Discussion What will be the next Far Cry or Crysis ?

[vortex33]

What will be the next Far Cry? I mean the old one really pushes the boundaries of what PC gaming was but Crysis was great at first but when I then saw it, I said this game looks like a port(regeneration health etc) and the newer ones have become more and more scripted. It seems that they are taking short cuts from Hollywood movies through video generation because it's costly emotionally and financially as well as the physical costs(this is the scariest bit about it)

In terms of graphically powering game that is. It seems that whenever we split apart game consoles, We either get very few titles on the PC.

I am betting on Just cause. Even in terms of hardware there is a lack of innovation(What VR? That's not innovative). We need immersive games that take us to a world that can't be matched or re-created anywhere else...

Most of the game engines that developers use follow a script or a pattern when they generate content so you are only getting the superficial side of the game engine not raw grunt of the game engine. This is obviously to save on costs since it's expensive to make a game engine.

 

[Colif]

Most games don't try to push PC to point no one can play them, as that reduces number of buyers

Crysis, the 1st one, was made thinking CPU would be running at 10GHZ by time it was released, but they never got that fast so it took years before PC could run it well. It wasn't intentionally made to be hard to run.

I don't know what might be next one.

 

[vortex33]

Most games don't try to push PC to point no one can play them, as that reduces number of buyers

Crysis, the 1st one, was made thinking CPU would be running at 10GHZ by time it was released, but they never got that fast so it took years before PC could run it well. It wasn't intentionally made to be hard to run.

I don't know what might be next one.

That's because it was using ported code. It's hard for me to prove this but given the fact that the game required extreme requirements, It can be considered as a console port and it still didn't run as expected. The single player campaign was heavily scripted and also the game had regeneration health which is all features from consoles.

I think that Crysis was originally meant for the console but they brought it to the PC because well I won't go into it because all this comes from extreme cruelty. The topic is too dark to talk out on an open forum but also extremely sad and depressing but let's just say that the PC industry was abysmal that time.

Not saying that a lot of effort was put towards the game engine but the game engine requires a lot of tuning.

 

[Colif]

I don't think it was ever a console port, it was made for PC.
The PS3 & Xbox 360 versions used a different version of the cryengine, PC was on version 2, Consoles version 3.

Crysis (video game) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The original Crysis debuted as a PC-exclusive game in 2007, and it quickly became the gold standard for unattainably high-end PC gaming. This was a game that brought most gaming PCs grinding to a halt unless you reduced your graphical settings.

Crysis Q&A - Why Bring the First Crysis Game to Consoles?

Crysis--the first game--is headed to the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 seven months after Crysis 2 already debuted. Why? We ask Crytek president Cevat Yerli.

www.gamespot.com

 

[Silas Sanchez]

Crysis, the 1st one, was made thinking CPU would be running at 10GHZ by time it was released, but they never got that fast so it took years before PC could run it well. It wasn't intentionally made to be hard to run.

At the time Crysis was made it was already widely understood that games need extreme gpu resources and that the cpu was nowhere near as important. In fact, by Crysis it was already well known among gamers that the MHz war was dead and that multicore was the future. Crysis required 2-4 geforce 9800gx2 to run properly at high resolutions with extreme OC dual core cpus. But the sli scaling was very poor.

 

[Silas Sanchez]

As far as next games, forget it, Far Cry is the fast & furious of games, utter western uncultured & untalented garbage. Just the same old copy paste mass produced boring junk designed to milk blind consumers.
I have been waiting for a spiritual remake of original Far Cry 1, something with extreme graphics and dark themes, something truly original. But the masses want fast and the furious. Ridiculous.
We are at a point now were Indie games are much funny than AAA titles.

As far as Crysis goes, Crysis 4 sounds like its going to be another blond bimbo, a complete bore, it will look good but have a ridiculous chessy story and fast paced boring over the top gameplay. For me Crysis series is done. Squid alien monsters?? Come on! they need to stop making western chess and actually make a good game and story. The problem now is consoles cap the game technologically in many ways and we wont expect much, nothing truly pushing the envelope.
Id love to see Crysis go back to its roots but with a much more mature sophistcated story that is more than just shotn monsters. But take at look...people are going crazy over GTA 6! Its like the same boring formula, so there is no point in trying.

 

[PEnns]

I was able to run Crysis (and its new versions) extremely well / very smoothly on my PC. I really don't think my PC at that time was a powerhouse.

Or maybe it was and I didn't realize it ....

 

[hotaru.hino]

That's because it was using ported code. It's hard for me to prove this but given the fact that the game required extreme requirements, It can be considered as a console port and it still didn't run as expected.

This implies that it was developed for consoles first, but the thing is the PC version of Crysis uses CryEngine 2. The console versions of Crysis used CryEngine 3. And as far as I can tell, Crysis and Crysis Warhead were the only games that used CryEngine 2.

Also PC ports from consoles don't necessarily need "extreme requirements" to play. You can find plenty of multi-platform games where the PC doesn't need much higher requirements. But also, hardware requirements on PC doesn't necessarily mean the game absolutely needs those requirements just to run. It just means the lowest end hardware the developer is willing to support. Consider Doom 3 running on a Voodoo2, despite the game officially requiring a GeForce 3 or Radeon 8500

The single player campaign was heavily scripted and also the game had regeneration health which is all features from consoles.

Heavily scripted single player games were nothing new. Consider the original Half-Life.

And game mechanics have nothing to do with what platform a game is developed on.

I think that Crysis was originally meant for the console but they brought it to the PC because well I won't go into it because all this comes from extreme cruelty. The topic is too dark to talk out on an open forum but also extremely sad and depressing but let's just say that the PC industry was abysmal that time.

Not saying that a lot of effort was put towards the game engine but the game engine requires a lot of tuning.

??

This is the first time I'm hearing of this. So either you're a former CryTek employee with juicy details or you're living in some kind of fabricated headspace.

 

[stonecarver]

I have been waiting for a spiritual remake of original Far Cry 1,

Bring back Jack Carver. IDK wright the story line he was in a cryo sleep for the past 20 years thanks to Doyle.

I love the lush islands and the maps back than Imagine what could be done with todays graphics.

I was so excited when Farcry 2 came out and than were in Africa and the whole game had that brown filtering every other game had at the time. Total turn off.

Every new Farcry seems to get farther and farther from original. That's good to a point but not when it could have any title and work but not Farcry 2-3-4-5-6-

I know it's just me I wanted to play more off the original story line.

 

[hotaru.hino]

Well, I guess to throw some sort of answer to the question of "what will be the next Crysis", I'd argue Cyberpunk 2077 has been it for a while. Especially since it seems to be the test bed for NVIDIA's fancy new features. And it's one of the few games that isn't a strategy game I'm aware of that actually can scale up to 8 cores.

 

[Eximo]

Yeah, this is a hard topic. On the one hand we have ray-tracing, and the other we have DLSS and FSR that allow games to run faster then they normally would.

Last of Us has been used as a benchmark pretty regularly this GPU cycle. So that is probably up there. It also looks pretty good even at low settings.

Cyberpunk certainly was an issue when it came out for the mid-range 20 series and 5000 series cards. But the entry level GPUs right now don't have too much trouble running it.

 

[Colif]

Seems I got Crysis & Far Cry mixed up. Its been a few years.
Intel expected CPU would be at 10ghz by the year 2011, and so games aimed at that speed

Speeds in excess of 7 GHz(!), and a pipeline upwards of 50 stages were rumored to be targeted by Intel,

Pentium 5 - a Rare Look Into the CPU That Could Have Been But Never Was - Slashdot

Long-time Slashdot reader alaskana writes: In late 2022 it was revealed that early samples of what was to be the "Pentium 5" processor, codenamed Tejas and Jayhawk were in development and made it as far as being released to board partners for evaluation. A few of these samples made it (of...

hardware.slashdot.org

Funny they still haven't hit 7ghz, 20years later.

 

[hotaru.hino]

Last of Us has been used as a benchmark pretty regularly this GPU cycle. So that is probably up there. It also looks pretty good even at low settings.

Allegedly the problem with TLoU on PC is it doesn't do async compute properly:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1802373604836839508

View: https://x.com/Sebasti66855537/status/1802373604836839508

 

[vortex33]

I don't think it was ever a console port, it was made for PC.
The PS3 & Xbox 360 versions used a different version of the cryengine, PC was on version 2, Consoles version 3.

Crysis (video game) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Crysis Q&A - Why Bring the First Crysis Game to Consoles?

Crysis--the first game--is headed to the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 seven months after Crysis 2 already debuted. Why? We ask Crytek president Cevat Yerli.

www.gamespot.com

You are going to believe what you read? Just see the pattern crysis follows. Compare it to any other console port. Most console ports run terrible on PC hardware and the scaling system of the graphics is broken and that's what I am talking about. Even the graphical setting are locked down and mod support is dead and the community is dead. Not saying that Crysis is or was a bad game but the game is a console port but most people don't want to accept this fact.

At the time Crysis was made it was already widely understood that games need extreme gpu resources and that the cpu was nowhere near as important. In fact, by Crysis it was already well known among gamers that the MHz war was dead and that multicore was the future. Crysis required 2-4 geforce 9800gx2 to run properly at high resolutions with extreme OC dual core cpus. But the sli scaling was very poor.

Crysis was suppose to be a tech demo but the engine never got adopted. The problem is that these people recycle assets and code etc and knowledge and that's the root cause of why there is very little innovation in the PC industry. Same goes for Consoles too. That poor SLI scalling is close but still does not prove that crysis was a console port but deep down I am sure it is.

As far as next games, forget it, Far Cry is the fast & furious of games, utter western uncultured & untalented garbage. Just the same old copy paste mass produced boring junk designed to milk blind consumers.
I have been waiting for a spiritual remake of original Far Cry 1, something with extreme graphics and dark themes, something truly original. But the masses want fast and the furious. Ridiculous.
We are at a point now were Indie games are much funny than AAA titles.

As far as Crysis goes, Crysis 4 sounds like its going to be another blond bimbo, a complete bore, it will look good but have a ridiculous chessy story and fast paced boring over the top gameplay. For me Crysis series is done. Squid alien monsters?? Come on! they need to stop making western chess and actually make a good game and story. The problem now is consoles cap the game technologically in many ways and we wont expect much, nothing truly pushing the envelope.
Id love to see Crysis go back to its roots but with a much more mature sophistcated story that is more than just shotn monsters. But take at look...people are going crazy over GTA 6! Its like the same boring formula, so there is no point in trying.

All these rushed games is something we saw on consoles rather than PC.

I was able to run Crysis (and its new versions) extremely well / very smoothly on my PC. I really don't think my PC at that time was a powerhouse.

Or maybe it was and I didn't realize it ....

Again the issue isn't whether you could run crysis it's the scalability of the graphics and the system requirements to make to run properly so that it looks pleasing and plays to what you expect it to play. High end PC to this day still struggle to play crysis on the highest setting. The remastered looks great but again not talking about optimization but the game can't run on older hardware like certain games can. The settings are preset no side panel between left to right to even custom where you can go beyond 0-100% scalability.

Even the new remastered sure looks great superficially but technically it's missing something

Well, I guess to throw some sort of answer to the question of "what will be the next Crysis", I'd argue Cyberpunk 2077 has been it for a while. Especially since it seems to be the test bed for NVIDIA's fancy new features. And it's one of the few games that isn't a strategy game I'm aware of that actually can scale up to 8 cores.

Again but it uses film and pictures rather than actually generating it through the background.

Yeah, this is a hard topic. On the one hand we have ray-tracing, and the other we have DLSS and FSR that allow games to run faster then they normally would.

Last of Us has been used as a benchmark pretty regularly this GPU cycle. So that is probably up there. It also looks pretty good even at low settings.

Cyberpunk certainly was an issue when it came out for the mid-range 20 series and 5000 series cards. But the entry level GPUs right now don't have too much trouble running it.

All these ray tracing technology is from the movie industry and film industry. These are NOT PC technology.

 

[Eximo]

Are you talking about Crysis now, or Crysis 1? Not clear to me what point you are trying make in regards to console ports. Saying that because it is difficult to run on PC that makes it like a console port? I don't see how that follows.

Recycling knowledge is a bad thing, okay. In terms of lack of innovation, what are you expecting? Major titles are designed to make money, not be amazing experiences. The latter is just a consequence. If you want innovation look to indy titles.

I always saw SLI as a niche thing, and I had it several times. Why put the effort into multi-gpu when you could wait around a year or two and a single GPU would do the same job. Catering to the 1% that bought such solutions was never a good idea. I would say the laziness is more today, relying on DLSS and FSR to smooth over the game performance.

All games these days are rushed to meet release deadlines that are major titles. One notable exception in BGIII.

Not even sure what you are trying to say in your second to last post.

Ray tracing was certainly used in films, but that could be said of almost all early CGI. Certainly played with POVRay back in the day. All of the lighting tricks used for games were trying to reduce the need for the computation heavy ray tracing. Now that that computation power is available, ray tracing is easy to implement. Should make game development easier when they stop having to accommodate non-ray tracing capable hardware, but we are still quite a ways off from that.

Or you can look at it this way. Do you want to simulate the way light actually works or do you want to fake it? You seem to think that because it "isn't for gaming", that it is a bad solution. When it is mature enough.

 

[hotaru.hino]

Doom 3 is a classic example of a game that can play on modern and old hardware but it's again a console port.. It's the scalability though works. Crysis slogan was adapt engage and survive. Not sure if that translated very well across to the game itself.

... Doom 3 is a console port? What? I mean the original had a console port to the Xbox, but it was by no means a port from a console to PC. Hell it was announced at an Apple press conference.

Again but it uses film and pictures rather than actually generating it through the background. I guess if we really want that we will all need to go blind and pretty much sacrifice ourselves for it or the land around us.

... What are you even talking about at this point?

All these ray tracing technology is from the movie industry and film industry. These are NOT PC technology.

You do know that early FPS games used the most basic form of the ray tracing algorithm?

I think at this point OP has been smoking something and we're not going to have a meaningful conversation.

 

[Colif]

Crysis was suppose to be a tech demo but the engine never got adopted.

I think you find Farcry was based on a tech demo that Nvidia saw and asked them to use as a tech demo for one of their GPU, and Ubisoft asked them to make it into a game.

EA funded them with the making of Crysis.
Video explains it all:

If you have a counter argument, links would help it.

 

[vortex33]

... Doom 3 is a console port? What? I mean the original had a console port to the Xbox, but it was by no means a port from a console to PC. Hell it was announced at an Apple press conference.


... What are you even talking about at this point?


You do know that early FPS games used the most basic form of the ray tracing algorithm?

I think at this point OP has been smoking something and we're not going to have a meaningful conversation.

Well it's definitely feels like a port. I have very little proof of this but these games are not designed for PC in mind. It's only modders that made it that way. I would say that crysis is perhaps programmed on a MAC than a PC because these days even the snapdragon elite is identical to apple. Also not all of the environment for crysis were destructive. Destructive I really mean destructive or interactive and also interactive but if you want to push it, over time the weather would burry the broken bits of stuff and now that's realism. You also can't even get foot prints in crysis. Some of the bushes were flat and didn't move at all. It seems that they did recycle assets from far cry.

Still the stuff I am seeing from video games is that they are taking the term video games literally without any context and meaning but they are definitely using videos from hollywood especially using a form of video editor to push out their engine as quickly as possible.
Older titles may say that they supported ray tracing but they were just simulating the technology and even now the ray tracing technology is still in primitive stages and has not advanced that much.

Are you talking about Crysis now, or Crysis 1? Not clear to me what point you are trying make in regards to console ports. Saying that because it is difficult to run on PC that makes it like a console port? I don't see how that follows.

Recycling knowledge is a bad thing, okay. In terms of lack of innovation, what are you expecting? Major titles are designed to make money, not be amazing experiences. The latter is just a consequence. If you want innovation look to indy titles.

I always saw SLI as a niche thing, and I had it several times. Why put the effort into multi-gpu when you could wait around a year or two and a single GPU would do the same job. Catering to the 1% that bought such solutions was never a good idea. I would say the laziness is more today, relying on DLSS and FSR to smooth over the game performance.

All games these days are rushed to meet release deadlines that are major titles. One notable exception in BGIII.

Not even sure what you are trying to say in your second to last post.

Ray tracing was certainly used in films, but that could be said of almost all early CGI. Certainly played with POVRay back in the day. All of the lighting tricks used for games were trying to reduce the need for the computation heavy ray tracing. Now that that computation power is available, ray tracing is easy to implement. Should make game development easier when they stop having to accommodate non-ray tracing capable hardware, but we are still quite a ways off from that.

Or you can look at it this way. Do you want to simulate the way light actually works or do you want to fake it? You seem to think that because it "isn't for gaming", that it is a bad solution. When it is mature enough.

It seems that all these games are programmed on a MAC or linux or made on older windows which poses a serious security issue. No wonder why windows requires so many patches. Macs are related even the games are made on Ubuntu or linux distro and the code is then transferred to Mac so that they can patch it later and console games are made on older Windows versions that don't have security updates and are no longer supported. It could be that it's programmed on a MAC and then the code is transferred across through to the PC.

Even the art style you can tell that it was made on cryengine. The ability to fly commache airplanes and newer aircrafts - those are all left out of the game.