• 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 CEO: Ryse wouldn’t have run at 1080p on PS4 (Decision was choice, not hurdle)

rdrr gnr

Member
How is it not?
Seriously? If they could do everything they are doing now but in native 1080p -- what compelling reason is there for them to arbitrarily choose 900p? It's not a "choice" in the sense they made a trade off between resolution for whatever else.
 

SLY_

Banned
The man's studio built an incredible looking game. He doesn't need to answer to anyone.

How it ends up actually playing is another matter entirely.
 

Midou

Member
I don't think Crysis 1 era Crytek would have said this, lol. They were always about trying to go beyond reasonable limits of graphics, not settling for 70% as many pixels.
 

coolasj19

Why are you reading my tag instead of the title of my post?
I'm still wondering if I'm going to travel up to Dallas to see the Xbox One apology tour deal. Among other non-Xbox related reasons too.
 

KKRT00

Member
He'd be pretty stupid to not use the ~90% improvement on pixel fill rate to make it 1080p.

Oh god. He's not saying that game would run on same settings on PS4. But that they would make it 900p, but with more effects.

---
Seriously? If they could do everything they are doing now but in native 1080p -- what compelling reason is there for them to arbitrarily choose 900p? It's not a "choice" in the sense they made a trade off between resolution for whatever else.

Pushing more stuff in 900p? Its really that hard to figure out?
 

Caayn

Member
Am I really the only one who prefers more and better graphical effects with 900p over less graphical effects with 1080p? As I can noticeably see the effects from 2~3 meters on my 37" TV, but I can't see the difference between 900p and 1080p on the same setup.
 

SHADES

Member
I can't see from any logical sense that he could of said anything else, MS are financing his latest project, how in the world could he state anything regarding his backers direct competition without critically affect his project & NDA's? Seems like a waste of time even asking the question, did someone think he might be pissed up & let his guard down?

Would be akin to saying to Larry & Albert " But you console is weaker isn't it" I mean, what are they going to say.... Yes? Of course not.
 
The internet is a scary place. A CEO of one of the world's most acclaimed graphics engine company became a shill in a single day.

He's been a shill. I used to respect Crytek. But I feel that Microsoft went after them so they could tout how they have the studio with the best graphical prowess, making an exclusive for their platform.

Microsoft goes after what is already popular, even if they are late to the game. 9 times out of 10, they fall on their faces. I also feel Xbox 360 is that 1 time where they succeeded, though.

Crytek and Microsoft belong together, imo.
 

i-Lo

Member
So he's basically just saying that Crytek would always rather push more shaders and effects on consoles instead of resolution. Same as they did with Crysis 2 and 3 on consoles.

Pretty much. However, the way he put it sounds utterly disingenuous.

Edit: At this point, the game looks fantastic and pulling out these excuses is marring the reputation needlessly.

Because of framerate?
I don't think it's mandatory, i just think that's what's going to happen. Look at ps3 and how the vast majority of sony's internally developed games ran at 720p.
Looking at this first batch of sony games for the ps4 (they all seem to be 1080p, as far as i'm aware of, i could be wrong), it seems to me they're kinda pushing for that bullet point.

Off topic: Yea and the LoD pop in shows, albeit in alpha builds. They may be 1080p now but I want the first parties not be held back by arbitrary constraints.
 
I have a serious question. Which is more noticeable, the difference between native 1080p res and 720/900upscaled. Or the Difference between 30fps and 60fps? Pleae try to be objective.
 
I don't think Crysis 1 era Crytek would have said this, lol. They were always about trying to go beyond reasonable limits of graphics, not settling for 70% as many pixels.

They want to push the engine features into the box, if the console versions of C2 and 3 are something to go by, their definition of graphics is not about pixels, but about how many effects they can have in the screen at the same time.
 
Sure.....
jon-hammu7sf6.gif
 

antitrop

Member
I have a serious question. Which is more noticeable, the difference between native 1080p res and 720/900upscaled. Or the Difference between 30fps and 60fps? Pleae try to be objective.
The resolution, unquestionably. At least to me. I'm extremely observant of both, but I think I would tend to notice the disparage in resolution more than the frame rate.
 

Caayn

Member
I have a serious question. Which is more noticeable, the difference between native 1080p res and 720/900upscaled. Or the Difference between 30fps and 60fps? Pleae try to be objective.
For me it would be: Lots of effects, lots going on, steady 30FPS > 60FPS > resolution.

In the end your question is personal, as people have different preferences.
 

BY2K

Membero Americo
Now we just wait for Naughty Dog to announce a PS4 game that runs naively at 1080p with better graphics than Ryse.

Patience is key.
 

abadguy

Banned
He's been a shill. I used to respect Crytek. But I feel that Microsoft went after them so they could tout how they have the studio with the best graphical prowess, making an exclusive for their platform.

Microsoft goes after what is already popular, even if they are late to the game. 9 times out of 10, they fall on their faces. I also feel Xbox 360 is that 1 time where they succeeded, though.

Crytek and Microsoft belong together, imo.

Whatever you say, brah. Everyone one is a shill unless they are saying something negative about MS or positive about Sony. He didn't even fucking slight the PS4 in anyway, he just said he would have went for the same resolution on that platform as well, jeez. Every little thing anyone says these days needs to be filtered through this console war bullshit.

Now we just wait for Naughty Dog to announce a PS4 game that runs naively at 1080p with better graphics than Ryse.

Patience is key.

Not sure what Naughty Dog has to even do with Crytek or Ryse but ok.
 

VanWinkle

Member
I have a serious question. Which is more noticeable, the difference between native 1080p res and 720/900upscaled. Or the Difference between 30fps and 60fps? Pleae try to be objective.

At first glance, difference between 60 and 30 is more noticeable. But you can usually get used to that, while I can't as easily get used to the blurry look of 720p on my 1080p display.
 

pixlexic

Banned
SO if a game developer says something bad about the xbone.. its all truth.. if they say something you don't want to hear.. its all lies..

Face it .. these consoles are not as strong as you want to believe.
 
Whatever you say, brah. Everyone one is a shill unless they are saying something negative about MS or positive about Sony. He didn't even fucking slight the PS4 in anyway, he just said he would have went for the same resolution on that platform as well, jeez. Every little thing anyone says these days needs to be filtered through this console war bullshit.

I think you need a few drinks of wine and to relax. It's only an opinion. "brah"
 

Skeff

Member
Why would they do that when they could get even more graphics if they stay at 900p?

Because Pixelfill rate wouldn't really help with more shader's etc.

Different parts of GPU's do different things, Resolution and pixel fill rate are closely linked, The PS4 finds higher resolutions easier than XB1 because of the 32 ROPS.

It's not straight forward resolution only depending on ROPS, but it is one of the bigger factors and is one of the main strengths the PS4 GPU has.

This is why so may PS4 first party games are 1080p
 
For me it would be: Lots of effects, lots going on, steady 30FPS > 60FPS > resolution.

In the end your question is personal, as people have different preferences.

Understandable, i just meant in a more broad sense. I believe the majority would be able to tell the difference between an upscaled game much easier than if a game were to run at a locked 30fps instead of 60fps.

I guess im in the minority that thinks give me a locked 30 and native 1080p, instead of a blurry looking game that runs only slightly more noticeably smoother...

I do know that 60fps is very important for the competitive fps front though.
 

Bedlam

Member
crytek is not going to badmouth xbone.

and crytek will never say their xbone exclusive would have looked better on ps4.

does anyone really want to bash some developer because he "lied"? does anyone really expect crytek to be truthful and at the same time not tarnish their game and their exclusivity deal?

sometimes, people are just trying to find a way to hate something and someone. no one is going to buy that explanation anyway.
If he didn't want to be ridiculed, he should've just kept his mouth shut then.

That'd be useful advice for that guy in general as seemingly every other week he decides to spout some kind of bullshit that makes him look bad.
 

OTIX

Member
It makes a lot of sense actually. Back in those days they didn't have any glasses so a slightly blurrier image could be an interesting design choice to emulate that.
 
The Order 1886 also got a lot of shit for choosing their resolution, I don't really think this thread narrative is completely about loyalties. (although a lot of it is)
 
Top Bottom