Why isn't Crysis on consoles yet?

Ok let's use pictures to explain this.

In the first picture is a cell streaming example, in the second Crysis.

With cell streaming small chunks of an area are loaded around the player (blue square), cells are loaded in and out of memory depending on the players position so they get the impression of a giant environment without needing gigabytes of memory. The yellow cells represent interactive content that is loaded and presented to the player, the white cells represent none loaded content that cannot be interacted with. Note there is an enemy in an unloaded cell, because consoles can only store 256mb of information in ram at any one time there isn't enough to load the cells were the second enemy is.

In Crysis no cells are streamed, a large map is dumped into memory with some objects being streamed in later. Because the whole map is basically in memory the player can interact with anything they can see, were in cell streaming they could only shoot the enemy on the right; using the method in Crysis they can also shoot the enemy on the upper left. In game play terms the right enemy may be approaching in a car while the left enemy may be way out at sea in a patrol boat, yet because of the way Crysis handles maps both are viable targets.

You get it now? Crysis would have to be converted to cell streaming to work on consoles, which would impact the players freedom and interactivity in the game.

AnnoyedDragon

thread done/

why can't crysis? Eyezonmii

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]

TC, by your own logic you could argue Metal Gear offers the same experience as Metal Gear Solid.

Simply because the core gameplay is similar.

Of course as your sensibilities should tell you, the experience is dramatically different because of the technicals and design that is enhanced by it.

Ok?

Eyezonmii

So by your own logic there is no experience difference between MGS and MG; the core gameplay design is exactly the same.

Care to elaborate?

[QUOTE="Stoner-Pimp"]

Because a linear version of crysis wouldn't be crysis, crysis is about freedom to do as you please, on consoles it would be go were i say as such it wouldn't be crysis anymore except in name only, what your asking is to remove all that makes crysis crysis and still call it crysis, whats the point then?.

No point i going furhter, you can't explain things to the ignorant.

Eyezonmii

Gameplay is ONE part of the experience. The Open world, detructability, large scale action, graphics/effects, game design etc make the rest of the experience. As I said before, if Crysis was getting a console port it would be a different game than the PC one. This is like talking to a brick wall...

Because a linear version of crysis wouldn't be crysis, crysis is about freedom to do as you please, on consoles it would be go were i say as such it wouldn't be crysis anymore except in name only, what your asking is to remove all that makes crysis crysis and still call it crysis, whats the point then?.

No point i going furhter, you can't explain things to the ignorant.

Gameplay is ONE part of the experience. The Open world, detructability, large scale action, graphics/effects, game design etc make the rest of the experience. As I said before, if Crysis was getting a console port it would be a different game than the PC one. This is like talking to a brick wall...

[QUOTE="aliblabla2007"]

[QUOTE="Eyezonmii"] RIIIIIGGGHTT, you say that but don't go into detail.....very smart. How do THOSE elements of cyrsis effect the CORE experience to that SUCH DEGREE? HUH? take your time. All that experience can be kept, while toned down...its possible. Eyezonmii

For example, one of Crysis's large maps is structured so that you can swim from one end of one side of a large island to another end across a distance of several dozen kilometres, and in some maps your actions on one end will affect the guys on the other end, who might respond. When you cut the level in, say, half (which still isn't small enough for the PS3, 1/2 a Crysis map = 300MB which > the PS3's RAM) most likely you can't swim to the other end anymore - cutting out a part of gameplay (shortcutting across huge distances) which Crysis had. Also, if the level is divided in two, your actions on your end will no longer be able to affect the other end, and mapwide dynamic actions was another feature that defined Crysis.

Those are fundamental gameplay elements of Crysis, man. Lower them, and what you get isn't Crysis anymore. By this point, I suspect you would simply reply that you'd settle for it; which brings me back to the original question of the topic. And whether or not you'll be alright with it, it doesn't mean Crytek would think the same.

[QUOTE="Eyezonmii"][QUOTE="Stoner-Pimp"]

Because a linear version of crysis wouldn't be crysis, crysis is about freedom to do as you please, on consoles it would be go were i say as such it wouldn't be crysis anymore except in name only, what your asking is to remove all that makes crysis crysis and still call it crysis, whats the point then?.

No point i going furhter, you can't explain things to the ignorant.

steve17989

Gameplay is ONE part of the experience. The Open world, detructability, large scale action, graphics/effects, game design etc make the rest of the experience. As I said before, if Crysis was getting a console port it would be a different game than the PC one. This is like talking to a brick wall...

so it would have to be downgraded...right? lol i see, nice..i didn't mention that or anything. (facepalm) Crysis can stll be enjoyed on consoles are some degree...much smaller one, YES...but who cares, the gameplay would be intact, story, missions...etc. Eyezonmii

Interactivity IS game play, the way players approach the game would be changed if everything you can see on the map wasn't interactive.

In Crysis I could use a rocket launcher to blow up a sniper tower long before I reached a base by road; causing visible physics damage, the sounding of alarms in the distance and seeing enemies mobilize through binoculars. In a console memory limited environment these would all be none interactive LOD objects.

[QUOTE="dk_2007"][QUOTE="Eyezonmii"] you saying consoles can't handle all that at some degree? or at least a acceptable one? I don't care if it was much more linear...i can still experience the gameplay and story and single player elements of all those. Eyezonmii

If you just want this then it can be done on PS2 as well.

I just replied to what you said. If you dont care that it is much more linear and just care about the gameplay, story and single player elements then it can be done on PS2 as well.

Ok, in anycase I give you a benefit of doubt and assume that you meant all that with current gen graphics? Again, in that case it can be done, but it will be "Crysis:instincts" and not Crysis. Moreover, there is also a significant cost involved in dowgrading a game and porting it to other platforms. Will it be profitable?

Given that Crysis was released in 2007 and we are in 2009. Majority of people, who wanted to, have already played Crysis and why will anyone buy a downgraded version of a game that is already available at discounted price now?

[QUOTE="Eyezonmii"] so it would have to be downgraded...right? lol i see, nice..i didn't mention that or anything. (facepalm) Crysis can stll be enjoyed on consoles are some degree...much smaller one, YES...but who cares, the gameplay would be intact, story, missions...etc. AnnoyedDragon

Interactivity IS game play, the way players approach the game would be changed if everything you can see on the map wasn't interactive.

In Crysis I could use a rocket launcher to blow up a sniper tower long before I reached a base by road; causing visible physics damage, the sounding of alarms in the distance and seeing enemies mobilize through binoculars. In a console memory limited environment these would all be none interactive LOD objects.

It cant be done on consoles because you cant upgrade your ps3 or xbox360's graphics card and memory. Next Gen consoles will have the specs man, Next gen.kozzy1234

[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

[QUOTE="Eyezonmii"] so it would have to be downgraded...right? lol i see, nice..i didn't mention that or anything. (facepalm) Crysis can stll be enjoyed on consoles are some degree...much smaller one, YES...but who cares, the gameplay would be intact, story, missions...etc. Eyezonmii

Interactivity IS game play, the way players approach the game would be changed if everything you can see on the map wasn't interactive.

In Crysis I could use a rocket launcher to blow up a sniper tower long before I reached a base by road; causing visible physics damage, the sounding of alarms in the distance and seeing enemies mobilize through binoculars. In a console memory limited environment these would all be none interactive LOD objects.

Again, referencing my MGS v MG example.

[QUOTE="Eyezonmii"][QUOTE="dk_2007"]

If you just want this then it can be done on PS2 as well.

dk_2007

I just replied to what you said. If you dont care that it is much more linear and just care about the gameplay, story and single player elements then it can be done on PS2 as well.

Ok, in anycase I give you a benefit of doubt and assume that you meant all that with current gen graphics? Again, in that case it can be done, but it will be "Crysis:instincts" and not Crysis. Moreover, there is also a significant cost involved in dowgrading a game and porting it to other platforms. Will it be profitable?

Given that Crysis was released in 2007 and we are in 2009. Majority of people, who wanted to, have already played Crysis and why will anyone buy a downgraded version of a game that is already available at discounted price now?

willing to accept that, even said that earlier...guess people got to defensive and in the process BLIND.

with a crysis instinct...the expeience can still be had...to some degree, massive levels, destructablity, massive explosions, explorations ALA FARCRY2, tone down the wooden envrioments and such and BAM, you got it.

The story could still be told in the same fashion.

[QUOTE="Eyezonmii"][QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

Interactivity IS game play, the way players approach the game would be changed if everything you can see on the map wasn't interactive.

In Crysis I could use a rocket launcher to blow up a sniper tower long before I reached a base by road; causing visible physics damage, the sounding of alarms in the distance and seeing enemies mobilize through binoculars. In a console memory limited environment these would all be none interactive LOD objects.

skrat_01

Again, referencing my MGS v MG example.

[QUOTE="steve17989"][QUOTE="Eyezonmii"] so gameplay in crysis (shooting, moving, grabbing, powersuits) etc..isn't part of the experience, its just running around big areas? right. Eyezonmii

Gameplay is ONE part of the experience. The Open world, detructability, large scale action, graphics/effects, game design etc make the rest of the experience. As I said before, if Crysis was getting a console port it would be a different game than the PC one. This is like talking to a brick wall...

The scope and size is a PART of what makes Crysis what it is! You would have a different (and worse) experience of Crysis on consoles, a complete game redesign would be necessary to do what your saying. If consoles could get the same Crysis experience as on PC, Crytek wouldn've ported it by now, considering how much they like the PS3.

You did nothing of the sort. You proved that you lack the abiltiy to recognise the change in experience depending on the hardware and design. [QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="Eyezonmii"][QUOTE="skrat_01"]

TC, by your own logic you could argue Metal Gear offers the same experience as Metal Gear Solid.

Simply because the core gameplay is similar.

Of course as your sensibilities should tell you, the experience is dramatically different because of the technicals and design that is enhanced by it.

Ok?

Eyezonmii

So by your own logic there is no experience difference between MGS and MG; the core gameplay design is exactly the same.

Care to elaborate?

If you dont have a willingness to learn or understand then you are proving you have an inability to.

[QUOTE="Eyezonmii"][QUOTE="steve17989"]

Gameplay is ONE part of the experience. The Open world, detructability, large scale action, graphics/effects, game design etc make the rest of the experience. As I said before, if Crysis was getting a console port it would be a different game than the PC one. This is like talking to a brick wall...

steve17989

The scope and size is a PART of what makes Crysis what it is! You would have a different (and worse) experience of Crysis on consoles, a complete game redesign would be necessary to do what your saying. If consoles could get the same Crysis experience as on PC, Crytek wouldn've ported it by now, considering how much they like the PS3.

[QUOTE="Eyezonmii"][QUOTE="skrat_01"] Nope, if Hideo had the ideas he did with MGS1 back in 1986...more could have been done...time is a factor...lol. skrat_01

So by your own logic there is no experience difference between MGS and MG; the core gameplay design is exactly the same.

Care to elaborate?

[QUOTE="steve17989"][QUOTE="Eyezonmii"] where did i say it had to be the same..i'm getting the impression that Crysis can't be done at all on consoles while keeping somewhat of the experience, considering the great technical console games out there. I understand it won't be indentical and mentioned DOWNGRADE so many times....but people ignore it....but ALL THOSE ELEMENTS cyrsis is known for can be done on consoles, just with much less in scope and size. Eyezonmii

The scope and size is a PART of what makes Crysis what it is! You would have a different (and worse) experience of Crysis on consoles, a complete game redesign would be necessary to do what your saying. If consoles could get the same Crysis experience as on PC, Crytek wouldn've ported it by now, considering how much they like the PS3.

It would have to be redesigned to the point where it wouldn't resemble Crysis on the PC at all! Why is that so hard to understand?

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="Eyezonmii"]Right.

So by your own logic there is no experience difference between MGS and MG; the core gameplay design is exactly the same.

Care to elaborate?

Eyezonmii

[QUOTE="Eyezonmii"][QUOTE="steve17989"]

The scope and size is a PART of what makes Crysis what it is! You would have a different (and worse) experience of Crysis on consoles, a complete game redesign would be necessary to do what your saying. If consoles could get the same Crysis experience as on PC, Crytek wouldn've ported it by now, considering how much they like the PS3.

steve17989

It would have to be redesigned to the point where it wouldn't resemble Crysis on the PC at all! Why is that so hard to understand?

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="Eyezonmii"]Right.

So by your own logic there is no experience difference between MGS and MG; the core gameplay design is exactly the same.

Care to elaborate?

Eyezonmii

[QUOTE="Eyezonmii"][QUOTE="skrat_01"]Again, you never even replied to this. Care to prove that you are further incapable? Even of understanding?IndianaJosh

[QUOTE="IndianaJosh"][QUOTE="Eyezonmii"] MG could offer the same experience, but in a much degraded level, you think half the ideas hideo knows now and if he did then wouldn't have made it in the game in some form? Over time he got new ideas, hardware isn't always a factor when adding something new in. Take a look at some of the games after his. btw that logic is flawed...expecially with what we're debating about now...and considering whats already been done on consoles with prior HEAVY PC TITLES. Unless your a DEVELOPER...you can't shoot down my claims. sorry. Eyezonmii

[QUOTE="IndianaJosh"][QUOTE="Eyezonmii"] Far Cry 2 is a great example. Eyezonmii

[QUOTE="Eyezonmii"][QUOTE="IndianaJosh"]

Unless you're a developer, you can't back up your claims either, which you've failed to do throughout this entire thread. Eyezonmii, have you even played Crysis?IndianaJosh

[QUOTE="steve17989"][QUOTE="Eyezonmii"] yes, that's why i said a DOWNGRADED one....i know everything would have to be toned down to a degree....thats fine, but the core gameplay can still be kept at a reasonable level. Like Farcry. You think devs now with the knownledge can't work around some of the stuff and give a SIMILAR experience..atleast in some fashion. I think so. Eyezonmii

It would have to be redesigned to the point where it wouldn't resemble Crysis on the PC at all! Why is that so hard to understand?

You would have to tone down those elements so much that it wouldn't resemble Crysis at all. All you'll get is a Crysis Instincts, and that sure as hell wouldn't be Crysis.

Seriously, does this guy ever take his hands off his ears?aliblabla2007

Doesn't seem like it. He's stuck in his cocoon of idiocy.

[QUOTE="Eyezonmii"][QUOTE="steve17989"]

It would have to be redesigned to the point where it wouldn't resemble Crysis on the PC at all! Why is that so hard to understand?

steve17989

You would have to tone down those elements so much that it wouldn't resemble Crysis at all. All you'll get is a Crysis Instincts, and that sure as hell wouldn't be Crysis.

[QUOTE="aliblabla2007"]Seriously, does this guy ever take his hands off his ears?steve17989

Doesn't seem like it. He's stuck in his cocoon of idiocy.

[QUOTE="steve17989"][QUOTE="Eyezonmii"] At all? AT ALL? yeh right. it isn't hard to understand...but each of cyrsis's elements could be done to some degree...and still keep the some what same experience. You all make it sound like Crysis is all about LEVEL SIZE and killing that size...kills the crysis experience...thats crock. Eyezonmii

You would have to tone down those elements so much that it wouldn't resemble Crysis at all. All you'll get is a Crysis Instincts, and that sure as hell wouldn't be Crysis.

Size isn't the only issue. Lighting, physics, textures, foliage, destructability, number of enemy's etc would all have to be redone or toned down, ending up as a linear shooter that features nanotech armour. BTW, Crysis's open world is part of the gameplay.

[QUOTE="steve17989"]

[QUOTE="aliblabla2007"]Seriously, does this guy ever take his hands off his ears?Eyezonmii

Doesn't seem like it. He's stuck in his cocoon of idiocy.

So I can't agree with someone without being ridiculed?

[QUOTE="Eyezonmii"][QUOTE="steve17989"]

Doesn't seem like it. He's stuck in his cocoon of idiocy.

steve17989

So I can't agree with someone without being ridiculed?

you haven't done much to convince me or given proof or any solid evidence to suggest what i say isn't possible. Eyezonmii

A whole threads worth.

Even on low it wouldn't work very well.

Stick to far cry because that's as good as it will get for console gamers.

Ok here is the CEO of Crytek pretty much saying what we have all said, if this doesn't do it nothing will.AnnoyedDragon

[QUOTE="steve17989"][QUOTE="Eyezonmii"] we debating here or trying to make E-friends? Eyezonmii

So I can't agree with someone without being ridiculed?

I never said it isn't possible, I've always said that if Crysis was to get a console port, It would have to be redesigned and toned down to the point where it doesn't resemble Crysis at all! This Developer interview (courtesy of AnnoyedDragon) CONFIRMS what I'm saying!