Crytek confident it could port Crysis to consoles

Crytek's lead artist, Michael Khaimzon, has revealed that the developer could confidently port highly-anticipated PC title Crysis to PS3 and Xbox 360 - although there are no current plans to do so.

Speaking to GamesIndustry.biz, Khaimzon said, "I don't think there would be any problem to convert anything we work on to the next-gen consoles if we decided to.

"We have enough power here, with programmers and artists, to be able to do such a thing. It's just a matter of making the decision."

[Dante1]

I think with the storage capacity of Blu-Ray this should never have been any doubt about this not being able on next gen consles, mabye the Xbox version will need more than 1 disk but there fans don't mind, just like the Europeans don't mind waiting for the PS3.

Oh and yes i know this game hasen't been confirmed yet for consoles!

[shotty]

It's not about disk space it about horsepower. Crysis requires an enormous about of ram and both cpu/gpu power. The xbox 360 can use at most 512 MB of texture will the ps3 can use atmost 256 MB of texture. So the xbox 360 has the edge there but sony made harddrive standard so some of the stuff can be cache onto the harddrive which gives sony an advantage there. Both consoles have similar CPUs and little is known about the ps3 GPU to make a comparison.

But the bottonline is that the publisher is EA. so im willing to bet anything that the game will come on both the xbox 360 and ps3.

[USMChardcharger]

man, that's a little harsh achira. just make your point.

[AuburnTiger]

You know the truth about the ps3 hardware so honestly you don't have to defend it. So when shotty says something completely wrong when it has obviously been proven, there's no need react to it. Achira you really need to control yourself before they take another bubble away from you. (unless you wanna look like DC rider 360) I'm not telling you what to do, i'm just saying we as a communtity should have higher standards of criticism.

[achira]

yep you two are right. i only wanted him to correct. the reason i was so harsh is he knows the truth but twists everything.

[Daytona]

still......................... ............................

http://news.teamxbox.com/xb...

[Silverwolf]

I don't think storage is much of a factor. This has more to do with the GPU and CPU processing power. This is primary a PC game and I haven't seen a PC game larger than 5GB. DX10 is about efficiency not storage capacity. Besides if I were to want to sound like a fanboy I could bring up the fact that only xenos has some DX10 capabilities making the port even easier to begin with.

[shotty]

Actually the Xenos has some capabilities that are beyond direct X 10 since as memory export which can do stream out. So crysis can be done on the consoles but the texture size will have to be worked on. Maybe even cut the drawdistance a bit aswell.

[unleash bass]

Lets hope that they do make a console version, this is potetially the most advanced (GFX wise) game todate. Lets just hope that PS3 and 360 have the power to do it, cus even on PC it has to be real high spec machine.

[achira]

i bet this game will come to the consoles.

[PS360PCROCKS]

I think it will but it wont be nearly as good

[Silverwolf]

As good as that game looks, I'll take 85% as good as the PC version and be happy as hell.

[andy capps]

Me too! Bet on it, it will either come out on Xbox 360 and PS3 or Xbox 360. They won't pass up the extra money that they could get by releasing this on consoles.

[D3acon]

If its possible why would they pass up the opportunity to make money? This game is deffinately coming out to the consoles, both consoles in some form or fashion.

[Marriot VP]

Yah for real guys, 360 or PS3 this game would sell like crazy if they dedicated enough time to it. So I would imagine that it will come around eventually, like oblivion did and many other PC games.

What happens is that when they release a PC game they realize they have a complete game just sitting around but only on one platform. So they weight the cost of porting to how much they'd make off of selling it on both or one console.

My prediction is they will port this game, but by that time dual and quad sli's will be slightly ahead of the 360 and PS3. But the difference is marginal, and when you think about spending over 1000 on just a video card sli, consoles will look very attractive.

[no_more_heroes]

Its EA. They make a game for almost any machine that has gaming possibilities (NFS Carbon for your cell anyone?) They weren't happy when they published Oddworld: Stranger's Wrath for xbox alone. They tried bringing it to the ps2 but it just didn't work out.

[USMChardcharger]

i think there is no doubt they would make their money on this if they do bring it to consoles.
if they do then us 360 and PS3 guys/girls can sing happy songs together.

[Phenom19]

the game looks nice and all, but wat is it about. i cant just look at a pretty game

[bilal]

they came to senses...
one of the developers said that next-gen consoles were too week for crysis....
i dont think anything coming out on any console or pc in the next year, is difficult to port to any next gen console (except for wii)...
as time goes on i think we would see games that can be only on pc but not any time soon...

[USMChardcharger]

yeah, i agree. i think that it was just a chance to hype the game from there stand point.

they knew that it would not hurt M$ or Sony's feelings by saying that. because when they do port it, M$ and Sony get to say, "Look are machines are so powerful that they can run Crysis when they said it could not be done".

then Crytek can flex their muscles and say we did the impossible by making the game work on the consoles.

everyone looks good in the end.

[EnforcerOfTheTruth]

...the Prey devs said their game can't be done on PS3 and Crysis looks much better...how...how...how is this possible? I...I...I...don't understand the world now :-(

[NextGen24Gamer]

With todays advanced compression techniques disc space will never be an issue to a competitant developers. And yes the ps3 has split ram and can't use all 512 for textures. 360 can. Much of the split 256 has to be used for the cell and its spe's.

I think porting from Xbox 360 to PS3 will be reasonably difficult, since the Xbox 360 has a lot more general purpose processing power that can be flexibly reallocated, and all of the Xbox 360 CPU cores have equal access to all memory. The asymmetric nature of the Cell could easily lead to situations where the game has too little of one type of processing power and too much of another. And the content might suffer as well, since you'll never see a PS3 title with more than 256MB of textures at any given time, due to the split graphics and system memory banks. When we announced 512MB of unified memory on Xbox 360, I think all of our game developers (and the artists too) did a little happy dance. It's easier to use and gives developers much more flexibility in how they allocate memory for various resources.

http://arstechnica.com/arti...

The 360 has a unique OS. It has direct x 9 and 10 capabilities and its on special feature sets. PC games that use direct x 10 will have an easy time getting the game up and runnin on the 360. As you have noticed PC ports have gotten better and better on the 360 as the developers figure out the multi core functionality. And its inexpensive compared to the ps3 to develope for. All good stuff for developing teams. Thanks Microsoft.

[NitrogenB]

I love it when people try to sound all smart....dude, give it a rest, IF Crysis is ported to the consoles, they will look almost identical, guaranteed. If EA is publishing the game, they don't want to get on sides w/ either of the competitors (xbox 360, ps3), so they will make the game look almost identical.

[no_more_heroes]

Stop advertising the 360. That's Microsoft's job. When you do that it just makes us (360 fans) seem desparate.

[AuburnTiger]

Unlike a PC, the Cell and RSX are able to communicate with 35GB/s bandwidth, and the Cell has 25.6GB/s bandwidth to its XDR RAM. This translates to 25.6GB/s bandwidth between the RSX and system memory. More importantly, this extra bandwidth is coming from a separate bus than video memory meaning that developers might actually want to do this intentionally to increase total bandwidth to the RSX. Rest assured, Matt and Microsoft’s insight is that developers will never want to have split memory banks because it’s just that much easier to share bandwidth and not have to consider the difference.

[NextGen24Gamer]

I saw a lot of mis information being put out there. I had to throw some truth in there. I didn't want to waiste my bubbles responding to every single mis truth. Crysis is a prime example to why blu ray isn't needed. And yes hardware is important but the software tools are what make games run. The 360 and the PC share many of the same tools. The ps3 is a chore to develope for according to most developers. Yes you can get some good things out of it. But its a hassle with little or no gain what so ever. But all this don't matter. The games is what matter. And I'm super excited about the games coming out from now till the beginning of 2007 on the xbox 360. Microsot made the 360 with the sole purpose to go hand in hand with the superior software tools. Its the perfect blend of tech and software that the ps3 can't match. The ps3 is a monster of a system in raw number pushing...but it takes a lot of time and even more money to get things to be on par with the 360.

[EnforcerOfTheTruth]

Actually you are the one that bombs this site with misinformation day by day. Will you ever open your eyes and understand that manufacturers opinion isn't objective and reliable? Here is the perfect example how relaible MS is and how much they know about the PS3:
"Xbox's Director of the Game Technology Group, Scott Henson, had his doubts about Sony's claim that PS3 games will feature 'full HD' (1080p resolution): "I think 1080p, just to address that directly, will be basically impossible. I think if you talk to any developer they will tell you that they will not have a performing game at 1080p."

Sheesh that's even too ridiculous that I'm responding to this fanatic fanboy, any with brain knows that the manufacturer will always tell you they are better than the competitor, they will always tell your their hardware can do things the other can't. Real Freakio is so ridiculous and the funniest thing is that he is damn serious about the things he says LOL Real Freakio and any other fanatic fanboy, the manufacturers word doesn't count, it's only important what reviewers and developers are saying. Truth was enforced.

[Antan]

Well Topgamer does like to talk $hite!!

[sparco]

Obviously he dont talk to much sh*te cos he still has his 5 bubbles ENFORCER! hint hint.

Im upgrading my PC just so that i can play this game at the highest my PC can handle. Currently i got a Intel Penitum D (dual core)2.8Ghz which ill be upgrading to Pentium D 940 3.4Ghz. Ill also be upgrading my Ram from 512mb to 1.5gb. And once ive saved up some more cash, will be gettin that Nvidia G80(codename) Direct X 10graphics card coming out sometime in november, along with Vista when its released. If they confirm the port to consoles sometime soon, that would be great cos i wouldnt have to spend so much money on upgrades.

[ApocalypseShadow]

you have to understand real top deal gamer.he'll say something nice mixed in with a lot of his opinion to make it seem it is fact.there aren't massive companies saying ps3 is a chore to make games on.it might be simular(360)to pc,but that doesn't make it better to make games on.just easy for lazy pc programmers who don't want to wrap their minds around new ways of thinking.carmack is one of them.i always thought more chips working together was better than one chip working by itself.i guess they needed to catch up with tech.it's like you want to move a piano.one musclehead could probally do it.but why?how about getting a couple of people together to move it which would make it easy.plus if a guy buys 6 or so 360s,then you KNOW where his mind is at.but it is his choice to make.from what i seen of crysis,ps3 and 360 gamers would be lucky to get it.

[Antan]

Lucky indeed, though ill be playing on my pc when i get a couple of the new ati or nvidia cards!! sweet as a nut. It would be funny if the game turned out to be garbage!!!!

[ImTheNumber12]

but all the consoles will get just another far cry with EVEN MORE FERAL ABILITIES. I can't wait for the ability to go through walls or go invisible or cause the game to crash.

[TheMART]

There is a very big difference between how Far Cry was/had to be ported and Crysis will.

Far Cry was ported to consoles which hardware was already mediocore when they released.

Just like this, original XBOX, released in 2001 (almost 2002, was november 2001). Hardware (all standard PC stuff):

CPU: CELERON (!!!) 733 Mhz CPU
GPU: Nvidia GForce 3 graphics card
RAM: 64 MB

That was not much already in that timeframe, let's say it was just put together of things that already were very normal on the market.

But this new gen, we got new, fresh hardware that is not released on the 'normal' mass market yet.

Let's look at the 360 hardware:

CPU: triple core 3.2 Ghz processor
GPU: special build ATI card, 48 unified pipelines, 500 Mhz, with 10 MB extra fast ram added on the shared memory use of RAM
RAM: 512 MB

That's all higher end hardware in it's timeframe then the last gen consolehardware was. So it will be no 2nd Far Cry story for sure.

And all those guys that say their PC has 1 GB or 2 GB of RAM, just think that Win XP uses about 700 MB in it's full size if I'm right and were not talking about other stuff that has it's processes running while playing games.

XBOX 360 only uses a couple of MB for it's dashboard to run and that's it. Almost all of the memory is used for the game.

So yep, Crysis is possible. And because it's DX9 based with some DX10 effects added, it's best possible on the 360. Which has DX9 as it's basis, and has an API control of the hardware of it's own. It's even more flexible then DX10 which has it's standard programming rules. 360 API Control can do whatever MS wants it to do. Things can be changed without having to follow DX10 standardized stuff.

Imagine that. Crysis could run on the 360 with ease and might even add more then the original effects because the control of the card is more flexible... Whow

[Antan]

Be quiet Mart with this 700 meg nonsense, your not right no. All PC owners on here go to task manager, go to performance, look at your total and available memory to see just how much Mart is spouting! The 360 or PS3 "versions" will not look as good as the PC version im afraid, well maybe on low or medium settings. All this talk even before the NEW cards hit the streets im afraid. Give it up, you boring individual, and stop trying to build peoples hope up with nonsensical twoddle.

[TheMART]

Well Antan, my laptop is running with 550 to 600 MB for WinXP, MSN and a IE screen and not much other things going around.
That compared to a few MB's of 360 dashboard running makes a lot of sense to me actually.
Imagine that. I have 1 GB, where more then half is eaten by Windows and processes. That's almost 60% there.
My 360 has 512 MB Ram, with a couple of MB's on the OS. Less then 1% even.
If that is nonsense you're dumb my friend.
Furthermore, new cards are hitting the streets, but Crysis is build on this gen newest cards. And those compared to the 360 GPU and the only thing it needs to do: play games, combined with the API 360 special control (can you deny it Antan? Please explain then) it will be another thing then Far Cry as I just explained.
If you think otherwise come with facts

Explain to me:

High end PC card at this moment: ATI 1900 XTX
CPU: single core or maybe duo core (the mass of people)

360:

GPU: even higher then the ATI 1900 XTX for example because of the 10 MB extra fast embedded RAM and the API control

CPU: triple core 3.2 Ghz processor

And the RAM issue I just explained.

So I can't see why the 360 would get low or mediocore versions compared to a PC that's not even that powerfull in most cases

[Antan]

HAHA! and where in task manager does it mention anything to do with WINXP taking that amount? 550 to 600 meg u say?? hhmm
So when u clicked on performance your physical memory total was ?
And your available memory was?
and how many processes were running?
Just for the record i have the following.
Total mem 2096620
Available 1733572
With 29 running processes.
So as we look at my figure it works out at very nice 363048 !!!!! just over half of what you claim!! Even on a one gig machine would still leave 640ish meg !!!!! VVEERRYY NICE !!!
glad i could ammend that for you.
Again, just to bring you upto date the top ATI card atm is infact the X1950XTX, which is roughly 7% faster than the X1900XTX due to the faster GDDR4 mem. Top Nvidia card is of course the 7950GX2 which is faster than ATI`s offering but is a 2 slot design. And of course there is always Crossfire and SLI, so when added up ......untouchable. The 10MB embeded mem on the 360 is nice, but is somthing these cards won`t miss. You also forget about the superior Anti Aliasing (6 times sinlge card)and Anisotropic Filtering (16x single card) with hardly any performance hits at 12x10!! impressive reading yes? then of course we have the screen rez which of course you can have pretty much anything you want. So 1.65 free system mem, 512 on single slot card, now thats a loooot of memory, coupled with a fancy Core Duo! WOW "If that is nonsense you are dumb my friend". LOL
Core Duo indeed! very nice, and of course overclock increadibly well, some are hitting 3.5Gig even 4 gig!! WOW, and of course the higher spec Core Duo`s have a lot more cache. We are not talking about masses of people, we are talking about what IS possible, to ANYONE if they want it and can pay for it, the lucky people who can, can build the fastest and most visually impressive gaming machine on the planet (and the most expensive, but we are not talking figures, as ive said before)PC`s have always had the upper hand because of the upgading possibilities. And finally....................&qu ot;A PC that`s not even that powerful in most cases"? do you actually know what you are talking about??!!??!! Give up the ghost. now im going to play Company Of Hereos on my Super Fast PC, then i will partake in an online game of PGR3, as i have the best of both worlds. Peace Out.

[andy capps]

That's your problem, theMART, you're using IE. Get a good browser like Firefox or Opera. Tried Firefox and I hate using IE at this point, too slow, takes up too much system ram, no tabbed browsers yet, and the many security vulnerabilities that it has. But yeah, your point about bloated OS taking up resources on PC's is correct. PS3 and Xbox 360 will have that huge advantage over the PC for gaming, at least for quite some time.

[TheMART]

Still Antan, you can try to downplay anything but you use about 300 MB of your RAM on the OS.

And many people use more, like the amount I was talking about as on my laptop. Ofcourse if you have 2 GB there is more RAM to get it all done in. But does the mass of people have 2 GB and an ATI 1900 XTX? How much do that all cost?

And does a CPU triple core 3.2 Ghz and a 360 GPU (better then the 1900 XTX and even better: I'll bet the 360 GPU can be optimized because the standardization better then the multiple different sort of PC cards and systems around) would have low graphics compared to a comparable PC high end config?

Don't think so. So you're still talking bull. Now go read about the comparing of the Far Cry on reasonably 'old hardware' last gen consoles and the high end new hardware of this new gen consoles. You know I am right!

[dantesparda]

Antan is right. I use only around 55 to 75MBs of RAM on a fresh install of XP with 12 processes running. And about 115 to 130MBs with all my programs installed and 12 processes running with SP2. And I have never seen it use over 512MBs unless a game is running. Usually the most I see it use is around 300-something, although I have seen it hit 400-something (but that is fairly rare and usually takes 10 or more IE windows running and some Windows Explorer windows open, with other programs running like Limewire, ZoneAlarm Pro and Yahoo Messenger, and some java applets running and more!) So Windows itself doesnt takeup that much memory, but the programs themselves that you install are what make it go up. So it really only takes about 55 to 75MBs, because thats how much RAM it takes when its got no other programs installed, and as you start installing other programs, more and more DLL's & proceses & threads & handles, & even exe's start getting loaded into the memory when you startup the computer.
And if you really believe that Xenos is more powerful than a X1950XTX none-the-less a X1900XT (not even the XTX) than you are sadly mistaken and need a crash course in technology. The Xenos uses a 128bit bus whereas the 1900 uses a 256bit bus, thereby has more bandwith. And it does! it has over twice as much bandwith as the Xenos. And is connected to faster RAM too! And runs at a faster core than the Xenos. Plus the Xenos has to share that memory with the CPU which will result in much higher latencies when compared to a PC. Also the Xenon is an in-order CPU making it far slower than a 3.2GHZ PC CPU, which are out-of-order (OoO)CPUs. The 360 CPU is closer to a 2.4 - 2.8GHZ OoO PC CPU. The Xnon does have 3-Cores and 2 threads per core which is good, but they all share the same 1MB L2 cache, which isnt good. That maybe fine so long as they stick to one core and maybe like one or two threads but as soon as they start doing more than that, than that cache will start to become insufficient. Whereas the PC CPU has 1MB or more L2 cache per core. And to tell you the truth, I am not to crazy about the PowerPCs performance. I think that AMD's processors and Intel's out perform them on 90 percent of the programs out there.

[THAMMER1]

I would be more than happy for this game to be ported.

[Antan]

Indeed, but keep your expectations in check until/if it happens, and to what extent.

[EnforcerOfTheTruth]

"14.2 - well...
sparco - 1 Hour ago | Let him/her speak
Obviously he dont talk to much sh*te cos he still has his 5 bubbles ENFORCER! hint hint.
Im upgrading my PC just so that i can play this game at the highest my PC can handle. Currently i got a Intel Penitum D (dual core)2.8Ghz which ill be upgrading to Pentium D 940 3.4Ghz. Ill also be upgrading my Ram from 512mb to 1.5gb. And once ive saved up some more cash, will be gettin that Nvidia G80(codename) Direct X 10graphics card coming out sometime in november, along with Vista when its released. If they confirm the port to consoles sometime soon, that would be great cos i wouldnt have to spend so much money on upgrades."

Well you must be a noob if you don't know that Real Freakio had 3 bubbles and later he simply registered a new account.
I'm bringing the truth here, you cant deny the things I have said. I've lost 1 bubble cause I was a little too harsh with the fanatic fanboys.

You should better upgrade to Core 2 Duo, this are the best CPU's with also a great price.

[MilkYMoO]

For all we know it could turn out to be crap or at best a new unreal 2 all graphics and not much else since no one here has played it lets wait and see but fingers crossed.