Crysis 3 on the Wii U? "Fat Chance"

[Greg Tito]

Crysis 3 on the Wii U? "Fat Chance"

Crytek doesn't think Nintendo's new console can handle it.

Remember when the first Crysis came out? It was such a resource hog that just getting 20 fps took a hugely expensive gaming PC. The second Crysis game was a bit better, perhaps because of years of optimization, but also due to its nanosuit-powered leap to consoles. The newly announced Crysis 3 will likely possess graphics as crisp as its predecessors, and that means it will need at least the beefy graphics processing of a decent PC rig and the HD consoles like the Xbox 360 and the PS3. There won't likely be a port to the Wii, and even Nintendo's upcoming new console the Wii U won't have enough juice to get the nanosuit working with any fluidity, at least according to Rasmus Hoejengaard, Crytek's Director of Creative Development.

Will Crysis 3 appear on the Wii U? Hoejengaard said there's "not a fat chance" of that happening.

"I don't think it's going to be possible" for Crysis 3 to use the Wii U's hardware. "The launch platforms are the PC, Xbox 360 and the PS3. I don't think it's in the cards to do a Wii U version of it," he continued.

Sorry, Nintendo fans. Chalk up one more third party developer that's not planning on supporting the new platform.

Source: Destructoid [http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=IDCDNlGhgdE#!]


Permalink

 

[therandombear]

Hasn't it been "confirmed" that the Wii U will be several times more powerful then the 360 or PS3?

So, technically it has more then enough "juice" to run it, but I guess it's cheaper to not make a Wii U version.

 

[SuperTrainStationH]

"Crytek doesn't think Nintendo's new console can handle it."

That's not what was said in the interview at all.

That non-quote makes it out like Crytek dislikes or has low expectations of Wii U in general, which flies in the face of earlier quotes from Crytek which I believe went as far as to say that the preliminary Wii U devkits they were working with had "very good specs" and that they were "very happy with it" or something to that general effect.

Additionally, hasn't Crytek already confirmed Wii U support anyway?

The way the story was written here seems to make a hell of a lot of assumptions that aren't featured in the actual interview, some of which to the best of my knowledge are objectively incorrect, or are based on conjecture that's not congruent with what most named, sourced developers who have spoken out about Wii U have said about its capabilities.

 

[CrystalShadow]

"Crytek doesn't think Nintendo's new console can handle it."

That's not what was said in the interview at all.

That non-quote makes it out like Crytek dislikes or has low expectations of Wii U in general, which flies in the face of earlier quotes from Crytek which I believe went as far as to say that the preliminary Wii U devkits they were working with had "very good specs" and that they were "very happy with it" or something to that general effect.

Additionally, hasn't Crytek already confirmed Wii U support anyway?

The way the story was written here seems to make a hell of a lot of assumptions that aren't featured in the actual interview, some of which to the best of my knowledge are objectively incorrect, or are based on conjecture that's not congruent with what most named, sourced developers who have spoken out about Wii U have said about its capabilities.

Yeah, I have to agree with this. What is up with these kind of articles?
Sure, Wii U specs are rumours right now, and overall it might seem below expectations, but it seems fairly obvious that it will at least be more powerful than the 360 and PS3.

How then, is it plausible to find an article claiming:

1. The Wii U is not powerful enough to run Crysis 3
2. Crysis 3 will be released on Xbox 360 and PS3

One of these two statements is almost certainly false.

 

[BrotherRool]

"Crytek doesn't think Nintendo's new console can handle it."

That's not what was said in the interview at all.

That non-quote makes it out like Crytek dislikes or has low expectations of Wii U in general, which flies in the face of earlier quotes from Crytek which I believe went as far as to say that the preliminary Wii U devkits they were working with had "very good specs" and that they were "very happy with it" or something to that general effect.

Additionally, hasn't Crytek already confirmed Wii U support anyway?

The way the story was written here seems to make a hell of a lot of assumptions that aren't featured in the actual interview, some of which to the best of my knowledge are objectively incorrect, or are based on conjecture that's not congruent with what most named, sourced developers who have spoken out about Wii U have said about its capabilities.

Yeah, I have to agree with this. What is up with these kind of articles?
Sure, Wii U specs are rumours right now, and overall it might seem below expectations, but it seems fairly obvious that it will at least be more powerful than the 360 and PS3.

How then, is it plausible to find an article claiming:

1. The Wii U is not powerful enough to run Crysis 3
2. Crysis 3 will be released on Xbox 360 and PS3

One of these two statements is almost certainly false.

It's not obvious that the Wii U will be more powerful though (well it would seem obvious, but this is Nintendo and they don't always do obvious ), people have been talking about on par so far and remember it's hard to squeeze full power out of a console for the first couple of years of development.

It's hard to find anything solid but we have this one
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/116517-Darksiders-Dev-Wii-U-is-on-Par-With-Current-Gen
this one
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-04-05-nintendo-responds-to-wii-u-power-reports
and this one
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-04-03-wii-u-not-as-capable-as-ps3-xbox-360-report

all suggesting that the Wii U is on par so much with the 360 and PS3 or even slightly inferior. The one from Nintendo seems to be all but confirmation. They say numbers aren't important but if they had the numbers they wouldn't be risking all this negative PR

It's a bit worrying, my first thought was that it'd keep down the price, but the controller system is already making the price high. I guess Nintendo are committing to the idea that power convinces developers to spend too much time and resources on games

 

[SuperTrainStationH]

"Crytek doesn't think Nintendo's new console can handle it."

That's not what was said in the interview at all.

That non-quote makes it out like Crytek dislikes or has low expectations of Wii U in general, which flies in the face of earlier quotes from Crytek which I believe went as far as to say that the preliminary Wii U devkits they were working with had "very good specs" and that they were "very happy with it" or something to that general effect.

Additionally, hasn't Crytek already confirmed Wii U support anyway?

The way the story was written here seems to make a hell of a lot of assumptions that aren't featured in the actual interview, some of which to the best of my knowledge are objectively incorrect, or are based on conjecture that's not congruent with what most named, sourced developers who have spoken out about Wii U have said about its capabilities.

Yeah, I have to agree with this. What is up with these kind of articles?
Sure, Wii U specs are rumours right now, and overall it might seem below expectations, but it seems fairly obvious that it will at least be more powerful than the 360 and PS3.

How then, is it plausible to find an article claiming:

1. The Wii U is not powerful enough to run Crysis 3
2. Crysis 3 will be released on Xbox 360 and PS3

One of these two statements is almost certainly false.

It's not obvious that the Wii U will be more powerful though (well it would seem obvious, but this is Nintendo and they don't always do obvious ), people have been talking about on par so far and remember it's hard to squeeze full power out of a console for the first couple of years of development.

It's hard to find anything solid but we have this one
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/116517-Darksiders-Dev-Wii-U-is-on-Par-With-Current-Gen
this one
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-04-05-nintendo-responds-to-wii-u-power-reports
and this one
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-04-03-wii-u-not-as-capable-as-ps3-xbox-360-report

all suggesting that the Wii U is on par so much with the 360 and PS3 or even slightly inferior. The one from Nintendo seems to be all but confirmation. They say numbers aren't important but if they had the numbers they wouldn't be risking all this negative PR

It's a bit worrying, my first thought was that it'd keep down the price, but the controller system is already making the price high. I guess Nintendo are committing to the idea that power convinces developers to spend too much time and resources on games

All but confirmation?

The response from Nintendo neither confirms or denies ANY claim about Wii U's capabilities.

And the third link saying that Wii U is less capable than the currently available HD systems is sourced from two or three anonymous sources which go AGAINST what many other named, on the record source have said about Wii U's capabilities, including Crytek themselves.

http://aussie-gamer.com/rumor-2/debunking-the-under-powered-nintendo-wii-u-rumour-is-surprisingly-easy/

 

[Mr. Omega]

So an EA-published style-over-substance FPS game isn't coming to the WiiU?
Huh. I guess Nintendo really is trying to appeal to hardcore gamers.

In all seriousness:
1: "Another" 3rd party? Where are the reports of the others that have said they won't?
2: People in Crytek have already said they were working on it. Or at least that it could run the Cryengine 3
3: It just sounds like there won't be a port. Unless there's more quoted that isn't in the article.

 

[gigastar]

I would think this has more to do with Nintendo forcing Crytek to utilise the WiiU controllers unique features.

And then forcing them to tone down all those bodily fluids that come gushing out of knife wounds.

And then the prospect of having to deal with Nintendo's infamous online support schemes.

And then developing a game like Crysis 3 on a new console for a release in line with its competitors.

Processor power hardly needs to come into it.

Hasn't it been "confirmed" that the Wii U will be several times more powerful then the 360 or PS3?

Nothings confirmed until Nintendo actually rolls out the info at E3.

Everything until then is best dismissed as optimistic rumors. Or degradatory rumors, whichever you deem fit to label them.

 

[BrotherRool]

"Crytek doesn't think Nintendo's new console can handle it."

That's not what was said in the interview at all.

That non-quote makes it out like Crytek dislikes or has low expectations of Wii U in general, which flies in the face of earlier quotes from Crytek which I believe went as far as to say that the preliminary Wii U devkits they were working with had "very good specs" and that they were "very happy with it" or something to that general effect.

Additionally, hasn't Crytek already confirmed Wii U support anyway?

The way the story was written here seems to make a hell of a lot of assumptions that aren't featured in the actual interview, some of which to the best of my knowledge are objectively incorrect, or are based on conjecture that's not congruent with what most named, sourced developers who have spoken out about Wii U have said about its capabilities.

Yeah, I have to agree with this. What is up with these kind of articles?
Sure, Wii U specs are rumours right now, and overall it might seem below expectations, but it seems fairly obvious that it will at least be more powerful than the 360 and PS3.

How then, is it plausible to find an article claiming:

1. The Wii U is not powerful enough to run Crysis 3
2. Crysis 3 will be released on Xbox 360 and PS3

One of these two statements is almost certainly false.

It's not obvious that the Wii U will be more powerful though (well it would seem obvious, but this is Nintendo and they don't always do obvious ), people have been talking about on par so far and remember it's hard to squeeze full power out of a console for the first couple of years of development.

It's hard to find anything solid but we have this one
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/116517-Darksiders-Dev-Wii-U-is-on-Par-With-Current-Gen
this one
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-04-05-nintendo-responds-to-wii-u-power-reports
and this one
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-04-03-wii-u-not-as-capable-as-ps3-xbox-360-report

all suggesting that the Wii U is on par so much with the 360 and PS3 or even slightly inferior. The one from Nintendo seems to be all but confirmation. They say numbers aren't important but if they had the numbers they wouldn't be risking all this negative PR

It's a bit worrying, my first thought was that it'd keep down the price, but the controller system is already making the price high. I guess Nintendo are committing to the idea that power convinces developers to spend too much time and resources on games

All but confirmation?

The response from Nintendo neither confirms or denies ANY claim about Wii U's capabilities.

And the third link saying that Wii U is less capable than the currently available HD systems is sourced from two or three anonymous sources which go against what many other named, on the record source have said about Wii U's capabilities.

http://aussie-gamer.com/rumor-2/debunking-the-under-powered-nintendo-wii-u-rumour-is-surprisingly-easy/

Well I don't care enough to get in an argument about this but my feeling is if Nintendo said 'we don't comment on these issues' fair enough it could go either way. However they actually did respond and it was a 'we're not going to say anything, but it doesn't matter if we lose anyway because we're not really playing' which is more suspicious

The article you linked to is interesting. Some of it's arguments are pretty weak, we've had leaks with all the previous generations and it was pretty rare for someone to give out exact specs. I reckon it would be pretty normal in most peoples minds that a general overview is fair enough but details is getting close to being pretty darn unethical.

And the article claims that the Darksiders devs said the Wii U is powerful when we also have quotes from the Darksiders devs saying 'on par'

"We got the game running on their hardware pretty quickly," game director Marvin Donald explained to Gamereactor. "Visually, for the most part, it'll be pretty much the same. So far the hardware's been on par with what we have with current generations."

So that article itself is itself sourcing pretty poorly. The stuff about the shader model is much more optimistic though and pretty cool. Good evidence to support the Wii U. On the other hand a 2008 graphics card probably won't exactly outstrip the current gen. Especially because I think the 360 and PS3 paid for some custom tech rather than using something freely available? Considering that gap in technology between say Uncharted 1 and Uncharted 2 it's not unreasonable to assume they might be struggling to initially beat the current systems. Although considering the card has been used commercially for 4 years they should really be able to adapt quicker (Although I guess it's more about how the system as a whole works than the components)

But the article does make those two sources sound iffy. Not so much on the 'mysterious interview' because that's silly, it's far more likely just to be an email or casual conversation and it wouldn't be surprising if they asked Game Industry not to expose them for breaking whatever NDA's they've signed. But the stuff about more shaders does sound pretty unlegit and it doesn't sound like an incredibly reliable source (although they did say the magazine was normally pretty good at these things?)

Tell you what, when it coems out and we actually know the answer, whoever turned out to be right can message the other an I told you so

EDIT: Sorry I didn't mean to sound so patronising on my part. You have exactly the same right to challenge me as I challenged the person I was replying to, the weariness on my part wasn't/souldn't have been 'gosh why are you playing around with all this speculation' and more a 'okay you've made reasonable points and _I_ have reached my limit in being able to debate them'

 

[CrystalShadow]

"Crytek doesn't think Nintendo's new console can handle it."

That's not what was said in the interview at all.

That non-quote makes it out like Crytek dislikes or has low expectations of Wii U in general, which flies in the face of earlier quotes from Crytek which I believe went as far as to say that the preliminary Wii U devkits they were working with had "very good specs" and that they were "very happy with it" or something to that general effect.

Additionally, hasn't Crytek already confirmed Wii U support anyway?

The way the story was written here seems to make a hell of a lot of assumptions that aren't featured in the actual interview, some of which to the best of my knowledge are objectively incorrect, or are based on conjecture that's not congruent with what most named, sourced developers who have spoken out about Wii U have said about its capabilities.

Yeah, I have to agree with this. What is up with these kind of articles?
Sure, Wii U specs are rumours right now, and overall it might seem below expectations, but it seems fairly obvious that it will at least be more powerful than the 360 and PS3.

How then, is it plausible to find an article claiming:

1. The Wii U is not powerful enough to run Crysis 3
2. Crysis 3 will be released on Xbox 360 and PS3

One of these two statements is almost certainly false.

It's not obvious that the Wii U will be more powerful though (well it would seem obvious, but this is Nintendo and they don't always do obvious ), people have been talking about on par so far and remember it's hard to squeeze full power out of a console for the first couple of years of development.

It's hard to find anything solid but we have this one
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/116517-Darksiders-Dev-Wii-U-is-on-Par-With-Current-Gen
this one
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-04-05-nintendo-responds-to-wii-u-power-reports
and this one
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-04-03-wii-u-not-as-capable-as-ps3-xbox-360-report

all suggesting that the Wii U is on par so much with the 360 and PS3 or even slightly inferior. The one from Nintendo seems to be all but confirmation. They say numbers aren't important but if they had the numbers they wouldn't be risking all this negative PR

It's a bit worrying, my first thought was that it'd keep down the price, but the controller system is already making the price high. I guess Nintendo are committing to the idea that power convinces developers to spend too much time and resources on games

Hmm. That is odd.

I have a fair grasp of estimated hardware power of consoles owing to their relation to PC hardware. (Architectural overheads on PC and optimisation issues mean a console with a given spec is more powerful than an equivalent PC, especially towards the end of a console cycle).

For this to be true though, it'd have to be really low-end components.

(Some articles implied it's about 3 times the power of an Xbox 360... But who knows? Especially when comparing a new console to one where games have been heavily optimised.)

I feel reasonably confident in the rumours that it's based around Ati 4000 series components.

To put that in perspective, the PS3 uses a close relation of an Nvidia 7800, while the 360 uses something closely related to the ATI 2000 series, but slightly less advanced.

The Xbox Xenos graphics chip has just 48 shaders, and the weakest 4000 series gpu in the entire range already has 40.

figures like that alone don't really tell you the whole story.
Benchmarks give a better picture.

3dmark06 scores imply a midrange part from this range should be around 20% faster than the PS3 gpu.
So... Any implication that is slower would suggest the use of very cheap low-end parts.

I guess it's possible, but... It's a little disturbing.

(Especially since the use of a controller with a display would in some cases imply needing to process a combined resolution somewhat higher than HD resolutions alone.)

Who knows. Though Nintendo's usual cryptic comments on the matter aren't encouraging either.

 

[BrotherRool]

"Crytek doesn't think Nintendo's new console can handle it."

That's not what was said in the interview at all.

That non-quote makes it out like Crytek dislikes or has low expectations of Wii U in general, which flies in the face of earlier quotes from Crytek which I believe went as far as to say that the preliminary Wii U devkits they were working with had "very good specs" and that they were "very happy with it" or something to that general effect.

Additionally, hasn't Crytek already confirmed Wii U support anyway?

The way the story was written here seems to make a hell of a lot of assumptions that aren't featured in the actual interview, some of which to the best of my knowledge are objectively incorrect, or are based on conjecture that's not congruent with what most named, sourced developers who have spoken out about Wii U have said about its capabilities.

Yeah, I have to agree with this. What is up with these kind of articles?
Sure, Wii U specs are rumours right now, and overall it might seem below expectations, but it seems fairly obvious that it will at least be more powerful than the 360 and PS3.

How then, is it plausible to find an article claiming:

1. The Wii U is not powerful enough to run Crysis 3
2. Crysis 3 will be released on Xbox 360 and PS3

One of these two statements is almost certainly false.

It's not obvious that the Wii U will be more powerful though (well it would seem obvious, but this is Nintendo and they don't always do obvious ), people have been talking about on par so far and remember it's hard to squeeze full power out of a console for the first couple of years of development.

It's hard to find anything solid but we have this one
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/116517-Darksiders-Dev-Wii-U-is-on-Par-With-Current-Gen
this one
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-04-05-nintendo-responds-to-wii-u-power-reports
and this one
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-04-03-wii-u-not-as-capable-as-ps3-xbox-360-report

all suggesting that the Wii U is on par so much with the 360 and PS3 or even slightly inferior. The one from Nintendo seems to be all but confirmation. They say numbers aren't important but if they had the numbers they wouldn't be risking all this negative PR

It's a bit worrying, my first thought was that it'd keep down the price, but the controller system is already making the price high. I guess Nintendo are committing to the idea that power convinces developers to spend too much time and resources on games

Hmm. That is odd.

I have a fair grasp of estimated hardware power of consoles owing to their relation to PC hardware. (Architectural overheads on PC and optimisation issues mean a console with a given spec is more powerful than an equivalent PC, especially towards the end of a console cycle).

For this to be true though, it'd have to be really low-end components.

(Some articles implied it's about 3 times the power of an Xbox 360... But who knows? Especially when comparing a new console to one where games have been heavily optimised.)

I feel reasonably confident in the rumours that it's based around Ati 4000 series components.

To put that in perspective, the PS3 uses a close relation of an Nvidia 7800, while the 360 uses something closely related to the ATI 2000 series, but slightly less advanced.

The Xbox Xenos graphics chip has just 48 shaders, and the weakest 4000 series gpu in the entire range already has 40.

figures like that alone don't really tell you the whole story.
Benchmarks give a better picture.

3dmark06 scores imply a midrange part from this range should be around 20% faster than the PS3 gpu.
So... Any implication that is slower would suggest the use of very cheap low-end parts.

I guess it's possible, but... It's a little disturbing.

(Especially since the use of a controller with a display would in some cases imply needing to process a combined resolution somewhat higher than HD resolutions alone.)

Who knows. Though Nintendo's usual cryptic comments on the matter aren't encouraging either.

I'll bend to you on this one. I think it's pretty clear you're more informed than me about it although from the human perspective I still think Nintendo would either just say 'no comment' or 'No they're wonderful and will fly you to the moon*' if that was the case.

Maybe people mean the controller is going to eat up some of the extra power? The guy who also responded to me pointed out the complaints about pixel shaders wasn't necessarily a legitimate source so it mightn't be true.

If the on-par stuff is true it's going to do some interesting things to the industry. PCs are pulling well away at this point and it doesn't feel like the PS3 and 360 can go on for that much longer so what's going to happen? Will it be another Wii/PS360 situation or will the Wii U actually lengthen the life of the other two?

 

[ph0b0s123]

Crysis 3 on the Wii U? "Fat Chance"

Crytek doesn't think Nintendo's new console can handle it.

Let's be clear here. YOU are saying, YOU don't think it can handle it. I see nowhere in the comment quoted or the video linked this being given as a reason.

From the comments, it would be just as valid to opinion that it won't be launched on the Wii-U due to them not being able to develop this on a console that has not launched yet / had hardware finalised. Or it has a development language they do not have time to learn before the launch date they are trying to hit.

Just to be clear about what is being reported and what is writer opinion in the story.

 

[The White Hunter]

It's pretty much guarenteed the Wii U will be on par if not more powerful than current gen consoles.

So power is not why Crysis 3 won't be happening on Wii U. If anything it's a business decision based on a projected install base that assumes the Wii U won't outnumber the PS3/360 in homes and that development wont be profitable on the format.

Money is always the answer. Especially if EA is involved. Or Activendiizzard or Ubisoft or Capcom, etc.

 

[therandombear]

Hasn't it been "confirmed" that the Wii U will be several times more powerful then the 360 or PS3?

Nothings confirmed until Nintendo actually rolls out the info at E3.

Everything until then is best dismissed as optimistic rumors. Or degradatory rumors, whichever you deem fit to label them.

Ye, hence the quotation marks. You never know with rumors, would be all so much easier if Nintendo just said what the specs were, instead of hogging it until E3, but then that again isn't a wise business move either.

Never easy.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

Wow. This article is....wow. It misrepresents sources, makes claims that contradict things that have already been said, and just plain puts words in Hoejengaard's mouth.