digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

"PS3, Xbox 360 Can't Handle Crysis" - Crytek

joystiq.com — "Some news slipped out during the Leipzig convention in Germany that Crytek senior game designer Bernd Diemer said their upcoming first-person shooter Crysis was too über for the next-generation consoles -- the 360 and PlayStation 3 specifically." He cited lack of DX10 as a primary reason.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • cody50, on 10/12/2007, -136/+10why are they making it then if there is nothing to play it on?
    • truspector, on 10/12/2007, -7/+109@cody
      There are these new things called PCs. You may have seen one before.
    • titlesaysitall, on 10/12/2007, -19/+68Pft PCs? I'm happy with the whole 3 games on my Mac.
    • cody50, on 10/12/2007, -12/+53From All i've been hearing, the PS3 is a PC practically anyway.
    • pbjorge12, on 10/12/2007, -9/+40A PC without Direct X 9 let alone 10...
    • twtmc, on 10/12/2007, -15/+22I have the feeling that this game is going to be all graphics and lack that fun gameplay. Higher requirements means less people will be able to play it, which means that as far as online play goes, it will pretty well be dead.

      Besides, it doesn't seem to be sporting anything really state of the art for a fps game other then the amazing graphics that like 1% of PCs can run. If they were smarter, they would introduce something crazy that would change the face of play (Portal is a great example of that. If you are waiting for this game, you cannot say that you are not completely stoked about portal).
    • eplawless, on 10/12/2007, -9/+24I got really bored with Far Cry really quickly, because I played it right after playing through HL2. If your game can't be run on the PS3, then you're not going to be targeting a large market; few people have computers more capable than a PS3.
    • asskey, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14OpenGL anyone...
    • daza, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12I don't know, eplawless -

      Purchasing a DirectX 10 card is going to be *far* cheaper than purchasing a PS3. Windows Vista will be encouraging a lot of DX10 purchases too. The G90 and R900 are also just around the corner - likely before the release of PS3.
    • Ignignokt01, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10The consoles can't keep up with the increasing rate of hardware turnout and graphical advancement. A decade ago, a graphics card would last you 4 years. Nowadays, you'd be lucky if it lasts you a year (that is if you always want to be able to play the new games, most people like myself just wait a while longer until prices drop down). But the consoles are being released at the same 3-4 year interval. Hence why Nintendo's vision of having consoles be more focused on fun gameplay rather than graphics makes much more sense and will prove completely true within the next few years. Mark my words, in another 2 years the PS3's graphics will look like crap, and it will still be at least a year or two until Sony or Microsoft releases their next console.
    • NeoTechni, on 10/12/2007, -19/+3"A PC without Direct X 9 let alone 10..."

      Do linux PCs have directx?
    • IcyStorm, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7@ daza
      You mean G80 and R600.
    • daza, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3IcyStorm -
      Yes I do. I have no idea where those 9's came from. My mistake! =/
    • rebrad, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2But will it run on a Mac?
    • jasonuher, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1@StatusQuoRules

      Apparently you haven't read any of the white papers on the cell/PS3, the whole /point/ of the cell architecture is to offload processing from the GPU into the cells. They can be reprogrammed to do anything, unlike your silly graphics hardware which is hardwired into a specific function, SIMD architecture ftw.
    • c0uchm0nster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@jasonuher - do you realise you just said the PS3 is great because it takes graphics work away from the GPU and puts it on the CPU? (you know, like the exact opposite of the creation/purpose of GPUs in the first place)... yeah... next thing you're going to tell me is the PS3 is great because it's GPU can process spreadsheets like no ones business.

      I'd also like to mention that the whole reason GPUs and other specialized processors are created is so they can do one thing very very efficiently, instead of (like a cpu) do everything OK.
    • jasonuher, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@c0uchm0nster
      "do you realize you just said the PS3 is great because it takes graphics work away from the GPU and puts it on the CPU?"

      That's exactly what I said, I'm glad you can read. Apparently you're the guy that dugg down Galileo when he said the solar system was heliocentric: "I KNOW IM RIGHTS AND YOU ARE WRONGS! EVERYONE SAYS SO!" The latest benchmarks show that the cell architecture vastly outperforms standard GPU's, even when using code optimized for linear processors (like the GPUs). The whole /point/ of the cell's MIMD arrangement is to do /just that/. You're spouting what is generally held to be a true assumption (dedicated hardware is faster) without a basic understanding of the underlying concepts. IBM has released several papers and demonstrations regarding the cell architecture that have nothing to do with the PS3, but certainly have applications there, that talk about the cell's ability to handle a graphics pipeline better than dedicated hardware. Can you show me a GPU that can do ray tracing at 70FPS in real time? The cell can do it.
      You know why? Because the architecture was designed that way. Do a little research on a subject before you go spouting off (incorrect) conventional wisdom.

      It is faster, period.

      Also, I think the PS3 is going to be crap for lack of games, but the hardware will definately be capable.
  • fatcat, on 10/12/2007, -3/+49they probally are going to make a watered down version for the 360 and the PS3
    • gregharmon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Remember that it's not so much that the Xbox 360 and PLAYSTATION 3 aren't powerful enough; It's mostly because of the fact that they don't support DirectX 10 which means they would drastically have to recode for those systems. It would be like creating three different games, almost.

      I'm not saying that those systems are just as powerful as next gen DirectX 10 video cards will be - I'm just saying that I think it's more of a coding / software issue rather than hardware performance issue.
    • estvir, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Not supporting DX10 doesn't matter, haven't ALL public demonstrations to date being running in DX9 for the most part ?

      The 360 also supports PARTS of DX10.

      I doubt Crysis won't make an appearance on either X360 or PS3, and I bet both will look freaking good.
    • StatusQuoRules, on 10/12/2007, -9/+4Does the ps3 even support dx9? I would think it would be opengl seeing as DX is Microsofts thing


      The 360 can look better seeing as it can do HDR + FSAA because it has ATI hardware :) (nvidia in ps3 can't do this)
    • keesj, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4in an interview the guy behind Crytek told there isn't a console version planned because for some reason he doesn't like consoles. Although he also said in the future they _might_ make a console version.
  • thebusdriver, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15Its too uber is current form perhaps, as a direct port. But you can damn well bet theyre working on a version for both PS3 and 360, might not look as pretty but thats consoles for you.
    • Wooism, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4"Some news slipped out during the Leipzig convention in Germany that Crytek senior game designer Bernd Diemer said their upcoming first-person shooter Crysis was too über for the next-generation consoles -- the 360 and PlayStation 3 specifically." He cited lack of DX10 as a primary reason."


      "too uber" = Poor coding
    • spidoman, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1too uber = The Xbox 360 can't even play Dead Rising without over heating.
    • ScionX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@spidoman

      I've played Dead Rising on my launch 360 for 12+ hrs some days & it doesn't get any hotter than normal. Hell, it seems like Oblivion still gets it hotter than DR.
  • Paroparo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10I wouldn't be suprised if they're saying it just to make the platforms they're not developing for look bad. Kind of like the "Resistance/FFXIII can't be made on other than PS3 omg omg!!!1" stuff.
  • gxcdesign, on 10/12/2007, -15/+24so I have to invest like another 1300 dollars just to play a 50 dollar game....

    borderline pathetic...I just barely can run CS:S
    • Portside, on 10/12/2007, -7/+22Wow, your computer must really suck. Even my laptop runs CS:S smootlhy.
    • AngryBacon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18You want pathetic? My old computer couldn't run cs 1.6 smoothly.

      Damn intel integrated graphics....
    • IcyStorm, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2How can you barely run CS:S... ? The Source engine is highly flexible and will even run smoothly on integrated video...
    • mrmidgetman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"You want pathetic? My old computer couldn't run cs 1.6 smoothly.

      Damn intel integrated graphics...."

      wtf? the 7 year old laptop i found at the dump and fixed can run 1.6. Are you trying 1.6 or CS:CZ. CS:CZ is a LOT more demanding even thought its not too much different.
  • oGMo, on 10/12/2007, -6/+27"Crytek can't handle fine-tuned coding for consoles" -PS3,Xbox 360
    • Phyltre, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12As spinnish as it sounds, that's probably true. The mindset for consoles is different, you don't need as much scalability and turn-this-off-or-on stuff.
    • wurzelgummage, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1"Fine tuned" meaning "locked to 30fps"
    • SL33PY, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5CryTek's previous title Far Cry was known to have "Rubbish" code. They hacked most features in.
  • StevenSank, on 10/12/2007, -6/+18Guess Sony should start on the PS4, and Microsoft on the Xbox 720, seeing as how "next-gen" is "obsolete" already. Isn't hardware suppose to come before software, I think we have hit some crazy parallel here.
    • GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4It's not about hardware DX10 is software and it would be possible to make a current card run DX10. It's just no company is going to make the effort making drivers to handle DX10 because that would stop you buying their new cards.

      Really all this talk about DX10 cards is just another way of getting you to part with your money. DX10 is more a house cleaning act and evolution rather than anything spectacular.
  • gxcdesign, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7The question is...what was he using to show off the demo?
    • Ignignokt01, on 10/12/2007, -13/+2DIGG THIS DOWN


      . for some reason it didn't display this reply i made until I made the second one.
    • Ignignokt01, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5A high powered PC? They've probably got one with two (or perhaps four, google 'quad-core nvidia') high end nvidia cards in SLI mode. PS3 can't compete, sadly, with the current top-of-the-line Nvidia set ups. but then again, having quad core would probably run you well over $1000 for just the graphics cards alone.
  • SuperGhost, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Now imagine what kind of systems they're using to develop the game. Game + Development environment...
  • CaptainOne, on 10/12/2007, -7/+8Maybe they should wait until they actually release the game before making comments like that. This game may never even see the light of day... for PCs or consoles.
    • mem2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4would be like trying to build a pc in spec for Duke Nukem Forever
  • Pharaoh777, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13So DirectX10, software, is what's keeping you from developing for the PS3 or 360. Sounds like they could handle Crysis fine (or far better than any current PC) if the right development tools were available - or they were better coders...
    • kingkilr, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10DX10 is also hardware, you may have noticed these things called graphics cards.
    • Ignignokt01, on 10/12/2007, -8/+5The console gamers just don't get it. They try to convince themselves that the 'next-gen' systems will be able to handle a game that was for the most part designed NOT to be limited by hardware, which is exactly what every console has ever done to a game. There will most likely be a Port, but it won't look as good or have as detailed physics as its PC counterpart running on a high-end rig. But hey, you probably saved lots of money by not buying expensive computer hardware.
    • NeoTechni, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13"They try to convince themselves that the 'next-gen' systems will be able to handle a game that was for the most part designed NOT to be limited by hardware, which is exactly what every console has ever done to a game"

      Every PC game has been limited by hardware AND software
      Developers try to cater to the lowest hardware they could possibly work with to maximize target audience,
      And then developing for multiple hardware configurations (for PC) is less efficient than developing for a single configuration (a console)
      Then there is the OS which takes a large chunk of the PCs resources.

      DirectX is just API for developers to use, the game could easily be ported to 360's DirectX 9 or PS3s OpenGL. He's just too lazy to remake the Dx10 API which doesn't have an equivalent on Dx9/OpenGL
    • Ignignokt01, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Oh look, I'm getting dugg down. I'm not saying PC's are better than consoles. I would go as far to say that PC gaming is far too expensive and complicated for the casual person who just wants to take a break and enjoy a fun videogame. However, the truth is: this game was designed for the next generation of PC hardware. You will most likely get a port for the PS3, but it will be somewhat scaled down in the graphics department. This probably won't affect the amount of fun you'll get the from the game, and you'll still be dropping your jaws at how awsome it looks. (because compared to most people's stuff today, the PS3 is quite jaw dropping). However, it is also true that right now you could actually buy a PC system that is already much more powerful than the PS3.

      Digg me down, but thats the truth. The next gen consoles will still be awsome, but don't go crying when a PC game has to get ported to a console. It happens all the time and usually you don't even care (Oblivion, anyone? Looks great on the Xbox360 right? But it still can't achieve the maximum graphics on a high end PC.)
    • geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9"DX10 is also hardware, you may have noticed these things called graphics cards."

      'fraid I have noticed them, and I can still tell you, DX10 is still Software. Those things you mentioned, graphics cards, they're /computers/, they have /instruction sets/ which are programmed by (you guessed it) software. The piece of software responsible for interfacing the chip with the computer is called the "driver", and is where most of the DirectX10 implementation lies. You see, programs (like games) pass instructions to the video card via DirectX. The driver then takes those DirectX instructions and turns them into native hardware instructions. Then the graphics card executes that code.

      Hardware can be DirectX 10 /compliant/ by having the right kind of hardware on board to make it easy for DirectX to program the video card. However, the implementation of this hardware can vary wildly, and that's why video cards from different companies and different generations have different abilities. In all likelihood, most of the video cards that exist today meet some, if not most of the requirements for DirectX 10 compatibility. The problem is, Microsoft doesn't allow for partial solutions, and it's either a DX10 part, or not. (Meanwhile, OpenGL allows for "Extensions" which means that if your video card has the capabilities, and there's an OpenGL Extension for that capability, then OpenGL can pass that instruction to your video card and rest assured it will be executed. This isn't necessarily better or worse than DirectX, it's just different.)
  • Robyr, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18Funny, heres their angle:
    We can't code without helpers, so the PS3 and XBOX suck!

    DirectX isn't THAT friggin important. The PS3 and Xbox aren't as powerful as most people seem to want to think they are, so there still may be alot of truth, but blaming DX not being available is borderline rediculous.
  • awgneo, on 10/12/2007, -7/+6I am glad to see the PC continue to be a strong gaming platform.
  • reddevil3, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Even though I prefer gaming on consoles, PCs will always be ahead of consoles when it comes to technical prowess.
    • Ignignokt01, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Hence why Sony's huge drive to make a graphical powerhouse in the form of an affordable game console is just not going to work. If you /really/ care about graphics in your video games, you'll get a job and buying a high end PC. If you just want to have fun and not spend an assload of money, buy a console. Now by that logic, the PS3 becomes even more ridiculous. I would bet large quantities of money that the Wii will come out as the most entertaining console of this next generation of consoles, simply because Nintendo has gotten their act together and gotten developers to make NEW games, and not just new games, but new games with new styles of playing altogether. Plus its just so goddamn affordable, that everyone will buy one, and then even more developers will hop on the bandwagon because they know how huge the Wii market share of gamers is.

    • crimsonalucard, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3ok enough about the wii. The system doesn't even stand a chance running crysis.
  • Darth, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11Getting bored? Read some comments - http://news.teamxbox.com/comments/11651/Crytek-Next-Gen-Consoles-Are-Too-Weak-for-Crysis/

    "Gears of War looks better than Crysis visually"

    "AND THIS LINK is why pc Hammer Legion Member developpers who are totally ignorant and stupid like Crytek developpers know absolutely nothing."

    "I'm not that interested in it anyway. I haven't followed it at all."

    "they can take this game and shove it up there a** if all i care"

    "Crysis will get ported over to the 360, and the 360 will eventually support DX 10 games via an update over XBOX Live"

    "the moment they realize that their profit is not that great coming from the pc... they'll port it over and find a way... just a matter of time."
    • chromium, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11"Crysis will get ported over to the 360, and the 360 will eventually support DX 10 games via an update over XBOX Live"

      http://digg.com/gaming_news/No_DirectX_10_for_Xbox_360
    • Harbinger67, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18""Crysis will get ported over to the 360, and the 360 will eventually support DX 10 games via an update over XBOX Live""

      Lmao, upgrading to dx10 over xbox live? What, they can send entire microchips through the tubes now? Someone call Teddy and let him know his staff internets are going to be a few more days late.
  • TheElectricFox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5BTW.... when are DX10 cards due out for desktop and notebook versions???

    • Harbinger67, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I've heard 4th quarter 06...can anyone confirm that?
    • Rickler, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"The G80 is expected to be released anywhere from October to November of 2006."
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_8

      Doubtful though; they're useless without Vista. Vista's speculated release is January 30th 2007.
  • kazem, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Sadly, I think that the Crytek games are mostly a display of the current state of the art of coding and graphical output, not gameplay. From what I understand, the FarCry demo was about as fun as you get with that game. It kind of felt like you were in a movie. But the game itself got boring fast, which is a shame with an engine like that. I can only assume that the same is true for Crysis.
    • WillDearborn, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3FarCry got boring fast? What are you talking about? It is a very hard game, maybe thats why you got bored. It's definitely one of my personal favorites. You do have to be stealthy and not just run through it like a lot of other games out there, but if you can't handle that then maybe you shouldn't be playing it after all.
    • pillfred, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I agree far cry was a bitch and that's why i didn't try and finish beating it after i had to reinstall. I will if i can keep off DOD for long enough. I do think though that it is a graphically nice game, it's too bad they didn't stick with the engine a bit more like with hl2.
    • crimsonalucard, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"from what I understand"

      Okay. Don't even comment on farcry unless you actually played the game. Both the gameplay and the graphics were revolutionary.
  • Araxen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Very late this year or very early next year usually around Feb.
  • Splitt3rxx, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I wonder if this could play crysis
    http://www.nvidia.com/page/quadroplex.html
    • Harbinger67, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Probablly not very well, if at all. That system is designed for professional graphics applications, not for running 1600x1200 HDR'd games. Those uber graphics systems/cards and the stuff consumers use are vastly different in their capabilities and purposes.
    • Rickler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5It can't play Crysis. It does not have directx10. In fact it would play CSS like ***** too because it would use software directx.
    • Sukino, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1FarCry will run on DirectX 9 as well...
  • Aldrenean, on 10/12/2007, -5/+42 things:
    a) Direct link: http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/11651/Crytek-Next-Gen-Consoles-Are-Too-Weak-for-Crysis/
    and b) Suck it, console users! :P
  • Strd, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Well, in past, when hardware could'n handle the game it was called "bad design", not "the game is too uber for hardware"
  • diggthiscrap, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Aren't you guys glad we stuck with the PC? DX10, bitches :)

    Sorry, you can digg me down for being lame. Can I still use "bitches" or whats the new fad word these days?
  • Gunblade, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Great.....unless they add a mouse to the PS3 or Xbox 360 then I would really be dissapointed. The only thing I am impressed about with their new title is the jungle fighting. However the aliens are lame, was anyone else un-impressed when he fought the alien thing on the deck of the aircraft carrier? I sure as hell was.

    Also with gaming computers these days it is getting harder and harder to build them on your own and save well... up to 1,000 bucks. Every recent machine I have built for friends/family for office using Intel np. But when it comes to the top of the line AMD chips, Mobo's and graphics card there is just rampant issues that have to many troubleshooting options. Crashes here, slowdowns there... etc.

    How about they just build a solid stable game that all gamers will love to play. Down to the guys who are still on MX440's.

    Why do you think steam is so popular. They innovate but everyone can still play. I know crytek is into new technology but in my opinion PC Gamers appreciate games like Americas Army, CS, Half-Life and RTS's more. Because everyone can play online or at a lan. I mean BF2 has a smaller community than BF1942 does....for more than just hardware reasons though
    • pillfred, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I agree they should make games so that they at-least, play and look decent on most any fairly current machine(3-5 years.) Why do you people think things don't last like they used to? It's because if it still worked fine two years down the road why would you; basically need to, buy a new one?
  • MrBrightside, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6the game does look fantastic though!
  • Kelmon, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4It is entirely possible that I missed something here but why should we care about this news? What will Crysis bring that the 17,000 other FPS don't already? If the only "thing" that Crysis is going to bring is pretty graphics then I really don't care that it's not coming to the consoles and I will not be upgrading my PC to handle it either. Personally, I'm fed up of games that constantly try to look more impressive than others but doesn't actually deliver a new experience. Frankly, the last "new" FPS that I played was Call of Duty when you started to feel like you were part of a team rather than as some sort of uber super soldier. Half Life 2 just put me to sleep...

    I just wish that developers would focus on something other than graphics these days. This is why I don't have time for super graphics cards, PS3s or 360s and am pinning my gaming hopes on the Wii - here's hoping that it delivers fun.
    • Ignignokt01, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Um, mowing down trees with a machine gun sounds pretty damn exciting... maybe its just me. /sarcasm
  • Yokai, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2well duh. Any noob would know that DX10 PC games will pwn this gen's consoles. Thats just the way life goes.
  • maxinux, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4yeah? They cant code it for the XB360 or PS3 and they said it will not run on both of them.
    Do they expect us to upgrade our PCs or buy a new one and waste a 1000 to play one game. What a dump, they just kill any chance that people will buy this game.
  • themacx, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2On GigaTv (German game program) he said it's not possible for consoles for they(the crysis team) are NOT making it for a console, it's just a technical thing with some adjustments it would be perfectly able too run on 360 and PS3, after that the reporter asked him about EA and he said they where talking with them and possibly more, so it's VERY likely that EA or an other group will make the console version, it's all about money.... but a scoop for some there will me a MOD pack included on release, so modding will be possible from day one!. On system specs the are programming two years backwards and 1.5 years ahead so when it comes this winter a 2004 PC should be able to run it.. just. Also if you want the full frame rate and prettiness then you'll need Vista and DX10, it's optimized just for that, so be prepared to shed your cash.
  • Nekurakun, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Not every PC will be able to support Crysis, either...
    Funny comic about it: http://www.gucomics.com/archives/view.php?cdate=20060726
    • doolittle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2That's great, reminds me of when I got the original farcry - I got the huge zalman dual-heatpipe vga cooler for my 9800pro and overclocked it 40% and was able to play on medium with good frames!
  • Volkor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I don't understand why people make games that only a select group of users can actually play :S
    • TimDigg, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Don't worry we'll let you come over and play every now and then...


      kidding...
    • Volkor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I forgot to mention that I happen to lie within that select group of people :D
    • Ignignokt01, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Because it sets the new standard. If no graphics intensive games ever came out, you would never see a gradual improvement in graphics in video games. We would still be playing 8-bit sidescrollers.
    • Volkor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm not saying they shouldn't be new, I'm saying that they should move one step behind the video hardware, rather than being right at the cutting edge.
  • TimDigg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6This is why I like consoles...its not about graphics its about gameplay

    I played the toned down version of Half life 2 on xbox...still a damn good game

    same with Resident Evil 4 on PS2
    • tokyopimp, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Yeah, because Far Cry and HL2, and tons of great looking games on the PC have crappy gameplay.

  • n8r0n, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Doesn't bother me, I don't play FPS on consoles anyway. Nor do I update my GFX card just to play one game. I wait it out until I cannot play any of the new games anymore, then I upgrade. Hell I am still running a ATI 9600 Pro.
  • jmdajr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I can live without this game.....

    no upgardes for me...
  • RyomaNagare, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4While its been true for a long time now that gaming has boosted the hardware requirements, and its also true that no console can match up to a "next-gen" PC, This article reeks of poor coding on Crytek hand.
    on a pure economical point of view, is just stupid to make a game with stupid hardware requirements, the technology to program a game with stupid poly counts stupid high res textures, and stupid effects has been around for a long time, most companies will then "choose" to make realistic games that a lot of players can enjoy, and not this über thing that no one will remember 4 years from now, its a little like doom3, does anyone remember all the hype, and new hardware upgrades, for a game that seriously was not worth it.

    I used to be an over-clocker, always buying the latest vidcard, and fine-tuning my ram and CPU speed to play games on the PC. eventually as I matured, I grew tired, now if i want to play a game, i just pop it in a console and forget about it, i still have this crappy old PC (once top of the line) and I'm still happy with it, things are. GFX are not worth the trouble.
  • saqibnk, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1im not too worried about the system reqs....only thing is getting vista....i was able to run oblivion and call of duty 2 using my 9700 Pro, both at 1024x768...which may not seem very high but it still looked better than anything on my ps2
    • drake546, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Now, try playing them both in widescreen on a 40" lcd. Both support it nativly too. :D



      Makes me sad whenever i buy a game and it dont do widescreen. :(
  • NinjAlt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I dont understand how this is a good thing.
  • Clockw0rk, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2I'd just like to tell every person who doesn't know how to build or price a PC that I was able to put together a dual core system with a graphics card that will play half life 2. For under 500 dollars.

    Let me repeat that.

    dual core, 80 GB of hard drive space, gig of ram, modern gaming graphics card. Case, PSU, monitor, keyboard, mouse, speakers. For under 500 dollars.

    That, my friends, is why the PS3 is *****.

    You can also build a -monster- gaming PC these days for under 1,500 dollars.

    Anyone who believes they need to drop two thousand bucks on a gaming rig is living in the late 90s. Wake up and get educated.

    Once the DX10 viable cards are on market, you'll be able to build a machine that smokes both 360 and PS3 for under a thousand. And you'll be able to use it as an actual web browsing, email sending, instant messaging, movie playing, content downloading machine. Unlike the half-ass PCs that the 'next-gen' is trying to be.
    • jmdajr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2how much did each part cost?
    • addicted68098, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3You don't buy PC's to play games, you buy PC's to number crunch, PC gaming is becoming more and more of a joke and isn't worth paying even $500 on a PC you will have to upgrade every two years to play the 1 or 2 worth-buying PC titles that come out every year, which always happen to be strategy and some half-ass shooter. Not only that but you can only get 60% of PC games to work on one system at a time.

      If you are 12 years old and only use your computer for kazzoing (kazza or how ever they spell it, its been so long) and FPS, you probably have a problem. Most good PC games arn't power hungry.
    • tokyopimp, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Ya know how many years, I've been hearing that PC gaming is becoming a joke. Forever, everytime new consoles come out, there are tons of people going. PC gaming is dead, or a joke. Consoles are now just as powerful.

      If it's such a joke, why would Crytek, or Epic, or Id create these games, and engines? Why would people spend 15 dollars a month playing MMORPGs? Show me a game like Crysis, that has the enviroments of Crysis, the open ended gameplay, and the graphics on a console? Where can I play a game like Rome Total War, or Civ 4 on a console? Where can I play the online games that consoles lack?

      If I have a PC, and use my PC for nearly everything I do, why not get a nice graphics card to enjoy great games? I am about to spend 500 dollars on upgrades to my PC, that I'll use for at least two years, and be able to play nearly every game that comes out. And get other things I do done faster.

      Or I could spend 500 on a PS3 and have a huge paperweight.
  • nooreazy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1http://www.crytek.com/inside_crytek/item.php?id=42&s=jobs&pID=4

    ammm sooo if they make a sequel with lower GFX isnt that murder?
  • Zreitan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3who cares? where's Spore? that's all i care about...and ill be running it in OpenGL thank you...
  • Ark7, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Eat it, console fanboys. The PC will always offer the top-of-the-line gaming experience.
  • Jarett, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I give it a year before you're able to preorder this for PS3.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.