Crysis Dev Looks To The Future

Andy Chalk

One Flag, One Fleet, One Cat
Nov 12, 2002
45,698
1
0
Crysis Dev Looks To The Future


Crytek [http://www.crytek.com/] co-founder Cevat Yerli says the next major advance in graphics technology won't come until 2011 or 2012, and this time around it will be consoles, rather than PCs, that drive things forward.

Based in Germany, Crytek is known for developing high-end game engines that maximize the abilities of graphics technology. Its first release, 2004's Crysis [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far_Cry], is even more complex and is one of the first games developed to take advantage of DirectX 10.

"The next graphics breakthrough will come in 2011/12, especially because it will be linked to next-generation consoles," Yerli said in an interview with GameSpot [http://uk.gamespot.com/news/6198054.html]. "I think the PlayStation 4, or the Xbox 720, and the PC generation that equals that will see a renaissance kicking in that will allow us to effectively deliver visuals that will rival offline CGI productions right now. With that, you'll see a variety of visual styles and identities, as well as techniques used to make more creative images than we have seen today."

He claimed that although there will be refinements, current game visuals will remain largely unchanged over the next few years. "We [are limited] by the 360 [http://www.playstation.com] hardware, but maybe on the PC we can scale some more. This will bridge the gap to some degree between current and next-gen on the PC without any new code. The possibilities we have are limited right now by the console generations," he said.

Yerli also predicted that the next major generation of graphics technology will lead to minimal changes in "realism," and will instead focus on things like big improvements in reflections, lighting, unique geometries and textures. "We'll see much more diverse visual development than we're seeing in today," he said. "So by then, maybe five out of ten games will be looking really different, whereas today eight out of ten look very similar."



Permalink
 

stompy

New member
Jan 21, 2008
2,951
0
0
Maybe he should be looking to actually make games that, you know, are great for things except graphics... or perhaps trying to please today's customers... just a suggestion is all.
 

bok

New member
Aug 25, 2007
12
0
0
stompy post=7.72249.754940 said:
Maybe he should be looking to actually make games that, you know, are great for things except graphics... or perhaps trying to please today's customers... just a suggestion is all.
That's a crazy type of idea son, what we need are more graphics for tiny parts of the market to enjoy.
 

Downside

New member
Sep 16, 2008
154
0
0
hang on a second, limited by the PS3's hardware? i thought it was suppose to last for 10 years?

that cant be right surely.
 

stompy

New member
Jan 21, 2008
2,951
0
0
Downside post=7.72249.755006 said:
hang on a second, limited by the PS3's hardware? i thought it was suppose to last for 10 years?

that cant be right surely.
Uh... surprisingly, the PS3 and Xbox 360 have quite similar graphics cards, and both have 512MB RAM, meaning their graphics output is quite similar. Of course, there are differences, but it's not like one is completely better that the other when it comes to hardware (unless you're talking about Blu-ray, which is a whole 'nother discussion).

Still, it doesn't make this idiot's claims any sillier. He made a game that's yet to be played by the majority of the gaming market in Very High, yet he's already thinking about next generation. Especially after his game was criticised by gamers for its short game length and mediocre gameplay, things that can be fixed in this generation.

It's unfortunate, as this kind of mentality, this graphics race, is really killing the games market. It's developers like Crytech leading the games development industry in the wrong direction.
 

dochmbi

New member
Sep 15, 2008
753
0
0
Hardware enthusiasts are moaning that because of consolization, graphics are now progressing in bigger jumps rather than in small steps.
Personally I think it's a good development, because if I buy new hardware whenever the new generation starts (next is 2012 I think), I will be able to run every game for that generation without having to upgrade, which is great.
 

Unknower

New member
Jun 4, 2008
865
0
0
stompy post=7.72249.755042 said:
Downside post=7.72249.755006 said:
hang on a second, limited by the PS3's hardware? i thought it was suppose to last for 10 years?

that cant be right surely.
Uh... surprisingly, the PS3 and Xbox 360 have quite similar graphics cards, and both have 512MB RAM, meaning their graphics output is quite similar. Of course, there are differences, but it's not like one is completely better that the other when it comes to hardware (unless you're talking about Blu-ray, which is a whole 'nother discussion).

Still, it doesn't make this idiot's claims any sillier. He made a game that's yet to be played by the majority of the gaming market in Very High, yet he's already thinking about next generation. Especially after his game was criticised by gamers for its short game length and mediocre gameplay, things that can be fixed in this generation.

It's unfortunate, as this kind of mentality, this graphics race, is really killing the games market. It's developers like Crytech leading the games development industry in the wrong direction.
Gamers thought Crysis had good gameplay.

Ooh, you said that gamers think it had mediocre gameplay and I said it had good gameplay. I wonder who's more right in generalizing the thoughts of millions of gamers.
 

Gxas

New member
Sep 4, 2008
3,187
0
0
If Microsoft actually calls their new system the Xbox 720 I'm gonna be pissed...
 

scarbunny

Beware of geeks bearing gifs.
Aug 11, 2008
398
0
21
No Crysis defiantly had mediocre game play, and story and they destroy everything physics weren’t that great either considering you couldn’t shot through the tin shack.
 

ElArabDeMagnifico

New member
Dec 20, 2007
3,775
0
0
OK so Crytek is saying they won't develop for consoles until the next-gen.

So now we turn this into a bash crytek fest?
 

Aries_Split

New member
May 12, 2008
2,097
0
0
stompy post=7.72249.755042 said:
Downside post=7.72249.755006 said:
hang on a second, limited by the PS3's hardware? i thought it was suppose to last for 10 years?

that cant be right surely.
Uh... surprisingly, the PS3 and Xbox 360 have quite similar graphics cards, and both have 512MB RAM, meaning their graphics output is quite similar. Of course, there are differences, but it's not like one is completely better that the other when it comes to hardware (unless you're talking about Blu-ray, which is a whole 'nother discussion).

Still, it doesn't make this idiot's claims any sillier. He made a game that's yet to be played by the majority of the gaming market in Very High, yet he's already thinking about next generation. Especially after his game was criticised by gamers for its short game length and mediocre gameplay, things that can be fixed in this generation.

It's unfortunate, as this kind of mentality, this graphics race, is really killing the games market. It's developers like Crytech leading the games development industry in the wrong direction.
Umm...No.

First of all, the 360 has 512mbs of shared memory between the GPU and CPU. The PS3 has 2 seperate instances of 256mb. One for CPU, One for GPU.

Secondly, the 360's graphics card is akin to about a 6800XT or a 7600 GT. The ps3's is equivalent to a 7800GTX Ultra. They are even based off the same chipset.
 

Acaroid

New member
Aug 11, 2008
863
0
0
The probalme with current "next Gen" consoles, they arnt anything speical... I remember when the PS2 first came out, the games ported to PC really struggled under the (at the time) massive weight of the ps2 hardware....

The post next gen consoles really need to step it up and bring out something amazing!
 

Aries_Split

New member
May 12, 2008
2,097
0
0
Acaroid post=7.72249.758767 said:
The probalme with current "next Gen" consoles, they arnt anything speical... I remember when the PS2 first came out, the games ported to PC really struggled under the (at the time) massive weight of the ps2 hardware....

The post next gen consoles really need to step it up and bring out something amazing!
...I don't remember anything close to that.
 

stompy

New member
Jan 21, 2008
2,951
0
0
Aries_Split post=7.72249.758463 said:
Gamers thought Crysis had good gameplay.

Ooh, you said that gamers think it had mediocre gameplay and I said it had good gameplay. I wonder who's more right in generalizing the thoughts of millions of gamers.
I will admit I was generalising. Of course, this is from information I got from general conversations, so it does some truth to it.

Aries_Split post=7.72249.758463 said:
First of all, the 360 has 512mbs of shared memory between the GPU and CPU. The PS3 has 2 seperate instances of 256mb. One for CPU, One for GPU.

Secondly, the 360's graphics card is akin to about a 6800XT or a 7600 GT. The ps3's is equivalent to a 7800GTX Ultra. They are even based off the same chipset.

See, having split RAM has its disadvantages. If a game needs to use the GPU more, then, on the Xbox 360, it has the extra RAM that the CPU isn't using. On the PS3, it's stuck with the 256MB allocated to it. That's why, if memory serves me, Intel Core 2 Duo processors have unified cache, since it means that the cache can be used for the processor that needs it, especially when only one processor's being used. Also, the Xbox 360 has an extra 10MB eDRAM for what it's worth.

As for graphics cards, you have a point. Though, from what I've seen (some old pics from Gamespot), the Xbox 360 has better texture rendering, while the PS3 has better lighting capabilities. Both have hardware that are better suited for different operations, but it's the kind of difference that needs to be focused on to be seen. Ultimately, one console doesn't blow the other out in terms of hardware, which is the point I've been trying to get at.
 

Aries_Split

New member
May 12, 2008
2,097
0
0
stompy post=7.72249.758771 said:
Aries_Split post=7.72249.758463 said:
Gamers thought Crysis had good gameplay.

Ooh, you said that gamers think it had mediocre gameplay and I said it had good gameplay. I wonder who's more right in generalizing the thoughts of millions of gamers.
I will admit I was generalising. Of course, this is from information I got from general conversations, so it does some truth to it.

I do believe your wrong about your comment on multi core processors. It isn't two processors handling two different tasks, it's them both working on the same task. Thinka bout it like this, they are knitting, and each core has it's own thread. Those threads work together to weave faster than one. Therefor, there is never one processor working while the other isn't. Unless we are getting into Multi CPU area, which is a different can of worms.

Aries_Split post=7.72249.758463 said:
First of all, the 360 has 512mbs of shared memory between the GPU and CPU. The PS3 has 2 seperate instances of 256mb. One for CPU, One for GPU.

Secondly, the 360's graphics card is akin to about a 6800XT or a 7600 GT. The ps3's is equivalent to a 7800GTX Ultra. They are even based off the same chipset.

See, having split RAM has its disadvantages. If a game needs to use the GPU more, then, on the Xbox 360, it has the extra RAM that the CPU isn't using. On the PS3, it's stuck with the 256MB allocated to it. That's why, if memory serves me, Intel Core 2 Duo processors have unified cache, since it means that the cache can be used for the processor that needs it, especially when only one processor's being used. Also, the Xbox 360 has an extra 10MB eDRAM for what it's worth.

As for graphics cards, you have a point. Though, from what I've seen (some old pics from Gamespot), the Xbox 360 has better texture rendering, while the PS3 has better lighting capabilities. Both have hardware that are better suited for different operations, but it's the kind of difference that needs to be focused on to be seen. Ultimately, one console doesn't blow the other out in terms of hardware, which is the point I've been trying to get at.
eDRAM doesn't really make much of a difference. I am glad you see that while there are differences, they aren't THAT huge.

On a paper technical war, the PS3 wins, but that doesn't really translate in the real world.
 

stompy

New member
Jan 21, 2008
2,951
0
0
Aries_Split post=7.72249.758775 said:
On a paper technical war, the PS3 wins, but that doesn't really translate in the real world.
I am sorry if it looked like I said anything else. In the end, it's all up to the developer and how they optimise the game for the platform.

On the lighter note, I enjoyed this tech talk... Dunno why, it was... interesting, for lack of better wording.