Crysis coming to PS3!

[TheLastWolf]

20 FPS is pretty bad. And alvino took the words right out of my mouth. No one knows what the hell Crysis is.

Guys - the PS3's GPU is about the equivalent of a 7900GT. Not even DX10. No way will it compare to the PC version's graphics. Didn't someone post an article where tri-8800Ultras couldn't max out Crysis?

Also, if the game is 1080P, you're running Crysis at 1920x1080. Good luck with that.

I'm pretty sure PS3 games don't use DirectX.

 

[CompMan]

They are going to have to make a whole new PS3 just to play Crysis, and they will charge like 2k.

 

[ssc456]

20 FPS is pretty bad. And alvino took the words right out of my mouth. No one knows what the hell Crysis is.

Guys - the PS3's GPU is about the equivalent of a 7900GT. Not even DX10. No way will it compare to the PC version's graphics. Didn't someone post an article where tri-8800Ultras couldn't max out Crysis?

Also, if the game is 1080P, you're running Crysis at 1920x1080. Good luck with that.

ok you cant compare the graphics in a PS3 tp a PC graphics card, the whole architecture of the PC graphics is completely different and those of you saying it will probably run it at like 20 FPS dont be stupid,

the human eye can notce 25FPS so obviously they will design the game specifically for the PS3 id probably agree with you if they put an exact copy of the PC game onto the PS3 but do you not think they will design it better and make it less graphical in the details the PS3 are weak on and more graphical on the details the PS3 are strong on,

i thought smart, inteligent people like you guys would know that they are obviously not gonna chuck a PC game straight onto a PS3 that cant handle it,

so i believe i will take $10 from MikeReiner and $20 from cryman and convert that to £ and its about £15 ill take paypal

lol c'mon guys use your head "its their for a reason".

Edit: the reason pc gaming graphics look better is because you have to spend £250 - £350 on a graphics card alone and then buy the processor and Memory and even then ill bet in 3 years time keeping the same pc you have built and the same PS3 i will buy my PS3 games will look better in 3 years time

 

[MikeReiner]

ok you cant compare the graphics in a PS3 tp a PC graphics card, the whole architecture of the PC graphics is completely different and those of you saying it will probably run it at like 20 FPS dont be stupid,

the human eye can notce 25FPS so obviously they will design the game specifically for the PS3 id probably agree with you if they put an exact copy of the PC game onto the PS3 but do you not think they will design it better and make it less graphical in the details the PS3 are weak on and more graphical on the details the PS3 are strong on,

i thought smart, inteligent people like you guys would know that they are obviously not gonna chuck a PC game straight onto a PS3 that cant handle it,

so i believe i will take $10 from MikeReiner and $20 from cryman and convert that to £ and its about £15 ill take paypal

lol c'mon guys use your head "its their for a reason".

Edit: the reason pc gaming graphics look better is because you have to spend £250 - £350 on a graphics card alone and then buy the processor and Memory and even then ill bet in 3 years time keeping the same pc you have built and the same PS3 i will buy my PS3 games will look better in 3 years time

Excuse me. I'll refrain from ever making a joke again.
I'm not stupid.

When the Xbox version of FarCry was made, ubisoft pretty much remade it. It wasn't like the PC version at all. It looked great, ran at an average 30FPS.
Sure, the load times were kinda lengthy, but it ran well enough to justify it.

One of the best console shooters if you ask me.

Also, heres a fun fact for you:
Xbox had a celeron 733mhz CPU.
GeForce 3 MX.
64 megs of ram.

Another fun fact?
Doom3, Halo, and riddick all ran better on the xbox than the PC version unless you had a really nice PC back in the day.
Granted, Doom3 was somewhat butchered compared to the PC version. But Halo and Riddick weren't.

 

[~NeonFire372~]

The fact that it's on Games Radar makes me a little skeptical, but if it were true, it would definitely show the PlayStation 3's potential.

 

[ssc456]

Excuse me. I'll refrain from ever making a joke again.
I'm not stupid.

When the Xbox version of FarCry was made, ubisoft pretty much remade it. It wasn't like the PC version at all. It looked great, ran at an average 30FPS.
Sure, the load times were kinda lengthy, but it ran well enough to justify it.

One of the best console shooters if you ask me.

Also, heres a fun fact for you:
Xbox had a celeron 733mhz CPU.
GeForce 3 MX.
64 megs of ram.

Another fun fact?
Doom3, Halo, and riddick all ran better on the xbox than the PC version unless you had a really nice PC back in the day.
Granted, Doom3 was somewhat butchered compared to the PC version. But Halo and Riddick weren't.

sorry mate didnt mean to offend n e 1 jus thought every1 was hating on the PS3 again and im a ps3 lover so we are bound t clash

 

[MikeReiner]

sorry mate didnt mean to offend n e 1 jus thought every1 was hating on the PS3 again and im a ps3 lover so we are bound t clash

Oh well..

I don't think I trust that website anyway.

 

[joe pic]

Umm I'd like to know how you went about determining that? There are some titles that look pretty damn good and the PS3 is no where near being fully utilized.

There is no way of telling which will look/play better until its released.

You're absolutely right!

This is great news, good find john!

I'm so excited!!!!!

 

[esa193]

this isnt a true article
i looked around the net
if this was true other gaming sites with more credibility would have posted this

 

[TheLastWolf]

Crysis wouldn't work well with openGL anyways.