Go Back   nV News Forums > Software Forums > Gaming Central

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-17-09, 11:21 AM   #1
jAkUp
eat. sleep. overclock.
 
jAkUp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chino, California
Posts: 17,744
Exclamation Cevat Yerli on the Future of Graphics

Quote:
He particularly discussed Crysis, which shipped in November 2007, and was deliberately intended to scale in rendering quality, even with new PCs created today. Yerli commented: "We are very often criticized for this", but it's the company's intent to make things highly scalable. Therefore, you can play the game now, and then, "when you buy a PC in two years time, the game will look better."

While receiving criticism, particularly from those who feel like this implies their current PC is underpowered, Yerli says the company has had more positive than negative feedback over the approach, concluding: "I guess we'll still do it in the future."

The firm then discussed CryEngine 3, which has been made over 5 years by 25 people, and is highly scalable. Since Yerli suggested that "games of 2012 will not look very different to the games of today", because the same basic console hardware will be in place, this leads to extreme importance for scalability between PC and console.

The company's in-house flagship title using it is Crysis 2, which is using "heavily improved Crysis technology" that is moving towards better implementation on consoles. Yerli then showed a PC-based demo of CryEngine 3 -- featuring both boat combat and on-land gameplay using enhanced Crysis assets, with 3D volumetric clouds, and HDR sky, voxel-based terrain, and a 7km view distance on the ocean.

One particularly impressive demonstration was a procedural frost shader, and Yerli suggested that, using CryEngine 3's approach, you can make a game that looks very high-end on PC and then still renders console-specific feature sets based around either current and next-gen console hardware.

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/new...hp?story=24865
__________________
965xe || evga x58 classified || 3x evga gtx 480 || 6gb g.skill || win7 x64
jAkUp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-09, 11:42 AM   #2
Erda
Local nV Tiki
 
Erda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 74
Lightbulb Re: Cevat Yerli on the Future of Graphics

I love Crysis and Crysis Warhead. I really just wish performance was better by now. On the Gamer Settings I can still only manage FPS in thge high 40s to low 50s. Hopefully someday we can all crank the graphics to max and achieve a high and smoother framerate.
__________________
PC Gaming Rig

Intel Core i7 Extreme 980x @ 4.00GHz || ASUS Rampage III Formula || 6 GB Corsair Dominator DDR3 @ 1.6GHz || EVGA GTX 580 x 2 Black Ops Edition SLI || WD VelociRaptor 300GB x2 Raid 0
SilverStone TJ10 ESA Edition || Corsair Hydro Series H70 || PC Power & Cooling 1.2KW w/ 12 AWG || Samsung LN40A750 40-Inch HDTV

PlayStation Network: TiKiMaN1
Xbox Live: TiKiMaN1
Erda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-09, 11:51 AM   #3
jAkUp
eat. sleep. overclock.
 
jAkUp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chino, California
Posts: 17,744
Default Re: Cevat Yerli on the Future of Graphics

2 295's can do it with 4xAA.
__________________
965xe || evga x58 classified || 3x evga gtx 480 || 6gb g.skill || win7 x64
jAkUp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-09, 11:55 AM   #4
NarcissistZero
Loving Everything Me
 
NarcissistZero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 8,033
Send a message via AIM to NarcissistZero
Default Re: Cevat Yerli on the Future of Graphics

Good to hear they are focusing on an amazing PC version that scales to a console.

I personally like their philosophy on graphics... the people who complained about not being able to run Crysis at max at release annoy the hell out of me. One of the coolest things about PC games is how they scale to the hardware... when Doom 3 came out I ran it on medium and it was a great game. Later on I ran it maxed and it looked even better... now I can run the damn thing supersampled and it looked even better than that.

I have always had mid-range rigs and I could run Crysis on medium when it came out at 1680x1050... not bad if you ask me. Now I can run it pretty much maxed a couple years later. If people could just turn back their settings to medium more often PC gaming would probably be a lot more popular than it is.
__________________
I gots one of them high powered gaming computers with an EVGA GTX 480 video thingy and a Q9550 processing device and also one of them Windows 7 64 operating programs with 4GB of some Corsair 1033 DDR2 ram.

Steam, Xbox Live and PSN: StingingVelvet
NarcissistZero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-09, 11:56 AM   #5
NarcissistZero
Loving Everything Me
 
NarcissistZero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 8,033
Send a message via AIM to NarcissistZero
Default Re: Cevat Yerli on the Future of Graphics

Quote:
Originally Posted by jAkUp View Post
2 295's can do it with 4xAA.
You can run it maxed out with 4xAA on a single GTX 260 in DX9.
__________________
I gots one of them high powered gaming computers with an EVGA GTX 480 video thingy and a Q9550 processing device and also one of them Windows 7 64 operating programs with 4GB of some Corsair 1033 DDR2 ram.

Steam, Xbox Live and PSN: StingingVelvet
NarcissistZero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-09, 12:24 PM   #6
JDiA
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 30
Default Re: Cevat Yerli on the Future of Graphics

It's a really dumb decision on the business end to make a product that can only be used properly years in the future, when the price has been dropped and the publisher can no longer make any money via retail.

I enjoy Crysis now, but only recently on my PC was it possible to enjoy. It's like an old Futuremark test. I don't like a product that tempts me, saying 'come back in 4 years, it'll be fun'. It's a horrible concept for a video game.

Anyways, I'm getting excited to see what kind of product Crytek brings out in 2012 or whenever with the new consoles. We think Crysis or the Crysis 2 tech demos look amazing now, just imagine a product that puts those to shame.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NarcissistZero View Post
You can run it maxed out with 4xAA on a single GTX 260 in DX9.
You can run it on 4xAA on a single GTX 260 in DX10 too, if you want a **** FPS.

You're still gonna get drops <30fps maxed in DX9 with 4xAA on a 260... As I have a core 216, I would know.
JDiA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-09, 12:45 PM   #7
agentkay
Registered User
 
agentkay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,866
Default Re: Cevat Yerli on the Future of Graphics

It's not a dumb decision at all, it increases the games "longevity" and its always how PC games that pushed the technological envelope were always designed. Dumb are only the people who fully max it out at a high res, with highest AA, and then expect 60fps or more and all that possibly even on low or midrange hardware.

I played the game fully maxed out on at 1920x1080 (without AA) back on release day on my 8800GTX and while the framerate wasn't always great, it was playable to my standards 95% of the time. Plus I could easily see why it performed the way it did, the amounts of polygons and advanced shaders it pushed per second were pretty damn obivious.
__________________

Intel I7-920 aircooled by Prolimatech Megahalems @ 3.8Ghz (200x19) | Gigabyte GA-X58-UD3R | OCZ Platinum 3x2GB DDR3-1600 RAM (7-7-7-24) @ 1600 | Gainward GTX 480 | WD Raptor 74GB + 150GB + Samsung 1TB | Soundblaster X-Fi Platinum | Corsair AX850 Gold | Coolermaster Stacker 830 silver | Logitech Z-5500 Digital 5.1 | Logitech G15 keyboard | Logitech G25 Racing Wheel | Sharp LC-46 XL1E (gaming and work)
F CliffyB.
agentkay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-09, 12:52 PM   #8
JDiA
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 30
Default Re: Cevat Yerli on the Future of Graphics

Quote:
Originally Posted by agentkay View Post
It's not a dumb decision at all, it increases the games "longevity". Dumb are only the people who fully max it out at a high res, with highest AA, and then expect 60fps or more and all that possibly even on low or midrange hardware.

I played the game fully maxed out on at 1920x1080 (without AA) back on release day on my 8800GTX and while the framerate wasn't always great, it was playable to my standards 95% of the time. Plus I could easily see why it performed the way it did, the amounts of polygons and advanced shaders it pushed per second were pretty damn obivious.
It IS a dumb business decision, fact. No way around it. People aren't going to want a game that their computer can't run properly, that's all there is to it.

Most games do run at maxed settings, high res, high AA and run just fine. That's what most people want, that's what most people like. They don't want to hear they have to spend another $1000 and/or wait a few years to play the game they just bought properly.

No doubt Crysis is the most optimized of the extremely graphics intensive games. It absolutely puts stuff like Cryostasis, STALKER, or UE3 to shame graphically. I appreciate good graphics, but personally I'd rather play a video game, not a waiting game.
__________________
mobo Gigabyte EP45-UD3L | cpu Intel C2D E8400 | ram 4GB G. Skill | gpu EVGA GTX260 core 216 | hdd WD 500GB Caviar Black | psu Corsair 550W | os Windows Vista 64 | monitor Dell 2209WA | mouse Logitech G5 | case Antec Three Hundred
JDiA is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 08-17-09, 01:08 PM   #9
NarcissistZero
Loving Everything Me
 
NarcissistZero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 8,033
Send a message via AIM to NarcissistZero
Default Re: Cevat Yerli on the Future of Graphics

Quote:
Originally Posted by JDiA View Post
It IS a dumb business decision, fact. No way around it. People aren't going to want a game that their computer can't run properly, that's all there is to it.

Most games do run at maxed settings, high res, high AA and run just fine. That's what most people want, that's what most people like. They don't want to hear they have to spend another $1000 and/or wait a few years to play the game they just bought properly.

No doubt Crysis is the most optimized of the extremely graphics intensive games. It absolutely puts stuff like Cryostasis, STALKER, or UE3 to shame graphically. I appreciate good graphics, but personally I'd rather play a video game, not a waiting game.
It's what you view as "properly" that makes your arguement wrong. I played Crysis on medium and enjoyed myself immensely... you do not need high settings to enjoy a game. You realize 90% of PC gamers play on lower settings, right? Go look at screenshot threads for Oblivion or Morrowind on the Bethesds forums, most of them are in 800x600 with low settings.

Here is the biggest flaw though... what would Crytek have done to make current hardware at release run the game maxed? They would have just made the medium settings the highest settings. What does that get you? Then you would never see the highest settings, ever, no matter what. The game would not have looked better at release, it would have just looked worse today. Why is that a good thing?

Your arguement seriously baffles me.
__________________
I gots one of them high powered gaming computers with an EVGA GTX 480 video thingy and a Q9550 processing device and also one of them Windows 7 64 operating programs with 4GB of some Corsair 1033 DDR2 ram.

Steam, Xbox Live and PSN: StingingVelvet
NarcissistZero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-09, 01:15 PM   #10
NarcissistZero
Loving Everything Me
 
NarcissistZero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 8,033
Send a message via AIM to NarcissistZero
Default Re: Cevat Yerli on the Future of Graphics

Quote:
Originally Posted by JDiA View Post
You can run it on 4xAA on a single GTX 260 in DX10 too, if you want a **** FPS.

You're still gonna get drops <30fps maxed in DX9 with 4xAA on a 260... As I have a core 216, I would know.
I did some thorough benchmarking and never saw below 28fps, and that was fine for me. I play Crysis slow and stealthy and never had a problem, plus I am mostly a 30fps guy anyway.
__________________
I gots one of them high powered gaming computers with an EVGA GTX 480 video thingy and a Q9550 processing device and also one of them Windows 7 64 operating programs with 4GB of some Corsair 1033 DDR2 ram.

Steam, Xbox Live and PSN: StingingVelvet
NarcissistZero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-09, 01:16 PM   #11
agentkay
Registered User
 
agentkay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,866
Default Re: Cevat Yerli on the Future of Graphics

Quote:
Originally Posted by JDiA View Post
It IS a dumb business decision, fact. No way around it. People aren't going to want a game that their computer can't run properly, that's all there is to it.

Most games do run at maxed settings, high res, high AA and run just fine. That's what most people want, that's what most people like. They don't want to hear they have to spend another $1000 and/or wait a few years to play the game they just bought properly.

No doubt Crysis is the most optimized of the extremely graphics intensive games. It absolutely puts stuff like Cryostasis, STALKER, or UE3 to shame graphically. I appreciate good graphics, but personally I'd rather play a video game, not a waiting game.

Then people can **** off to console gaming if they are too poor to invest a bit into new hardware when their computer are outdated. They are very welcome to play CoD at 600p. If every damn developer would think like that we would be still stuck at DX6 with crap graphics. Technology wouldn't advance by as far as it did when nobody would push the limits. The "current gen" problem shows this pretty well, very few people are willing to push the limits but are rather greedy for profits and we are stuck with graphics that barely get better.

Also remember all the indrustries that are associated with commercial hard- and software products. Think if everyone would be stuck at the thought of "current tech is enough, we don't need faster and better hardware". All the companies would have much smaller profit margins and much lower revenues and we would litereally be stuck in technological stone age. I'm glad that the I7 @ 4Ghz is currently a high-end CPU, and not a PII at 400Mhz.

Again, I applaud people who are willing to push the technogocial limits and are willing to take risks and are NOT satisfied with "current tech".
__________________

Intel I7-920 aircooled by Prolimatech Megahalems @ 3.8Ghz (200x19) | Gigabyte GA-X58-UD3R | OCZ Platinum 3x2GB DDR3-1600 RAM (7-7-7-24) @ 1600 | Gainward GTX 480 | WD Raptor 74GB + 150GB + Samsung 1TB | Soundblaster X-Fi Platinum | Corsair AX850 Gold | Coolermaster Stacker 830 silver | Logitech Z-5500 Digital 5.1 | Logitech G15 keyboard | Logitech G25 Racing Wheel | Sharp LC-46 XL1E (gaming and work)
F CliffyB.
agentkay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-09, 01:21 PM   #12
JDiA
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 30
Default Re: Cevat Yerli on the Future of Graphics

Quote:
Originally Posted by NarcissistZero View Post
I did some thorough benchmarking and never saw below 28fps, and that was fine for me. I play Crysis slow and stealthy and never had a problem, plus I am mostly a 30fps guy anyway.
Well I prefer to run it in DX10 with noAA, not optimal, but I'd rather play it in higher fidelity. I use a custom config, so I have turned off some things I didn't care so much about, and turned up some effects beyond V. High (made my own config, took a week or so to do it right).

Quote:
Originally Posted by NarcissistZero View Post
It's what you view as "properly" that makes your arguement wrong. I played Crysis on medium and enjoyed myself immensely... you do not need high settings to enjoy a game. You realize 90% of PC gamers play on lower settings, right? Go look at screenshot threads for Oblivion or Morrowind on the Bethesds forums, most of them are in 800x600 with low settings.

Here is the biggest flaw though... what would Crytek have done to make current hardware at release run the game maxed? They would have just made the medium settings the highest settings. What does that get you? Then you would never see the highest settings, ever, no matter what. The game would not have looked better at release, it would have just looked worse today. Why is that a good thing?

Your arguement seriously baffles me.
The problem is how people feel about the stuff. I know there are people out there playing stuff like Oblivion and TF2 at lower than 360 graphics fidelity. Personally, my obsessive side comes out in any situation that isn't optimal that I have some control over.

I think a lot of people must be like me because there's a lot of people that were upset that they couldn't run Crysis right, and I understand that.

Running at medium as maxed may sound crazy, but those thoughts don't run through my head when playing on a console. You don't hear many people saying, 'if only they would have cranked up the settings in Halo 3...'

It may not be logical, but that's how people think about it, and Crysis is proof.
__________________
mobo Gigabyte EP45-UD3L | cpu Intel C2D E8400 | ram 4GB G. Skill | gpu EVGA GTX260 core 216 | hdd WD 500GB Caviar Black | psu Corsair 550W | os Windows Vista 64 | monitor Dell 2209WA | mouse Logitech G5 | case Antec Three Hundred
JDiA is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.