Crysis ONE coming to PS360!

[demonfox13]

brendude13 said:

lestatdark said:

brendude13 said:

demonfox13 said:
Heh, if you all have a PC with semi decent specs you should get Crysis and Crysis Warhead on PC. Kb/M combo crushes pad all day, plus the graphics just blow anything away on consoles. Plus I guarantee it's cheaper than the console counterparts with higher quality.

I would say that Crysis on High in 720p would be almost identical to the console versions. To acheive a constant 30fps you would need a HD 5770 combined with a powerful Core 2 Duo or an Intel i3 at least.

That PC would cost you £400 at least, twice as much as a PS3 160gb and three times as much as an XBOX 360 slim.

PC fanboys...easily the worst on the internet.

Consoles won't be able to run Crysis on High even on 720p, if they use CryEngine 2 for it. Crysis on Medium can use up to 1.5 GB of RAM at the most intensive areas, so unless they cut back on enemies, foliage and explosions, it isn't feasible. 

If they update Crysis to CryEngine 3, then there's a chance that it will be able to run on consoles, though Crysis 2 on consoles is barely the Gamer setting on PC, which is two levels below the current best mode, Ultra. 

It's not a matter of being a fanboy or not (I game on PC's as much as I do on consoles or handhelds), it's a matter of knowing the arquitecture of a game and seeing that in it's current form isn't feasible. My laptop can run Crysis on Very High at 25 - 30 FPS and it has a ATI HD 6770 and an i7 Core. A Core 2 Duo won't run you Crysis on High, an i3 even worse. You'll need at least an i5 for it. 

CryEngine 2 is an unoptimised joke, I was talking about them using CryEngine 3. And I think Crysis on High is similar to Crysis 2 on consoles, just look at the tech demos. Not only that, but I think that foliage looks a lot better than a building.

And yes, it is a matter of being a fanboy. I get so agitated by people whining on about how PC's have the best graphics and how you can make a PC which looks better than a console for only a fraction of the price, the latter point being a load of bullshit. And then they whine on about keyboard and mouse being the best thing since sliced bread, they are just so ignorant and annoying.

HD 5770 and Core 2 Duo is my PC right now, and I normally have an FPS higher than 30fps when I play on "Very High" settings. The point you just made makes PC's look even more expensive, your laptop must have cost you about £700.

First flaw in your post comes from calling me a PC fanboy when in fact I am a Sony one but we'll leave that alone. Second, the kb/m combo is proven time and again to be more accurate because you control exactly where you aim as opposed to velocity/stop in a pad. Finally, yes my gripe is them taking this long to bring Crysis 1 to consoles instead of much earlier. To me it looks like they will make the same mistake as EA when bringing ME2 to the PS3 at full price (despite DLC) over a year later. My gaming rig including the monitor cost me 650 including shipping. Lets say without monitor and shipping (to bring on even ground with ps3 and 360 launch) it would be roughly $480ish. I have another thread with full specs when I asked Disolitude for advice, but in summary I have an Sapphire Radeon HD 5830 1gb gddr5 256-bit, AMD Phenom II X4, etc. I play Crysis 1 at max and it easily blows anything away on consoles atm and Crysis 1 is only at about $20 on D2D and Steam. With that being said optimization on consoles has been done well which is why we have beauties such as Uncharted 2, KZ2-3, Alan Wake, Heavy Rain, etc. You simply have to understand that my rant is based on Crysis 1 coming out this late on consoles with most likely  a full 60$ price tag when you can get it for cheaper on a PC and get better performance out of it. In order for it to be worth it, they would have to release Crysis 1 and Warhead at 30-40$ (getting both bundled on PC is $30 on steam) and I honestly do not see them doing that.