How does Crysis run on Switch?

[Pemalite]

JRPGfan said:
When put side by side with the PS3 version, it doesnt always look better.
Frame rates are decent, even if DF says it has near constant micro stutters.
540-720p reconstructed resolution is to be expected.

Overall it looks okay imo.
That old joke "But can it run Crysis?" Yes, yes it can.

No. It always looks better.

The fact it is using voxel-based global illumination is a catastrophic improvement... To put that into perspective that is the *exact* same technology that is powering Lumin in the Unreal Engine 5 demo on the Playstation 5.

Mr Puggsly said:

When Doom came to GBA, it was 8 years old.

Crysis is 13 years old now, the 7th gen port is about 7 years old.

All considered, it basically what I expected. Switch can play 7th gen games well when properly optimized.

Crysis would run well (when tweaked) on a high-clocked Core 2 processor, 4GB of Ram and a Geforce 8800GT at below 720P.

The Switch equals or beats such a system on every front.
The newer CryEngine though has better threading support and will utilize some of the Maxwell chips advanced hardware features to reduce CPU loads, Crysis might be a "7th gen game" but it was a demanding one at that due to it's no-compromise approach to rendering.

Zkuq said:

Mr Puggsly said:

No, its still built with 7th gen version as the foundation.

They didn't take the PC build per se.

Uh, it would probably take way more effort to port an old version of the engine to Switch and then add some of the changes from the upcoming PC version than it would to take the upcoming PC version and downgrade it until it runs well enough. That's because for the latter, it's mostly done and it's just a matter of downgrading. Taking the 7th gen version would require doing some actual changes twice, which I reckon is more work than a relatively simple downgrade since the engine already runs on Switch.

EDIT: And just as I write that, I run into news confirming that is actually is a port of the 7th gen version. That seems like a fairly curious decision, especially since it's sold with the same name as the upcoming PC/PS4/Xbox release, but I guess it must have made sense.

It's all down to the engine... Porting from CryEngine 2 to CryEngine 5 will be harder than porting from CryEngine 3.

Chrizum said:

Wow, apparently all console versions are based on the 360/PS3 version (CryEngine 3) and missing the Ascension mission. That sure is baffling. Remastered looks nothing like the 360/PS3 version. Seems like it was too much work to bring over the PC version to consoles? Meh.

The consoles aren't powerful enough to run the original game on the original engine without some serious concessions, CryEngine 2 is that demanding on the CPU... And Jaguar does no favors to that end.
The Xbox Series X and Playstation 5 on the other hand...

The likely reason why they opted for the 7th gen as a base was because allot of the hard work optimizing and downgrading and replacing rendering features for consoles was already done and dusted, it makes sense not to reinvent the wheel.
It's also missing Parrallax mapping which was a big graphical feature of the original game, the very least they could have done was parsed some meshes or leveraged the Polymorph engines to give depth to some surfaces.

Will wait this out and see how the other versions fall, the PC modded version from 2013 will still look better than the Switch version without a doubt,
 missing a level means it is not going to be the definitive version, should have included the entire shebang, the game is 13 years old now.

Crytek probably needs this to be a success, but they are giving us a few reasons not to hand over our cash...