Rumorang: PS3 Crysis will be '50% new game'

by James Ransom-Wiley { Mar 3rd 2008 at 3:30PM }

PSW got one thing right, and that's our collective: Huh? The UK magazine would have us believe that Crytek's "hard-worked" code monkeys have confirmed -- "in many interviews" -- that Crysis is coming to PS3 later this year. Not true. But we can count this latest report as another adherent of the 'Crysis 1.5' theory, which here evolves into rumor of a hybrid-port that combines aspects of the original PC Crysis and its sequel into "almost 50% new game." Assuming that a Crysis-brand product will eventually land on PS3 (what else is the console version of CryEngine 2 good for?), we'd be curious to know how much of the alleged 'newness' would translate into better gameplay. Are we really talking Crysis 1.5 -- or just Crysis Lite? (Remember, Far Cry's leap to console had plenty of 'new,' just not any better.)

[Via PS3 Fanboy]

Tags: crysis, crytek, port, rumorang

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

zhine @ Mar 3rd 2008 5:52PM

Sounds good

Kane @ Mar 3rd 2008 3:34PM

so no 360 version? great.

Cyro @ Mar 3rd 2008 3:43PM

We don't know yet for sure.

jonondaspot @ Mar 3rd 2008 4:24PM

Exactly. We don't know for sure. But what does joystick say? They say Not True. And the link they provide for their so called truth does nothing to dispel the rumors of it coming to the PS3. In fact the link they provide bolsters the rumor. We didn't get the GDC announcement we were looking for but how does that end the matter. it doesn't. The question remains, why say it so surely? Simple.

This site is so quick to promote items like 'Internal HD DVD drive in the 360'. They stated it was a rumor and then proceded to promote it into the ground.

They said 'not true' because it was a positive PS3 story. That is what it comes down to. Well people had better prepare to eat some humble pie because it is coming. Most people in the CRYTEK developer network know about it already.

Eggy @ Mar 3rd 2008 4:31PM

Agreed that it's coming jonondaspot. The whole conspiracy theory is a bit lame though.

Tranando @ Mar 3rd 2008 6:01PM

The latest copy of Game Informer says that the 360 version of Crysis is canned and that it will only be able to run on the PS3.

Check it out it is on page 26 in the March issue.

I'm guessing lack of HDD, Blu-ray, and crappy CPU being the culprit here..

Marty @ Mar 3rd 2008 6:18PM

Yeah, because the PC release required a Blu-ray drive, right? I'm going to ignore the rest of the flame-bait you posted Tranando, but I will point out that they probably had to re-make 50% of the PS3 version not because they are adding anything particularly new, but because that 50% of the original game wouldn't run on the PS3.

Tranando @ Mar 3rd 2008 6:22PM

@Marty

Are you some kind of retard? Do they let you on the computer unsupervised?

Crysis on the PC came on multiple DVD's and installed to the hard disk....

CPTStewart @ Mar 3rd 2008 6:38PM

@Tranando

Are you some kind of retard? Do they let you on the computer unsupervised?

Crysis on the PC came on a single DVD.

Marry me Mario @ Mar 3rd 2008 6:54PM

"but I will point out that they probably had to re-make 50% of the PS3 version not because they are adding anything particularly new, but because that 50% of the original game wouldn't run on the PS3."

Even if your FUD were true Marty...the 50% would still be 100% more than what could run on the 360 version.
The gap will widen...as the year rolls on.

bobartig @ Mar 3rd 2008 8:16PM

Porting to either next gen console would require gutting the damned engine so that it will run without asploding your XBOX, or PS3. Neither system has the graphical capacity to keep up with high-end PC gaming. You need to take out all the newer-than-next-gen lighting and texture effects, and put in the stock motion-blur and bloom lighting that consoles can pull off.

And, crysis definitely came on just one DVD, but a lack of a HDD install option may have been a key factor in Crytek siding with the PS3. M$ likes to think that their customers with and without HDDs are somehow equal, but devs have known since before the xenon was released that this wasn't going to be true.

LameDuck @ Mar 3rd 2008 10:38PM

ITT: Fanboys talk out their asses.

The game would be more compatible with the 360 since, yea know, it's DIRECTX BASED. Only a retard would think the 360 CPU is underpowered. And lastly, it was one DVD.

Please go back to sucking MS or Sony's bits and leave Joystiq. I mean really... A windows game... that uses DriectX... going to the PS3. If they did can the 360 version, it was only because someone payed them off.

York @ Mar 3rd 2008 10:48PM

Ok, lets look at it like this: Crysis had one thing going for it: good graphics. Crysis slaughtered top end graphics cards, but barely used a dual-core processor (well, like 50% of it). All the processing power in the world won't make up for the fact that the PS3's graphics card isn't even up to par with last years mid-high end cards, which Crysis chugged on. I'm not saying the 360 is any better off, I'm just saying the graphics will be worse on the PS3 to the point that it won't have any redeeming qualities and will end up just being average. Also, why would they do so much work to release a game on a console with such a low install base? I'm not saying they should do it for the 360, I'm just saying they should keep it off consoles.

jonondaspot @ Mar 4th 2008 12:42AM

York,

Someone else said it better:

"The architecture of the Cell bears some resemblance to a GPU. The Cell allows the PS3 to make up for RSX shortcomings because it can handle functions like vertex processing. If it requires mathematical calculations the Cell can show its capabilities. That is why it is humorous for people to make a blanket statement that the 360 has better graphical capabilities.

You can't isolate the GPUs and compare them in a vacuum without regard to the processors with which they interact. The PS3 has 6 SPEs (the 7th one is reserved for the OS) that can be used in graphics processing to assist the RSX. They are doing this in development now but not with all seven. Not even close. But they are improving."

Neebs @ Mar 3rd 2008 3:39PM

Far Cry -> Legends was a great transition I'm sure we all know.

paragraph @ Mar 3rd 2008 3:40PM

Why not play the PC game... you know... the one thats been out for a while now... the one that can play on my laptop...

Yeah, people keep overreacting to Crysis, it will run on mediocre computers... just doesn't look all that good... and if thats all you care for then you deserve Crysis Lite...

But if it turns out not to be a turd, this could get added to the short list of titles that make me want a PS3...

Gangsta Smurf @ Mar 3rd 2008 8:23PM

Wow.

*walks off*

ThornedVenom (Harley Quinn Defense Force) @ Mar 3rd 2008 8:58PM

They'd buy Crysis for the PS3 because it could run on 400 dollars worth of hardware (from a consumer point of view, anyways).

Perhaps there's also the couch + huge flat HDTV screen to take into account. Dunno if there are going to be any achievements for the Trophy Room.

paragraph @ Mar 3rd 2008 9:37PM

@Thorned

I guess i don't think like a normal consumer, but i don't equate the whole cost of a $1000 computer to one thing. The only thing beefy about this laptop is the DX10 support, and these days any half-way decent laptop (or damn near any desktop for that matter) has DX10..

I guess i don't get it... *sigh*

*plays crysis* :-P

FidliousWong (Oatmeal Defense Force) @ Mar 3rd 2008 3:44PM

See, a friend of mine is going to loan me his copy of Crysis just because of the emergent gameplay. So I will give it a shot. Still not certain if it's good and the lack of resell value in the PC market keeps me from buying games until I'm sure...

Meanwhile, I have a preorder on Dawn of War 2... hypocritical, huh?

Vidikron (FU) @ Mar 3rd 2008 3:49PM

The game is very good. You have lots of options on how to approach most combat situations in the game. Most people tend to not like the last 1/3 of the game though. It gets more linear and seems like it is less optimized than the first 2/3s of the game. The final boss fight of the game nearly became a slide show at times on my machine.

Marty @ Mar 3rd 2008 4:48PM

Lots of options? So what, like 'should I approach straight on, or from the side?'

I found both Far Cry and Crysis boring and repetitive. If they weren't billed as graphical masterpieces, they would have been just another iteration of Mediocre Shooter™.

FidliousWong (Oatmeal Defense Force) @ Mar 3rd 2008 5:01PM

I personally feel any game that gives you the feature of dropping a tree (any tree) on a road to divert an enemy envoy is worthy of having "this game gives you options" on it's box.

Vidikron (FU) @ Mar 3rd 2008 5:31PM

@Marty

You don't even sound like you have layed the game. Yes, as you point out, and can indeed approach most obective from any side you want. Once you decide on an approach you have further options from there. Let's say your objective is gather some intel. You can choose to make heavy use of your cloak, run from cover to cover, and get the intel without doing much, if any, combat. Or you can a more Rambo approach... bust out your maximum armour and/or maximum strenght and bring the house down on the enemy... kill them all and then take the intel at your leisure. Or you can do what I did most of the time... find a good sniping position outside of the enemy camp and kill them all from a distance. If they run out of the camp toward your position you can choose to use your cloak to run to new sniping position or wait for them to arrive and kill them as they get there. Then, as Filidious points out, you can also use the environment to wreak some havok as well.

Crysis doesn't stray all that far from the Far Cry recipe, but the addition of the nano suit with abilities like the cloak added a fair number of options on how to handle the combat. Just admit it, you've never played the game.

Vidikron (FU) @ Mar 3rd 2008 5:32PM

Oops... that should obviously say, "You don't even sound like you have played the game." I made it sound dirty :-)

Vidikron (FU) @ Mar 3rd 2008 5:39PM

And, yes, I butchered the spelling of your nick, FidliousWong :P

Marty @ Mar 3rd 2008 6:15PM

I've played both games, and neither is the 10/10 experience everyone bills them as. Take away the graphics, and you're left with a game nobody would play - the hallmark of a terrible game experience.

Vidikron (FU) @ Mar 3rd 2008 10:29PM

Crysis has sold over a million copies even with the steep requirements and the vast majority of the people that I've seen comment on the game say they really liked it. Only a handful like yourself that don't even sound like they have played the game claim it's mediocre. And, frankly, you have to be pretty stupid to claim it's a mediocre shooter. It's fine if you don't think it's 10/10 material, but at the very least it's a good shooter. And cry about the graphics all you want, they do add a lot to the game. I'm so sick of this utterly stupid attitude these days that good graphics don't contribute to gameplay or that great graphics and great gameplay can't co-exist. Graphics/physics/etc... can add greatly to how immersive a game can be. And believe me, if you have decent enough hardware the graphics in Crysis are very immersive.

ApolloIV @ Mar 3rd 2008 3:46PM

Hopefully this game will add to the "PS3" comeback of the year.

jsn @ Mar 3rd 2008 4:00PM

is this the same comeback that involves double the delayed games and twice as many wasted development hours? If so then yah, probably.

FidliousWong (Oatmeal Defense Force) @ Mar 3rd 2008 6:46PM

I'd say it's the same comeback that involves cardboard on a sidewalk with a ghettoblaster bumping Miami Sound Machine...

But then they'd have to name it Playstation Too, Electric Boogaloo.

DP @ Mar 3rd 2008 3:49PM

More Cysis, really? This game better be sick to get so much press.

Spakkenkhrist @ Mar 4th 2008 8:09AM

I think the press mania is due to the fact that people love bitching at each other about it.

Spakkenkhrist @ Mar 4th 2008 8:10AM

I think the press mania is due to the fact that people love bitching at each other about it.

ViagraFiend @ Mar 3rd 2008 3:49PM

I bet you these comments will turn into another this tech is better than that tech fued.

I hate you all.

copa @ Mar 3rd 2008 3:52PM

Pffft. You're just bitter because you picked an inferior console.

NATO_Duke @ Mar 3rd 2008 3:56PM

Its better than a "This trekkie is better than that trekkie" feud starting again.

borland502 (SDF - Macross Ring) @ Mar 3rd 2008 4:30PM

Feh, this generation of consoles has no respect for gaming. Back in my day, Pong was all we needed. We had one game, two controllers, and we liked it that way!

Now it's all waggle this, and eye that, and VR all over the place. A gamer grows decadent and immoral with all these fancy "input" choices. Even grayscale is a perversion of that natural order, let alone "HD".

Bah!

ViagraFiend @ Mar 3rd 2008 4:31PM

lol @ Copa

Which one did I pick that is inferior?
The PS3, Xbox 360 or Wii?

I like all of my babies equally.

Jamesology @ Mar 3rd 2008 4:37PM

Yeah! Just like ViagraFiend I wanna know which one of mine is also inferior, I'm lost b/c I have all three too and I love all three equally too. THE HORROR!

copa @ Mar 3rd 2008 4:43PM

ViagraFriend, I have no idea what console you own or don't own. I'm just trying to get this party started.

ViagraFiend @ Mar 3rd 2008 4:47PM

Indeed.

copa @ Mar 3rd 2008 5:18PM

Dude, just pick one and get offended. Do I have to fucking walk you through this?

Look, here's a freebie:

The only thing worse than buying one piece of inferior tech is owning three of them.

Bet it's pretty hard to memorize friend codes for your Wii games when your RROD 360 is flashing red, looking like it's gonna blow. Maybe you could try scrawling that code in the dust that's collecting on your unused PS3!

WiNG @ Mar 3rd 2008 3:54PM

50% old game: Plot, acting, weapons
50% new game: Reasonable graphics & physics engine

Jeff @ Mar 3rd 2008 3:54PM

The "power of cell" that everyone makes fun of will really be helpful in the case of a game like Crysis. Give physics, complex particle effects, etc their own core, basically, and then just optimize the game so that it can't exceed what that core can handle.

jsn @ Mar 3rd 2008 4:04PM

I can appreciate your application of assumptions:speculation vs. reality, but CELL has failed to show its capabilities in any real world application.

doc j @ Mar 3rd 2008 4:31PM

jsn, i am assuming you meant "gaming application" - as the "real world" applications of the cell processor have been shown numerous times by groups completely independent of Sony. the cell-powered Toshiba HDTVs at this year's CES come to mind, as do the IBM RoadRunner supercomputer and the newest iteration of IBM's blade servers.

the cell is a powerful graphics processing unit, it's a matter of its utility in the video game industry at this point - which, from the rest of your comments, you seem incapable of commenting upon objectively.

Zeus.:God @ Mar 3rd 2008 4:36PM

Cores are the future- not SPEs. SPEs are gimped "cores" if you can even call them that, and once we start getting 8 cores and so on and they become standard, we won't have any use for "Cell" processors.

Jeff @ Mar 3rd 2008 4:39PM

To Zeus: I absolutely agree with you. I imagine that in the next generation of gaming consoles even Nintendo will rock a cheap quad-core CPU. But for this generation, having a ton of what are essentially nerfed cores is ahead of the curve, and will be useful in many ways.

Nate @ Mar 3rd 2008 4:43PM

JSN - Real World Applications? Like all those articles about universities networking 6 PS3s into a super computer? Or Folding@Home where the PS3 is something like 50 times as effective as even the best PC?

Or were you talking about some other real world that only you can see?

| 1 | 2 | Most Recent | Next 50 Comments