What is Digg?108 Comments
- 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, -18/+68Pft PCs? I'm happy with the whole 3 games on my Mac.
- fatcat, on 10/12/2007, -3/+49they probally are going to make a watered down version for the 360 and the PS3
- 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...
- oGMo, on 10/12/2007, -6/+27"Crytek can't handle fine-tuned coding for consoles" -PS3,Xbox 360
- AngryBacon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18You want pathetic? My old computer couldn't run cs 1.6 smoothly.
Damn intel integrated graphics.... - 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. - 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. - Portside, on 10/12/2007, -7/+22Wow, your computer must really suck. Even my laptop runs CS:S smootlhy.
- 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.
- thebusdriver, on 10/12/2007, -3/+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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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 - inactive, 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. - 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.
- 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.
- inactive, 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 - 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.) - 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 - cyssero, on 04/18/2009, -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. - asskey, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14OpenGL anyone...
- 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...
- pillfred, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8"bitches" will alyways be cool.
- 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." - 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). - kingkilr, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10DX10 is also hardware, you may have noticed these things called graphics cards.
- Ignignokt01, on 10/12/2007, -3/+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.
- MrBrightside, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6the game does look fantastic though!
- 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.
- 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"
- 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.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5BTW.... when are DX10 cards due out for desktop and notebook versions???
- 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 - 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.) - IcyStorm, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7@ daza
You mean G80 and R600. - 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.
- 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.
- 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. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4would be like trying to build a pc in spec for Duke Nukem Forever
- themacx, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5and most expensive
- 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
- 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?
- NinjAlt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I dont understand how this is a good thing.
- 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.
- cyssero, on 04/18/2009, -0/+3IcyStorm -
Yes I do. I have no idea where those 9's came from. My mistake! =/ - 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 - 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 -
Show 51 - 100 of 108 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is