next gen console not powerfull enough for crysis , LOL

[HangTime]

To get back on topic, i think its a bit of a risk to target a game at such a high requirement level regardless if it can be run on the new consoles or not. Its pretty much commercial suicide if the game can only be run at a reasonable level on very few machines. Then again if the game scales quite well onto different hardware albeit with lowered details, there is no reason whatsoever that it couldnt make it onto the new consoles.

As mentioned above, the reason why it doesn't get a release on console may be more to do with the way the game is coded as opposed to the hardware requirements (hearsay so take with a pinch of salt).

As for the commercial suicide bit, you need to remember that many gamers don't really worry that much about performance. People with average PCs will still buy the game, and run it at 15-25fps, because that's what they do. My sister for example plays games on a p3-500 with a TNT, even stuff like Warcraft3, Neverwinter Nights etc. I dread to think what kind of framerate she gets.

We can all sit here as experienced gamers with our superdeluxe hardware and fully tweaked systems, but take an average gamer and he probably won't be expecting to run modern games at 60fps+ (if they even know what FPS means).

I'm sure that while it won't look it's best, and performance will be shoddy, something like a P4-2.8 with 768meg ram and a 6600GT will probably be capable of running Crysis.

Plenty of people moan about poor framerate in modern games, but how many of us actually refuse to buy a game based on the hardware requirements? I haven't bought Oblivion yet as I only have a 6800GT, but lack of time to play it is also a factor.

 

[melchy]

As mentioned above, the reason why it doesn't get a release on console may be more to do with the way the game is coded as opposed to the hardware requirements (hearsay so take with a pinch of salt).

As for the commercial suicide bit, you need to remember that many gamers don't really worry that much about performance. People with average PCs will still buy the game, and run it at 15-25fps, because that's what they do. My sister for example plays games on a p3-500 with a TNT, even stuff like Warcraft3, Neverwinter Nights etc. I dread to think what kind of framerate she gets.

We can all sit here as experienced gamers with our superdeluxe hardware and fully tweaked systems, but take an average gamer and he probably won't be expecting to run modern games at 60fps+ (if they even know what FPS means).

I'm sure that while it won't look it's best, and performance will be shoddy, something like a P4-2.8 with 768meg ram and a 6600GT will probably be capable of running Crysis.

Plenty of people moan about poor framerate in modern games, but how many of us actually refuse to buy a game based on the hardware requirements? I haven't bought Oblivion yet as I only have a 6800GT, but lack of time to play it is also a factor.

You make perfectly valid points and im entirely in agreement with you. The problem may arise when the minimum spec for the likes of Crysis is higher than what most average peoples PC's are. You've then got to throw Vista into the mix. You are then limiting your market to a huge extent. Crysis could very be the "best" game ever created, but without a market to sell in it wont be as much of a success as it otherwise could be. So its not so much about people not knowing any better and playing their games at 15 - 25 fps, but the fact that the may not be able to run it at all.

I've not seen the minimum specs for Crysis so this is all conjecture.

 

[HangTime]

I've not seen the minimum specs for Crysis so this is all conjecture.

Minimum specs are a bit of a joke nowadays anyway, since often:

1) It's actually possible to run the game with a LOWER specification that that specified. It's not like the old days where you either had a 3d accelerator, or you didn't. Low memory systems can often run a game just with a huge amount of paging. And if the spec says 2ghz cpu, a 1.5ghz one will probably run the game, just very slowly.
2) To get good performance, my rule of thumb is to get the RECOMMENDED (not min) spec, add then add 50% more RAM, cpu speed and graphics power.

They also tend to wary wildly from developer-to-developer, publisher-to-publisher. So sometimes when a game is being more 'honest' about the min spec (i.e. to get acceptable performance), there's a bit of a blacklash on forums with people saying "LOL, 3ghz cpu, 1gig ram and geforce7 min spec, this is ridiculous, are any normal people going to be able to play this game". And on the flipside sometimes min specs get slated for not being realistic, "i'd like to see the developers trying to play the game on that spec" etc.