Crysis on a console? Not yet

Geekpulp speaks with Colin Robinson from EA about the Crysis franchise, with palm trees and shipping vessels in the back ground, comes the news that Crysis is not yet a definite on consoles.

[Shaka2K6]

Crysis for x360 = impossible.

[Blademask]

Its impossible because it would have to be developed for the Core system. It is impossible to run Crysis without an element installed on a HDD. Our technology and disc reading speed isn't at the significant levels to where it would be able to run Crysis on the 360 without a HDD install or cache. Streaming with complicated engines has been the weakest performers on the 360. Yes, games have streamed on the 360. Old games, or games that aren't hardware demanding like Mass Effect. If you are under the impression that Gears is the most technically advanced title on the 360. Stop reading now, please. I cant get to anyone with that level of denial.

Mass Effect was supposed to be not only a show piece for graphics, but it was also supposed to be an amazing title story/depth wise. It delivered on that portion, but the graphics were severely criticized by everyone that reviewed it. the 360 with the CORE in the developmental cycle can't allow developers to use the HDD for caching of large sized data. It stuttered at every turn, the load times were horrendous, and the streaming did not work. Yes ME was rushed, it is the best example of a technical advanced title running on the 360. More so than Gears/COD4/Bioshock because the scale of the game, texture quality, and model quality.

Gears\COD4\Bioshock all cheat when it comes to this aspect by hiding details in the dark with Normal maps, or in the case of COD4, Using PHOTOGRAPHS as textures. Everyone always makes the comment that COD4 looks photo real. Well mates, thats because it uses Photos. The particle engine is a joke, the lighting is all pre-baked into the maps, there is NO dynamic lighting at all.

Crysis optimized to stream load on the PS3 is a possibility. Seeing as the closest advanced engine running on consoles is Uncharted: Drakes Fortune. Say what you want about the game, but it stands up as the only console game to push out the elements that it does,HDRI lighting, High resoltuion textures, High resolution models, 300 animations per character, amazing sound design, runs at 720p, and STREAM from a disc without installing. This is within the first years of the PS3's development cycle, and it has a game that the 360 has no answer to (on technical paper). Naughty Dog has developed the backbone for games to be developed using multiple processors to handle different tasks, only to handshake them at the end. The PS3 has the ability to have 1 virtual processor handle all of the Collision detection for example, while another proc is handling shader management. That is just a very simple example of how Uncharted was pulled off, but it is done in a way that it could have only been done using a cell like processor, or a heavily configured PC that would rely heavily on ram and videocard. Every task in Crysis could be worked in using a broadband proc.

The 360 relies on a videocard, and a small amount of ram to pull off all of its graphics. There is no way that 7 tasks that are usually done on either a video card, or a dual proc because you develop games for the 360 in the traditional way. You have a limit of the amount of data based on the videocards capabilities working with the processor. Its the traditional way of gaming, and that is why as time goes on a broadband chip is significant. With a broadband chip you no longer have to keep beefing up your videocard. Operations are ran in place on one of the SPU's, This is what no one understands about the PS3. The videocard isn't the muscle, its just.. a tendon perhaps? No 360 title when translated to the PC needs high requirements to run. This is because of the specifications of the 360, and once again. The Core systems specifications. To Crysis on the PC based 360. You are going to need a heavier videocard, and more ram. OR, it will take a graphical hit like we see in the Farcry videos. Crysis stomps all over the current videos of the Farcry engine that we have seen. I am not fooled by wind in a tree, or breaking a low polygon tree apart when I shoot at it.

Remember the main reason WHY the 360 is easy to develop for, is because you use traditional PC means to develop for it. No Broadband chip knowledge required, just solve for software using the Hardware. "Ok we cant have 40 guys on screen with 2000x2000 sized textures.. Lets try 1000x1000 sized textures OR cut down the amount of guys because the videocard is chugging" There is nothing NEW about CRYSIS technology, it is PC technology that pushes it, Very expensive technology. Because you need a powerful videocard and gigs of ram to run it at 1280x720 let alone the higher resolutions. Then after all of that strip the use of a HDD to install/cache massive amounts of data.

THe reason why its hard to code for the PS3, if it isn't obvious. Is because its new technology that isn't hindered by the use of a videocard to process everything. The same gripes were made with the PS2 when it debut. GOOGLE the year 2000 and "PS2 problems". Developers are quoted to say that its difficult to develop for. When you do rely on just the videocard, and neglect the use of the rest of the "engine", You get Madden or any of the other EA ports that all fail and use the Unreal Engine. The PS3's videocard isn't super powerful because it doesn't need to be. Its not *supposed* to work alone. Thats why you see all of the sony exclusives running in HD, stable framerates, and more things going on in the screen than other "multiplats" or even exclusives. I have yet to see a 360 title match the opening fight of Heavenly Sword. Those of you that own both systems know what I am talking about. Infinity ward figured this out early on, and thats why COD4 performs the way it does. Same with Criterion. Its not that it CANT perform the tasks, its that its in a different language - not literally - than the 360 is. Its easy to say that the PS3 gets crippled ports because of the support of the 360. If you have programmers that have no clue how to use the cell, or if the dev doesn't want to spend the money to hire these people. What do you think the product is going to be? I agree with Gabe Newell on that point. At the time of Orange Box, it made no financial sense to hire the qualified PS3 programmers( They are at a premium rate as well ) when you can get a port from PC HL to 360 HL within 5 months packaged and sold in 2 more.

The closest chance a technically advanced Title like Crysis has, is definitely on the PS3. Even if you don't believe in any of the SPU bs, you have to believe that CRYSIS will never run on a Core system, AT the level that it runs on the PC,its impossible 100%. Because you have to look at the 360 like a PC with Specifications, nothing you do for crysis is going to make it run on a PC with the 360's specifications, what makes you think it will run on a 360 with 360 specifications?

Either Crysis is running on a PS3 at the level or very close to the PC. OR, Its dumbed down to run on the 360Core/PS3, to look like Farcry2. If you guys think Farcry 2 is amazing and "epic' You clearly haven't played Crysis on the PC. Hell just take a swim and tell me how it is :).

[TheIneffableBob]

You must've had fun writing that, Blademask.

[BloodySinner]

Very, very, very... funny.

[Big Jim]

The question I always have when I see someone writing about the possibility of Crysis on the PS3 looking as good as Crysis on the PC set to the highest settings is: how could a machine that costs $400 run crysis, when the only PCs that can run crysis on max settings will run you well over a grand? And why would anyone buy a $2000 gaming rig, when they could get a $400 console that outperforms it? I know nothing about computers, but am I wrong?

[Charlie2688]

@Big Jim: I think you have to remember something (and other people too), as stated by Crytek in one of the interviews (found here on the site) the current CryEngine2 for consoles runs a equivalent to the MEDIUM(ish) PC settings at 720p and I would guess at least 30fps so it wont be the same as the High or even the hardware nightmare of the Very High Setting of the PC version

[Bolts]

Blademask must have a lot of free time.

[Goodfella78]

its only a matter of time till its on the ps3 looking dam fine

[tidus007]

http://i238.photobucket.com...

[Asurastrike]

Crysis is coming to consoles, the question is when. But honestly, I am more excited for FarCry 2.

[RIPHDDVD]

http://i238.photobucket.com...

[PumPum]

LOL at the random disagrees.
Fanboys can be absurd.

[PumPum]

Its pobably cUmming. If it wasnt EA prob would have shot down the rumors by now?

[Fox01]

thank you very much for the explanation Blademask

[fermcr]

Don't care for Crysis in the console (i finished it on the PC). I want Crysis 2 for PC :)

[princejb134]

is crysis really needed to be ported to a console?
i understand the graphics is just awesome and one of the best out there in the world of gaming, but i also hear gameplay its not as addictive
so let me ask again; is crysis really needed to be ported to a console?if it is enlighten me

[gambare]

Because there is many people who can't afford a $1000+ PC and wanted to play that game.

[DFresh]

PS3 is the only console that's proven that they can play it not just w/ that Linux Program but w/ processing power.

[W S K]

@Bloodmask
first of all you cant compare a pc to an xbox 360.
You say that 360 to PC ports dont need high specifications on PC......what are you smoking???
Assasins Creed, Guitar Hero 3, NFS Pro Street...they all have up to 3Ghz minimum requirements (better is a dual or a quadrocore CPU)and up to 2 GB Ram.
If Crysis is coming to consoles it is surely looking better on PS3 (its one year newer....what did you expect!?!).
So all this discussion you made is useless and PS3 Fanboy $HIT.
The thing about the development and that the 360 relies on the Graphics Card is the only true thing.
If Crysis comes to consoles it will NEVER be as good looking as on PC (for sure) anything else doesnt make sense.

[Blademask]

Assasins Creeds specificatiosn were corrected because the game was an utter technical mess. I know you aren't here trying to pretend that AC's requirements were justified by the strength of the game engine? Especially in the face of Crysis. You are blowing smoke up everyones butts if you want us to think that AC was some technical marvel that demands processing power like Crysis.

What are the requirements to play Half Life 2 || Orange box on the PC? Yet it runs superior than the 360 port. Correct? When i say HIGH Requirements, I'm talking about CRYSIS high requirements. Which mean you have to fork up some cash to play 1920x1200 with everything turned to high. The same isn't the case for the major graphics 360/PC hits.

You can play any 360 PC ported title on the same machine that played Hl2 well 4 years ago. Sure you more than likely cant play at 1920x1200, but the 360 doesn't push that out either. You can play 1280x1024 easily with everything turned up. Not AC though, because its a technical disaster. However you can play all of the titles that the entire 360 community boasts about when it comes to graphics and technical achievement. Bioshock, Call of Duty 4, Gears of War, and soon Mass Effect. On older specification PC's.

A 3ghz machine isn't exactly pricey, combined with a 128mb or 256mb videocard. You aren't running into any problems with the titles I have mentioned. This is the main issue that development for PC/360 titles aren't pushing forward in technology.

Although I feel like you are missing the point entirely. It isn't a knock on the 360 that a Medium grade PC can run its titles. What I said was to illustrate the relationship between the 360's hardware and the PC's hardware. Unlike the PS3 the 360 is dependent on videocard and ram, its the same exact thing a PC is reliant on. To play Crysis, or any demanding title, You MUST upgrade your system. The Developer makes a game that requires certain things of the videocard. Those things aren't going to be available on the 360. If you think that magically Microsoft will upgrade the 360 to run 1 single game, its not going to happen.

Because the 360 is built on old PC rules, it will require hardware upgrades on some level to run a close to PC version of Crysis. The PS3 on the other hand{new technology}, wouldn't. If it were ported over with the SPU in mind, it has a higher chance of getting done, than MS upgrading hardware. The PS3 has flexed its technical muscles with all of its early titles, and there is much more room for development. As it stands, the PS3 has already done things that the 360 has proven it is unable to. Stream loading with an advanced engine is 1 thing. The 360 has yet to show off any technically advanced titles outside of GEARS of War and Bioshock. Gears & Bioshock both run on medium grade PC's, and are nothing close to the level of Crysis as far as Dynamics/Lighting/Animation/Te xture Size/Model Resolution goes.

[W S K]

We will see on which console Crysis is coming and how it will look like on each system (the rest is speculation).
Until then you can Jerk off on your PS3

*Have a nice day*

[W S K]

...and Please!!!! PLEASE!!! show me one Graphic Card that is 4 years old that uses Shader 3.0.....you cant!?! Right?!? And almost all games you mentioned dont run without Shader 3.0. The PC dont relies completely on the graphics card. There are Games who are using the CPU more and there are the ones who needs a fast GPU. sure you can play NFS Pro Street on a 4 year old machine but it looks Fugly like hell (i swear you will go blind...like a Wii version). So i dont get YOUR point.

[jinn]

im sure TnS will be pleased