@gbaturin I hope when you say 'nobody' you only meant about yourself. Cuase the rating given to your comment hints that. ;)
Crysis company says it does "not have any next generation hardware from Microsoft"; focused on bringing DX11 update to Crysis 2.
Earlier this week, a rumor linked German developer Crytek with Microsoft's next generation of hardware. The report--citing a "high-ranking" source at Crytek--said that the Xbox 360 successor would likely be announced at E3 2012 and that it would feature DirectX 11 integration. However, today the company is saying it has no knowledge of Microsoft's future technology.
According to a Crytek statement obtained by GameSpot, Crytek does "not have any next generation hardware from Microsoft" and has no idea when the Xbox maker will announce its future console plans.
Crytek did, however, offer word concerning the next generation of consoles. The German shop said its CryEngine under-the-hood technology--based on its estimates--will be a "next generation engine for all consoles."
As for what Crytek is up to at the moment, the statement said the developer is currently focused on "pushing the boundaries of what current technology can bring" and will "shortly" release a DX11 update for Crysis 2.
Guys check this out AKA Crysis 2 http://www.mycrysis.com/dx11#
@ClaudiusCaesar, piece of s**t which PS3 is having a hard time surpassing in terms of sales you fanboy.
I doubt the next gen consoles will be anything too shocking. Faster CPU, more cores, more RAM, more powerful graphics. DX11 or DX12. @Sk8rlink, they don't need to re-write their engine, they just need to crank up the detail settings, and add support for any new APIs. MS will want to keep it backward compatible as much as possible, so it's probably just going to be a more powerful version of the 360.
I say that they are probably wrtiting a new engine as we speak for the new xbox and PS4, obviously they can't say so, but if the don't start now, they will never get it done for realeases around 2013-14, as of now I think Frostbite 2 is the best game engine, of course it's speculative as BF3 is not out, but it looks amazing in the E3 demos, amazing graphics, awesome physics and destructable enviroments. What I've been wondering is if the consoles will be able to handle it, or if consoles will stick to frostbite 1.5
really......cmon guys.....ea we know u gave us a chicken s**t game called crysis 2......i mean it insults the first game on so many levels......and a dx 11 patch......now we pc gamers know wat u did wid d da2 dx 11 patch.....it was rubbish......dudes where's our dedicated graphics engine for the pc?......dont tell me i saved up my money so that i can crossfire 2 6870hd......so that it can play dis game titled crysis 2.....which i did btw nd was devastated......please can we stop wid d console porting ea.....develop separate game engines....dat way optimization will also be better such that low end pcs can run it on low settings easily......please do not give us that piracy horse s**t.....u already s***wd us wid fifa .....DO NOT take away our crown jewel from us......and degrade it to console standards....u have absolutely no right to treat us like that.....and yeah console games get pirated just the same.......and most pc gamers still buy originals.........so please this time really bring out a dx 11 patch that is worthy of atleast salvaging some reputation of the first 2 crysis games that redefined pc gaming.....
Nobody trusts Crytek anymore, after the stunt they pulled on us with Crysis 2. Everything they claim or deny has lost credibility. Thumbs down if you work for Crytek.
@munnybag5 "Your comment would probably be more effective if you weren't half illiterate. Just a thought." i was wondering how many laguage can you speak? i went to europe for 3 Month whitout any base in spanish and german a very litle base in english and now i can speak a good english(ppl understand when i speak at least)and write a "bad"english.i can talk a little spanish/italain(both is almost the same) and i speak a litle bit of german(i cant have a big discusion but i can ask many thing).and of course i speak and write perfectly my mother tougue:french...maybe i am half illiterate when it come to writing but i am not limited to englsih(i have nothing against ppl who only talk english i am not racist)
I think they are probably developing games to do with next gen consoles,but just cant say they are for legal reasons. As for what it supports?i don't really care,im sure it'll be good enough for consoles,and some of us who dont like,or dont understand pc gaming will make do.
Thanks for the corrections to my original post as it was typed up in less than 5 mins, as I was in a hurry to get to work. I'm personally very happy with consoles and you get a lot of bang for your buck, still but they are starting to show some age. I'm very happy that some companies, specifically EA, have started using the PC as the lead development platform so games such as Battlefield 3 look great for people who have capable computers. More or less I think its important that people know that when you read the 720p/1080p resolution on the back of your game that's only what its being "upscaled" to and not the native resolution ( at least the majority of the time ). I'm actually glad developers are limiting the resolution and focusing more stable framerates than higher resolutions but it is a tradeoff.
the game should of come with dx11 when it was released...... i stoped playing a while back now so seems a waste of time. @C4nnon i would say frostbite looks stunning at the moment.
actually Crysis and Warhead were so demanding from our hardwares but people please don't exaggerate it... yes I agree for playing it on ultra graphics setting and 60 fps you'll need a supercomputer even now. but playing it on optimized graphics setting (medium or high and maybe 30 to 40 fps) in that time was accessible and fun. Cry Engine is one of the best graphics engine and the best in physics. it has it's problems but I'm sure with more supports from fans they will be solved in future (like now we have it on consoles in lesser graphics and in future maybe it'll be less demanding and better). Main problem of Crysis is that maybe Crytech be one of the best game engine developer but obviously they're not very creative in game developing (crysis was boring after 3 or 4 hours pasts from beginning). And maybe it's better to Some creative game developers like PEOPLE CAN FLY develop crysis and other new IP with Cry Engine.
crytec has already voiced thier opinion on ho the nextgen console needs to have 8 Gb ram, which meens they want to have an opinion voiced to Microsoft and PS3 that they want better hardware.
DX11 update is too late for me. I've played the game as much as I ever will and I've now uninstalled it. Roll on BF3!
No matter how much cryteck visuals improve i would allways be a fan of cod engine... as it is the one that is bringing next gen gamplay even on normal machines.. Cryteck sould make its engine less resource eating and more performing can..
To: @Everybody It's. All. About. The. GAMES. When Crysis came out in 2007 all the HYPE was NOT about how FUN it would be. But, on how it would take most PC's at the time and 'drive them to their knees". "You're going to need a Super fast, liquid nitrogen cooled, multi-cored CPU with at least 2 GeForce7000+ or 2 ATI Radeon HD 2000+ XT Series Graphic cards, AND at LEAST 8 Gigs of RAM to even HOPE of running Crysis at DECENT settings!" As an IT Tech, I've custom built my own PC's for over a decade now. In 2007 my PC was an AMD Athlon 64 X2 3000+ with 2 Gigs of RAM and an ATI HD Radeon XT(mid-high range GPU). Cost me about $475 to personally put together. I was told that... "Crysis would be a slide show on my 20 inch monitor because my unit was LOW quality at the time." So I didn't buy Crysis then. The point I'm making, PEOPLE/FANs, is that there were other PC games that were rated about as high or HIGHER than Crysis by Professional game critics in 2007. Games like: The Orange Box, Bioshock, Call of Duty4, World In Conflict, and Command & Conquer 3 just to name a few. These games did not need a NASA Supercomputer to run them in 2007. My PC at the time ran these games at a decent framerate and all the effects turned on. OK, I'll admit I only ran at 1024 x 786 resolution, but it still looked awsome on my 20 inch PC screen. They were still FUN. At the end of the work day, it's all about how FUN the games are AND NOT the hardware specs. And that's the bottom line.
@omnimodis78 i do have a dx10 gtx260 and dx11 ati 5770 which both are priced at $150 each 2-3 yrs ago. So i did test those card on metro2033 (only true dx11 period), and my ati 5770 runing dx11 (tessellation on) at 16-23 fps. In the end i revert back to dx10 with 30-45 fps and i dont notice any significant difference other than tessellation is a resource hog. I love to get a new gpu gtx460 or ati 6870 but why does it cost $260 (70% increase) for a same midrange card 3 yrs ago. It seems like upgrading GPU have been getting more and more expansive each generation. The price of current GPU puts me in doubt for the future of graphic industry
@Frogman_7 Well put, even though a lot of those games are only 540p, or 720p at the most, it did make a big difference when comparing the clarity between PS3/360 and PS2/Xbox. I think a lot of devs said they could push 1080p, but the frame rate would suffer, therefore opting to go with a lower resolution, and better,more stable frame rate. These next consoles should be able to produce 1080p, along with 60fps, with no issues. I just hope the costs don't rise anymore, with companies having to grind harder to get these games to look great. That and the fact that a lot of devs won't be adjusted to the hardware at first, sorta like the first 360 games, like Perfect Dark Zero, which looked better than the games of the previous gen, but not by a wide margin.I'm happy with the way games look today but if they were to release a new console I would be interested for sure.
@gino_pachino: Your comment would probably be more effective if you weren't half illiterate. Just a thought.
What's wrong with the consoles we have now. I mean come on they have great graphics, online services and now they are all reliable. If anything I wish Sony and microsoft would hold off for a while. I wouldn't mind one but really what's wrong with the consolEs we have now.
Oh my oh my,so many thought out comments,well I'm on XP so I can't even have dx10,let alone 11,but I don't need it,I'm happy with dx9,some games run better on dx9,and the visual difference is minor. as far as dx10 goes for crysis.Also too bad that crysis 2 isn't a PC exclusive anymore
They should have made the sodding game in DX11 to begin with instead of half arsing it and releasing something based on XP technology, then fumbling about to tart it up at a later date, Crysis 2 was nowhere near the game it should have been
lol it funny to see how a comment whit sense get thumbs down that why i love getting thumbs down....the truth shock..:)anyway many cry here for stupid graphic the best game ever made most of the time got normal or bad..graphic:zelda ocarina of time metal gears series(only the 4 was whit good graph) final fantasy now it crap and it have good graphic...just square and enix now it crap not only ff...all the blizzard game...the fps i had the most fun whit pc c.s/unreal/bf2 when i was litle boy mario those game is real stuff. and other proof of what i am saying the wii is the console whit the most sale(i dont have a wii but it a fact wii got crappy graph and many sale)...
@Falmar That is what he said. They run at a custom resolution lower than 720p. However he said TVs already have 1080 and going ABOVE that, once again FOR TVs, is unnecessary at this point unless you have a huge freaking TV. Did you mean to reply to jmc88888? @Frogman_7 Add the @ infront of the name if you want them to know you are answering them. If you just put "to" they won't be notified. BTW I thought the 580GTX was more powerful than the 480GTX? I know the 590 is dual gpu, but thought 580 was single. @GodGundamNT1 "Now they claim to have the next gen xbox" Did you even read the article? They said they did not ~.~
@Frogman_7 Im sorry to dissapoint even more but CoD games -and this was already stated by IW about Modern Warfare 3- run both in xbox and ps3 at 540p resolution. Which means -mostly- that high def consoles are a bluff. Thats why everyone would like a next generation, the jump to 1080p and steady 60 fps would feel like the jump from psx to ps2
@GodGundamNT1 You didn't really read the article at all, did you? They aren't claiming they have the next gen Xbox hardware anywhere in the article. In fact, they debunked it as a rumor.
To jmc88888, First off 1080p gaming has yet to take off, on current gen systems ie ps3/xbox360 its actually rare to find a game that actually renders at 1080p most AAA titles like Call of Duty and Fable actually run at a custom resolution lower than that of 720p. Higher resolutions for TV's are very far off from taking off in the consumer market and for the most part they are completely unnecessary, adding more pixels at this point (unless you have an 80"+ TV) isn't going to making any noticable difference. Also the argument you could buy a 3.6ghz processor in 2001 is completely unsupportive of your claim. Processors really cant get any faster because of the speed that electrons pass in and out of logic gates and we've hit a limit on how fast they can reliably do that. However improvements in the speed of cache and instruction handling have speed up substantially over the years. On an old intel 386 processor it took 8 cycles to process a multiplication instruction it now takes only 1 on modern processors is just one example, so more is being done per cycle. I should also mention videocards have come a LONG way in the last decade. When the 360 came out the 7800 GTX the most powerful graphics card at the time had 302 million transistors, the most powerful single gpu the 580 GTX has over 3 billion and the performance boost is an obvious one. While cpus have seemingly slowed down, graphics cards have sped up substantially to account for increased gaming performance.
Crytek is desperate for attention, they made CryEngine 3 based on DirectX 9 only like CE2 was while DICE is making bold claims that their Frostbite 2 engine is completely "only Directx 11" based implying that the PC version will not run on any graphics card that is not a Dx11 compliant card. Now they claim to have the next gen xbox, it might be true but it could also be a ruse to get people into once again eating hype train subway and play the crappy console ports of Crysis 2.
@YoungSinatra25 Yea,its really sad that the company who always pushed PCs to its limits with great games like Crysis,Crysis Warhead and Far Cry 1 has completely sold itself out,and became another money hungry whore.Those were some of my fav games of all times,but now,we wont get anything that good from them for a long time,perhaps even never again :(
Plus when you consider that 1080 gaming is getting old, you have to wait until the whole 1600p, or 4k gets launched in earnest. THEN coupled with dx12 or 12.1 running the new unreal engine+ you have a next gen console capable setup. We're not there yet, and yes THAT would be considered 1 generation difference. People just don't realize that tech has not grown as fast as it did in the past. That's why in 2001 you could by a 3.6 ghz computer, and now you still buy ~ same...they've had to find OTHER routes to increase effectiveness, and all of them have been at a slower pace.....more cores, more optimized instructions, many generations of lithography to equal the benefits of what one used to bring, etc. Plus the games are getting so complex and time consuming that bad coding is the norm, and much of the power is wasted because of it. People just need to look at facts and realize unless you are nintendo with a crap last gen product with motion controls and both are crappy compared with your competitors you NEED to upgrade after a given time period. But sony and ms are doing fine with their tech. Plus they can hold on a bit by dropping their consoles prices. It would be a waste, all that time and effort, and money from a company and user wasted on a barely an upgrade. You want to play bf3 in dx11? Play on a pc.
Also why would any company want to launch an expensive console going INTO a depression? Wait until AFTER Glass-Steagall is passed, the takedown of the fraud is complete, and we start rebuilding. Seeing how that luckily corresponds with new tech finally achieving a 'generation' difference and hopefully the coders actually get better (because look at the difference between well coded 360 games and poorly coded ones, and better coders could still produce awesome results), it's in the best interests for companies to wait. Nintendo is going cheap route, using updated cheap components that will be slightly ahead, but severely behind when the next gen comes out from sony/ms a few years from now. But then again, maybe they ask their faithful to get a 3rd cheap route and only be slightly behind then? Hard to say. But nintendo has been a generation behind the whole generation, so it makes sense, with much risk due to economy, for them to put out a moderately priced system. If they charge more than 400, they're nuts.
There isn't much difference between dx10 and 11. Yeah there are SOME nice visuals. But if you think it's really a generational upgrade, I have some beach front property in Arizona, and some stock that will NEVER go down to sell you...like sino forest. You need a REAL upgrade, not something you can get with a 100 dollar vid card that almost matches a next gen console. Yeah let's all run out and buy something cheap that can be put into a computer. Dx11 is 1 1/2 years old. Yeah a console that is supposed to last a 5-10 years (not 10 as the leader ofc) is going to come out and use 3 year old tech by launch time? Makes no sense. You have to wait for the next leap, and we're not there yet. It needs to be dx12 or 12.1 at the least, utilizing at minimum the new unreal engine (for starters), otherwise you have a console no better than a current high end pc, and why in the hell would they do that? I repeat, there is NOT MUCH DIFFERENCE between xbox360 and dx11 on pc. Better AA and dx11 visuals like motion blur....oooohhh (not), although it is cool but c'mon..it isn't...give me a new console good. Who wants to pay another 4-600 for that when you can get it for much less on your pc with a vid card upgrade. Hell even a 5770 will give you that, albeit marginally. No way is anyone paying 400-600 bucks for a console that matches or barely exceeds that. No way can they make one for less.
@darkslayerM A new console is a waste? "xbox is perfect" The technology is old and showing it's age. Yeah sure when they came out the graphics were good but technology has advanced greatly since. If you compare to a pc (Not a fanboy), most of those graphics cards you cannot even use because they're to powerful, you can pay half the price and get similar results. While on the xbox it lags on games like Halo Reach. I don't think you understand this, if consoles update to current technology you'll be running Bf3 dx11 maxed instead of dx9 med with lag.
well of course they are going to say this.. its out out of fear of being sued.... I mean c'mon they did sign a "Non disclosure" agreement... so they have to say no...
@YoungSinatra25 Yes, it does make sense. It means that they focused on making the game work on all platforms instead of just one. Why were they supposed to spend all that time and effort for ~10% of their market? The game has sold near 2million on consoles. @Omnimodis78 "when the lowest common denominator dictates fiscal policies(i.e. game developers catering to consoles)" Even in the world of JUST PCs only about 23% of Steam users are on the DX11 bandwagon. Most people, 68% are only on DX10. Don't blame the consoles. The PC market does not widely support DX11 either. On the other end: CPU, which also has a lot to do with what you can do: Dual Core is half of the market and the other half are quads. People on PCs, as a majority, are nowhere near the hardware level gamers would like to believe (therefore functions and money spent on functions they want). A lot of them are on mom or dad's Dell or HP computer that they bought for work/school/family. To get to DX11 you need 2 things for "older" computers: A new card and a new OS. $$$$. The best function DX11 has is not the graphical improvements but it's efficiency. In that I agree. Same settings on DX9 or DX11 on the same system is a big difference. However the fact that it devours "recent" games, which you seem happy of, is that they are making games so everyone that wants to play them usually can. So, you like that... but then hate on it? ;) I wont bother answering who you were talking to. He mentions DX12.
Avalanche Studios co-founder says developer's ambition is for action, not moments that make players cry; steampunk-style game on hold. Full Story
- Posted May 15, 2013 6:33 am PT
4A Games creative director Andrew Prokhorov thanks Jason Rubin for telling the studio's story, but says, "We deserve the ratings we get." Full Story
- Posted May 16, 2013 12:44 pm PT