CryEngine 3 Tech Demo

jnagtube Says:

Jan 14, 2011 - It's only natural that PC's will always have better graphics and performance over consoles. Consoles *are* PC's with a custom operating system in a nice shiny case that can't be upgraded.This doesn't stop me from owning and playing on both now does it? They are both good in their own right.

antwnis94 Says:

Jan 15, 2011 - 0:53 is CODENAME KINGDOMS :))

antwnis94 Says:

Jan 15, 2011 - at 0:57 you can see on the left side a flag..does anyone know what does the symple mean?(is that a cross?)

coollat17 Says:

Jan 15, 2011 - i know right...i seem like one of the concept arts. but i dont know what the symbol means

Ostnizdasht206 Says:

Feb 1, 2011 - PCers are always pissed off at consoles for some reason.. probably because they spent 3x more just to have better graphics and they never get the console exclusives like Uncharted or Killzone 3.

MrMike655 Says:

Mar 10, 2011 - why is there always a flame war between pc and console ffs i have a fast pc and ps3 and xbox 360 i will admit pc absolutly flaws consoles with playability and graphics but on the other hand console is easy as 123 thats the difference and i have done crysis warhead on my pc with high settings 1920x1080.my pc:amd phenom ii x4 955 be 4.0ghzgainward radeon 4870 512mb golden sample 775/10004gb geil black dragon ddr3 1600mhz rammsi 790fx-gd70 motherboard1000gb hddblu ray drive

NobodyProtoype Says:

Mar 31, 2011 - These comments make me want to punch myself in the face. PC Gamers, Please stop this elitist bullshit, yes we can get better graphics but then you complain about how it's below 60fps. I'm happy with 35fps on a new release. Console Gamers, The reason you are perceived as immature is because of that damning 15% of players that normally get booted on PC games using server tools. I paid less for my PC than my console, I like both for different reasons. To that guy, I don't want to play Unc

NobodyProtoype Says:

Mar 31, 2011 - -charted 2 or Killzo- you were joking right? We get plenty more exclusives than any console. There's also a different mentality, I'm willing to bet that if you own a console that you like Crysis 2's multiplayer. PC gamers in general don't.

daveparkinson25 Says:

Apr 15, 2011 - true

psycl0n3 Says:

Jun 29, 2011 - the biggest problem consoles have is really the texture memory, the xbox has like 64mb or 128 so it has to constantly load and unload textures

WakeboardTricker12 Says:

Aug 23, 2011 - Agreed, PC will always have the upper hand on consoles, since PC's can evolve with the technology, and be upgraded whenever we see fit. Still wished Crysis 2 had stayed a PC exclusive though, the game was very console-fied, with smaller maps, and more linear gameplay.

daimyo2 Says:

Aug 28, 2011 - I dont know about this engine but I couldnt start it up... it crashes lol... Stick to UDK i guess

LucianLuminosul Says:

Feb 21, 2012 - nice video. crappy resolution.

jella11 Says:

Apr 29, 2012 - That's actually quite an outdated PC, even for a year ago when you posted the comment. I got a Quad-Core CPU and 4 GB RAM +1GB GPU 5 fucking years ago. I guarantee that with your system you can't even run this engine or even the one used for the first Crysis on highest settings anywhere near smoothly. You could have the newest video card available but with a fucking quad -core CPU it'd be like putting a battery inside an antique steam-powered tool. I know your vidcard won't be new either tho.

MikeT2005 Says:

May 1, 2012 - You do realise that not every quad-core processor is the same right? Even clock for clock older processors are out performed by newer models. And you do realise that texture memory isn't the sole determinent of performance? The reason I mentioned the RAM on the video card is because a modern video card has more RAM on it than the current generation of consoles. You do realise that the latest Intel® Core™ i7-3820 3820QM is "only" a quad core? I don't think you know anything about computers.

MikeT2005 Says:

May 1, 2012 - I forgot to mention RAM speed. A lot of people have new systems with only 4 GB of RAM, but its really fast RAM. There's a hell of a lot of difference between a system with fast RAM and a system with slow RAM.

jella11 Says:

May 4, 2012 - You do realize that you specified a Quad-Core CPU as an element that would outperform consoles, right? Now saying that not every quad-core is the same in your way, is like having specified "My PC has a motherboard" and then thinking this should come across as the newest technology there is. On TOP of that, the argument is in actuality invalid because your specified Quad-Core i7 may be new, but it's a rather weak Mobile CPU. On top of that, the way you specified a Quad-Core CPU as (cont.)

jella11 Says:

May 4, 2012 - (cont.) outperforming consoles is also rather worthless seeing as a PS3 has more than double the cores. 4GB of RAM is pretty much factually extremely outdated, and where did you get the idea to question whether or not I realized that texture memory is not the SOLE determinant* of performance? That is infant-level reasoning. You specified it in your summation and I included it in mine, since you thought it was important enough to mention, when really a card with 1Gb texmem is nowhere near (cont.)

jella11 Says:

May 4, 2012 - (cont.) "modern" at all, like I said before. See I think you failed to see the point. You were bragging about your specs as being some kind of ultimate win, when really you just seem to be talking about a fucking laptop of all things, and everything you specified falling under old technology, as The gaming PC that will keep outperforming consoles. I thought I'd help you out of the dream before you got wind of the new console tech. Do you want to make more of a fool out of yourself still?

MikeT2005 Says:

May 7, 2012 - I wasn't saying my system was a laptop, only that the latest processors are still quad-core processors. The fact that you are dismissing quad-cores as somehow out dated technology still indicates to me that you have no clue what you are talking about. Yes, there are processors with more than 4 cores available, but most of them don't necessarily out perform their quad core counterparts.

MikeT2005 Says:

May 7, 2012 - Firstly, the PS3 processor has 7 cores. Not double as you specified. Regardless of this, it is still out-performed by 3 year old PC graphics cards in terms of FLOPS. You keep saying how 4 GB of RAM is out-dated, yet I'm yet to see any modern game really demand more. I have 8 GB in my system which rarely gets used, and my friend has 16 in his, which he only needs due to the fact that he does 3D design and needs it when rendering complex scenes. Yet again, I think you're absolutely clueless on PCs

jella11 Says:

May 8, 2012 - That's what I mean. The latest quad-core processors are Laptop processors. Anyway, you still seem to have failed to grasp the whole point even though I explained it thoroughly. Like, for fuck's sake have you even read the complete reply? Because you're still making those retarded assumptions, that I already completely addressed and I don't want to put more time into this than I have to just because you have no reasoning power. Just, read all 3 of the comments and come back to me.

MikeT2005 Says:

May 18, 2012 - You're wrong again. Most of the latest release processors for desktops are still quad-core processors. Check Intel's website if you don't believe me. I don't exactly know what point you're trying to argue. That a system with a quad core processor, 4 GB of RAM and a 1 GB Graphics Card won't run the latest games? Well that'd depend on the type of processor, the type of graphics card, and the speed of the RAM. What point are you actually trying to prove?

jella11 Says:

May 18, 2012 - Jesus Christ you're thick. I even spelled it out repeatedly. The point basically is that you're boasting with specs that would've sounded new 7 years ago.