Crytek: PCs Are a Generation Ahead of Consoles

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
 

Simalacrum:
I guess the rather long console cycle has also let PC's go even further ahead graphically - since console cycles were shorter before, I guess they might have been able to 'catch up' (so to speak) with PC's more frequently in the past... Though, I hastened to point out this is an amateur speaking who has only really been following the gaming industry since this generation of consoles :P

Still, I remain a console player at heart (even though my PS3 is far away at home and I have no TV at uni... *sniff*) - I honestly don't have 5000 or however much to invest in a big gaming powerhouse of a PC, and my little 13" MacBook Pro can't really compete against my PS3 graphically speaking :P

Also, graphics aren't everything Crytek! In many cases high-end graphics themselves can hold back games too - just look at Minecraft!

I'm going to be honest here, if Crytek are hampered in creativity terms because of the hardware/graphical limitations of the console systems... then I fear for the innovation department in Crytek =\

Stop wasting 1000+ on a piece of shit Trust Tomy Trendmaster laptop and you could easily build a gaming PC. I built my tower for 600 2 years ago and still haven't needed to upgrade. Ignorance is the biggest enemy of the potential PC gamer - there's a lot of ramp-up before you're confident that you know what you're doing. You've got lots of people with a wealth of experience here to help you through if you want to learn.

FYI we (me and my housemates) have a PS3 two gaming-standard PCs, one Trust Tomy Trendtower (that I'm using right now) and one Trust Tomy Trendmaster laptop (bricked) in the house - I'm fluent on all of them (more or less) and beyond the experience of being treated as though you were an idiot by the operating system, I really can't see why both this crappy tower and the bricked laptop cost more than the two MORE powerful gaming PCs or the PS3. Re: consoles and PCs, I've played the Orange Box games on both PS3 (which you will have splashed what, 400?) and the experience on the Playstation is far inferior. GT5, on the other hand, is FUCKING AMAZING.

Robert Gerhardt:
i would be a happy man if platforms didn't exist and gaming as a whole was held to a much higher standard

..so.. let me guess - you have a Windows computer, and look forward to the next directx version? Probably have steam, and buy games on disc with numbers after the title. ..?

I'll go ahead and jump on the 'because buying/kitting out a PC that will run this dude's idea of a cutting edge game is impossibly expensive' bandwagon.

Gaming is an expensive hobby, fine. But it's much more attractive to be able to buy one machine that will play all the latest games for several years. He might want to remember that actual FUN can be had on any of the platforms. All that he can really make a difference to with powerful PCs is graphics, and that should never be the be all and end all of a game.

Besides, the only reasons to own a PC for gaming (in my view) are FPSs (although I personally think consoles have made great strides in that respect ) and RTSs. Since I'm not a super huge fan of either genre, I don't feel compelled to invest in a gaming PC.

Oh, also maybe point and click adventure games. But, depending on the vintage, pretty much any average modern PC should be able to run those ;-)

Sounds accurate. Consoles haven't had a refresh in a very long time, and since most games are released for both console and PC there has been no need for PC owners to upgrade.

As a PC owner this gets annoying when, say, ME2 (2010) comes out and has the same poly count as ME1 (2007), which itself was much lower than crysis (also 2007). Some of the ME2 environments have such low detail it actually damages immersion, while my not-cutting-edge graphics card was happily humming along at refresh rate.

Just one more reason to hate consoles. I'll add that to ports that are completely unplayable (deadspace) or that won't let you disable auto-aim because console controllers are so shitty they can't be played without it.

EDIT: And all this cover-based garbage as well. I'm tired of being shit on because of the inadequacies of consoles. They only exist because single purpose systems used to be cheaper than a real computer, but somehow they became the dominant paradigm and now the entire medium is crippled by their bullshit.

Reaper69lol:
I miss the days when gaming was not all about the visuals.

you can tecally blame sega for all this

To be fair, it's true. But we're looking at two budget ranges here.

200-300: Console
300-600: PC

Just depends how much you can afford to spend on games. To be honest though, buying console gaes for 60 is pretty laughable when the steam sales come along and you can pick up Black Ops for like, 10 for PC.

Anyway! Anybody here know much about PC hardware? Trying to find a compatable motherboard for a new build (i5 760/GTX 470)

Nope, your wrong... Whats holding up games is that no one makes PC games anymore... They make ports from consoles, but there are so few exclusive PC games (notice the word games, as Sims is not a game), as to be considered at mathematical improbility.

Heres a tip to developers... Stop making new versions of Halo/Call of Duty & make soemthing new.

-M

ZombieGenesis:
To be fair, it's true. But we're looking at two budget ranges here.

200-300: Console
300-600: PC

I have an idea, take the money that would be spent on a console and add it to your PC budget.

uc.asc:

ZombieGenesis:
To be fair, it's true. But we're looking at two budget ranges here.

200-300: Console
300-600: PC

I have an idea, take the money that would be spent on a console and add it to your PC budget.

Well...okay YEAH, if you know what you're doing that's a fair direction to take. For example, I COULD spend upwards of 300 on the Xbox Super-Elite Big Black C*** or whatever they're calling it, but instead I'm throwing that into a high end gaming PC.
BUT the problem is, people aren't aware of how to do this. Or that they even can.

Just look at what Dell is advertising as a 'gaming pc'. The alienware brand goes between 2000-3000+ at high end ... and those use 5770 graphics! That's tiny by todays standards.
The highest graphics card I've seen in an alienware is a GTX 460 and those sell for about 130! Where does that extra few thousand come from? Donuts?

Moral of the story; the industry knows most people are ignorant of PCs, so they jack up the price and make it all look more complicated than it is.

ZombieGenesis:

uc.asc:

ZombieGenesis:
To be fair, it's true. But we're looking at two budget ranges here.

200-300: Console
300-600: PC

I have an idea, take the money that would be spent on a console and add it to your PC budget.

Well...okay YEAH, if you know what you're doing that's a fair direction to take. For example, I COULD spend upwards of 300 on the Xbox Super-Elite Big Black C*** or whatever they're calling it, but instead I'm throwing that into a high end gaming PC.
BUT the problem is, people are aware of how to do this. Or that they even can.

Just look at what Dell is advertising as a 'gaming pc'. The alienware brand goes between 2000-3000+ at high end ... and those use 5770 graphics! That's tiny by todays standards.
The highest graphics card I've seen in an alienware is a GTX 460 and those sell for about 130! Where does that extra few thousand come from? Donuts?

Moral of the story; the industry knows most people are ignorant of PCs, so they jack up the price and make it all look more complicated than it is.

Yeah, that's true. And it's probably why consoles and PCs haven't converged already, since they're basically identical.

I have a dream that console manufacturers switch to making PCs, current console users will know that such PCs can run games, and once they find out how much better the experience is consoles as we know them die forever.

Won't happen, of course.

If memory serves me correctly, CryEngine was a pretty inefficient game engine. That's why people were able to reproduce graphics similar to Crysis using much less memory and processing speed. Considering how wasteful his company seems to be with processing power, maybe this guy isn't the best person in the world to comment on what this console generations is capable of.

Addressing his point, though, I'm okay with graphics and sound capabilities where they are right now. Developers have become so obsessed with the appearance of their games that they've forgotten to make the games fun or to think of new mechanics to make their games unique. I'm tired of playing Generic Shooty Video Game 1574: The Game. Moving to the next generation will only make the development cycle more expensive, which will make innovation more risky and less likely.

The 8-bit console generation lasted a really long time, and when you look back on the innovation of that gen, it's pretty impressive. Maybe it's time for the hardware to stay where it is for a bit so that game makers can catch their breath, reflect on the fact that they're supposed to be making games, not really pretty moving pictures, and think of reasons we should give them our money other than "Check out our Graphics! Kaboooooooooooooom!!!!!".

Here is my whole deal in a nutshell. I want to love Pc games, I really do. However No matter how over powered my pc is my games are choppy. Then you find out the game isnt optimized for quad core or your radeon Hd 4850 can run WoW on ultra settings by leaps and bounds and yet it won't.

I love my console because games just work no fuss no muss. I never have to bother with screen tearing or having the lesser experience to have good frame rates. I mean really I just want to install it and play it on settings that are rig acceptable.

So the developer that produces games that are usually the top of the "Look how amazing our Graphics are!" for the PC says that limitations of consoles in terms of graphics are holding everything back?

Trollbait is trollbait, is it not?

Well, Crytek, while you do have very lovely graphics, have you considered working on your gameplay any? Your games aren't exactly the stalwart triumphs of Gaming, you know, especially since Gaming isn't about graphics--graphics are nice, but if I just wanted graphics, I'd go watch a movie.

BehattedWanderer:
So the developer that produces games that are usually the top of the "Look how amazing our Graphics are!" for the PC says that limitations of consoles in terms of graphics are holding everything back?

Trollbait is trollbait, is it not?

Well, Crytek, while you do have very lovely graphics, have you considered working on your gameplay any? Your games aren't exactly the stalwart triumphs of Gaming, you know, especially since Gaming isn't about graphics--graphics are nice, but if I just wanted graphics, I'd go watch a movie.

Yeah, that about sums it up for me as well.

Some backstory should clarify my position. I've had my current gaming PC for going on 3 years now. It is the absolute first gaming PC I've ever owned that can still run NEW games MAXED OUT after owning it for more than half a year. And it's not like I splurged when I bought it. It was a very aggressively "mid-range" system at the time. And, of course, the only developer that has ever been able to stump my lovely, cheap, long-lasting, run anything, gaming PC has been Crytek, with the likes of Crysis.

The primary (only, IMO) appeal of their games is graphics. I found the gameplay extremely bland and repetitive after the "oo pretty" wore off about 5 minutes in. I know I'm not alone with that opinion. So, it isn't exactly shocking to hear that Crytek, the developer that pretty much relies on people wasting their money on ridiculous hardware is pushing the PC as the ultimate platform.

One thing, PC os's use 23% of ram and processor at ALL TIMES.

Stefan Larsen:
One thing, PC os's use 23% of ram and processor at ALL TIMES.

Not entirely accurate.

ZombieGenesis:
Anyway! Anybody here know much about PC hardware? Trying to find a compatable motherboard for a new build (i5 760/GTX 470)

If you wanna keep the price down, you can't go wrong with a Gigabyte P55M / H55M. (More or less the same mobo, but the H55M supports the onboard graphics of the i3 and dual core i5s. Not really relevant to you, but worth mentioning.) But if you wanna spend a little more, The Gigabyte P55-UD4 would serve you very well. Have a look for the P55 Asus Sabertooth, as well.

EDIT: The Gigabyte P55-UD5 does support SLI, iirc, which could be useful for yourself in the future. It costs a bit more, though, and doesn't add much unless you are multi-GPU running. Hope that helps!

Stefan Larsen:
One thing, PC os's use 23% of ram and processor at ALL TIMES.

Maybe in a weaker system with a hungry OS. Most 500 quid machines with a fresh Windows 7 install won't use anywhere near that, CPU-wise. The CPU more or less idles once it has done loading and starting up all the shit people put in their start up folders. RAM will usually hover between 20% and 40% usage, depending on how much you have. What you clearly failed to understand is that Vista and Windows 7 aren't actually using that RAM. The more you have, the more RAM appears in use. This is because those OSs will pre-load the RAM with programs it thinks you might use. If you want to do something RAM intensive, it clears off what is pre-fetched and lets you do your thing. If you load a program that is pre-fetched onto the RAM, then it starts faster, and you are a happy bunny.

A clean install of Windows 7 one a machine with 4-6GB of RAM shouldn't use more than 15% until you start loading it up with programs.

For fuck's sake...

If you don't like the technical limitations of consoles, Yerli, then don't develope for them!

What? You want a slice of that big ol' console sales pie? Then suck it up, princess, and accept the limitations that come with that.

ZombieGenesis:

uc.asc:

ZombieGenesis:
To be fair, it's true. But we're looking at two budget ranges here.

200-300: Console
300-600: PC

I have an idea, take the money that would be spent on a console and add it to your PC budget.

Well...okay YEAH, if you know what you're doing that's a fair direction to take. For example, I COULD spend upwards of 300 on the Xbox Super-Elite Big Black C*** or whatever they're calling it, but instead I'm throwing that into a high end gaming PC.
BUT the problem is, people aren't aware of how to do this. Or that they even can.

Just look at what Dell is advertising as a 'gaming pc'. The alienware brand goes between 2000-3000+ at high end ... and those use 5770 graphics! That's tiny by todays standards.
The highest graphics card I've seen in an alienware is a GTX 460 and those sell for about 130! Where does that extra few thousand come from? Donuts?

Moral of the story; the industry knows most people are ignorant of PCs, so they jack up the price and make it all look more complicated than it is.

alienware.... the latest one has these little flaps on top of their box that open up to let out all the hot air. I'm assuming all that extra cash is used to fund the group of guys that sit around in the office to dream up new stupid stuff.

Stupid shit like that is what convinces the ignorant to buy their stuff. I wish the xbox was easier to add a new third party hard-drive like how the PS3 console does theirs.

I bet crytech newest creation is going to crash PCs and consoles alike.

nipsen:

Robert Gerhardt:
i would be a happy man if platforms didn't exist and gaming as a whole was held to a much higher standard

..so.. let me guess - you have a Windows computer, and look forward to the next directx version? Probably have steam, and buy games on disc with numbers after the title. ..?

why would i buy games on disk if i have steam?

The Imp:

TheRightToArmBears:
The thing is, not that many people have super-powered latest tech PCs. You could make a game for such crazy-ass PCs but it wouldn't sell too well.

I bought my PC in summer 2008 for 1300€, haven't changed a single hardware component since and but i still can play every game on the market on highest settings. I wouldn't be able to do that if the developers were pushing the limit in the graphics department.

Again, most people don't have 1300€ to just throw away at a gaming rig.
Hell, most people don't even have 700€ to throw away at a pc.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here