What Will Replace Crysis?

Everyone has an opinion on Crysis....people either love it or hate it....I personally love it. I also believe that whether you hate the gameplay or not, one just cannot deny the visual accomplishments in this game. What is next? Has anyone even heard of a hint of Crysis 2 ? Is Crytek planning anything else? Whats the word on the street ?

 

Crysis will be replaced by the next 3DMark program.

Seriously though, Crysis's mindshare reminds me of Doom's back in the day. Although there were much better 3D games available, (System Shock anyone) for good or bad, Doom remained THE game for years.....
As to what's really going to replace it, who knows what the next big thing will be.

 

Or some other game programs in 1mil years jk
If crysis was able to achieve that much. Most of the games in 2009 would beat it as the gpu is keep upgrading each year.

 

Far Cry 2 is due out this fall if I remembered correctly. Graphic is pretty close to Crysis if not identical, but offers improvement, especially on NPC interaction and quite a few things.

 

Yes, and apparently Far Cry 2 will actually run on the majority of machines it's designed for.

 

First of all. NPC interaction is not equal to graphics and indeed has nothing to do with it. Far Cry 2 is a ... far cry (no pun intended) from Crysis in terms of technical graphics.

Nothing can or will touch Crysis graphically for at least the next 1-2 years considering that right now Maxed out (ie. very high with full AA, AF) no game really even comes close to it (although I know that it runs poorly on most setups at this level, but thats not really the issue). In addition it is very possible that Crysis could still be the best game in terms of technical graphics for even longer since Crytek has locked out some features of Cryengine 2 such as advanced shadows because current hardware really cannot handle it. But they did say in the future when hardware catches up they would simply release a patch to unlock these options and just like that they are once again the best in terms of technical graphics.

Now you may think there is something that 'looks better'... and thats fine but what you are really talking about is your personal preference with respect to Artistic graphics or a mix of art and technology that you like better than Crysis. Thats a subjective topic that is debateable. But technically no game can touch Crysis now or in the near future (ie. no announced games can touch Crysis). This is not a debateable point, technical graphics can easily be objectively assessed.

 

I'm going outside and taking a few pictures. Then I'm stringing them together in a game I'll call "Boredom". Guarenteed Uber-Realistic graphics, better than anything Crysis can put out. You don't need to use AA/AS/APoop, and you can run this on a EEE PC.

Go out and buy it when I release in tomorrow. Only $.99.

Edit: Now that I think about it, it's been done. A game called Myst. Great game.

 

But...can I get it on Steam?

 

Sure. If you pay extra, I'll send it to you in a steam kettle.

 

I'll suggest Crymeariver as the title.

 

fry cry 2 looks very similar to crysis.

 

All I know is that Crysis is gonna be sequaled, then triqualed(is that a word?)

 

Less graphics more gameplay plox.

At least until someone can incorporate both.

 

Farcry2, 3DMark07

 

technical graphics isn't too important for gaming (i think most of us agree). plus i'm sure something will supersede crysis in terms of pure technical graphics in less than 12 months. probably 6. i bet it will run better on the same hardware too...

i already think CoD4 looks much better than crysis overall.

 

I wanna know what kind of computers Crytek was using when making the game...

 

That's a question I've wondered as well.

 

Crysis is a trilogy, so two more games are on the way . . . no timeframe has been given though.

The next 3DMark is called 3DMark Vantage by the way:
http://www.futuremark.com/3dmarkvantage/promo/?redirect=/download/pcmarkvantage/advanced/

 

Far Cry2 will be just as good looking as Crysis. And there are more games to come, don`t worry

 

I'm sure HL2 EP3 will look really nice also. Maybe not with the extreme detail that Crysis has, but it'll still look really nice. Even HL2 still looks really good with everything maxed out.

I think Far Cry 2 will be similar in graphic capabilities as Crysis, although hopefully it'll be more scalable.

 

Rage by Id and Project Offset by Offset Software (now of intel)

And with Project Offset being bought by intel I expect all the hype and such of Crysis, until then I doubt anything will be as anticipated for the same reasons as those two games. Although right now Rage is moe touchy-feely and Offset is more about the gameplay and graphics, the same way Crysis was pimped.

 

Far Cry 2 will be really close if not equal to Crysis in graphics. Gameplay wise it will be much better in my opinion, much more freedom and that is what counts. Looks like a Oblivion with Crysis graphics to me

Of course there will be games that can touch crysis graphically in 1-2 years. Far Cry wasn´t king for a very long time either when they said the same thing.

 

Crysis 2 will replace Crysis...

 

HL 2 doesn't really come close. Don't get me wrong I am a HUGE HL fan but the source engine is old and tired. Most people seem to agree Far Cry 2 will be the shizzle this year and from what I have seen I'd agree. Don't forget it just wasn't the gfx in Crysis that awed us it's also the physics. Brushing by leaves, shooting branches, vehicles moving & reacting differently depending on damage, inertia and the environment, etc... This is taken a step further on Far Cry 2, at least according to the developers and demo vids we see. Weather systems, fire reacting to the environment, hardware becoming used and unreliable, better AI and a bunch of other stuff I can't think of at the moment.

 

Still waiting for a game that lets you blow holes in the terrain deep enough to use as cover. Crysis's physics were more of the eye candy type. Unless you count the realistic vehicle inertia with the same clunky vehicle controls that most FPSs use as an improvement...... Maybe Far Cry 2 will do it?

 

Just about sums it up nicely.

I might also go out with my HD camcorder into the woods, a few clips from the beach on holiday, string them all together. My game will be GRAPHYCALLY much better than Crysis.

I think crysis is missing one very significant point. Gaming is supposed to be fun.

I bought Crysis, and very occasionally, I'll have another look at it, kill a few enemy soldiers, or have an online game, but can anyone seriously tell me that it provides more fun than real games such as UT3, COD4 etc ....

And before all the fanboys start making comments like Ha - UT3 - Where's the Physics ?, or COD4 - The vegetation physics can't touch Crysis, I agree, on the right machine, it's very pretty, but it's what I believe amounts to a somewhat boring, and slow walk through a beautiful jungle, with the occasional beach scene, rather than a game.

Oh, and in answer to the original thread : "What will replace Crysis?", my answer is .........

Hopefully, Nothing.

P.S. If you're playing a FPS, and standing there watching how the tree top sways from side to side, and telling all your friends about how good it is, it must surely be a really immersive game - After playing UT3 for weeks, I hadn't even noticed that the physics were virtually none existent until I started reading threads, but maybe that's because I was having fun

 

Actually don't include UT3 in anything about living up to expectations, it's a big dissapointment, UT2K4 was a much better game from the perspective of gameplay versus what was expected.

COD4 is fine solid game exceeded expectations if anything (thanks in part to the failure to deliver in COD3), I prefer it to Crysis, but UT3 is a poor example of what the UE3 engine can do, and a terrible let down after all the hype and time that lead up to it, kinda like Crysis and COD3.

 

I don't recall including anything about expectations, although I suppose one's enjoyment of a game does depend heavilly on expectations. When I bought UT3, I had no prior experience of any of the other series, and was sold on it simply from my experience of Gears on the Xbox 360. After expecting something similar, Initially, my opinion was one of dissapointment, I felt that it lacked depth, with no real storyline or proper campaign, but after playing it for a while, I view it differently. I now see it as a no-holds-barred, fast paced, simple, yet still pretty shooter, and am aware that that's all it will ever be, and for this reason I don't compare it with any of the other FPS's.

Because it runs so well, doesn't need the disk to run, and provides good instant fun, it keeps me coming back (even though on the grand scale of things I'm pretty hopeless at it ), although I can appreciate that if one had followed the series and had higher expectations then the game could be viewed as somewhat shallow when compared with some of the latest FPS's which feature epic (no pun intended) and gripping campaigns.

 

What I meant was that HL2 still looks good despite its age and with EP3 coming out (this year? next year?), there's a chance it'll give other games a run for their money graphics-wise. IMO HL2 really pioneered physics and object manipulation in FPS games.

 

No, but then again, neither is "sequaled"

 

If Ep 3 is on the Source engine I'd expect something more like Ep 2. And yes HL 2 did lay the groundwork for physics and objects I agree. Just as HL 1 set the bar so did HL 2. However Far Cry came out just around the same time as HL 2 and gave us long view distances, jungles and fairly open environments.

 

Actually Crysis were a fun game, though I completed it and got bored of it. To me Crysis now is the new 3D Mark, yes I actually use it to benchmark my system and it is a really good benchmark too compared to the synthetic 3D Mark 06.

 

Wow...I guess "fun" is certainly subjective..because I have a blast playing Crysis...or maybe it's because I haven't had the chance to play much of anything else yet....I believe the fun and enjoyment one gets from a game is very individualized...what I find cool, others may find totally boring...it is def. the physics and small attention to details that I find so impressive in Crysis...shooting a soldier off of a cliff, watching him literally bounce on the way down..splash into the water at the bottom..then float in the ocean with arms splayed out doing a "deads man float" cracked me up....but then again I just got back into PC gaming after a long layoff (like 8 yrs) so maybe it just doesnt take much to entertain me at this point lol ....

 

Hihi... i actually thought that was kindda finny ^^ .

 

Yah I'd say Far Cry 2

 

Far Cry 2. Then Crysis 2. And so on, I guess..

 

HL2 is just the best game ever... the artistic input is amazing, it feels like a movie or like your there. I would gladly live in City 17

Fracry2, Crysis 2&3 (whatever the name will be), some new engine, 3D Mark Vantage, many others... and this is before 2010...

Hopefully we will be seing new trends such as 3D goggles ( affordable ) and smell technology


PERFECT GAME = Crysis + Half Life + GTA + Garry's Mod maybe even some Guitar Hero imho

 

Not exactly a pleasant thought in certain situations...

 

I like all the points you made, and I agree. I think Crysis is a great game for its gameplay - the story is not very original but it is epic. Gameplay is always going to be subjective - every aspect of the experience I like, from the dynamic environment to the way the guns felt.

Personally, I think many people who are anti-Crysis or don't like the game just don't have the machine to play it properly.

 

We already have wind and vibration by Philips
Visuals by Nvidia (mhmmm ATI and others may count... )
Sound by many different companies
Smell is the last one missing!!! for consumers of course...

oh... how about HURT? haha
HURT ENGINE EXTREME (Risk of Internal Bleeding included)

 

That.... isn't exactly "entertainment"...

 

It`s a matter of time until games like Crysis become mainstream. I`m guessing Far Cry2 will be one of them,other titles are not that impressive just yet,but I`m guessing 2010 will bring many new titles that rock.

 

I think 2008 will be the year of discovery... as in annoucements of new games
2009 the year of demos and the beginning of the new generation (TRUE DX10)
2010 the beginning of enjoying the visual amazing eye raping games

 

hey does anyone know what graphics card they use to make these games? especially Crysis....

plz no stupid responses...i have asked this quesion on numerous forums but have always been made fun of...

 

EITHER OF THESE

They either use insane rigs at the time
They receive PRE released gpu's
They use clustering (multiple computer interconnected)
They use quad plex (Nvidia external 4 GPU box and they have other models, $$$)
They have servers with GPU's and divide everything from the PC to them and then back to the computer or screen... so like each frame is constructed/rendered by one single graphics card.

I probably think they used special workstations with scientific/special GPU's for design/super calculations, quadplex or external gpu clustering.

 

They use top of the line systems, but rest assured that they test in not so hot systems as well to make sure what the minimum requirements are.And the recommended.You can`t just input that in a computer and poof,requirements unveiled.
It`s probably the best possible system at the time,tweaked for the game only.
Ie : tri sli 8800 ultras, quad 9800x2 ...etc.

 

If there is any games have a better graphic than crysis then I will cry, because it will be too realistic to play.

 

It's not the graphics card that matters until the game is nearly finalized most of the ground work is on rigs that rely on CPU power, and are hooked up to workstation cards for the art work, where colour accuracy and such are more important than fps.

Until the very end stage most of the truly tough work is emulated in CPU or is very unoptimized and slow. They use gaming cards to test chunks to make sure they're working right, but they aren't concerned about it running at 30-60fps so much as rendering correctly and doing what they expect.

Crysis was primarily developed on low power Quadros in workstations and then the top gaming cards of the day.

While ATi and nV provide developers with early card samples, that usually isn't a major factor until the optimization before finalizing stage, when building new features, like DX10, when no hardware exists, they virtualize the features in CPU.

Probably the most important card to finalizing Crysis would've been the GF8800, but even then it was an end stage situation, where they had the card that's their target, now optimize for it, that's the stage where pre-release hardware and that comes into play. But Crytek talked alot about the X1K cards before that.

Some of that has to do with the GetInTheGame or TheWayItsMeantToBePlayed programs which offer the developers this type of support (along with expertise in their marchitectures) that the program is about, not the payoffs most people think of (which is still a factor despite the statements, free advertising is still a tangible benefit).
However even those badges/stickers don't mean that the game was developed on either company's hardware. As an example Oblivion was developed primarily in two batches using the R9800 alot very early on, and then closer to launch the X1K cards, however it became a TWIMTBP game and the devs talked about some last minute optimization, but where they didn't have as much time on those nV cards as they had developing on those two primarily ATi platforms. Doom3 is a very open example of the back and forth where Carmack mentions using the best of the day to test dev stuff talking one moment about working on the GF4s then the R9700/9800 and then the FX5900s (talking about the ARB2 & NV30 path) and the early GF6s. And sometimes cards or development ideas are droped or changed like adding the NV30 optimizations into the general NV40 path instead of making it it's own.

If you think about any 'DX11' game that is on the drawing board, there isn't even hardware for it being produced at TSMC yet, or even finalized at intel, so they run programs that emulate the features using M$' early rough outline of the standard and just test ideas and concepts for their engine, and then focus primarily on the stuff that's easier to do now, like maps , artwork, base texture, storyline, physics, etc.

Basically at first it's all on hardware that would maybe only impress graphics artist if that, and only the last 10% of development or so, the IHVs come in with their new hardware and say "we'll be selling this in a quarter or two, optimize for this, and here's a few examples of all out current hardware too". And then that last tweaking stage starts, and is really a small portion of the development.

Alot of people think companies like EA or Id or Valve or Crytek are working right now with an early R800 or GT300, but it's really more boring than that. They may know more about those cards and their expected features than Fudzilla and the InQ and even many of ATi and nV's own workers (not the R&D engineers of course), but it's only the specs to give them an idea of what to aim for.

 

Thanks Great Ape u very very helpful...i have ran out of rep to give today but tommorow i will definitely give u Thumbs up

 

Gaming will certainly move in the direction of Virtual Reality in the future....there is actually already some truly astounding multi-sensory VR technology currently being developed....the trick will be to make it affordable to the average consumer. If we could look into a crystal ball anywhere from 50-100 yrs into the future...I believe we would all be completely blown away....