Crysis 2 tech demo analysed

By Richard Leadbetter Published 23 April, 2010

The challenge of "nothing under 30FPS".

Can consoles run Crysis? That was the question Digital Foundry posed in December last year, pulling apart CryTek's own engine demos and pitting their in-house work against the shipping PC title.

The result was inconclusive, but one thing was apparent: maintaining frame-rate was problematic in the demos, and we foresaw a serious retooling of the Crysis concept in order to more adequately accommodate the limitations of console technology.

CryTek's recent reveal of the in-progress Crysis 2 at a press event in New York impressed all that saw it. The developer chose to showcase the game on Xbox 360 in an attempt to shake off the lingering doubts that CryEngine tech can transition across to the consoles, while at the same time demonstrating that the lush tropical environs of the original Crysis have been replaced with a more urban jungle, in line with our thoughts that a sequel would need to be tailored towards a setting more favourable to rendering on the likes of 360 and PS3.

Performance-wise, CryTek is bullish about the game's prospects.

"We're looking at 30 [frames per second]," CryTek CEO Cevat Yerli told VG247. "There's nothing below, nothing... I'm very happy the game works at all. I think the amount of push we have and the fact the game works like that puts me in a very happy situation right now."

CryEngine 3 is an immensely advanced piece of tech, and hitting that performance level is key. The New York press event was accompanied by the release of two videos: the first appears to be rendered out from the PC version, while the second is the third in a series of CryEngine 3 tech demos.

This latter video, created for GDC 2010 (and so we can assume a few weeks older than the Xbox 360 version taken to NYC) gives us some idea of how performance is looking in the scenes taken from Crysis 2.

Here's CryTek's GDC 2010 demo showing excerpts of Crysis 2 running on console, with added Digital Foundry frame-rate analysis.

Similar to the previous CE3 tech demos, there are some performance issues. Some of this is down to the fact that for this video at least, CryTek chose to enable v-sync, and the double-buffer nature of the renderer means that any frame-drops result in a big performance drop down to 20FPS almost by default.

We can expect the final game to operate far more smoothly than what is shown here, but it's clear that the challenge facing the developer in reaching Cevat Yerli's "nothing below 30FPS" target is significant.

On the computer side of things, console-level optimisations in terms of memory and of course multi-core processing roll back very nicely into the PC side of the equation. Combine the new tech seen in CE3 with the all goodies of CE2 and it should be something really special.

Crysis 2 at E3: we're so there.

Picture of Richard.

About Richard Leadbetter

Rich has been a games journalist since the days of 16-bit and specialises in technical analysis. Commonly known around Eurogamer as the Blacksmith of the Future.

Read more articles from Richard by visiting the Richard Leadbetter archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (30) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Retro_ #1 2 years ago

    And the point of this article is what exactly? Why no mention of the PS3 version which is supposed to running 'slightly' better than the 360 version at the moment, doubtless that'll change and we'll all get the best experience possible on our consoles.

    Whatever, This is an exciting looking engine and I for one look forward to seeing the end result.
    Edited by Retro_ at 23/04/10 @ 12:34

  • Stop-gap #2 2 years ago

    Nothing under 30 FPS my ass, it dips to 16. Congratulations on being just over half way there. :p

  • Darren #3 2 years ago

    I'm really looking forward to seeing how CryEngine 3 runs on the PC because Crysis and Crysis Warhead are still two of the best looking (not to mention brilliant to play) first-person shooters on any platform despite being over two years old. CryEngine 2 is demanding still on current high-end PCs and it's only now that I have two HD 5870s in CrossFireX that I can play both games on Very High/Entusiast settings with 4xAA at 1920x1200 and get above 45 fps on average (min. 30 fps). Looks absolutely gorgeous and runs silky-smooth, mind.

    Hopefully CryEngine 3 will be more optimised for multi-core/multi-GPU systems because the previous engine doesn't scale very well in that respect. That Crysis 2 is coming out for the consoles probably bodes well for the PC being less demanding than the previous games but I have heard that the PC version will look far better than either of the console versions, making full use of new features such as tessellation. Can't wait.

  • Shakey_Jake33 #4 2 years ago

    @Retro_ - In fairness, this isn't a Face-Off article, just a quick look at the technology running on consoles.

  • ocmerius #5 2 years ago

    @Retro
    You mean "slightly" better at the moment?
    And the reason why theres no mention of the PS3 version is because nobody has seen it yet.
    Like it said in the article, the xbox360 version was demoed
    Edited by ocmerius at 23/04/10 @ 12:28

  • Retro_ #6 2 years ago

    Guys, original post modified. We're all friends here :)

    Re the PS3 version, It has been seen and it does look fantastic :)
    Edited by Retro_ at 23/04/10 @ 12:35

  • Er-El #7 2 years ago

    @Stop-gap
    Did you even read the article? Digital Foundry said the game was v-synced and currently using double buffering so it's going to drop to 16 by default at times, but that doesn't mean they can't easily achieve the 30fps locked if they switch to triple buffering. And who knows, maybe the current build already is triple buffered and hence stays at 30fps.

  • Dizzy #8 2 years ago

    I have a feeling Crysis 2 will be released against some other big game and nobody will care about it.
    Edited by Dizzy at 23/04/10 @ 16:11

  • JJrabbit #9 2 years ago

    Very matrix-like music they have there. Liking the engine though, lets see if it's made use of in a good way.

  • Er-El #10 2 years ago

    @Milky1985
    No, clearly you didn't understand what you're reading or what I'm trying to put across. When a game is triple buffered the frame rate doesn't drop to a half like it would when it's double buffered. I can't go into detail explaining why this is but you only have to do a quick google search on how v-sync and frame & back buffering works to find out why this is. Then come back read the article and my post carefully again.

  • Kenshin001 #11 2 years ago

    Looks great. It really is a great time to be a gamer. The level of graphical fidelity that is being achieved these days is amazing thinking back to the ugly boxes and jaggies of ten years ago. I remember playing a helicopter game called Comanche Overkill on my cousin's 386 which used a new rendering technique and thinking it looked incredible. Kind of laughable when looking at what devs like Crytek, Naughty Dog and Remedy are putting out today.

  • el_pollo_diablo #12 2 years ago

    It's pretty but the art direction is about as bland as it gets. I feel like I've been in this gameworld about 100 times before.

  • DoctorFouad #13 2 years ago

    Honestly I dont believe at all that Crysis 2 on PS3 will be technically more advanced than the likes of PS3 exclusive titles : Killzone 2, but especially the latest Uncharted 2 and God of War 3.

    I think that Resistance 3 will be more impressive this fall 2010 than crysis 2 on ps3, the edge framework, morphological anti aliasing, the cell doing advanced motion blur, depth of field...and especially 5 years of experience developing for ps3 from the folks of insomniac releasing each year a ps3 title, and working closely with naughty dog and technical engeneers from sony....how the hell could crytech guys with only 2 years of development time on PS3 surpass insomniac programmers with 5 years experience handling the ps3 hardware ?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    this guy at crytech saying crysis 2 PS3 this year withh surpass anything on PS3, was he serious ?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i think it is just PR talk, irrealistic...
    Edited by DoctorFouad at 23/04/10 @ 15:52

  • ronuds #14 2 years ago

    If they can barely get it running with a tech demo, what's an actual game -- pushing all kinds of effects and characters on screen at once -- going to be like? Probably rubbish.

  • DoctorFouad #15 2 years ago

    1) I dont believe at all that Crysis 2 on XBOX360 will be technically more advanced and impressive than Alan Wake or gears of war 3.

    2) Neither do I believe that Crysis 2 on PS3 will be technically more advanced and impressive than Uncharted 2, God of war 3, Resistance 3, or GT5 (if it is comparable)

    I feel that the crytech guys are over confident in their technical skills (to not to say arrogant) : they come late to the console development in this generation and they want to achieve in 2 years with consoles what no exclusive developer could achieve having 5-6 years of exeprience handling the console hardware ?!!!!!!!!!!!! are they dreaming ?!!!!!!!!!!! be realistic guys...if your engine is on par with the unreal engine 3 it is aleady something....
    Edited by DoctorFouad at 23/04/10 @ 16:04

  • cianchristopher #16 2 years ago

    Resistance 3?

    WTF are you on about?

    Also, Resistance 1 & 2 both had shit graphics (1 was passable due to being a launch title, 2 was just bad).

  • DoctorFouad #17 2 years ago

    @cianchristopher :

    1- for a launch title resistance was pretty impressive, not a la halo1 launch title for xbox1 on 2001, but an excellent game !

    2- resistance 2 is technically impressive given its scale (they added compared to resistance 1 : streaming technology (so no loading and allowing : normal mapping + hi res textures which were absent from resistance 1) + new shaders + bigger scale and enemies...etc by no means resistance 2 wasnt a technically impressve PS3 titles.

    3- with resistance 3, they have now more experience developing for ps3 (resistance 1 + resistance 2 + 2 full ratchet and clank games) + the latest ps3 development kits from sony engineers, the latest edge kit, access to the latest technology used by killzone uncharted 2 and god of war 3...so i wont be surprised if resistance 3 technically will be the most impressive ps3 title, using motion blur and morphological anti aliasing pioneered by the god of war 3 santa monica developers, the SSAO and depth of field pioneered by naughty dog uncharted 2 developers...etc

    I predict resistance 3 will be the most technologically advanced ps3 title for 2010, benefiting from the experience of naughty dog and santa monica and building from it...we will see it running at this E3 hopefully !

    I even predict resistance 3 to be one of the best FPS ever created ! I am confident in Ted Price and insomniaac guys skills ! we must not forgot that resistance 1 was their second fps (after the first one in PS1) and t was a great game, with the experience obtained from developing resistance 2, resistance 3 must be incredible !

    I am sure insomniac guys are jealous of the success of uncharted 2 and god of war 3 (especially the incredible graphics compared to resistance and ratchet and clank) so they must be very motivated and incited to do even better ! their latest comments of not doing anymore 60 fps games are just a manifestation of their sentiments i believe lol
    Edited by DoctorFouad at 23/04/10 @ 17:34

  • sarcasmoidosis #18 2 years ago

    It really doesn't look up to par with other blockbusters on the consoles. Expected as much.

  • Er-El #19 2 years ago

    @DoctorFouad "the SSAO and depth of field pioneered by naughty dog uncharted 2 developers...etc "
    LOL Crytek were the first to use SSAO and make good use of depth of field in Crysis, so Crytek are actually the pioneers in that stuff. Also, they're not trying to compete with just 2 years experience on the ps3, they've officially been researching the PS3 and Xbox 360 for five years roughly. And there's proof of this around on the web as people who have had studio tours even noted their rooms dedicated to researching the PS3 and 360's architecture since Crysis 1 was in development.
    Edited by Er-El at 23/04/10 @ 18:57

  • DoctorFouad #20 2 years ago

    @Er-El :

    Thanks for your interesting comment

    1- I didnt say naughty dog pioneered the use of ssao and depth of field in general, I was talking about the ps3

    2- I didnt know that crytek were researching ps3 and 360 hardware since launch ! are you sure of that info ?
    it would be interesting if true ! do you have a link or more info on that ?

    but still even if thats true, you cant compare 5 people researching a hardware for 5 years, with a whole team of 60+ people dedicating ther time and resources on creating 2 games on a specific system (naughty dog : uncharted 1 (2-3 years of development on PS3) uncharted 2 : 2 years of development on ps3) of the 3 years of development of the santa monica team on god of war 3, or the 4 games made by insominiac on PS3 ...

    I believe that developing in consoles is different than PC, with consoles you need a lot of time and experience with the hardware to achieve incredible things...and the crytech team lacks this experience, if they had worked with 360 and PS3 since the beginning : OK like unreal engine 3, but they are coming late to the party, so I am not confident in their capacity to achieve better results than naughty dog, insomniac, guerilla games, liverpool studios,santa monica...all First party developers of PS3...

    If they could achieve this than I will say : great ! you are the best programmers of video gaming technology in the world !

    So we will see that

  • Rob_B #21 2 years ago

    I'm looking forward to this but have a niggling suspicion it will be a bit dissapointing.

    Oh & for the record, Resistance 1/2 are probably some of the worst, most bland & unimaginitive games I've ever played, I'm assuming R3 will be crap so hopefully I'm wrong & will be pleasantly suprised!

  • spiritsnake #22 2 years ago

    doctorfouad you are just giving a bad name to PS3 fans and owners.

  • StooMonster #23 2 years ago

    DoctorFouad, are you on the Resistance 3 development team or something?

  • Felwyn #24 2 years ago

    now I'm even more confused as wether to upgrade to a 5850 or, for the same price, buy a ps3...help

  • Bagpuss #25 2 years ago

    "now I'm even more confused as wether to upgrade to a 5850 or, for the same price, buy a ps3...help "


    Well seeing as a 5850 can only run Crysis at 25-35fps (with settings at max and at 1680x1050 or below).....i would get a Ps3 and wait for the the 2nd generation of DX11 cards in late 2010 or early 2011...

    The first generation of cards designed for a new DX version are never really fast enough to do it justice......

  • hesido #26 2 years ago

    While indeed there are same frame drops which would indicate realtime footage, there's no way to tell that those clips without frame drops were realtime. Crysis engine allows for frame by frame rendering. I'm not saying they aren't, but I'm saying it is pointless to investigate these videos.

  • patchbox360 #27 2 years ago

    nice stuff but 54 sec in on the video

    i don't think massive brick pieces bounce

  • Nebula #28 2 years ago

    Bagpuss wrote: "now I'm even more confused as wether to upgrade to a 5850 or, for the same price, buy a ps3...help "

    Well the 5850 will be able to do Crysis/Warhead/Crysis Wars at 1920x1080, very high settings and 2-4xAA while being around 30-40fps with odd dips to 25fps. I got a 4890 which can do either Crysis at very high 1440x900, 16xAF and vsync on easily way over 30fps pretty much constantly or with 4xAA at 25-40fps outdoors and 40-60fps indoors.

    The question is how much do you value mods to come and also visual qualkity becouse console version will be much lower IQ than higher settings on PC versions/previous Crysis. IF you got something like the 8800GTS/3870 from 2006 then you will achieve better perf/IQ than either console version at same or higher resolution.

  • Nebula #29 2 years ago

    Mike985 wrote: "16 != 20

    but i did see it drop to about 16 during the vid, the normal drop was down to 20 but it seemed to get hit harder at one point. "

    Yep since it has vsync on and Hertz is 60 that means double buffering will clamp framerate to 30/20/15fps etc. If it cant maintain 30fps it dips to 20fps, if it cant maintain 20fps it dips to 15fps etc. Though the framerate counter hit framerates that indicates it has triple buffering.

  • Nebula #30 2 years ago

    N@ wrote: "You'd be doing very well to get that performance. O_O

    I don't get much better than that with my 5850 at 720p."

    Either your CPU is extremly weak (single core/A64 X2 3800+ type) or your drivers/HW is faulty. I get around 25-40fps at 720p with 8xAA on my single 4890 1GB and around 50-60fps with just edge AA 2 and ofcourse that with very high on all settings.

    Actually if you follow up the link in article to previous "Can Crysis run on consoles" article you will find screenshots of Crysis at 720p with all very high settings + edge AA 2 hence "custom" mark. Notice framerate is around 50fps on wide views and that becouse I was CPU limited. Yes screenshots are from my PC as I helped out with article.

    E8400@3.6GHz, single stock 4890 1GB, 8GB RAM, Vista x64.
    Edited by Nebula at 27/04/10 @ 20:26