LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksRead more.Electronic Arts announced today that it has agreed to a deal extension with Crytek to publish Crysis 2.
Read more.Electronic Arts announced today that it has agreed to a deal extension with Crytek to publish Crysis 2.
No!. Crysis will be ruined! I enjoyed crysis alot and the graphics made it even better but if its a multi platform then it will be crap graphics and will play possibly even worse on pc as ea are bad for porting games.
Well the duo was good now its gone. Great news, not.
Originally Posted by snootyjim
Chances of it looking worse than Crysis then?
o dear
edit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ps--sUz7oww the engine itself
Last edited by j.o.s.h.1408; 01-06-2009 at 12:23 PM.
as long as they do a simultaneous release across the platforms all should be well. just so they don't spark flame wars from whichever gets it first.
oh well end off crysis being good as we know it, making it run on xbolox will surely kill the graphics in the game. What made the original so good was its realistic engine and great graphics they even said no consoles can run it. Now the next one runs on 360 means tons off detail is going to be lost and its going to get turned in to another one off those arcade games where you need live to invite your friends etcAnd i also guess this would mean the end to game support for the pc.
I guess warhead was the last good crysis
anyone joins me in a toast to end off good crysis'es?
our boiler broke so we has no heating or hot water, this is the bloody result ^^
I don't think this will effect how Crysis 2 looks. Theoretically, an intelligent enough of an engine should be able to increase/decrease quality to a given platform target. Design for high quality, run for platform, so to speak. Much the same as running on a GeForce 285 over a 7600 or something.
But the one constant in the universe is, that multi-platform games *always* plays horribly on PC if they're designed to accommodate consoles. Kbd/Mouse v.s. control pad is too much of a dichotomy in input and gameplay methodology. Just look at Dead Space as a classic example of that. Far Cry 2's input and gameplay was quite clunky on the PC as well.
Not to mention the screaming kids playing multiplayer because their well off parents thought the armoured suit fella looks a little like cinderalla..
I'm not too fussed about the graphics really, I'm more crossed about the appeal of crytek in the future..
It just downgraded themselves from being partly an acquired taste like danish pate to just peas on chips..
Surely everyone will eat peas on chips, but I wont feel great eating it..
But I suppose it cancels out given EA will throw so much money at the Crytek team that it'll blot out the sun...
** Please.. no 300-esque response **
Me want Ultrabook
oh is it just me or is anyone else getting anoyed when console games are ported to PC and they leave the main menus as they were....when they are desighned to be used with a pad for pressing left right up down etc. instead off being able to easily select what you want with a mouse. Hawx is a great example of that
our boiler broke so we has no heating or hot water, this is the bloody result ^^
It isn't just the menus they don't change when they port to PC, it's all sorts of elements of how you interact with the game. The FEAR 2 demo put me off the game because they had so much of that - they'd forgotten to make the PDA's mousewheel scrollable for one, you have to use the arrow keys...which neither of your hands are over when you play.
I don't mind them building console versions of the game if it means the engine will take a lot less power to get good results from, but if they start treating PC gamers like second class citizens by not bothering to set the game up properly then they can take a long walk off a short pier.
So far as the actual gameplay goes, I hope they actually do something with the AI that makes them more than just simpletons with eagle-eyes and super-accurate guns this time around. Although this is Crytek we're talking about...
Hopefully CryENGINE 3 will be just an optimised version of CryENGINE 2 so that it can run better on a range of hardware. After all there are other engines which did the same like the Unreal 3 engine and the PC versions of these games still looked FAR better than the consoles versions.
If this means that the game that looks like Crysis Warhead(or even better) can run better on cheaper hardware then it will be a good thing for most gamers.
The more worrying think is if the next Crysis keeps the control and menu system from the console version as Fear 2 did. TBH this would just ruin the game. Also I hope they keep continuity with the previous games too.
I personally think it is too early to pass judgement now until some screenshots or gameplay videos come out.
lol, yu r teh funnehs XD
sorry, just my feeling is this hits consoles specially hugely underpowered XBOX then its end of crysis as we know it
atleast PS3 has some juice in it, where as the ATI's x1300 is a bit too old for this and 512mb of ram if i remember correctly (stuff inside the 360)
our boiler broke so we has no heating or hot water, this is the bloody result ^^
You remember wrong. Really wrong. The X360 has a far more powerful graphics card - sort of x1950 level but suped up with the edram. The PS3 has a roughly 7900 era chip and developers have already moaned about it.
iirc the 360 and ps3 perform similar to a 7800 or 7900, few gens out now and even the new gens cant play crysis on max yet so how can a console cope?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
