The latest whispers down the lane from Crytek sound something like a Crysis port bound for PlayStation 3, but not Xbox 360, at least, that's what PlayStation World UK is hearing (reposted by Games Radar). "Technical reasons" are cited for the lack of Xbox love, but with money kinda tight these days, we're guessing the gang hasn't turned its back on Microsoft's console just yet. (Heck, Ubisoft managed to shovel some semblance of Far Cry onto the original Xbox.) You can bet EA's got a few tricks up its sleeve too.
We've reached out to the publisher for the customary "no plans" comment. We'll keep y'all posted.
[Thanks, Eugene]
Reader Comments (122)
Posted: Jan 29th 2008 12:41PM quickshade said
First off since it is direct X based and MS has given the development tools (XNA Studio) to port games from PC to 360 and vice-versa I'll take it with a grain of salt. We already know the engine is for both consoles. So technical reasons are bullshit. We shall see what happens.
Reply
Posted: Jan 30th 2008 12:36PM (Unverified) said
Hmmmmm. I've been playing the shit out of UT3 on my PS3 and I love it. I think it looks amazing. I know there's a better version of it on the market and working within the gaming industry is begging me to see it but I'm torn whether or not to spend $5000AU on a PC to run it at best frame rates and the platter of equally important visual offerings (or so I hear/read) Now Cryengine will be deving for consoles? Hmmmmmmm, I'd like to say I don't care and that I'm entirely into games for the fun of playing them but I can't. I do like to look at every intricate detail and I do study the animations and environment and physics effects. I've steered clear from playing PC Crysis as I'm.......well, pissed off that my 'future proof, consoles supposedly aren't capable of running games like it as good as other versions. But, with games like Uncharted being a first release for a new engine on a new console, that has to give hope that future Cryengine console adaptations may well keep up with some of the PC's out there. Not at the moment, but if dev's can work around the limitations then we might be playing some fancy shiny jungle FPSers with all the bells and whistles on the PS3 and 360. The financial future in gaming is in consoles, that I know. I live in Shanghai, China. There is a massive gaming community here, literally 100 times the size of Australia (where I am from) and XBOX isn't supported here at all. You still find consoles (chipped of course) on the 'not so black' market and can buy games for $1 on every corner. Hence it not being supported, there's no point as there's way too much piracy. I know you can chip 360’s but your immediately canned from live so that’s a massive deterrent. This is what is killing the PC market world wide. File sharing as well as expensive hardware and the list goes on. So my point here is PC gaming will always be there and PC's will continue to reign in power performance but will dev's bother spending years deving a game like Crysis on PC again if it doesn't sell as well as it would on a console. Or will devs spend that time making beautiful games for consoles that will surely sell millions if it is as good as Crysis in every aspect? People in China (1 example) can't afford to buy original games so shops don't bother selling them. That's billions of dollars PC gaming is losing. People in western countries can mostly afford them but why? When you can download it though file sharing. I don't at all participate or recommend this one bit but for every PC game sold, there would be hundreds copied. Crytek made Crysis with the statement 'PC gaming is not dead', in mind but the worlds most graphically powerful game sold poorly. Apart from the 3-4’000’000 pirated copies in Shanghai that some old dusty woman made a fortune from selling them for $1AU each from a box on the back of her bike. Crytek made $0.
Reply
Posted: Feb 25th 2008 11:14AM (Unverified) said
I have both consoles. I think if there was a unified console, fanboyism would halt, which may be good..but more importantly we would win, right? I mean doesnt the ps3 have a better cpu, and the 360 has a better gpu? If you combined these features would running a game like crysis even be an issue?
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 5:35PM FredFredrickson said
Seems that if they are having money problems, they'd best stay out of the console game... especially if the only machine they release it for is the PS3, with the lowest user base of the three.
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 5:37PM (Unverified) said
Um.... wouldn't common sense say that because sales were beyond shitty for the PC version, they would try to recoup development cost with a console port?
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 5:47PM (Unverified) said
Your comment doesn't make sense. If you have a game already done and that will take little effort to port over why wouldn't you? It would cost less than 5% of the development cost and would easily make a profit. That would be like EA not putting Madden on PS3 because it has the smallest amount of users.
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 6:00PM SheppyReturns said
Curtis, according to Ubisoft Montreal, it only ran them an additional 10% cost development to develop for two systems at the same time on Assassin's Creed. Given this info and the plans from the ground up, where do you get 5% for a complete conversion.
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 8:05PM Mal F4cti0n said
Seems to me that if they are having money problems, porting the game to the 360, with the largest install base and being so similar in architecture, would help them recoup some costs.
I would call BS on this rumor of being a PS3 port only. They would more likely port "only" to the 360.
Reply
I would call BS on this rumor of being a PS3 port only. They would more likely port "only" to the 360.
Posted: Jan 18th 2008 11:15AM (Unverified) said
so far the 360 has been chugging and whirring and blinking along with the prettier games of next gen's first two years. but it's graphical and processing threshold is known: it's essentially a gaming-optimized computer, and a great one at that.
360 owners keep saying the ps3 processing architecture sucks because no game devs know how to design for it. well, any time a game developer, especially the ones that design their own graphics engines, decide design or adapt their "showcase game" to the ps3, there's a better chance for more breakthroughs in utilizing the ps3's processing architecture to its fullest abilities. any 360 fans that are bothered by this PS3-centric news are just pouting that another group of people are trying to understand and make better games for the ps3, and that's just craven and pathetic.
good games for all, i say. but i wouldn't buy crisis. besides looking pretty, it doesn't bring much to the fps genre, and it won't even look that pretty on a console anyway, ps3 or other.
Reply
360 owners keep saying the ps3 processing architecture sucks because no game devs know how to design for it. well, any time a game developer, especially the ones that design their own graphics engines, decide design or adapt their "showcase game" to the ps3, there's a better chance for more breakthroughs in utilizing the ps3's processing architecture to its fullest abilities. any 360 fans that are bothered by this PS3-centric news are just pouting that another group of people are trying to understand and make better games for the ps3, and that's just craven and pathetic.
good games for all, i say. but i wouldn't buy crisis. besides looking pretty, it doesn't bring much to the fps genre, and it won't even look that pretty on a console anyway, ps3 or other.
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 5:37PM heypaul said
I love my PS3, but unless EA manages to find some superprogramers from the year 2012 to do the port, I doubt it'll look nearly as good. Then again, I've heard that even with the best PC hardware it's tough to run DX10 max settings faster than 15FPS. Anyone who's running max settings on PC care to chime in?
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 5:42PM (Unverified) said
I hate ignorant people. This game really isn't as much of a PC hog as people says it is. It honestly does not take THAT much to run it at maximum settings at acceptable framerates.
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 5:42PM (Unverified) said
built a system for a buddy about a month ago with a q6600, 8800GT, 2gb, on vista and it runs Crysis wonderfully at 1280x720 on high and the game looks AMAZING. Total cost of the system was 1100 without monitor.
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 5:43PM Vidikron said
I think it's a given that it won't look as good a console compared to an up-to-date PC. That's true of pretty much any PC games. And, yes, Crysis is very hard on even SLI quad core PCs at the very high settings. But a console version would likely be set to 720p which is a lower resolution than at what many PC gamers attempt to run the game. So 720p plus dx9 would likely result in a very playable console version. It won't look as good as is possible on gaming PCs, but it will still be a good looking game and help the devs pull down some extra cash.
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 5:43PM (Unverified) said
I'm with you on this. The PS3 can't run simple games at more the 30FPS in most cases. I was just playing UT:3 and the textures, framerate and overall shine lack in all areas.
In other words... I'll believe when I see it.
Oh and wouldn't that be Crysis .5?
Reply
In other words... I'll believe when I see it.
Oh and wouldn't that be Crysis .5?
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 5:44PM (Unverified) said
I'm with you on this. The PS3 can't run simple games at more the 30FPS in most cases. I was just playing UT:3 and the textures, framerate and overall shine lack in all areas.
In other words... I'll believe when I see it.
Oh and wouldn't that be Crysis .5?
Reply
In other words... I'll believe when I see it.
Oh and wouldn't that be Crysis .5?
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 7:29PM (Unverified) said
How the fuck do I get ranked low? I'm absolutely correct in my statement.
I have similar specs to jsn, only with an E6750, and I can run everything on high at 1680x1050 with an average FPS of 45. The lowest is 30. Thats not bad for having a 1000 dollar computer with a mid-line processor, graphics card, and memory setup. I have no reason to suspect that with an 8800GTX or even just 2 GTs in SLI, I can run max everything in DX10 with acceptable framerates.
Stop being such fools. Crysis isn't as much of a hog as everyone makes it out to be.
Reply
I have similar specs to jsn, only with an E6750, and I can run everything on high at 1680x1050 with an average FPS of 45. The lowest is 30. Thats not bad for having a 1000 dollar computer with a mid-line processor, graphics card, and memory setup. I have no reason to suspect that with an 8800GTX or even just 2 GTs in SLI, I can run max everything in DX10 with acceptable framerates.
Stop being such fools. Crysis isn't as much of a hog as everyone makes it out to be.
Posted: Mar 3rd 2008 4:23PM (Unverified) said
I run a E6700 with 4 gb ddr2 800 mhz ram and a single xfx 8800 gtx on Vista. The game runs on Maximum with all options on (Except for antialiasing, which is turned off) @ 1024 x 768 with 25+ frames on my pc. But that's with all of my background softwares (download manager, antivirus etc.) enabled. With those woftwares turned off, this game chugs out a very decent 30+ frames per sec.
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 5:45PM bakedbeans6 said
I hope my puny PS3 cell processor can handle this behemoth of a game **rolls eyes**
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 8:52PM (Unverified) said
uh, wake up..its more about the GPU than the CPU. Your cell wont render for you
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 5:45PM (Unverified) said
It makes more sense to do a port to the 360... unless they don't wat to earn the double of money.
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 5:59PM SheppyReturns said
Double the money, you say? Well, it all depends really. If they have to spend more to get it working on 360, it offsets the profit margins. Whereas if the PS3 port is easier with their code as it stands, it's a lower cost of development, thus fewer copies sold could equate to more profit on one system versus the other.
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 6:17PM (Unverified) said
i'm actually going to side with fernando on this one. Crysis on PC sold ridiculously bad. Most AAA ps3 games actually beat it in sales. If they want to make money, which they should since they didn't on PC, it should be on 360 because of the bigger FPS install base.
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 6:41PM einhanderkiller said
Only the US sales have been tallied for Crysis. I'm positive Crysis sold much better in Europe, since their PC gaming market is a lot larger than the United State's.
Reply
Posted: Jan 18th 2008 1:52AM SoCoolCurt said
yea im a PS3 fan and even i can admit that it would be better suited on 360 seeing as how the "Xbox 360" is a "DirectXbox" and all. thats why most good games you see on 360 you eventually see on Games for Windows. the code they are written in is very similar and thus easy to port. i dont really understand how it would be easier to port to PS3 honestly. dont get me wrong, i would love to see it on PS3 but im also a realist. ill believe it when i see it.
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 5:45PM thethirdmoose said
This crysis 1.5... it is like 2 cryses duct taped together?
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 5:48PM (Unverified) said
The console version is wii exclusive............Well someone had to say it.
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 5:52PM HighFiveJesus said
And it'll be renamed.. Crysin' raggidy jaggity version.
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 5:56PM SheppyReturns said
So what you're saying is we should be looking forward to another Call of Dooty port, right?
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 6:14PM (Unverified) said
haha, nah dude, why do we need to say something when the news says it all....
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 6:14PM (Unverified) said
haha, nah dude, why do we need to say something when the news says it all....
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 6:02PM (Unverified) said
it would be good on on the ps3 .and fernandando stop being so you xbox balllickin bug
Reply
Posted: Jan 17th 2008 6:04PM BoBsS said
It wasn't going to be long for rumors like this to pop up.
FarCry 2 is suppose to come out on the consoles too is it not?
Most people think that Crytek is desperate to make more money because their sales were not high which is not always the case. They make lots of money licensing the engine to other developers.
Although Crytek must be bummed out about the sales, they were hoping to get close to the sales of FarCry (which sold a lot btw). I think we will see Crysis coming out on the 360 and the PS3 in the near future, but don't expect to receive the same level of detail, motion blur, or any other fancy effects.
^ Some one above mentioned that its not hard coding over a PC game to a console, well its extremely difficult. The PS3 and X360 development code is entirely different from one another and from the PC. It takes a very long time, and a lot of man hours to do the transition. Poor transitions results in poor performance. I won't expect Crysis on a console until '09.
Reply
FarCry 2 is suppose to come out on the consoles too is it not?
Most people think that Crytek is desperate to make more money because their sales were not high which is not always the case. They make lots of money licensing the engine to other developers.
Although Crytek must be bummed out about the sales, they were hoping to get close to the sales of FarCry (which sold a lot btw). I think we will see Crysis coming out on the 360 and the PS3 in the near future, but don't expect to receive the same level of detail, motion blur, or any other fancy effects.
^ Some one above mentioned that its not hard coding over a PC game to a console, well its extremely difficult. The PS3 and X360 development code is entirely different from one another and from the PC. It takes a very long time, and a lot of man hours to do the transition. Poor transitions results in poor performance. I won't expect Crysis on a console until '09.
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.
Featured Stories
Dark Side 'Cause It Looks Cool: The Failings of Moral Choice in Games
Posted on Feb 10th 2012 7:45PM
GameStop sees majority of digital sales from cash; won't pursue used PC game sales
Posted on Feb 10th 2012 5:45PM
The most popular posts
in the last 7 days
- Vita 'UMD Passport' won't be offered in US 221 comments
- Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning review: A tempting fate 155 comments
- Blizzard taking Valve to court over 'DOTA' trademark 110 comments
- David Jaffe leaves Eat Sleep Play, layoffs hit developer [Update] 107 comments
- Don't call it a remake: Final Fantasy X is a 'remaster,' to be clear 95 comments








