PS3 News: Crysis 2 Confirmed For Consoles - PS3 News

Members Login: Register | Why sign up? | Forgot Password?

Crysis 2 Confirmed For Consoles

There was much talk about Crysis possibly coming to consoles, but you needn't worry about that any longer.

According to GameZine, Crysis 2 has been confirmed for the PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 and PC. It will be the very first game built utilizing the CryENGINE 3 and EA is set to publish the promising title. You may remember that Crytek recently picked up the struggling developer Free Radical (responsible for the likes of Haze and the TimeSplitters series), so perhaps that was a small indication of the studio's desire to include consoles in their future projects. Said Cevat Yerli, Crytek CEO:

"The development of Crysis 2 marks a major stepping stone for our studio. This is not only the next game in the Crysis franchise, it’s the first title we are developing for consoles and the first title being built on CryENGINE 3. We are excited to have the support of EA Partners again as we work together to make the launch of Crysis 2 a huge event."

At this point, we're starting to question the need for PC gaming any longer. Don't take that too seriously, PC fans, we're just acknowledging the drastic shift in the gaming industry in the past decade and at this point, very few games left are "better" on the PC platform. How will Crysis 2 look and play on consoles? We're willing to bet...every bit as good as it looks and plays on the PC.

Related Game(s): Crysis 2

6/1/2009 Ben Dutka

Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Google Share on MySpace Share on Delicious Share on Digg Share on Google Buzz Share via E-Mail Share via Tumblr Share via Posterous

Comments (41 posts)

LegendaryWolfeh
Monday, June 01, 2009 @ 9:56:29 PM
Reply

Saw this the other day on Kotaku, really interesting....hope this one has a better story, had great gameplay and graphx of course..

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Scarecrow
Monday, June 01, 2009 @ 10:01:12 PM
Reply

They should keep this thing on PC

"It'll look better there anyway"
Personally I hope it does badly on consoles. We have too many damn FPSs.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

bxshotboi
Monday, June 01, 2009 @ 10:03:15 PM

its true that we have too many shooters out and i would rather there be a nice stream of rpg's headed towards the ps3 but hey as long as its a fun game

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Monday, June 01, 2009 @ 10:16:31 PM

Indeed, although it will be interesting to see how this stacks up against Gears and KZ2 on the consoles.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Kevadu
Monday, June 01, 2009 @ 11:44:11 PM

Well, I can't say I'm terribly excited about it either, but saying "They should keep this thing on PC" seems a bit harsh.

I agree that there are too many FPS games these days. I probably won't buy this, but there's nothing wrong with having a choice.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Geobaldi
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 1:12:02 AM

I agree it should stay on PCs as well. Even though consoles are getting it, it will still look far and away better on a PC.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Mamills
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 7:07:33 AM

its gonna suck, again, as usual. sorry the 1st crysis was horrible. some of the worst AI i have ever seen period. graphics were great, if u had a PC that could handle it. but other than that Crysis = Generic shooter. and it lost pc exclusitivity because it was the most pirated game on that platform. guess people were using it as a benchmark for their PC rig

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

bxshotboi
Monday, June 01, 2009 @ 10:02:03 PM
Reply

well im looking to play it although i havent played the first but wat the heck might as well give it a chance since many say crysis was awesome

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

SarahPalinMILF
Monday, June 01, 2009 @ 10:07:45 PM
Reply

As long as I get my Modern Warfare 2 fix it, I really don't care about any other FPS

Agree with this comment 1 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Deleted User
Monday, June 01, 2009 @ 10:09:50 PM
Reply

See it's stuff like this that makes me think the 360 is really powerful, and can pull off almost anything the PS3 can.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Monday, June 01, 2009 @ 10:33:50 PM

Can it? Let's see KZ2 or Heavy Rain.

The advantage PS3 has is not in the GPU it's in the CPU. While the developers are still working out how to best take advantage of the 6 available SPEs on the PS3, the programmers on the 360 are essentially able to only worry about their multi-threading across three identical CPUs. In absolute performance terms the CPU in the 360 can run 3 instruction streams (one of the cores in the triple code PCU in the 360 handles the resident OS and Hypervisor)at the same clock speed that the PS3 can run 7 instruction streams (one of the SPEs is reserved for the Sony OS, and a small proportion of the main CPU core runs the Hypervisor). Right now though, PS3 devs have been using about half of the available SPE computing 'power' that the PS3 has to offer because they are still learning what they are best suited for and how best to use them.

Graphically the GPUs are very similar, but the CPU architecture is very different, and although the PS3 is harder to learn, it's ultimately a reqarding platform because of the extra return on investment of time and energy learning to use it.

This advantage shows up in physics, and any time the developer is able to use the cell as part of the graphics engine. The Cell was partially at least optimized for graphics work - remember Sony's original design didn't have a honking big GPU, the Cell was doing the work. This year and next PS3 games make start to regularly exceed their 360 counter-parts. Ports and multi-plats will look similar, but exclusives will increasingly show what can really be done.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

vXn
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 8:31:17 AM

360 cpu can work with 6 streams, so, please, RTFM.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 9:29:02 AM

vXn

Alright, Xenon is a tri-core dual issue CPU. However....

The Xnenon is a tri core processor, each core is served by a single instruction and data bus. The cores are dual issue, but you know what, they still have a single bus and it's still a single processor core. Multi-issue, branch prediction, out of order execution (not present on the Xenon or Cell), all these things are techniques for maximizing the use of the Core's resources at a given time, after all if an instruction just branched and it'll take a dozen cycles to reload the pipe behind the branch, why not issue another instruction? that way the core isn't laying idle. Intel does it, AMD does it, the Cell BE does it, the cores on the 360's CPU do it, well they should they're lightly modified versions of the PPU core in the Cell BE.

If you want to get technical and think in terms of threads, a 3 core dual issue CPU could have up to 6 concurrent threads apparently executing at once. Wanna count some more threads? Alright The Cell BE in the PS3 has a PowerPC core (the same one that IBM lightly redesigned for inclusion in the 360's CPU) and a minimum of 7 functional SPE cores. That makes a total of 8 cores, and guess what my friend, they are all dual issue. So while that mighty 360 is crunching on 6 threads at once, the Cell is kicking up to 16 threads at once. The SPEs are not simple math units by the way, they have all the instructions needed to be a general purpose unit, they are essentially very efficient RISC processors with heavily optimized floating point instructions. The SPEs have their own local memory (256KB) that is private to that core. All cores in the Cell are linked via an internal data bus called the EIB. EIB has a theoretical peak bandwidth of 96 bytes per clock cycle,m at 3.2GHz which is over 300GByts/second. The SPEs are configurable to run in series, in parallel, and the EIB allows data from one SPE to move to the next at the internal clock speed of the CPU. Xenon is a nice CPU, a triple core dual issue Power PC design running at 3.2GHz is nothing to be sniffed at, and the enhanced floating point units on each core sure help, but at the end of the day, you're comparing a device capable of handling 6 threads against a unit capable of handling 16, 14 of the 16 threads on the Cell are running on processor cores that are specifically optimized for floating point math, and are far more efficient than the FP units in Xenon. At the pure hardware level there really isn't a comparison here. What matters is the software, and it takes time to master a complex architecture, which PS3 certainly is. But it's also more powerful in raw computing terms.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

bebestorm
Monday, June 01, 2009 @ 10:32:52 PM
Reply

Happy to hear this. I wonder if they will release the first game as well. I agree with you on questioning the need of pc gaming...There have been changes I use to be PC/PS2 and now Im a dual console owner... Im still hoping Diablo 3 will at least come to the PS3.

Last edited by bebestorm on 6/1/2009 10:35:28 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Jian2069
Monday, June 01, 2009 @ 11:00:53 PM
Reply

Honestly, I thought the original was stupid.
I was just in it for the graphics and physics...
Keep this on PC where people can pirate it

Agree with this comment 1 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Xra897
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 12:43:58 AM

dude gota support publihsers

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Zemus101
Monday, June 01, 2009 @ 11:49:50 PM
Reply

I completely agree that we don't need PC gaming as much as we used to. I'm upgrading my damn RAM to 2gb just to play Sims3? I even had to install windows xp for it :P (Was using Ubuntu exclusively, and now both) The reason I say this is because I'm playing Sims3 right now, a day before it's release (with all intentions on buying the damned thing when I know I can run it fine) Maxis is telling people that this pirated version "isn't complete" that you get an extra city to live in if you buy the proper version... why not just release this game for ps3/360. That's like 50million units out there, at least... there, no more pirating problems. Just a lot of angry pc gamers >.> I'm probably not making sense, i'm just a little peeved that to play a new pc game (not even a graphic heavy one) i have to spend $100 in RAM (which I needed anyways I guess) oh well ...there wasn't any ps3 games I wanted to spend that $100 on anyways, at least I didn't spend it on drugs or alcohol >.>

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, June 01, 2009 @ 11:59:17 PM
Reply

Hmm, Won't need it, Killzone 3 will be coming around the same time I bet.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Xra897
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 12:43:32 AM
Reply

yay. cuz i suck with mouse and keyboard

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 5:18:53 AM

Mouse and keyboard just suck. Before anyone just bashes me I'll try to explain. Didn't you like the controls in Killzone 2 because they were more realistic and "weighty" than typical FPS? Wasn't the point of that to give it more realism? If you were always a pinpoint shot there would be no realism because under REAL heavy fire a human does not behave precisely. Think about it people.

Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 6/2/2009 5:21:24 AM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Qubex
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 1:46:27 AM
Reply

Actually, we would be closer to PC gaming if mouse and keyboard was included in console based games; or at least included as an option. I don't see the sense in leaving it out when it would be so easy to implement... if people have the peripherals; let us use them! I think KZ2 would be wonderful with a mouse and keyboard control system... so much more accurate.

Unfortunately tis true that a fully specced PC will always look better than consoles... the ability to simply up the resolution is the biggy. The PS3 needed a more powerful GPU that was able to pump 1900x1080p with no sweat; and it needed at least 1 GIG of ram... that would have helped immensely...

Q!

"i am home"

Last edited by Qubex on 6/2/2009 1:48:13 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 5:21:56 AM

Would you wanna go toe to toe online when you like your DS3 and someone else likes their Mouse?

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

JofaMang
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 7:00:34 AM

Restricting the consoles from using mouse and keyboard is important to maintaining a level play field.

Someone with great experience with PC FPS games, allowed to use a Keyboard and mouse will have an unacceptable advantage over your average console player. I think allowing mouse+KB support would hurt the online play for your average console owner.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

LegendaryWolfeh
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 8:12:30 AM

not true, whether you have a mouse and keyboard or a controller, the sensitivity settings are set in stone, so they would still work

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

JofaMang
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 8:23:37 AM

KB+Mouse that would be limited to the motion speed/accel of the analog sticks would be useless, and only elicit complaints of severe input lag. True this would keep it equal, but would be infuriating to use by anyone who is comfortable using KB+Mouse on any FPS PC games.

It would be epic failure to do it that way, and would only harm the reputation of the brand that instituted such a system.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

daizycutter
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 2:32:49 AM
Reply

the gfx card alone just to play crysis on a decent system will cost much more than a ps3!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Geobaldi
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 4:40:21 AM

Ummm. No it doesn't. Paid $80 for my 1gb GeForce card a few months back. And Crysis runs smoothly on it.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

JofaMang
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 6:56:08 AM

Sorry Geobaldi, I call BS. Each of my video cards cost more than a PS3 (4870x2s) and until I added my second card, I couldn't run crysis smoothly at max settings at my native resolution of 1920x1080.

Perhaps you could qualify your statement with your settings and resolutions. I could keep a silky smooth 60+ frames on crysis at 1280x720 and medium settings with one card. I would never claim I could run Crysis smoothly on that rig, as crysis is a killer app/benchmark game. Running a killer app/benchmark in hobbled limited settings is not the way to credibly boast about the capabilities of your rig. It is not fair to those looking to run a killer app like crysis to be tricked into thinking that a cheap upgrade will fulfill their needs.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Geobaldi
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 8:24:42 AM

It also depends on your ram and processor. A video card on it's own is not going to do it by itself. I also have a quad core and 6gb of ram to go with it. No a relatively older system is not going to run it smoothly, unless it could be upgraded to more modern standards and even then you'd be lucky with that program. It runs smoothly at the same res you run it at but that's the highest my monitor will allow. I really need to get a new one :(

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

JofaMang
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 9:03:22 AM

I understand that, my Processor is my current bottleneck and probably my next upgrade. (Phenom II 720 triple core OCed at 3.1) I am running 8gb of 1066 ram, on XP 64. I am pretty confident that my single video card was maxed out and not limited by the rest of my system, and that by adding the second card, I have found a bottleneck in my processor. Even though crysis is running on average about 55fps on my current system(1920x1080 max settings), I have been experiencing aggravating microstutter at times, an issue that I have diagnosed to be from the limitations of my processor, not from my videocards.

I guess my point is, that a single 80 dollar upgrade alone probably won't play the game smoothly, unless installed in a fairly powerful (and pricey) rig to begin with. If they do right with the new game engine, the PS3 might be the cheapest price of admission for top notch Crysis action. I don't count the 360, as I am doubtful that crytek will be able to match the ps3 on the 360 given the chance to truly optimize the engine for each console. There is of course the chance that Crytek will be persuaded ($) to keep the systems graphically on par with each other.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

vicious54
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 11:56:42 AM

The single $80 card CANNOT run the game on the highest settings EVER. I don't care what processor and memory you have in your system, that card will not run Crysis on high unless someone gave you a highend card for $80.

Last edited by vicious54 on 6/2/2009 11:59:33 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Qubex
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 10:02:24 PM

Just to add what you guys mentioned above... the PS3 GPU, while powerful, is still left wanting.

Killzone 2 is an amazing game... beautiful textures, great modelling and full AA... but why not run it natively in 1080p as one could have done on a PC... simple memory and GPU card bandwidth. It just cannot do it from what I can tell.

The CryEngine 3 will run at 720p and will probably not have the level of detail the PC version will have... a fact!

Q!

"i am home"

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

dveisalive
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 4:53:41 AM
Reply

This is great finally I can play Crysis without the hassle of buying expensive upgrades to play it in higher resolutions. I think they should of focus more on PS3, cause I get a bad feeling that the PS3 version is going to suck for these are PC guys etc... Mainly 360 is nothing but a PC based console, This could be like Valve all over again.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

isaya85
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 6:55:42 AM
Reply

After this year I'm taking a break from shooters, I already have KZ2 then we got MAG and MW2 in novembro, I'm burnt out no more shooters for me for a long time

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

JofaMang
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 6:57:40 AM

I concur, minus MW2. I am so fricking done with COD clone games. Its the same reason I won't buy EA sports games anymore.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Mamills
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 7:11:27 AM
Reply

they really do need less shooters man, MW2 and Mag are the next 2 im picking up. KillZone 2 is hollding me over right now, i need more variety in games. this is y i think Japanese developers need to stick to their roots. if they don't, hell everyone will be playing shooters.

im sorry but most games made for western audiences are pretty retarded and straight forward, here shoot this.. and then make it look pretty. god, f*ck shooters

just watch, wait for the day you see Square enix make a shooter. it'll be pretty boys shooting each other with gunblades, as they throw grenades that summon. LOL

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

JofaMang
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 8:24:13 AM

Wasn't Dirge of Cerberus a FPS?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

JofaMang
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 9:56:08 AM

NM, it was a third person shooter. I admit I never played it, heh.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Naga
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 10:49:27 AM
Reply

Meh it'll end up getting torrentized spreading across the dark corners of internets. Crysis 2 is doomed

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

vicious54
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 @ 12:04:28 PM
Reply

I wasted a lot of money getting the 1st game to run on all the highest settings on my pc for just an OK game. The story was that of an original SciFi channel movie but the gameplay was fun.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

somethingrandom
Thursday, June 04, 2009 @ 12:23:50 AM
Reply

PC gaming is changing, not dying. The last game I bought for mine may have been Left 4 Dead (much better than 360 version). L4D is all about the online play, it doesn't have amazing graphics or anything, but it's wicked fun.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Leave a Comment

Please login or register to leave a comment.

Our Poll

Are you getting Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor?
Yup, I'm nabbing this one now.
Yes, but I'm waiting for a while.
Maybe...not sure yet.
No, not interested.

Previous Poll Results