Crysis 3 will “melt down PCs”, says Crytek CEO
By Tim Colwill on August 20, 2012 at 12:33 pm
Remember how we all used to joke about how no computer on earth could run Crysis? Well, Crytek’s CEO thinks that joke is about to come back with Crysis 3. “That joke will be resurrected again with Crysis 3, I’m quite sure about that. There are brutal expectations around the PC version of Crysis 3. So this time we promise to melt down PCs.”
Crysis 3‘s latest tech demo trailer certainly showed that the CryEngine 3 is looking really good, but with Crytek yet to release system requirements for Crysis 3 it’s hard to know exactly what will be required to run that sort of beauty. Stay tuned.
Source: TweakTown (via PalZer0)
Graphics are “60% of the game”, according to Crytek boss
"Looks like a PS2 game" occurs on 17% of all image-heavy gaming news posts
Crytek CEO frustrated at reception of what he sees as the best game in the series
Console fatigue partly to blame.
Crysis 3/ASUS AMD giveaway: Winners announcement!
After a slight delay, we reveal the winners of this impossibly excellent competition.
You can use the following bbCode
[i], [b], [img], [quote], [url href="http://www.google.com/"]Google[/url]
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
facebook
twitter
google+
rss
It was more than just a joke. There really was no consumer grade PC hardware capable of running Crysis at its maximum settings with a high framerate.
I’m not sure why CryTek thinks this is a good thing.
It pushes Nvidia and AMD to continue producing faster, better hardware and it encourages gamers to purchase said hardware so they can say ‘I can play Crysis3 on medium settings at 12FPS!’. Seriously though, it is good for the industry. Someone has to make graphically intense games for people to test their expensive hardware. Looks like CryTek is doing a pretty damn good job at that.
Because if developers (and especially Crytek given their reputation) release a PC game with low-average quality textures, the outcry over console port syndrome will be huge.
I say bring it on Crytek. 5 years on and I’m finally able to play Crysis with everything maxed out using my 5800. Game still looks superb and puts most of today’s releases to shame.
@ wolf it’s not good for the industry it shows that developers can get away with being lazy and not optimizing software.
if my system can’t 60 FPS crysis 3 in its sleep it means it is poorly optimized as it should be able to handle every thing it can throw at it and then some.
How long did Crysis survive for? Noone plays it anymore.
Have a look at games like Battlefield 2 and you’ll find more people are playing this old game over a more recent game like Crysis.
At the end of the day it’s all about gameplay and multiplayer. If you nail those two then you’re on to a winner. Fancy graphics are not going to get you very far if only 10% of PC gamers can play it at reasonable framerates.
My core i7 3930k @ 4,8ghz, 32gb of ram and dual Radeon 7970 3gb cards are willing to give it their best shot! Bring my PC down Crytek! Bring pleasure to my eyeballs.
Wait. What?
Making a game look so amazing that computers can barely run them at those settings is lazy? That makes no sense.
If your system can’t run the game at 60fps on the highest settings, it doesn’t automatically mean the game is poorly optimized. Optimization can only do so much. Once it’s fully optimized it’s up to the hardware to take care of the rest. If your hardware can’t handle it, too bad.
Crysis is still a fantastic benchmark for a new PC, although BF3 is too.
yeapal,
My system can handle all the rendering techniques show with ease, considering how badly previous cry engines have been optimized this is just my base assumption
I think its a good thing that a game can have graphics higher than what is capable at release.
The High settings are good enough, but 2-3 years later its like an official release of an “HD” pack. But maybe that is what they should do, release the highest setting as a free patch years later?
The problem with Crysis games is their not really catering for casual gamers who don’t have things like this:
core i7 3930k @ 4,8ghz, 32gb of ram and dual Radeon 7970 3gb cards
@lordapophis: BTW, how much did that set you back?
Too much! Probably spent about $4000 on the entire rig including my eyefinity display setup.
so much foolery in these comments already… urgh :S
@spooler:
if your system can’t run crysis3 on max etc… it does not mean the software is poorly optimised. correlation does not equal causation. the software COULD be poorly optimised – but i like to think Crytek has learnt a thing or two since the early days of crysis. The alternative is that your computer doesn’t have enough grunt to put out what you and Crysis 3 are demanding of it.
Which, incidentally, is what Crytek are claiming they want to do.
@alexdotau:
Longevity could be the focus behind some games, but that doesn’t mean all games. Besides, Crysis actually did pretty well – it was still quite popular around 2010 (what’s that… 3 years after release?), and that’s not including the Mechwarrior mods for it. I myself reinstalled Crysis and Warhead earlier this year to have another muck about in it.
And you’re right – gameplay and multiplayer are important aspects of games. But that a game has particular styles of gameplay, multiplayer, narrative construction et al doesn’t mean it is bad because it differs from another game.
@ captno0b:
Since when do devs HAVE to cater to the casual gaming market? I’m fucking grateful that Crytek are pushing for more technologically demanding games, as opposed to the virulent crap we have available nowadays.
I don’t even have a particular good system anymore, and won’t be able to play Crysis 3 on anything but low probably. But fuck, as a PC gamer it makes me glad to hear that SOMEONE is pushing the envelope *coughcoughwakeupcallvalve*
Damnit, now I’ve forgotten the points I wanted to make.
A game doesn’t require amazing graphics to cause computers to melt, it could just be really terribly coded!
I thought as much when i seen the 2 tech demos released sofar…
Excited to see that there will be a game that will use everything i have paid for for once ;D
spooler,
I really hope you’re trolling. Just because your graphics card can handle the rendering techniques, doesn’t mean it has the power to handle a large amount of the rendering techniques. I guess you have to appreciate the technical detail that goes into the game to understand why it’s lagging.
The crysis 2 pc patch which added allot of features WAS poorly optimised. It needlessly ran routines on water that wasn’t even visible.
Crysis 2 was a major let down so I don’t really care what it’s doing unless it’s a proper Crysis sequel (computer melting graphics or not).
Yeah crysis 2 sucked dick, Unless it’s back in the forrest with that cool shit then I won’t bother.
I can remember when I had to upgrade my PC from playing the old C&C, Half-Life and Doom games and others just to handle the new kid on the block Crysis.
It was great, the best looking game on the market and my computer couldn’t even play it on full options. It Didn’t matter knowing that this game was pushing my PC to the limits was were I wanted to be at that time.
I will with out issues get this game day on day one if it will as they state, melt PC’s hardware and be the benchmark that this type of game should be.
Putting out Crysis 2 was clearly a console port at best not a bad game but not pushing PC to the limit. Most PC players expected this game to do the same as the first, It didn’t.
They set the benchmark with Crysis and failed to do the same with Crysis 2, here is hoping that they can bring more to the game then just a bad port.
Thanks.
*cough*GTA4*cough*
Its companies like this that keep the industry moving forwards. Lets be completely honest, the graphics they showed in that video were absolutely stunning. I’d be incredibly surprised if any game that’s even remotely mainstream will look like that in even the next 3-4 years. I’m not a CryTek fanboy, if there is such a thing, heck, I never went near the original Cysis until 2010, because I knew my system couldn’t handle it. It might not just have been how outstanding the graphics look that caused this, but even then when I finally did get it running at maximum settings many years after release I was extremely impressed with just how pretty it looks. I still am.
It seems CryTek are one of the few developers that care less about how many copies they sell and more about how their game makes people say ‘wow’. The original Crysis had almost every PC gamer talking about it, and as people have said its still used as a benchmark today. Disregarding Crysis 2, because we all know that CryTek are still a business and still need to make money, I wish more devs would take their example and apply it to their own games. Don’t just shit them out with a ‘good enough’ stamp on them every year, like the majority seem to be doing these days. Take your time. Stretch the boundaries. Games were once an art form and now they’re just a mass produced blob of sameness. I might not be getting Crysis 3 on release or for a while after, because I don’t want to clean up the mess it makes of my computer, but I will be getting it one day, even if it is just to marvel in its beauty.
zombywolf,
Can you explain how you used virulent?
Thanks…