Crytek: PC A Generation Ahead of Consoles

[exfileme]

Although the PC is a generation ahead of the consoles, multi-platform games will suffer limitations on the PC due to console hardware restraints.

Crytek: PC A Generation Ahead of Consoles : Read more

 

[terror112]

Maybe if the game was worth spending $60 on....

 

[fonzy]

Prove it then Crytek!...seriously when are we going to see another game that will push the graphics envelope for the PC?The PC community is getting sick of ports.

 

[dokk2]

First things first , copyrighted games are available from ALL platforms , not just the PC, IF the game in question is popular enough you can bet dollars to doughnuts that it has been copied, bottom line , you cannot build a lock that someone else cannot pick,, quote , I built a machine that only an idiot could screw up, and guess what ??? end quote ...And anyhow what is stopping them from writing for the PC and then porting to other platforms, seems that it would be a lot easier to down grade for consoles etc, than to go the other way for the PC >>>

 

[adamboy64]

In terms of graphics, sure. PC Hardware is updated more often than consoles.

 

[Haserath]

*sigh* If only you could buy a gaming PC for $199, the market wouldn't be so small since many of the gamers are below 18(thus very little money) or won't justify $600+ for gaming when the comp will become worthless in a few years. Instead we have Intel gouging prices along with Windows 7. At least we have AMD for cheaper processors, but there isn't a free OS that will provide a good gaming experience.

 

[TemjinGold]

So wait, he's complaining that because graphics has hit a wall, developers might actually have to make games that aren't just pretty?

 

[ultameca]

I also agree that cost is an issue...

when crysis came out only rich people could enjoy it and we are just getting to full playability with what.. the next generation of GFX cards to come out in 2011...

sure you can take 3 gfx cards and crossfire/sli but people like me can't afford to buy even one high end card.

you can't release a game that only 5% or less of the community can afford to play and expect it to do well, that's just insane...

I don't even think you could max it out back then with those older cards and nvidia was charging over 500 bucks if I remember per card... ouch...

 

[Guest]

while piracy didnt help, the big problem was that it was released ahead of its time, most pcs could not play the game at medium+ quality. Essentially making it a niche game, yet it sold several million copies anyway. At its release, there was no computer on the planet capable of playing it at max details, and it cost a fortune to try to come close. (I tried) Crysis was the big benchmark game chart to look for in any new videocard review for ages.
Today an average game pc can do crysis at high detail, but gaming graphics havent really progressed since then. My gaming PC idles playing most new games.

 

[Simple11]

[citation][nom]dokk2[/nom]First things first , copyrighted games are available from ALL platforms , not just the PC, IF the game in question is popular enough you can bet dollars to doughnuts that it has been copied, bottom line , you cannot build a lock that someone else cannot pick,, quote , I built a machine that only an idiot could screw up, and guess what ??? end quote ...And anyhow what is stopping them from writing for the PC and then porting to other platforms, seems that it would be a lot easier to down grade for consoles etc, than to go the other way for the PC >>>[/citation]

As far as I am concerned, PS3 can't play hacked/ripped games.

 

[tpi2007]

Crytek is just a dishonest company. They gained all the popularity a PC ONLY game gave them, which enabled them to go on and have the necessary resources to build an engine that can run on THREE PLATFORMS and now they start hinting that the PC version will be sub-par...

Crytek, if you don't push another milestone with the PC version, I will surely NOT BUY IT! You can have all the Nvidia logos on the game (don't you receive a good sum from them too ?), but I won't buy a top of the line Nvidia card to play a game designed for 5 year old, DX9 7900GT-like hardware, which is what is inside a PS3, the most powerful of the two consoles.

This is completely dishonest and the same kind of thinking behind EA (Crytek's publisher) that got Crysis patches for only the first six months and is still the buggiest game I have ever played.

And that silly argument "Ohh Crysis is one of the most pirated games.." YES, but it's still one of the best selling games! It's natural! Chinese also copy Mercedes and BMW designs, because those cars sell well!

Now that they got rich from Crysis and all the accolades they won in the industry, they just want a quick buck out of the consoles. This is how they thank PC gamers.

Think about it: how much money and resources do you have to have gained in previous years to be able to make an engine that runs on two entirely different platforms such as the Xbox360 and (the admittedly difficult to program on) PS3 and adding to that the PC version ? Think about it. If they had focused on the PC version the game wouldn't have been delayed, would it ? But they have so much money and are expecting so much money, they can actually afford that, what do you know?

And more: a modern PC is TWO (at least) generations ahead of a console. Only if you factor in the average, then you could say it's just a generation.

Crytek carefully avoids this because making comparisons to a platform (PC) that can play a game with better visuals at medium settings with a budget CPU and a budget HD4670 or 9600GT than a 5 year old console is not good publicity.

 

[shurli]

The real reason behind piracy... games for console cost 40-50 dollars and consoles are not that expensive. On the other hand a descent PC cost's atleast 1k. I would say that if a game is 50 dollars for console, it should be 25 dollars for PC!!! This should be better for games as well as developers.

 

[haze4peace]

"We seem to lead the charts in piracy by a large margin"
People don't actually want to play the game, they just want to benchmark their brand new shiny computers. Would you pay full game price for a benchmark?

 

[ph3412b07]

Its really not that difficult to pirate a game for 360, ps3, wii etc. However there's still a vicious cycle of PC piracy: devs make crappy games, customers become motivated to pirate, less money for devs, rinse and repeat. This means i won't have an excuse to upgrade my rig to play the latest game for a very long time (3 yrs so far)

 

[AMW1011]

It's not all bad though. I CAN'T play on Xbox Live because of the skill-less children who are either really clueless and a detriment to team based play, or are so bad that competitive play becomes boring. The shit talking and immaturity on the Mic is also an epidemic that I would prefer to avoid.

The simple truth is that the PC lacks many of these players simply because of the price of admission. I don't have anything against children playing video games, but I have to admit that most M rated titles and competitive multiplayer titles tend to suffer because of their presence. Its one of the many reasons that I wish there was a ladder type setup in all competitive multiplayer games. That way, for example, the extremely good CoD players can play with others of their skill level, and the ones who just like to pick up the game every once and awhile can play with others like them.

As for the title quality on the PC. There are very few games that are worse on the PC than the consoles, but the degree should be much greater, but I don't blame this on piracy all that much. I blame this on the adolescent gaming audience. Right now, most of the hardcore PC gamers are the original gamers, who were far fewer when they where children than the children gamers of today. In time I believe the more hardcore and older audience will expand and PC gaming will surge forth a bit more since the larger the audience, the larger the profits. Maybe I'm just hoping here though.

 

[XZaapryca]

[citation][nom]adamboy64[/nom]In terms of graphics, sure. PC Hardware is updated more often than consoles.[/citation]
In terms of everything. Graphics, i/o choices, scalability, multitasking, and experience control. Comcast doesn't drop kick my PC off the net if I'm running FW on my DVD drive it doesn't like.

You can buy a Boxter and think it's great, but it'll never be a 911, let alone a GT.

 

[amk09]

[citation][nom]haze4peace[/nom]"We seem to lead the charts in piracy by a large margin"People don't actually want to play the game, they just want to benchmark their brand new shiny computers. Would you pay full game price for a benchmark?[/citation]

If you can't afford to buy a $50-$60 dollar PC game, then you certainly shouldn't be able to afford a rig thats worth benchmarking. End of story.

Besides that, there is plenty of free benchmarking software available, no need to pirate a game for the lame reason of "benchmarking", let alone any reason.

Buy the FU**ING game if you want PC gaming to have a future.

 

[tykel]

Crytek, but more importantly EA and other publishers, should be aware that selling games for $60 is not viable in the long-term. The best way of sidestepping the piracy issue would be to use Steam which makes piracy a lot more difficult, as well as promoting lower (and fairer) prices.
I agree that it would be a real shame to see Crytek go from leading the PC graphics frontier, to simply port console games.
I also think it is unfair that PCs be treated as the ugly duckling of this console generation. Unfortunately, until it makes economic sense to do otherwise, why would you?

 

[osxsier]

First, the PC is more than "a whole generation" ahead of the XBOX and PS3. Its more like 3 or 4 generations ahead.

Secondly, if the game is a quality game, people will rush out and buy, i.e.Starcraft II, Civ V, etc.

I see one of the biggest issues on the PC is World of Warcraft. It has cannibalized so many other games sales, that someone or something needs to kill this game.

Sure, there are always going to be those that pirate. But then there are always going to be people willing to pay for the hard work put in. If the game is good, it will sell. Period.

 

[bv90andy]

Nothing new here, ALSO xbox360 and the PS3 were made with technologies that were used by PCs in 2005-2006... one might think that current PCs are 4 generations ahead.

 

[robochump]

[citation][nom]fonzy[/nom]Prove it then Crytek!...seriously when are we going to see another game that will push the graphics envelope for the PC?The PC community is getting sick of ports.[/citation]

Again thank piracy for ported games... When it is all said and done it is all about the money! And currently PC gaming is NOT where the money is. I am hoping that changes!

 

[frozenlead]

"We seem to lead the charts in piracy by a large margin, a chart leading that is not desirable. I believe that's the core problem of PC Gaming, piracy. To the degree PC gamers that pirate games inherently destroy the platform. Similar games on consoles sell factors of 4-5 more. It was a big lesson for us and I believe we won't have PC exclusives as we did with Crysis in future. We are going to support PC, but not exclusive anymore.”

What charts? Proof, please?!
Simply comparing sales numbers doesn't capture the full picture. You should compare sales numbers relative to the marketshare of the platform. You're going to sell more games on the consoles because they're more popular; that doesn't mean that piracy is necessarily making you sell 4-5 times fewer copies on PCs.
BS stats, BS reasoning, all lines up to what will be just another console port.

 

[amk09]

To elaborate even further on my previous point...this applies to both consoles and PC's.

WHY EVEN BUY A GAMING SYSTEM, IF YOU CAN NOT AFFORD TO BUY THE GAMES???

That's like buying a 10 cylinder Dodge Ram truck, and then crying about how much gas you have to buy because you only get 8 miles per gallon.

If you don't have enough money to afford the occasional $50-60 game, then you should not be investing in a gaming system in the first place.

 

[phate]

You can buy a Boxter and think it's great, but it'll never be a 911, let alone a GT.

Actually most rags rate the Boxster as more enjoyable and a better driving experience than the 911. It's mid-engined and better balanced, as compared to the polish a turd rear-engine design of the 911.

http://www.caranddriver.com/features/10q4/2011_10best_cars-10best_cars/2011_porsche_boxster_2f_cayman_page_10

But other than that yes, your post is spot on, everything about a modern PC is superior to console hardware.

 

[requiemsallure]

umm, seriously? PC is probably a good 2 generations ahead, and for a few simple reasons im sure there are more.

1. Graphics already looks a hell'ava lot better on PC.

2. I doubt any PS3 or Xbox360 game has ever even hit 720p, try to set your TV to a 1:1 ratio, and see what you get, you'll understand then that this is the only way they can get graphics as good as they have on a system that runs essentially a Radeon X1900 (Source: Wikipedia - The Xenos is a custom graphics processing unit (GPU) designed by ATI, used in the Xbox 360 video game console. Developed under the codename "C1,"[1] it is in many ways related to the R500 desktop PC graphics card series and therefore very similar to an ATI Radeon X1900 PC graphics card as far as features and performance are concerned.) most games are upscaled to 720p or 1080p, which in my opinion looks nothing like true 1080p.

so actually, how many generations is the PC ahead exactly? 4?