Crytek: PCs Are a Generation Ahead of Consoles

[Logan Westbrook]

Crytek: PCs Are a Generation Ahead of Consoles

The technical limitations of the Xbox 360 and the PS3 are holding the PC back, says Crytek CEO Cervat Yerli.

According to Yerli, you don't need to wait for the next PlayStation or Xbox to experience the next generation of gaming, you just need to invest in a decent gaming PC. He believes that the PC platform has left consoles far behind and says that as long as this disparity in power exists, gamers won't be able to get the real benefits of either type of platform.

Yerli thought that games like Crysis 2 [http://www.amazon.com/Crysis-2-Pc/dp/B002BS47YE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1290768962&sr=8-1] represented the ceiling of what could be achieved with the Xbox 360 or the PS3, and said that Crytek would struggle to "squeeze more juice from these rocks." He also thought that future CryEngine projects would be hampered creatively by these technological limitations. Yerli described the vicious circle that he thought was keeping the PC out of the limelight: developers had low sales expectations for the platform, so didn't invest enough in the PC version of a game, which affected revenues and kept the cycle running. He thought that until PC games were making as much as their console counterparts, this cycle would keep running indefinitely.

Nothing that Yerli says is actually untrue: gaming PCs are typically a lot more powerful than consoles and it's mainly financial concerns that keeps developers from using all that power. That said, trying to make it into an "Us vs. Them" discussion just seems entirely unproductive. Games are getting more and more expensive to make, and developers and publishers have to invest their time and money wisely. If there's a fortune to be made in cutting-edge PC games, then Yerli is going to have show people that, not complain that they aren't doing it already.

Crysis 2 comes out for Xbox 360, PS3 and PC on March 22nd.

Source: CVG [http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=277729?cid=OTC-RSS&attr=CVG-News-RSS]


Permalink

 

[Simalacrum]

I guess the rather long console cycle has also let PC's go even further ahead graphically - since console cycles were shorter before, I guess they might have been able to 'catch up' (so to speak) with PC's more frequently in the past... Though, I hastened to point out this is an amateur speaking who has only really been following the gaming industry since this generation of consoles

Still, I remain a console player at heart (even though my PS3 is far away at home and I have no TV at uni... *sniff*) - I honestly don't have £5000 or however much to invest in a big gaming powerhouse of a PC, and my little 13" MacBook Pro can't really compete against my PS3 graphically speaking

Also, graphics aren't everything Crytek! In many cases high-end graphics themselves can hold back games too - just look at Minecraft!

I'm going to be honest here, if Crytek are hampered in creativity terms because of the hardware/graphical limitations of the console systems... then I fear for the innovation department in Crytek =\

 

[Andy of Comix Inc]

In all fairness, it was supposed to be time for a new console generation round about now. With Microsoft and Sony trying to squeeze all they can (and failing), why should developers be left with that baggage, too?

 

[TheRightToArmBears]

The thing is, not that many people have super-powered latest tech PCs. You could make a game for such crazy-ass PCs but it wouldn't sell too well.

 

[The Imp]

So nothing has changed in the past 15 years of gaming. PCs were always a generation ahead of the latest consoles but also much more expensive and more difficult to handle. But thats the point why the mainstream gamers are console gamers, they want to plug the thing in, sit down and play. PC gamers are a whole different type, we usually mess around with preferences and configurations, community created mods and maps. It's more of a tech hobby than just racing/shooting/playing around with pixels and polygons. So, no, the PC market was and will never be as big as the console market as long as the people using them don't change.

The thing is, not that many people have super-powered latest tech PCs. You could make a game for such crazy-ass PCs but it wouldn't sell too well.

I bought my PC in summer 2008 for 1300?, haven't changed a single hardware component since and but i still can play every game on the market on highest settings. I wouldn't be able to do that if the developers were pushing the limit in the graphics department.

 

[mad825]

Also, graphics aren't everything Crytek! In many cases high-end graphics themselves can hold back games too - just look at Minecraft!

what else is there to pick on? the RAM for all of the current gen are easily beaten (512MB RAM DDR3 is sooo expensive), the processors for all of the is severally beaten Finally the storage is laughable

 

[thenumberthirteen]

Yeah. He may be right. I mean consoles, by their nature, are not a gradually evolving platform as PCs are. It's more like Punctuated Equilibrium when new consoles are released. This is one of the longest console cycles in recent times so the gap is growing. Another problem is that high end PC development is expensive, but PC gamers expect to spend less on a game than consolers. PC games are generally £10 cheaper than the 360 or PS3 release; though Digital distribution is more prevalent which can reduce costs. All in all PC gaming is held back a bit by the market, but it's a business and you need to make money.

EDIT: You know I just realised that I've become a PC gamer. My PS3 broke in late September, and I still haven't got it fixed yet. Partly because it's expensive, but also because I've got loads of cool PC games to play now. All I need is a Blu ray drive (about £40 from Amazon) and I've pretty much replaced my PS3.

 

[Ravek]

The thing is, not that many people have super-powered latest tech PCs. You could make a game for such crazy-ass PCs but it wouldn't sell too well.

That's the only type of game Crytek has ever made, and they seem to be doing pretty well.

 

[Calico93]

I guess I agree, to an extent, yeah sure the best most amazing PCs can play really big games, but the thing is not many people have the best PC in teh world as itll probs cost quite a bit and then theres the cost of maintaining it and upgrading it
I think they can be much more advanced but a generation ahead ... I dont really think so.

 

[kittyspartan117]

Want PC gaming to be big? Gotta meet us halve way. Cheaper and less confusing hardware naming, Better labeling on those pieces, and easier instructions on piecing it all together (learned all this the hard way, $300 dollar self-upgrade turned in $700 dollar new computer). Not to dumb down PCs, people need to get actually get smarter too.

 

[Sheinen]

Well, looks like they've hit a brick wall and are complaining about it.

Surely it's more productive to go around, climb over, dig under or smash through the wall? Hell, the truly creative would find a way to dematerialise themselves and walk through it, or transform the solid material into a permeable goo...

My point here being that the constant pressure on games to look as good as possible has had a negative effect, just as it has with movies (Transformers 2). Maybe NOT concentrating on the aesthetics for a while will lead to better crafted experiences? Deeper plots, more engaging characters, greater variety in gameplay... there's still a lot more that you can do with this gen of tech as MS and Sony well know.

 

[Delusibeta]

Yeah, we know. [http://www.gametrailers.com/video/unreal-overview-unreal-engine/707835]

Ultimately, PC gaming won't ever be as big as console gaming, but console gaming's reliance on motion controls will probably make PC gaming bigger.

 

[Reaper69lol]

I miss the days when gaming was not all about the visuals.

 

[kittyspartan117]

Maybe NOT concentrating on the aesthetics for a while will lead to better crafted experiences? Deeper plots, more engaging characters, greater variety in gameplay... there's still a lot more that you can do with this gen of tech as MS and Sony well know.

I doubt MS and Sony are for Deeper plots and characters, or variety, just squeezing their as much money form their consoles as they can with gimmicks...

 

[jords]

I miss the days when gaming was not all about the visuals.

Funny, whenever I see ads for older games, visuals is usually a big selling point of the games ...

 

[Quesa]

That's just crazy, how can hardware that was created a week ago be superior to hardware that was created five years ago?!

 

[JustShyofGenius]

I miss the days when gaming was not all about the visuals.

When was this?

 

[Danish rage]

Maybe NOT concentrating on the aesthetics for a while will lead to better crafted experiences? Deeper plots, more engaging characters, greater variety in gameplay... there's still a lot more that you can do with this gen of tech as MS and Sony well know.

I doubt MS and Sony are for Deeper plots and characters, or variety, just squeezing their as much money form their consoles as they can with gimmicks...

True fanboy hate. I dislike.

OT. Well, duhh?? you have to be some kind of non existing magic retard not to know PC always will be at the frontier of gaming and lightyears ahead of consoles.

But i hornestly think consoles gonna be the only way we play games in the long run.

There will of course be the diehard PC fanatics, but even those will eventually die out when consoles get´s Rts friendly and don´t feel like a joke for mouse and keyboard users in FPS´s.

Or they could just launch WOW and DOTA like games for the next gen console. Maybe not so much, a fun thougt though.

 

[KiKiweaky]

I guess the rather long console cycle has also let PC's go even further ahead graphically - since console cycles were shorter before, I guess they might have been able to 'catch up' (so to speak) with PC's more frequently in the past... Though, I hastened to point out this is an amateur speaking who has only really been following the gaming industry since this generation of consoles

Still, I remain a console player at heart (even though my PS3 is far away at home and I have no TV at uni... *sniff*) - I honestly don't have £5000 or however much to invest in a big gaming powerhouse of a PC, and my little 13" MacBook Pro can't really compete against my PS3 graphically speaking

Also, graphics aren't everything Crytek! In many cases high-end graphics themselves can hold back games too - just look at Minecraft!

I'm going to be honest here, if Crytek are hampered in creativity terms because of the hardware/graphical limitations of the console systems... then I fear for the innovation department in Crytek =\

Well you'd be surprised my computer when i bought it (about 2 years ago) was insane but it is still more than capeable of running the new games coming out, it 'only' cost ?2,000 now i notice the only is in quotation marks :/

I could afford it as I was working for an entire summer and living at home (no bills \o/) while waiting for the next semester of college to start. Currently I have a 1gig graphics card in it, cost about £350 when I bought it. The shocking thing is for me to be able to play most modern games I need to fork out more for a graphics card than I would for a console and thats not counting all the other things you have to buy. Motherboard, processor, RAM, hard drive.....

Simply comes down to a matter of money, people can't afford to invest in a gaming pc. Which is a shame but also entirely understandable.

 

[RobfromtheGulag]

I can appreciate that pcs are stronger, but at the same time there is a certain security in having a high end gaming pc. I won't have to drop 2 grand every time they come out with a new video card because I know games are still going to look good for a couple years due to this console limitation.