Consoles too weak for Crysis

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I wouldn't be surprised if PS3 wasn't powerful enough, as it only uses a 7900GTX core, which btw was recently downclocked . . . so PS3 got respecced for the worst . . . again.

It amazes me that the Xbox 360 GPU wouldn't be powerful enough, because if IT isn't, most everybody's computer's won't be either, considering it's going to be the most powerful GPU we have until G80 and R600 come out.

mpjesse, the R500 beats the R580, plain and simple. The R600 is a faster version of the R500. It has more pipelines and a faster clock, but besides that I believe they are relatively similar. The R500 beats anything there is out right now, and it will until the R600 and G80 come out.
 
The only thing about the R500 that's superior to the R580 is the unified shader architecture. The R580 has a higher pixel fillrate, a higher clockspeed, capable of more shader operations per second, and more vertex transformations. It's true the unified shader architecture is the future, but the R500 simply isn't the future we're looking to. Also, the PS3 uses a G71 core at 550MHz with half of the ROPs disabled.
 
You guys know that DX10 means nothing in the console world right?
PS3 has incredible graphics but doesn't use any type of DX. The only reason that Xbox does is because its Microsoft. Even Nvidia said that right at this moment the PS3 is a more powerful gaming machine. That will change in 6 months or so but I cant afford $600 every six months for the latest greatest graphics card.

I love console and PC's for different reasons.

I game on both and love it but these fanboys are getting ridiculous.
 
How old are you guys honestly? Those are some pretty uneducated remarks to make. Consoles are great gaming machines... Some of the greatest games out are for consoles only. I honestly dump almost a grand a year into computer hardware, this compares to maybe the grand that I've spent in consoles over the last 4 years... PC's will always have the leading edge when it comes to capabilities, it'll only be a short time before PC graphics will catch up to the next gen consoles. Honestly, if you can afford to keep your PC up to date with the latest gaming hardware, then you can definately afford a console... Titles like FF, GranTurismo, and MGS you can't really find outside of the console realm...

If you think that the Xbox360 is more powerful than a current high end gaming PC, you're sadly mistaken. What's in the Xbox360 is old tech. Most of us have dual core processors and the Radeon x1900xtx is out. That alone beats the 360. PS3 is the same story. nVidia's GPU in the PS3 is over 1.5 years old now. Hell, the PS3 probably won't even do SM3.0 (or the Sony equivalent). It's true that we spend thousands a year, but I also recoup a LOT of that cost by reselling old parts on eBay. I'm currently considering upgrading to dual 7900GTX's and it's only going to put me out about $250-300 after i resell my dual 7800GTX's.

You are, hwoever, right about games. There are some DAMN good games on consoles that u can't get on PC. Like Halo 2 (and eventually 3), GranTurismo, and a ton of others. BUT, the opposite is true as well. Prey is WAY better on PC, HL2: Episode 1 can't be had on console, Crysis will only be on PC (initially), and a ton of other great games never make it to console. AoE3, all the MMORPG's, Star Wars: Empire at War... and so on. IMO, in terms of pure gameplay, the PC can't be beat. The ratio of good to bad games on PC is far lower than the ratio of good/bad on console. Quite simply, PC's have the best overall gaming experiences.

??? At no point in any of my posts did I argue that console architecture was in any way superior to that of a PC's. Great games come out on many different platforms, that's why I have both a PC and console. I'm just sick of people saying how vastly superior thier PC is compared to a console and how gaming is so much better on a PC. Consoles are designed differntly from a PC, so it's more than possible to get a visually stunning game out on a console that would match anything on a PC.... for a little time anyways... But that's besides the point. The point I'm trying to make is that gaming can be just as, or even more of a great experience on a console than a PC.

I'll keep upgrading my PC regularly because it's a everyday life tool and the gaming is always great on it... but I'll still also continue buying consoles simply because I enjoy the console gaming experience just as much.

I'll be honest with you guys though... If they weren't releasing titles like FF, GranTurismo, and MGS on the PS3, I would say goodbye to my console gaming days... I can even proudly say that I don't play FPS's on my console... Somehow I always expect a really dilluted gaming experience on consoles when it comes to FPS's... Controls are the biggest issue when it comes to an FPS on the console...
 
so what exactly are these unfathomable specs for Crysis that consoles will not be able to handle? can anybody like post those? i'd like to see them, myself. Crysis looks unbelievably amazing, and i wanna know what i'll need to run it.

and, imo, whatever i can get most easily FREE (computer component givaways, console game givaways) is what i like best. well, that statement didn't make much sense. what i'm trying to say is that i likes em both.
 
Another key area that I'm putting a lot of faith into Sony with is the multimedia capabilities of the PS3. I almost went and picked up a D Link MediaLounge Player to stream multimedia content to from my PC to the Home Theatre system, but when I found out that the PS3 might be able to support this type of function I dropped the plan. Nothing wrong with using the main PC as a HTPC as well, but they aren't in the same room... I could go out and build a decent HTPC for about $5 - 600, but why not shell out the extra $100 and get a PS3 instead... Both the PS3 and the 360 are leaving a lot of room for HomeBrew development which is another area that really exites me. Look at what was possible with a 1.5v PSP.
 
Haha, you knew it was coming didn't you?!!?!?!

Anyways, Lord Aardvark2... the specs for Crysis were already posted in this topic... use your eyes and read the topic and you will find them.
 
I think the ONLY reason some games look better on console than they do on PC is the low resolution of TV sets. Most everyone is still gaming on SDTV and it doesn't take a genious to figure out that Doom 3 is going to look better on a crappy 32 inch TV at the same resolution than it will on a monitor or LCD at the same res.

Doom 3 looks incredibly more realistic on my little 19 inch gaming TV than it does on my PC. But again, only 'cause the resolution blows. TV's don't pick up the finer details like aliasing, low res. textures, etc. like a computer monitor does.

And yeah, FPS's on consoles suck. LOL. I personally only use my XBox for sports games (MLB 2K6) and a couple racing games. Anything else can be better done on a PC.

Anywho, thanks for the input. 🙂
 
I wonder if Pong came out before NetHack/Hack/Rogue...

Actually it did. However, I think that there is more merit to create a game still alive 26 years after its first version than to one out and forgotten by mid-80's...

Considering FPS, remember that Wolfenstein and Doom were first out on PCs...

Yes, PC games rule. Console versions are cut-down versions of the same, or eternal remakes of beat-em ups (eventhough a good game of Streets of Rage can still be enjoyable at times).

The nice thing about console though, is that you can trample the controller in exasperation and have a chance to get it back in one piece. [/devil's advocate]
 
You guys know that DX10 means nothing in the console world right?
PS3 has incredible graphics but doesn't use any type of DX. The only reason that Xbox does is because its Microsoft. Even Nvidia said that right at this moment the PS3 is a more powerful gaming machine. That will change in 6 months or so but I cant afford $600 every six months for the latest greatest graphics card.

I love console and PC's for different reasons.

I game on both and love it but these fanboys are getting ridiculous.

Um, they're saying that so that you'll buy it. I'd like to see an RSX beat even a 7950 GX2. Nvidia says the PS3 is more powerful so that YOU'LL BUY IT AND THEY'LL SELL MORE CHIPS. DUH.
 
Probably true... but again with the appropriate development we'll have some beatiful looking games. Keep in mind that there won't be any game developer for years that will ever come close to pushing your 1950xt to it's limits (stock game settings of course), while the PS3 developers will have a single platform to make games for and won't be restricted by someone not having up to date hardware... Most modern day PC games need scalability to accomodate for the oldtimer like me who is still running a 6800GT... You don't have this kind of problem with a platform like the PS3. Developers are free to push the limitations of the console without have to worry about constraints like that...

As for the argument that games like Doom etc. were out on the PC first... I think that's stupid... No idea when the Ford Model T rolled out... but I'm sure it was one of the earliest production cars out there... Does that mean I'll drive a Ford today??? Hellz no. I'll stick with my imports thank you very much... Keep up with the times... Just because Sony ruled the console industry in the last generation doesn't mean they'll continue to do so this time around... Things change... Just try to keep an open mind...
 
Well I've owned PCs for many years and have owned very nearly every console since the woodgrain Atari 2600 in the 70s. I love all my gaming machines because there are some great games on them all.

Having said that I do feel the highest end PCs you can buy right now can't be touched by consoles in raw power but they are far more expensive too.

Pauld wrote:
That's not gonna sit well with some folks.

I'm sure it will sit about as well with console users as Call of Duty 3 not coming to PC sits with those of us who love that series. I can understand a dev not wanting to "dumb" a game down at all to port to console but not making a PC version of a PC game series and only making console versions for the next sequel is a way more strange move in my opinion. Well my 2cents anyway.
 
Call of Duty 4 has been announced by Infinity Ward as COD3 is being made by Treyarch. I think Activision dropped the ball on the game titles. COD3 shouldn't be called COD3 it should be called something along the lines of COD: Battle of Normandy or something of the sort... since it is not being made by Infinity Ward the maker of the series. It's being developed by a seperate developer like that of Big Red One and Finest Hour. Calling it COD3 is scratching a wound in most COD2 players... and alot of PC players feel left in the cold.

I'm patiently waiting for COD4 on the other hand... the true COD2 follow up.
 
It's still all a matter of opinions. I game on both consoles and PCs and until about 3 years ago I used consoles more. I went from NES-SNES-N64-PS2 and still love to break out the NES and SNES from time to time. It's also nice to just be able to insert GoldenEye for the N64 and plug in 4 controllers so my friends and I can shoot each other rather then everyone lugging their PC and monitor over to shoot each other up in UT2004.

It's basically two different markets - consoles (until xBox Live and stuff) were for people to get together and have fun face to face. PC games (not counting LAN parties) are for logging in to an MMO and being anybody you want to be because of the anonymous aspect.
 
:lol: LOL, that kind of deductive reasoning wouldn't pass in Pre-war Iraqi courtroom. It's because I limit my gaming that I do these fantastic things that I do. 😀
 
And how, might I ask, does the fact that you "limit" your gaming have *anything* relevant to do with the hardware pros and cons of either a console or a PC?
Synergy6
 
Yeah, at 26 you sure seem to have it all figured out.
Whoa...that sounds to sound like an absolute statement and as far as I can remember nothing is for certain, but I do have alot figured out though.

It's called expanding your knowledge...something you'll never get sitting on your couch with both hands on your stick.
Which is why I sit on the couch with both hands on a keyboard, expanding my knowledge.

Instead of instantly attacking the majority of the people who post here (without knowing WTF you're talking about), next time you might want to use your big boy voice and say something productive.
I wouldn't say it was exactly instantaneous... I did deliberate with a panel first and wrote a couple rough drafts. Are you saying we don't know we are talking about? I wan't to apologize on behalf of us for "offending" the gamers in a hardware forum. Next time I will try SHOUTING <-----like that so I can expose the hypocritical PC elitism. To me all the $h!7 is hardware for me to mod and re-engineer. I guess for me it's more about the implementation than the application.
 
He acts like we are all children with no lives outside of our computers. HA!

I'm glad he feels like a big boy at age 26... aslong as I'm still a kid... and not a grumpy "old man" like he is I'm fine. Lemme just go grab some Red Bull and Pizza so I can tweak out while looking at Tweakguides.com.

Yay for the moron!

Unless you were a child who has no life, I don't understand why my comment upset you. Why are you upset when these characteristics I list don't apply to you. LOL. 😀

Who in the world said I was grumpy... Sometimes a reflection can be a hard thing to look at I know, but this is reality not a video game grasshopper. :wink:

Now America insulate yourself with entertainment and eat, drink and be merry.
 
It doesn't upset me. I think your stereotyping is ridiculous though.
I was simply playing on your ignorant information that we are all geeky little boys tweaking in a room by ourselves eating take out foods and drinking caffienated drinks.

That's quite a stereotype don't you think.
 
And how, might I ask, does the fact that you "limit" your gaming have *anything* relevant to do with the hardware pros and cons of either a console or a PC?
Synergy6

Oops! 😳 It appears I've hijacked the forum... this is neither about my gaming habits or hardware pros and cons, but rather "Consoles too weak for Crysis". My apologies. :? I only responded that way because some people don't understand everything "even consoles" have their purpose and role under the sun.

I'll reserve my comments until someone again talks about their l337 rig is and how l337 they are and I'll be back to pwn them with how l337 I am because "every body want's to rule the world".

I'll hold my tongue for now.
 
It doesn't upset me. I think your stereotyping is ridiculous though.
I was simply playing on your ignorant information that we are all geeky little boys tweaking in a room by ourselves eating take out foods and drinking caffienated drinks.

That's quite a stereotype don't you think.

I suppose that was quite outrageous. My bad.
 
Oops! 😳 It appears I've hijacked the forum... this is neither about my gaming habits or hardware pros and cons, but rather "Consoles too weak for Crysis". My apologies. :? I only responded that way because some people don't understand everything "even consoles" have their purpose and role under the sun.


And what is "Consoles too weak for Crysis", if not a negative (i.e. con) of a console? Although, evidently, how it applies to your social life is *terribly* more important. :roll:

I'll hold my tongue for now.

First sensible thing you've said on this thread.

Synergy6
 
Hopefully stupid console fanboys will realize those are little baby toys while PCs are like expensive cars and guns.
Hah hah, I like guns and computers, Crysis had better be a good game though, otherwise console fanboys won't have much to whine about.
 

TRENDING THREADS