GAME HAS EVEN RELEASED, the excuses have begun, just in case the ps3 doesn't measure up.
Not only that but the damage control has begun as well!
Are you guys gamers or excuse-makers?

In any case, I am looking forward to seeing the comparisons.
I am hoping that the excuses will cease once and for all following the release of this game.

SnuggleBandit3391d ago

@commodore...well have you seen uncahrted 2? ok what s the 360's best looking game gears 2?

I think everyone not blinded by fanboism can see that the ps3 can produce better graphics when taken advantage of

commodore643390d ago


I thought we were talking about multiplats?

Why is it that as soon as we all agree that multiplats on ps3 suck, you guys start taslking about exclusives?

It is all a bit predictable.

Anon19743390d ago (Edited 3390d ago )

It's because anyone with a brain in their head knows the PS3 is a superior machine because we've all SEEN the evidence, time and time again. Just because a couple of multiplats looked better on the 360 back in 2007 doesn't somehow negate the fact that nothing on the 360 can graphically touch games like MGS4, GT5, Heavy Rain, Killzone 2, Uncharted, Uncharted 2, GOWIII, etc...etc.

We know when a multiplat is inferior the answer is simple, the developer for whatever reason couldn't hack it...and we know that's a fact because we've seen what others can do on the PS3 hardware.

If the 360 is such a better machine, where's the proof? Why isn't there a single title out that can compete? It's been 2 years since Gears came out and Gears 2, while a fantastic game, is really only a slight improvement from the original and still can't compete with the top PS3 titles. Where's your proof, and don't tell me it's because occassionally some multiplat has a slightly better texture if you pause the game, if the lighting in the room is just right and you squint really hard at the third rock to the left in the far background.

caladbolg7773390d ago

Dark, I really don't see why you even bother with these [email protected] You're wasting time that could be better spent playing good games or shagging beautiful women.

commodore643390d ago (Edited 3390d ago )

...only problem is that it is literally over a hundred multiplats that look better on the 360.

Well over a hundred. Is that proof enough?
and... the trend has continued well through 2008 and 2009.

The most recent installment?

Only someone with a delusional agenda could not see it.

Anon19743390d ago

Could it be that it's not true?
Just look at metacritic. If a hundred multiplats are better on the 360 vs the PS3, why isn't this reflected in the scores. How have professional game reviewers missed for the past 2 years that all games are better on the 360 if that's the case? The reason is simply that it's not true. Even look at a site like "Lens of Truth". Of the comparison's they've run on there, half the titles they've compared are better on the PS3 or identical to the 360 counterpart, half have a slight advantage on the 360 - according to their opinion. Not quite the fabrication you'd have users of N4G believe.

And we've seen that report by some guy on the E3 floor who claims the PS3 version has jaggies with no idea who this guy is, what versions were running at E3, no evidence to back it up. Heresy is not evidence to support your ridiculous claim of "hundreds" of multiplat's better on the 360. Nor does it negate the FACT that the PS3 has proven itself a graphically superior machine to the 360, over and over and over again with it's exclusives. There's no denying that.

@ caladbolg777. There's something to that, but today I'm just killing time before I have to go stain my deck. I suppose I should get to it. :)

+ Show (18) more repliesLast reply 3390d ago

I agree, i would really like to see them push the hardware on an individual level. push both systems but none of this dumping down to make them look equal.

what i am really looking forward to or hoping is that they license the engine to other Devs. We have had enough of the market flooded with epic's space marine production line multiplier.

Serg3392d ago

Well technically Crytek is a engine developer and FarCry and Crysis are "tech demos", like Quake 3 was for the id Tech 3 engine and Doom 3 for the id Tech 4 engine and so forth.

They are in for licensing the engine, maybe this time they manage to get a lot of devs on board. Epics UE3 is structured the same as UE2, devs are familiar with it already, takes them less time to produce decent games, hence the UE3 based games flood.


Thanks for the info and bubble to you man.

I knew they had made engines, but didn't know that was their actual primary focus. let me re-phrase what i said; I hope other devs start to use their engine a lot more.

thanks again.

commodore643392d ago

if that is the case, then why-oh-why aren't they licensing the KZ2 engine for use across more games on ps3?

That would only make sense!

Why not port the engine to the 360?
even more sense!

DARK WITNESS3392d ago (Edited 3392d ago )

@ C64...

while i am not expert on it i would imagine that a lot of the killzone 2 tech is already being used in future projects ( remember killzone only just launched ) I am sure the would not want to crap on it's hype by showing us too much of what else is using their tech before the game even launched.

No 2. Sony practically paid for the engine. they own it ( i think but i could be wrong ) I very, very much doubt that they would let MS use it to showcase their games, not to mention there is the debate as to weather the 360 can even run the engine.

but i totally expect to see more ps3 games using the tech ( engine )in other titles.

Serg3392d ago

May I ask, what in the world are you talking about? What has Crytek to do with KillZone? Guerrilla Games developed most of the engine, some of Sonys other 1st party studios provided components as well. Again, your link to Crytek is...? Crytek makes their own engines and they are licensing them, I don't know any game besides Crysis that was using the CryEngine 2, but I think with CryEngine 3 and all of it's great productive multiplatform capabilities, like realtime editing of every part of the game and being able to play on any platform at the same time, they have a convincing argument over Epic games Unreal Engine 3.

Look up the GDC 09 interview with Cevat Yerli, he explains a few things about it if you are interested.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3392d ago
bjornbear3392d ago

And in the end don't throw us "PS3 is too complicated" crap please =(

I have faith in thee CRYTEK!!!!! Do not let us gamers down! =D (i know they wont ^^)

All-33392d ago

Errrr... tell that to Sony as well. Remember Sony has basically stated that too.

SuperM3392d ago

Ehm no, sony has not stated that PS3 is TO complicated. They have said that its meant to be a challenge to get the most out of the machine. I dont see how you can translate that into sony saying PS3 is to complicated to develop on.

3392d ago Replies(4)