• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Crytek: Striving to achieve "DX11 level" visuals on consoles with Crysis 3

D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
Making sure the experience is the same across all platforms means it's equally bad across all platforms, too.
 

sleepykyo

Member
New. consoles.


Look at all this bullshit and hoops devs have to jump through because the PS360 are so far behind the natural tech curve.

The new consoles are coming. Crytek, being Crytek though, will have it run at sub30 on consoles anyway. They probably figure if the performance isn't detrimental to the experience, they aren't pushing the consoles hard enough.
 

RoboPlato

I'd be in the dick
I just hope that they can get a smooth framerate and a not stretched resolution on PS3 this time. T2x SMAA on consoles will be pretty cool if it isn't too much of a performance hog. At least that will eliminate the annoying ghosting from 2.
 

KKRT00

Member
I just hope that they can get a smooth framerate and a not stretched resolution on PS3 this time. T2x SMAA on consoles will be pretty cool if it isn't too much of a performance hog. At least that will eliminate the annoying ghosting from 2.

720p with SMAA T2x and stable 30fps in such demanding like Crysis 3 would be mindblowing finish for current gen consoles.
 

TriGen

Member
Its good to want things.

Right, no way they can pull this off on current hardware. They should have waited till next-gen if they really want the Crysis series to evolve graphically, it will be hard for them to top Crysis 2, right now.
 
Yep, but he 'joined' late in and help with some functions and examples, most of the works is made by guys from Universidad de Zaragoza.

Dont know i think i already saw thiago being mentioned when this group released MLAA.
But oke this Universidad de Zaragoza improved on MLAA and TAA.
 
Lots & lots of bitter tears of DX11 users posting here.

cartman_tears.gif
 

Minsc

Gold Member
Should be interesting to compare Unreal Engine 4 screenshots against Crysis 3 "DX11" console screenshots... if they look similar, they'll have achieved something really amazing.
 

SapientWolf

Trucker Sexologist
Should be interesting to compare Unreal Engine 4 screenshots against Crysis 3 "DX11" console screenshots... if they look similar, they'll have achieved something really amazing.
If they're similar then Rein has massively over-hyped their UE 4.0 demo.
 

TGO

Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
Never was a fan of Crysis when it first came out, had the PC to run it & all that but just wasn't interested.
fast-forward to 2011 I own Crysis 1 & 2 on PS3 & I actually like the games, I'm definitely getting 3 day 1, may even get the limited edition.
 

subversus

I've done nothing with my life except eat and fap
Should be interesting to compare Unreal Engine 4 screenshots against Crysis 3 "DX11" console screenshots... if they look similar, they'll have achieved something really amazing.

well, Sweeney has already used Crysis 2 screens when he was talking about UE4 and its rendering techniques so may be you are onto something.
 
Crytek focuses on dated consoles
Unreal team looks on the next step


Epic has had massive amount of studio license their engine from the start of this gen.
Crytek just started with crysis 2 and probably want to secure some more licenses for next gen by finishing this gen with a bang. They probably are already working on Cryengine 4.0 for next gen.
 

Emily Chu

Banned
developer promises are much like politician promises...

sounds good on paper but they never actually happen or deliver

ever...
 
Crysis 2 on 360 was such a mess for so long that Ive given up on this franchise. I waited months and months only to get no fixes to the online and consistent game crashing. Needless to say, Ill be skipping on this game and i don't care what DX they put in it.
 

sp3000

Member
Højengaard provided a concrete example of this: parallax occlusion mapping, while pointing out that it was not a feature confirmed to be in the console version of Crysis 3.

"I'm not saying this will be in the game, but they managed to make parallax occlusion mapping work, which is an advanced form of bump mapping where you get silhouettes as well, and you have self-shadowing even though you have absolutely no polygons," he explained.

"That's a very advanced feature, and it shouldn't theoretically run on a 360, but they made it run on a 360."


Yeah let's totally ignore the fact that Crysis 1 on consoles had POM because we want to advertise our new game. Let's also ignore that POM is a DX9 feature.

"Very Advanced Feature." Even though it's 5 years old now. Is this guy trolling


because we don't want the experience to be different between the platforms

No, you want them all to be dumbed down equally.

Yeah, let's hold PCs back because of 7 year old console technology. Great idea.

Maybe these guys should look to DICE to see how to make a PC game that actually takes advantage of the platform.
 

RoboPlato

I'd be in the dick
720p with SMAA T2x and stable 30fps in such demanding like Crysis 3 would be mindblowing finish for current gen consoles.
I'm not getting my hopes up for a full 720p or even a constant 30 but if they can get it so that the shotgun crosshair isn't an oval because of scaling and keep the framerate average significantly higher than 2 it'll be a huge upgrade. I wonder if they could get 1280x704 to work like DICE did with BF3. The balck bars are hardly noticeable and it maintained a solid IQ.
 

Majanew

Banned
I'm not getting my hopes up for a full 720p or even a constant 30 but if they can get it so that the shotgun crosshair isn't an oval because of scaling and keep the framerate average significantly higher than 2 it'll be a huge upgrade. I wonder if they could get 1280x704 to work like DICE did with BF3. The balck bars are hardly noticeable and it maintained a solid IQ.

Not a bad idea, and it'd still be 720p.
 

Frankfurt

Banned
Linear boring shooter is how I would describe Crysis if I'd never played Crysis. At least other trolls have the decency to research the game they're trashing.

Crysis 2 was a linear, boring shooter.

Crysis 1, on the other hand, is anything but linear and anything but boring. I don't like the preview i read for C3 saying the demo was linear and limited (despite the Crytek rep bragging about freedom), though.
 
I'm not getting my hopes up for a full 720p or even a constant 30 but if they can get it so that the shotgun crosshair isn't an oval because of scaling and keep the framerate average significantly higher than 2 it'll be a huge upgrade. I wonder if they could get 1280x704 to work like DICE did with BF3. The balck bars are hardly noticeable and it maintained a solid IQ.

They did some Tiled deferred rendering i saw someone playing with it in Cryengine 3.0 sdk in a forum post somewhere.
 

Haunted

Member
Eh, I'd say what they are achieving here is more impressive than what developers delivered on the original XBOX when it was more recent. I mean, Doom 3 and Half-Life 2 were equivalents back in 2004 yet both of those games were heavily compromised on XBOX.

Crysis 1 and 2 were much more accurate on 360 and PS3 than those games were on XBOX. Of course that ignores the fact that Doom 3 and HL2 would have been impossible on PS2 or even Gamecube.

So, despite their age, I'd say the current consoles are still pretty capable.
I feel this is either attributable to diminishing returns [although I personally], or consoles sapping some of that development talent and slowing down PC development in these areas.

If I see what a handful of European low budget devs can produce by completely focusing on PC, I can't help but feel that all this effort of bringing console graphics to a level that's not a generation behind PC visuals by the big "AAA" houses are resources misspent.


edit: not from a business perspective, but purely as someone who wants to see the medium's tech driven forward.
 

kinggroin

Banned
Eh, I'd say what they are achieving here is more impressive than what developers delivered on the original XBOX when it was more recent. I mean, Doom 3 and Half-Life 2 were equivalents back in 2004 yet both of those games were heavily compromised on XBOX.

Crysis 1 and 2 were much more accurate on 360 and PS3 than those games were on XBOX. Of course that ignores the fact that Doom 3 and HL2 would have been impossible on PS2 or even Gamecube.

So, despite their age, I'd say the current consoles are still pretty capable.


Doom 3 and a half life 2 were developed for the pc first and foremost.


Crysis 2 was not, and suffered for it.
 

RedSwirl

Junior Member
Another game of give and take, the consoles have nothing more to give, whenever they add something pretty another thing always suffers.

I don't know why they don't just delay the game six months and release it on the next gen consoles, which are probably launching in late 2013.

Maybe we'll get 720/PS4 versions that are more based on the PC version.

If I see what a handful of European low budget devs can produce by completely focusing on PC, I can't help but feel that all this effort of bringing console graphics to a level that's not a generation behind PC visuals by the big "AAA" houses are resources misspent.


edit: not from a business perspective, but purely as someone who wants to see the medium's tech driven forward.

And even then, look at what CDProjekt achieved on the 360.
 
I don't know why they don't just delay the game six months and release it on the next gen consoles, which are probably launching in late 2013.

Maybe we'll get 720/PS4 versions that are more based on the PC version.

Because they can re-release it on next gen in a "game of the year" format and get your money twice.
 

Majanew

Banned
I don't know why they don't just delay the game six months and release it on the next gen consoles, which are probably launching in late 2013.

Maybe we'll get 720/PS4 versions that are more based on the PC version.

Probably because they want the large base for 360/PS3. I'd prefer Crysis 3 launch on next Xbox, but I understand why it isn't.
 

Eusis

Member
If I see what a handful of European low budget devs can produce by completely focusing on PC, I can't help but feel that all this effort of bringing console graphics to a level that's not a generation behind PC visuals by the big "AAA" houses are resources misspent.
I feel like having some of the big PC guys on consoles primarily could be a mistake partially for this reason. These are people who are used to pushing new hardware as well as they can, and rather than trying to make the best with what you have like some titles from prior generation (or hell, now that I think about it maybe CoD) they seem to want to act as if it were a modern PC anyway and push technology at the expense of FPS or smooth playing.

Well, and the bigger problem can be if next gen hardware really IS catered more to what they want, at the expense of being affordable. That might actually have been somewhat worthwhile in the 90s, but now budgets are getting crazy. I doubt following the whims of those like Crytek, Dice, or Epic is worth it if it becomes unviable for anyone who isn't a huge company to produce a console game, not unless development can get MUCH cheaper or just being OK visually can be accepted (again?)
 
Top Bottom