bit-gamer.net

Epic: Crysis will be as good as it gets

Published on 31st July 2007 by Joe Martin

Mark Rein, VP for Epic, doesn't think DirectX 10 will see a wide-scale adoption in the games industry.

That DirectX 10, eh? That stuff's looking good, like really. It's the type of thing that could take us all to a new level of graphical bliss if game developers all hop on to use it.

Unfortunately, some of the big players in game design just don't think that's going to happen.

Speaking to CVG this week, Mark Rein, the VP of Epic, has said that he thinks that DX10 won't see the massively enthusiastic adoption PC gamers are hoping for.

Why? In a word: consoles.

"[Developers will] have to dumb the games down for the consoles...[It's] less and less economically viable to do the super high-end stuff," said Rein.

In fact, Rein thinks that Crysis will be the height of graphical brilliance for a pretty long time - probably until we see a new generation of consoles. The man's obviously never heard of Project Offset.

Epic is currently hard at work building the PhysX-enabled UT3, which it claims is built to run on two-year-old PC rigs easily. While that's going on, it's also fending off lawsuits from Silicon Knights.

We're not entirely sure his reasoning is correct, and we hope it isn't, as putting super high-end games in a PC-only position could be a way to revitalise the PC gaming scene. Still, I suppose having a pause in graphical advancements could be a good thing if it forces developers to focus on other technological and gameplay issues.

Reckon Crysis is the best we'll get for another five years, or so you think Epic is backing the wrong horse? Let us hear your thoughts in the forums.

36 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply

DougEdey 31st July 2007, 14:11

I'm willing to bet this is going to be an "eat my own hat" quote. Someone probably said a similar thing with DX9. Like the "3 computer" quote.

Mark Rein is a genius in his own games. But I don't understand why he doesn't promote UE3 rather then Crysis.

Jack_Pepsi 31st July 2007, 14:17

As Joe said in the article...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Martin
Still, I suppose having a pause in graphical advancements could be a good thing if it forces developers to focus on other technological and gameplay issues.

... I freaking hope so! We're still using bloody 32bit and how long have we been buying 64bit CPUs? Bloody consoles! >.<

Bursar 31st July 2007, 14:19

If DX10 doesn't take off, then surely that will spell the end of the GPU race. There won't be any need to develop faster and more complicated GPUs as they will set there mostly unutilised.

Even if game interfaces are "dumbed down" for consoles, people will still want the spangly graphics and wizzy effects. In fact, there are a large number of games that seem to get by on that alone!

DX10 seems to have been a bit of a slow starter, but given the large number of games that are due out later in the year, I reckon it'll be picking up pace pretty quickly :)

samkiller42 31st July 2007, 14:23

I think Crysis will be the best looking game this year, but not for the next 5 years. It also depends on what you think is a "good looking" game, as well as the type of game. I thought C&C Generals was a good looking game, but its an RTS, but im sure there was some one else who thought there was a better looking game, which might have been a FPS, its all down to personal opinion at the end of the day.

Sam

DougEdey 31st July 2007, 14:23

Consoles have been 64-bit for longer then PC's. GPUs have been 128bit aswell.

Vergil_117 31st July 2007, 15:14

People listen to mark today? I remember when everyone booed and dissed him for his idiotic remarks.

Bauul 31st July 2007, 15:28

I don't think he's right, I think developers will always be looking to continue to out-do each other in terms of graphics and looks of games. Also remember that even though the technology in a console is fixed, games do get better looking graphically as time goes on during a console's life, and the developers get better at cramming better graphics into the same internals. In much the same way films, even after a hundred years, are still striving for better effects, so too will games.

msm722 31st July 2007, 15:40

I wonder what the UT4 engine (2 years into development) will bring, if mark rein thinks this.

Hells_Bliss 31st July 2007, 15:42

I'd like to see 64 bit games, and crysis does have amazing graphics, so I wouldn't be sad if they started using the crysis engine, or a similar level of graphics in computer games, especially if they start using the time to optimize their code and stop releasing crappy products for the PC.

I don't see software makers blocking themselves into just dx10 games just yet, since it only runs on Vista, and vista hasn't really been adopted yet by the majority of consumers. They're out to make money too :)

F T W is blocked? lol i can't type sof.t.w.are anymore? :D

revlob 31st July 2007, 15:48

Executive-type in "our game is the best" shocker.

But seriously, he does have a point. There's not much to stand in the way of the progression of technology, and the potential to create better-looking games, but it's getting more and more expensive and risky to develop games with cutting-edge visuals.

devdevil85 31st July 2007, 15:56

Honestly, check out what the MGS4 gameplay demo looks like and you'll see that the next-gen games on the console (or the PS3 atleast) will look superior to what's currently available on the PC....but once Crysis debuts and consumers see the the reason to buy the hardware, and then game developers see that the hardware is selling then DX10 will go mainstream and GPUs will continue to progress and we the PC gamers will be up to our heads in graphical prowess, and Mr. Rein's quote will be splat all across the forums....

P.S. I like Joe's statement about Project Offset....I mean just look at that game....Crysis won't last long at the top...but it will be the best for a good while....

Da_Rude_Baboon 31st July 2007, 16:00

With AMD, Nvidia and Microsoft pushing DX10 of course it will take off.

CardJoe 31st July 2007, 16:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by devdevil85
Honestly, check out what the MGS4 gameplay demo looks like and you'll see that the next-gen games on the console (or the PS3 atleast) will look superior to what's currently available on the PC....but once Crysis debuts and consumers see the the reason to buy the hardware, and then game developers see that the hardware is selling then DX10 will go mainstream and GPUs will continue to progress and we the PC gamers will be up to our heads in graphical prowess, and Mr. Rein's quote will be splat all across the forums....

P.S. I like Joe's statement about Project Offset....I mean just look at that game....Crysis won't last long at the top...but it will be the best for a good while....

We agree again! What happened to our constant PS3 arguements?!

naokaji 31st July 2007, 16:18

how much did sony pay him? honestly.... that stuff sounds like its coming directly from ps3 marketing department....

Vergil_117 31st July 2007, 16:18

everyone forgets alan wake (I find that game 10 times better looking than crysis, one reason being the massive draw distances, and it actully looking "real" and not as if it were a video game)

devdevil85 31st July 2007, 16:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by naokaji
how much did sony pay him? honestly.... that stuff sounds like its coming directly from ps3 marketing department....

How about they sold me on their console's abilities and then MGS4's graphics! Seriously, I'm getting tired of being called a fanboy when I'm just a guy who loves innovation and who will never own a console in his life (other than the Wii).....not to be mean, but seriously stfu and stop referring me to that....I mean to be completely truthful you might as well just call me an overly fanatic PC fanboy because I'm more crazy for DX10 & Crysis/Project Offset.......

Quote:

Originally Posted by CardJoe
We agree again! What happened to our constant PS3 arguements?!

/\...as you can see I'm getting tired of it...also Joe there are multiple things that we have in common, and tbh as long as you respect the PS3 as a console and not because of Sony's mistakes or it's crazy pricetag, I'm fine with it...because even if the PS3 was the greatest thing since sliced bread, the games are what matters and if the games are lacking, either in the gameplay, graphical or innovative levels, I would NOT buy one...so...I hope that explains my perception on it...

CardJoe 31st July 2007, 17:06

@DevDevil

Sorry to rile you up - was only poking fun a little and didn't mean to cause offense

Ramble 31st July 2007, 17:15

Is he crazy? Can he not see the massive amount of new titles coming this fall?

devdevil85 31st July 2007, 17:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by CardJoe
@DevDevil

Sorry to rile you up - was only poking fun a little and didn't mean to cause offense

Joe you're fine man, it's the guy above that I can't stand...

fargo 31st July 2007, 17:26

If dx10 gets out of the gate like vista you may see ms dummy down and make dx10 available for
xp as we all know now this is possible. also if this happens game developers will be jumping for
joy.

devdevil85 31st July 2007, 17:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by fargo
If dx10 gets out of the gate like vista you may see ms dummy down and make dx10 available for
xp as we all know now this is possible. also if this happens game developers will be jumping for
joy.

I heard that there's already a hack to allow it....but I may be wrong and idk if it retards performance....

Bauul 31st July 2007, 18:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vergil_117
everyone forgets alan wake (I find that game 10 times better looking than crysis, one reason being the massive draw distances, and it actully looking "real" and not as if it were a video game)

Blow me! I'd never seen screenshots of it, it looks... gorgeous! I've never seen a game get sunlight SO perfect. You can really tell it was done by the same guys who did Max Payne, there's something about the textures that just screams Max FX.

naokaji 31st July 2007, 19:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by devdevil85
Joe you're fine man, it's the guy above that I can't stand...

if you got a problem with me just say what problem you got exactly? ok? dont just say i cant stand you... say what specifically it is... thx.

anyway... btt:

i cant stand the allrdy far too extensive trend away from computers and towards consoles...
and what mark rein said was like a justification to throw away the computer and buy a console.
and no, i havent forgotten all the s*** sony has done....
so just count one and one together....

-EVRE- 31st July 2007, 19:24

Quote:

UT3, which it claims is built to run on two-year-old PC rigs easily.

great... a 6600gt was popular back then. woot for UT3, a title that play on 2 year old hardware ::rolls eyes::

I'm sure he was talking about the 7800 / 7900 class of GPU's... but still, whats the point.

Amon 31st July 2007, 19:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by devdevil85
I heard that there's already a hack to allow it....but I may be wrong and idk if it retards performance....

You're probably talking about Falling Leaf (previously The Alky Project).

Bungle 31st July 2007, 19:49

Maybe this "visionary" needs some glasses
http://www.gamasutra.com/db_area/images/news2001/11102/markrein.jpg

knuck 31st July 2007, 20:56

looks like your avatar

devdevil85 31st July 2007, 22:13

/\ LOL and seriously, who would want to play UT3 on a 6600GT. It's like playing NFS Carbon on regular Xbox...WTF!!??

avalanche0316 31st July 2007, 23:39

If I'm not mistaken, don't consoles rely on the technological improvements seen on pc's? Consoles today are powered by variations of pc hardware, made by Nvidia and ATI. If PC games stagnate graphically, there will be no need for people to purchase new hardware from Nvidia or ATI, and I believe that will severely hurt both companies. The consoles graphical achievements, and therefor consoles in general, rely on the success of these companies. At least in todays world of gamers demands in terms of realism in graphics. I don't see how consoles could ever really put the PC out to pasture based on this alone.

Cthippo 1st August 2007, 01:29

And what happens when the next console generation is built on DX10 hardware, like the current generation is built on DX9? MS is driving the DX10 bandwagon, so expect that the X-box 666 or whatever they call it will be DX10.

mattthegamer463 1st August 2007, 03:48

I would sign a petition to have all current-gen consoles burned in massive piles! They're holding us back!

perplekks45 1st August 2007, 08:32

That just made me laugh... at EA that is.

Some EA dude just recently "explained" why Fifa 08 for PC won't be next-gen:

Quote:

Will the PC have next-gen gameplay and graphics and if not, why not?
The gameplay engine that we've built for the Xbox 360 and PS3 is designed for multi-threaded, multi-core consoles. This is a significantly larger amount of power than even the top-end PCs on the market right now. Unlike many FPS titles that scale through dropping down the graphics detail, most of the power is used for the gameplay to calculate AI, animation, ball physics etc – we can’t drop the number of players!.

We have done tests that show that our new gameplay engine takes up to 34 times the CPU power of the CG gameplay engine. In other words, there are very few PC's available in the market that could run a next-gen FIFA 08 gameplay engine.

Instead, we've focused on innovating and polishing the gameplay on the current-gen engine for FIFA 08 PC. We've also improved the graphics and added 8-player LAN this year.

So PCs have less power than consoles... Why is it then that games have to downgraded to run on consoles? ;)

BlueDemon 1st August 2007, 11:32

Creating worlds in increasing detail, on a visual level as well as on a physics level, requires a significant amount of extra work. Maybe the "other technological and gameplay issues" could be building a next-gen development environment, that would take over much of the additional work needed to create the high-def game worlds. Such a tool could also maintain multiple rendering paths for PC and for consoles.

Blademrk 1st August 2007, 13:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by devdevil85
/\ LOL and seriously, who would want to play UT3 on a 6600GT.

*raises hand*

I've got UT3 pre-ordered, and that's my graphics card and although I want to update it, I can't see it happening any time soon.

cjmUK 1st August 2007, 17:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by mattthegamer463
I would sign a petition to have all current-gen consoles burned in massive piles! They're holding us back!

Lol yeah!

There is more money in consoles - lower tech but higher price. Usually a new console is a step or two ahead of your average gaming PC but not nearly as good as a high-end PC. Within a year or so, the console slips back as the PC evolves. So to save money (by cutting development costs), the developer tries to build a game around a common [PC + Console] core and thus the PC version is limited to the console technology. For a year or so, the owner of a lower-end PC might be better off with a console, but the higher-end PC gamers have to endure inferior graphics and interfaces.

The biggest laugh is that console fanboy will rave about the gfx capabilities of the latest consoles, yet the majority of console users are using conventional TVs (with a vastly inferior resolutions) - and often on smaller, older (or portable TVs). Mum and Dad are watching Coronation Street on the big 40" Widescreen - little Timmy is stuck in his bedroom with a 14" portable.

completemadness 1st August 2007, 21:03

link to forums doesnt work ... odd seing this article is a day or 2 old