News Haze developer blames PS3 architecture

This is probably a fairly subjective thus ultimately pointless argument, but I'll do my best!!

I admit that at maxed out settings crysis is a lovely looking game. The problem is that to play it in all it's glory requires a high-end pc. Other games may not look so good on the same system, but bring the fight to budget and mainstream comps and while crysis will have to be massively scaled back, other games can still be played maxed out and now look
nicer than our gimped crysis. If crytek had properly optimised crysis then it should still be able to be played at reasonable resolutions/draw distances/textures/... On machines other than those at the top end. As it's aged it's faired well as hardware is slowly catching up but we all know when it came out people with average systems were forced to upgrade - although this was probably
good for the hardware guys!!

 

Wrong, how can you comapre it to toehr games, it was years ahead of its time, which is the point.....

Even on MEDIUm settings, it was amongst the best looking games, and only required cheap hardware to play on those settings, sorry, but your arguemnt falls flat. When looking at how far ahead it was and still is, it is amazing it was able to be maxed out on hardware even then. Also, how many games do you play? Tonnes of games are released that require even more powerful PC's then crysis did (GTA IV, assassins creed, ARMA II, etc.), yet none look as good 1.5 years later. On top of this, it scaled to work on cards as old as 9800 PRO'd, thats optimization.

Comparing a game that was really ahead of anything else, and still is to other games only underscores that it was incredibly optimized, it still is ahead of any game out with all the tech bells and whistles it has. no point bringing up other games as other games do not have the combo of graphics, scale and tech crysys did, yet it still ran well even on the high end compared to many Pc games.

 

I hear far too much trash talk about Crysis not being optimised. Without seeing the code, and being able to develop a game of that standard yourself, you really can't say for sure how optimised it was.

Something we do know for sure though, is that no game pushes as many polygons as Crysis (or at least no game did last I checked). Call it bad optimisation if you will, but bear that in mind when you say it.

 

the cell is a bitch to program for and anyone who knows about programming knows this. all you playstation fanboys deny this but you know nothing about SIMD or parallelism.

if you read cryengine whitepapers you will realize how smart they are and you will enjoy having 100's of light sources in a single scene. as for optimisations cryengine 3 will have the best lighting of any engine and you cant say it is poorly optimized without seeing the source code or knowing what hardware they are optimizing for ie AMD intel nvidia processors.

 

I'm no fanboy, I just find it funny how it's suddenly cool to blame any development issues on the architecture of the console. It wouldn't surprise me if next week a new story is released saying that the complexity of the architecture was the cause for the massive delay leading to the canning of duke nukem forever.

Also, having done a computer science degree and now working as a software developer for a living, I think I have some idea about the issues they are facing. I admit it takes some time to get your head around, but that should be taken into account before the project has even began. Failure to account for such things is bad project planning so passing the buck just doesn't cut it.

 

Greetings!

All that it is needed to know about PS3 game development proccess:

Well, if Sony companies couldnt make games for Sony consoles, it would be even weirder.

 

Maybe next time make it a pc game first so it is done right and then spend a million years dealing with Sony... oh wait maybe if they did that they would still be in business.

 

Even though it looked nice, the code was not well written. Run crysis and 5 mins into the game hit the ~ key to bring up the console and see just pages of errors you see.

 

That's ridiculous, they complain that they spend so much time making it work that they couldn't spend as much time on making the game play well.

um, isn't that why game developers have a separate design team and coding/engineer team? Why couldn't the design team get working hard to make a good story/level design while the engineers get cracking on making the engine work? Poor excuse.

Games outputting at 540p and using the PSU to upscale to 720p in itself shows VERY lazy programming - why couldn't the processing power used to upscale the graphics be used in the first place to output raw at 720p? I'm aware that the two don't use the same amount of power (it probably takes more processing power to output raw at high res than the upscaling) but still, that shows lack of effort to me.

 

No, I see no errors, errors or no, game is incredibly optimized considering how far ahead it is over every other game out there. MTYH, it did not take a hign end PC to max out crysis even in 07, and considering it is still the best looking game out by a wide margin in 09, yeah, ......