I have to disagree with this. I've been playing on my new 360 since Monday and slowdown is very noticable in games like GOW and Blue Dragon. If they were on my PC, I'd just turn a setting down.
Would crysis ever be on ps3/xbox?
- Thread starter Bengaboy
- Start date
Pikmin definatly did work - however I played C&C 3 on the Xbox 360 and it really really really didn't work (I am too used to a mouse / keyboard combination myself really)
Rich
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 20,345
- Location
- Stanley Hotel, Colorado
The game feels very consoley, I think it'll be converted a year from now maybe
Even if it does get converted it won't be done by Crytek, chances are EA will give it a shot, ruin it and release it to cash in.
That said considering the CEO of Crytek has said consoles don't have enough memory maybe taking that into account would be a wise idea.
That said considering the CEO of Crytek has said consoles don't have enough memory maybe taking that into account would be a wise idea.
How so?
Your point about requiring a HDTV was clearly a poor one. Many people use the same montior for pc and 360 gaming, just as many use an HDTV for pc gaming. The majority of 360 gamers still use a SD crt.
As for lowering settings in pc games to increase performance, in my experience pc games on medium to low tend to look like complete ass. I'll give one example of many - to play ET:QW at a decent framerate on my current rig I have to compromise on details to the extent that they arguably look worse than the original RTCW! The fact is most PC games are designed to look good at high settings and the quality plummets once you start taking a visual hit. Even Crysis running at medium settings on what, just over a year ago, was an uber rig, didn't impress me in the slightest. Infact, the only time pc games impress me more than the console offerings (and we're talking purely technical grunt here, in terms of quality, variety, innovation, creativity and aethetics, console games have been streets ahead for years now - imo, of course
) is when played with everything maxed and running at a constant and high frame rate.This is what both amuses and frustrates me about pc gaming. People often tout the pcs technical superiority over consoles, how it visually outstrips them as new components are released, yet for this to be true you constantly need to upgrade (and at no small cost). If, like most pc gamers, you upgrade once every couple of years, this advantage simply doesn't exist. It could be argued that it's pc components that age ridiculously quickly while developers continue to squeeze more and more out of the various consoles and continue, even years after release, to produce staggeringly good looking games.
Long-term and completely jaded pc gamer signing out.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 14,081
- Location
- Between Realities
Yeah, in the same way I have 4098mb of ram and 320mb on the 8800GTS. You don't see me going 'I have 4418 of memory on my PC' do you?
Thats not how it works atall
Yes it does, I've got 4862MB of Ram in my PC, it owns.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 14,081
- Location
- Between Realities
Yes, But what i mean, is it's not the same principal when looking at the PS3. Different hardware architecture.
Associate
- Joined
- 28 Sep 2007
- Posts
- 257
- Location
- Manchester
agreed, that's what I was trying to say earlier, it's not accurate to directly compare a console's stats to a PCs
How do you know it won't be done by Crytek? Do you work for them... thought not.
I'm not sure you can call a move to consoles a 'cash in' either, because they will make way more money on a console release than they ever will with a PC specific title. It makes financial sense to develop for consoles.
Crytek have already said it cannot be done, Far Cry port was not done by Crytek either, it just makes sense they won't do it.
As for cashing in, it's what EA do best, they will make a crap port (If they even do that) and release it on multiple platforms like they did Far Cry.
If you want to play Crysis with nice eye candy you'll need a medium spec computer, not a console.
Yours is a fair bit above medium and will run Crysis nicely, if that's what you're asking.Define Medium spec please
Aye it's not like the Xbox 360 and PS3 have multi-core CPUs for complex mathematical calculations, GPUs for calculating and processing 2D and 3D graphics and visual effects, memory chips for temporarily storing textures and environment data, hard disk drives for permanently storing information, USB root hubs for peripherals, network controllers for connecting to the internet and other devices... Oh wait.
Last edited:
Define Medium spec please
8800 GTX, Quad Core, 4 gig ram. Should get high settings at a okish framerate. Best to upgrade in 12 months if you want it to run well!
What he said, total exaggeration.That's far from medium.
Keep in mind it's also a beta.
I know it's far above medium, just making a point. Crysis makes my brothers 8800 gts cry to the extent that he's considering upgrading. It's insane - a few years ago I was the same. Spending obscene amounts of money to play a handful (if that) of games on high settings. It's not even that fun, yet the draw to see Crysis running as perfectly as possible is there.
When did the focus of pc gaming shift from originality and innovation to super high res and detailed gfx?
When did the focus of pc gaming shift from originality and innovation to super high res and detailed gfx?
I can't run Crysis on Low at 800x600 with more than 20 fps average, it's a really bad performing Beta.
Honestly? Youre rig looks pretty uber. I expect Crysis to run like a dog, but that's silly.
Well I can run something like Half Life 2 for example on my 2 year old PC at full settings, high resolution with a constant 85 FPS, and guess what...it looks and runs a damn sight better than that POS game Halo 3.
If you want to upgrade to play Crysis on full settings then fine, but it's not a necessity. Most of you consoles gamers are happy playing Bioshock for example on what is equivalent to low/medium settings on a PC.
You say it was ridiculous spending all this money to play only a handful of games on the absolute highest settings...so...why do you do it? The majority of games will run on high perfectly well without spending ridiculous amounts of money.
If you want to upgrade to play Crysis on full settings then fine, but it's not a necessity. Most of you consoles gamers are happy playing Bioshock for example on what is equivalent to low/medium settings on a PC.
You say it was ridiculous spending all this money to play only a handful of games on the absolute highest settings...so...why do you do it? The majority of games will run on high perfectly well without spending ridiculous amounts of money.