Support NeoGAF

[dragonelite]

I'd like to make a thread.

Which is the bigger bottleneck to advances on the visual end, Console focused development or game budgets?

Or the possible third option (which sort of relates to the second), a longer generation cycle.

The third one. You now have 3 graphics api to work with.
Direct X 9,DirectX11 and not sure what ps3 uses i believe a low level version of opengl or something that is derived from it.

New console means pc and next xbox probably can make use of the same graphics api Dx11 or probably dx11.1 i dont see a dx12 appearing sometime soon, and ps4 will probably also have something that looks like that. But then you can already simulate a lot of dx11 features on the Spu of the cell if im not mistaken.

 

[kinggroin]

Perhaps a mix of all three?

I'm not sure Crytek is interested in pushing the PC platform to its limits ala Crysis 1 as that actually resulted in a lot of headaches for them at the time.

Also, I think PC gamers have grown accustomed to high framerates and great image quality so releasing a game that really pushes PC hardware to its limits would result in a lot of compromise on the performance/image quality end. When Crysis was first released nobody was playing at 60 fps and a lot of people had to drop the resolution well below that of their monitors.

If a PC game is released that routinely dips below 30 fps even at modest resolutions what sort of reaction would it receive, I wonder?

Its a trade off I touched upon, Dark. I find myself struggling with it too. On the one end, i'd love to see what a game that makes my 680 scream, look like. Having a new, "but can it run xxx?" means we have a game that keeps giving as we progress with hardware.

On the other end, I think we're almost at a point of diminishing returns, and really appreciate the extra horsepower in my PC going towards giving me insane image quality and a matching framerate to boot.

 

[cgcg]

..
I mean, watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glqeaaxZ7kM&hd=1

That's pretty god damned smooth, if you ask me. Sure, it's not as detailed as the PC version, but it still holds up very well and proves that the original Crysis was not too ambitious for dated console hardware.

It looks running at a constant sub-30fps in that video. You might've been fooled by the motion blur?

I mean look at this one. The fps gets pretty awful in both versions.

http://www.eurogamer.net/videos/crysis-gameplay-performance-analysis

 

[RoboPlato]

Crysis on the 360 (not played or seen the PS3 version) is fantastic. Certainly felt more smoother than Crysis 2 and considering some of the setpieces (The mountain collapse,The alien ship and the warship battle) and the sheer size of the island i can only applaud Crytek for bringing it over.

That's why when people are talking shit about consoles potentially holding back the third game i invite them to if they can lower themselves to such debased activity to go and play at least the 360 version if they can, and be pleasantly surprised.

I always suspected porting Crysis this late was a test to see just how big they can make the stages in Crysis 3 and the reveal of that game certainly shows which direction they are taking it.

And why i have no worries about how big the game can be.

The PS3 version of Crysis did have some pretty big framerate issues, particularly in the final fight and when zooming in with the binoculars. Still, Crytek said that it was a test for improvements to make to the engine so they may have been able to smooth those out for 3.

 

[pottuvoi]

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

These pretty much describe the whole thing.
http://www.slideshare.net/DICEStudio/spubased-deferred-shading-in-battlefield-3-for-playstation-3
http://www.slideshare.net/DICEStudio/bending-the-graphics-pipeline

The third one. You now have 3 graphics api to work with.
Direct X 9,DirectX11 and not sure what ps3 uses i believe a low level version of opengl or something that is derived from it.

Most games on ps3 use LibGCM and it has nothing to do with opengl.

On pc if you do not target windows xp you can drop dx9 completely as DX11 allows different paths to SM3, SM4 and SM5 class hardware.

New console means pc and next xbox probably can make use of the same graphics api Dx11 or probably dx11.1 i dont see a dx12 appearing sometime soon, and ps4 will probably also have something that looks like that. But then you can already simulate a lot of dx11 features on the Spu of the cell if im not mistaken.

DX12 and/or shader model 6 comes late 2013 or early 2014 with a next generation of GPUs.

 

[dark10x]

It looks running at a constant sub-30fps in that video. You might've been fooled by the motion blur?

I mean look at this one. The fps gets pretty awful in both versions.

http://www.eurogamer.net/videos/crysis-gameplay-performance-analysis

Not fooled. The motion blur helps a lot and looks fantastic.

The framerate is not consistent, but it is rather reasonable considering the game in question. When the game was originally released it was common for the game to run slower than this even on powerful (at the time) hardware.

I feel like people are really trying to minimize the achievement there. It's not perfect, but it runs smoother than Crysis 2 did on 360 while demonstrating that the open world of the original Crysis was not compromised for consoles alone.

 

[ii Stryker]

It's hit or miss, though. The enemies do not always act in that way.

Part of the problem is that they are often wildly inconsistent.

Poor AI is what ruins games if this ilk. And regardless of whether the AI in C2 is garbage, wildly inconsistent or piss poor the fact remains that the AI needs to be greatly improved in C3.

C1 had better AI then C2 imo.

But i sincerely hope they work to build upon the multiplayer. I really enjoyed C2 MP intensely for a short period of time but the netcode didn't feel consistent, the map rotation was broken, the party system was unstable, and the fact that they didn't incorporate ALL the DLC maps into the main playlists was an epic fail on Cryteks part and the main reason I passed on the last map pack.
Hopefully Crytek will add all of C2's maps to the new maps in C3.

 

[Elsolar]

"Does it run at more than 20 FPS this time? What? They added even more graphical bullshit? Uhhh....