News Crytek devs say new consoles are too weak for Crysis

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/08/30/Crytek_devs_say_new_consoles_too_weak_for_Crysis/

 

Yes!!! More quotes for me to fight the console fanboys with!!!

 

So crysis is becoming Vistas launchtitle in a way.

 

tis the other way round... vista is crysis' launch title.

 

Vista requires DX10 and Crysis requires Vista and DX10 to run properly.

Gonna be glad when my loan comes in Jan

 

Christ! it's going to be another year before I can actually afford to play this game

 

like I keep saying you can spend $399 for a box thats not
upgradable or you can spend around $800 for a pc that you
can upgrade. me I'll take the upgradeable product every time

 

I think someone got a big payoff from MS

 

I'll do both

 

The thing is if you look through each gen of console and buy one each time a new generation (not model) comes out, compare the price of that to upgrading your PC to the latest specs.

And you'll find the PC is waaaay more expensive.

 

Yes that's true.. But if you're fortuneate enough to not have to worry about costs, with your PC you can always stay up on the latest hardware and have the very best quality in your game play. (ahh, quad sli goodness!)

Consoles, as good as they are for what they are, will never ever compete with a top of the range PC. Fanboys can always try to argue the case -- but a spec'd out PC still blows the pants off any console at the console's time of release and time thereafter. Always has, always will.

Having said that tho, I do enjoy the 360 immensely!

 

I do prefer PC over console.

But it is just the cost which hurts me, I've been running my PC for almost 3 years now (I spent a LOT of money originally importing from the states due to supplier problems here) which cost me more in the long run due to voided warrantys.

 

Now I bet very few of you seen that comeing . This is indeed a great strike to console manufacturers, they won't have one of the most poppular games available at the time. I sure hope the pc gamming industry will not die cuz I like it much more then the consoles.

Still the ps3 has some specs that I just simply find outrageous....I don't know If I can assemble a pc with that much power....

 

no one ever mentions that pc games can be played at higher resolutions. 1920x1200 to 2560x1600 compared to 720p for xb360 or as yet to be seen 1080p for ps3. tell me why the console makers don't even offer for higher res over dvi-because they are not powerful enogh.

pc wins

 

anyone who honestly thinks that consoles would one up the PC in terms of performance is kidding themselves.

The strength of consoles isnt in their prowess but in their accessability. Its easeir to insert a disk, fire up a console and hit a button to play a game than boot up a computer, install the game, install the updates and play the game (not to mention install new hardware, install new drivers.. etc etc.)

Granted.. the process is part of what makes the PC platform fun in my opinion. But you cant compare consoles to PC.. they're different products for different environments and offer different things. Comparing costs of a console vs a pc to justify one purchase over the other makes as much sense as comparing a mac truck to a mini cooper on the premise that they both get you from point A to point B.

And that my friends, is why you dont argue with people on the internet. Theres no point as 90% of the time people are so completely off point it hurts. Crysis will be on the PC where it belongs.. and it will be a great game. The consoles have games that will be just as great. No need to pull them out of context and compare them. Great = great regardless of what goes into making them and theres no point in being jealous of one platform over the other. Games are meant to entertain, not be the political realm of geeks, nerds and wanna-be geek/nerds.

 

I don't game much (on computer or console...but I play more console when I visit friends), so this is just a question without any debate attached:

When playing with a group, consoles will accept 4 controllers so we can all sit next to each other and talk and see each other and share snacks while playing. I know many FPS computer games are all about the keyboard functionality...but can you even plug 4 controllers into a computer to play a game multiplayer on one box? Or do you always need an extra computer and some network cable to play with another person in the same house in all games on computer?

 

@ EQC

Yes you can, just not usualy with things like FPS games, if it is a sports game or somthing with a common view then you can usualy hook up at least 2 sometimes more controllers, or split use a keyboard. But If im gaming in a group its console all the way. Maden 07 was ment to be played with your friends in your living room, drinking beer and talking smack, not in your room, or den, huddled around a 19in screen.

 

Crysis, in it's DX10 incarnation may well indeed be "too much" for consoles.


BUT, it's being Published by EA. If the game sells well, do we honestly think it won't be ported to the consoles? Even if Crytek themselves refuse to do it, i'm sure EA will find some studio, somewhere, to hack and slash at the code, until it "fits" onto 360 et al. It will probably be worse for the wear, though. But since when has that stopped anyone from doing anything

Aggies

 

FFS, NO! Crysis WANTS DX10 to run, it's PERFECTLY HAPPY with DX9. Every screenshot we've seen to date has been on DX9 hardware! And for that matter, Vista doesn't require DX10 either (though DX10 DOES require Vista, which is a completely different matter)

Sorry about the aggression, but I've had to say this WAY too many times. And for some reason, I feel like I've been punched in the ribs, though I certainly wasn't.

Anyways, l0ll0rz!!!!1111!!!one at the new consoles.

 

I don't think the "PC gaming is dead" concept holds even an ounce of water.. why?

Look at some of these indy games. Space Empires series, my personal favorite 4X, has been made and supported by one man. Just one. Not fifty with a ten million dollar budget, just one. Flatspace II, mildly entertaining, one man. Stardock's GalCiv, I dont know how many people but definitely a solid 'indy' game.

The major publishers will never STOP making PC games, they might make fewer if the profit isn't there for more, but if they ever left any kind of significant void.. just give those indy developers months or a year or two and they'll pick up their pitch forks and march forward to fill that void. We've got the one man developers, the smaller teams, and even several large, hard-working open source games like TA:Spring, a couple amazing graphics engines projects, and games like Vega Strike (and its mods)... The list goes on..

Besides, I swear I think the major dev's get their 'original' ideas from obscure garage-made games anyway. It's part of the reason I like Steam; it's shineing, in a small way, a light on some of the more popular independently made games.

Consoles though, neh. When I can get tired of working on my database, can alt-tab to check on my DVD-rip, alt-tab to my IM window with my girlfriend, check on my torrents progress, and then finally alt-tab in to my RTS game, and then upgrade four or six months down the road so it all happens quicker (and at ATLEAST 1600x1200), then I'd look at consoles. HDTV quality still blows, horribly, compared to a 20" LCD at native res.

edit: Good analogy for indy's filling the gaming void.. Look at Star Trek! Enterprise sucked, then died, leaving the franchise without a show.. So.. fellow geeks have created more episodes than I even have time to begin watching. Most of them are cheesy as can be, but still. Void got filled with cheese, but it got filled.