Close
Report Comment to a Moderator Our Moderators review all comments for abusive and offensive language, and ensure comments are from Verified Users only.
Please report a comment only if you feel it requires our urgent attention.
I understand, report it. Cancel

Next-gen consoles can't compete with PCs, says Crytek boss

Next-gen consoles can't compete with PCs, says Crytek boss

Wed 20 Feb 2013 4:46pm GMT / 11:46am EST / 8:46am PST
HardwareTechnology

Cevat Yerli says it would be "impossible" for new consoles to ever again match what high-end PCs can produce

Whatever Sony and Microsoft have up their sleeves for the next round of console wars, Crytek CEO Cevat Yerli says the next-gen boxes won't be able to compete with existing PCs on horsepower. Speaking with Eurogamer to promote the launch of Crytek's Crysis 3, Yerli said the math just doesn't work out in the console makers' favor.

"We used Moore's Law," Yerli said. "If you predict how hardware evolves at the current speed of evolution, and then take consumer pricing evolution, already two years ago you could see, whatever launches in 2013 or 2014 or 2015, will never beat a PC again."

Yerli said what could be packed into a $2,000 or $3,000 high-end PC should have no trouble besting what Sony or Microsoft put into a mass market machine with a more consumer-friendly price point.

"So, given consumer pricing, and given the cost of production of a gamer PC and the amount of watt of power it needs, which is like a fridge, it's impossible," Yerli said.

While Yerli said he was under non-disclosure agreements about the next-gen consoles, he did say both Microsoft and Sony would make post-launch support for games easier on developers.

"Sony and Microsoft are both looking to improve the process of updating live games and online games," Yerli said. "They understand also that as soon as you launch a game, whether it is retail or digital, you have to service the game. This whole servicing wasn't a thought they had when they launched the Xbox and PlayStation...But it is a thought that has come up recently in the last two years, from changing from games as a good to games as a service. And when games as a service changes the platform has to become a platform as a service platform."

Crytek has been exploring the games-as-a-service approach with its free-to-play shooter Warface, currently in beta testing.

24 Comments

Adam Campbell Associate Producer, Miniclip Ltd

1,179 967 0.8
-_-

Posted:A year ago

#1

Andy Samson QA Supervisor, Digital Media Exchange

237 180 0.8
Is this even necessary. =_=

Posted:A year ago

#2
Yay PC! The original and still the best.

Posted:A year ago

#3

Dan Howdle Head of Content, Existent

280 810 2.9
Popular Comment
Last time you said it was 'impossible' for Crysis to work on current-gen consoles.

It's 800MSP, in case you were wondering.

Posted:A year ago

#4

Krzysztof Nizielski Junior QA Project Lead, Testronic

34 34 1.0
Captain Obvious strikes again!

Posted:A year ago

#5

Sergiu Badau Wittenberger QA Tester

26 32 1.2
It works yes, but on low details compared to what a PC can dish out. Same thing goes for games like : Skyrim, Battlefield 3 and even Dark Souls.

Posted:A year ago

#6

Nicholas Pantazis Senior Editor, VGChartz Ltd

1,020 1,467 1.4
@ Dan and he was right... Crysis was never released on current-gen consoles. A game skinned to look like Crysis on a completely different and WAY less advanced and demanding engine running none of the high-end physics that made Crysis unique was released on current-gen consoles.

PS: It won't take anywhere near a $2,000 PC to beat out Sony and Microsoft's next offerings. My two year old $900 build is already more powerful.

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Nicholas Pantazis on 20th February 2013 10:18pm

Posted:A year ago

#7

Andreia Quinta Creative & People Photographer, Studio52 London

224 590 2.6
Thanks Sherlock, we'd never know...

But why publish something blatantly obvious?

Posted:A year ago

#8

Barrie Tingle Live Producer, Maxis

381 180 0.5
Hasn't this been said about every console generation previously.
Consoles don't need to match a PC in spec or performance, they will still be the biggest market share in home gaming (exclusing social and mobile).

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Barrie Tingle on 20th February 2013 10:23pm

Posted:A year ago

#9

Gareth Jones Senior Software Engineer, BBC

49 118 2.4


I think the rest of the world can safely say they already know that because it's common sense.

In other news, a Ford KA will never be as fast as a Bugatti Veyron.

Posted:A year ago

#10

Saehoon Lee Founder & CEO, Pixellore

60 41 0.7
Well, not everyone.. .. most of us if I dare to say can't afford $2000 top end pc. And even if you do , not too many people put that just under then TV in the living room.

But I like Crytek pushing the boundary of the gaming graphics and experiences. Someone is got to do it.

Posted:A year ago

#11

Adam Campbell Associate Producer, Miniclip Ltd

1,179 967 0.8

Posted:A year ago

#12

Nuttachai Tipprasert Programmer

79 60 0.8
Yerli said what could be packed into a $2,000 or $3,000 high-end PC should have no trouble besting what Sony or Microsoft put into a mass market machine with a more consumer-friendly price point.
Thanks for stating the obvious. We really appreciate your generosity.

Posted:A year ago

#13

Paul Jace Merchandiser

936 1,412 1.5
They say that you learn something new everyday. Apparently this isn't one of those days.

Posted:A year ago

#14

Felix Leyendecker Senior 3D Artist, Crytek

182 202 1.1
It might sound obvious today, but it's worth pointing out that the same thing couldn't have been said at the 360 and ps3 launch. They had internals that were equal or better than anything 3000$ could have bought you for PCs. The delta wasn't nearly as huge as it was today. Will it matter much? That's a different question.

Posted:A year ago

#15

Rick Lopez Illustrator, Graphic Designer

1,269 942 0.7
Honestly I dont care about PC games. Everytime I need to replace it or update it it would cost me upward of 1000$-2000$. And a good gaming PC costs upward of 3000$. And PCs need to be replaced pretty often. So Im not interested in the slightest (unless its to play starcraft). I generally use a PC or MAC for work purposes, not gaming. I just bought crysis 1,2, and 3 for the PS3. Im pretty happy with the graphical results. Initially didnt bother with crysis franchise. I figured i really cant afford a PC to play it, but then I saw my girlfriends kid playing Crysis 2 on a PS3. I got to say i was impressed on how it was running on a PS3 I went out the other day and put in a reservation for Crysis 3. It plays at 1080p on PS3 and the differance in graphics isnt really worth the 2000$ or 3000$ dollar difference it is to obtain it from a PC. And what I saw from the PS4 in the SONY presentation, leads me to honestly belive that I have no reason to be spending money on a gaming PC.

Edited 3 times. Last edit by Rick Lopez on 21st February 2013 12:47pm

Posted:A year ago

#16

Peter Dwyer Games Designer/Developer

482 293 0.6
While I totally agree with the high end PC being better than any console statement. It's also true that my current up to date PC is going to get trounced by the PS4 and new XBox. I'll then update my GPU and CPU combo but, while I do that, the devs will learn the new console hardware and still produce better playing, if not better looking games for years to come.

The advantage of consoles is what it has always been i.e. that the target platform is known and fixed. Write for one works on all. This is not the case in PC land and usually only a handful of PC gamers ever get to see the amazing uber-settings that games support. The majority of us broke-ass people who live in reality simply don't have that level of rig to run the "Better than your outdated console" setting.

Posted:A year ago

#17

David Radd Senior Editor, IndustryGamers

359 78 0.2
While I certainly believe what Yerli has to say when it comes to hardware power, I think his compatriot Leyendecker has a good point of "Will it matter much?" Functionally, I think this means that we'lll be seeing the situation we see today (PC ports of games that see some technical improvements) faster than we did this passing generation. With AAA budgets, it's hard to make it exclusive to any platform, PC included.

Posted:A year ago

#18

Ben Campbell Graphic Designer / Freelance Games Journalist

17 20 1.2
Wow really...$3000....just....yeah...I would cry bullshit...but it's so obvious it is like a screaming man on fire wanting you to put him out.


*Rolls eyes at the easily swayed, thinking to self that someone so OBVIOUSLY knowledgeable about announcement presentations and wouldn't at all be vulnerable to [as the yanks put it] "Shock and Awe".*

I mean...It's not like there is anyway possible way that first announcement footage from a new console is at all pre-rendered or that numbers are thrown around to dazzle you with specs in a grab for your cash, no no, that would be silly...

Wait, you mean we don't live in a completely honest industry where companies put the customer first, and where we aren't blatantly lied to on a monthly basis? Or an industry that has stagnated because of obsolete 7 or 8-year old hardware?

Posted:A year ago

#19

David Serrano Freelancer

300 272 0.9
"Cevat Yerli says it would be "impossible" for new consoles to ever again match what high-end PCs can produce"

Um... duh? Just as it will aways be impossible for hybrid economy cars to ever match what high end sports cars can do. This doesn't mean the high end sports car market is larger, more profitable, more stable or sustainable. The game industry must stop thinking in extremes. The goal should be to meet consumer demand in incremental stages of price and function. If consumers can't afford or don't want a Bugatti SuperVeyron, then sell them a Mercedes Benz AGM Coupe. If they can't afford or don't want the MB AMG, sell them a Acura NSX, etc... Try to capture their business at as many levels as possible. Because when businesses and industries hyper-focus on the extreme high or low end of a market, they are by default extremely vulnerable to innovative disruption.

Posted:A year ago

#20

Hugo Trepanier Senior UI Designer, Hibernum

156 144 0.9
What Mr. Yerli fails to consider is the ease of use offered by consoles. Sure, PCs will always be more powerful, though that is probably only significant to a minority hardcore group, but at what cost to all other gamers (and not just in terms of $$$).

Every time I have to upgrade video drivers or install patches manually, configure this and that, and wait half an hour for a game to be ready before I finally get to play it, I remember why I don't miss gaming on PC. At all. I don't have time for that anymore and I certainly don't enjoy it (although I once certainly loved tweaking my config.sys to get that extra 20K memory as a young teen).

Consoles have easier access and availability. I get to play on a bigger screen in my living room and run games that I am sure will work 100% of the time (occasional bugs excluded). And all this for a much, much lower price and never any headache to upgrade software or hardware. All things considered, I personally wouldn't consider going back to PC unless consoles were to disappear. Nowadays, the rare games I play on PC are a few that can't be found on console, and most of the time I don't even bother.

But that may be just me :)

Posted:A year ago

#21

Nicholas Pantazis Senior Editor, VGChartz Ltd

1,020 1,467 1.4
@ Hugo Er... where are you playing PCs? 1998?

Steam is far more convenient than anything offered on Xbox or Playstation. All games are kept up to date, your whole library is available without swapping discs, and the store and social services are more robust and integrated. My PC sits under my TV, so I play on the exact same screen I play my PS360 and Wii U games on. The only "drivers" you ever need to update on a PC are video card drivers, and it's as simple as a single click on the nVidia website (which can in fact find the right driver for you).

PC games are also much less buggy because the certification process for patches is much simpler on Steam, allowing devs to keep your games clean and functional. Even modding is now integrated into Steam with Steamworks, meaning you have infinitely more content in a game like Skyrim and no hassle to use it (Steam will keep your mods up to date for you).

As for the costs everyone in this thread keeps touting, I guarantee you if you go build yourself a $900 PC right now it'll run every game in the upcoming generation better than anything on PS4 and Durango, and you'll pay less in the end by a LARGE margin. The average cost of a game on Steam is so much less than buying a retail console game it's not even funny. I picked up Borderlands 2 plus the season pass 2 months after release for $35... it's really not even close.

The software price difference is so large that that apparent gap in hardware costs is easily closed, and you're left with a machine that doesn't NEED social features or always-on features because it's a freaking PC. It's already able to do all that. And play all your movies (digital and retail). And actually function as more than a toy.

Posted:A year ago

#22

Hugo Trepanier Senior UI Designer, Hibernum

156 144 0.9
@Nicholas, yeah that's old school, I know. I probably stopped playing PC games seriously around 2006 or so, when I got my X360. I know things have gotten much better with Steam once you're set up but it's still not pristine. Above, I was referring to my recent experience with Metro 2033. I got a free download code during the Holidays and had to set up so many things in order to finally get to play it that it really bothered me. Heck, I even needed to... gasp... reboot! Plus I found the game's performance laggy and my PC isn't even as old as my X360 (although I admit it has at least 5 years).

Don't assume I even have $900 for a new PC. That's still a lot of money when you consider my good old console can still provide countless days of very decent entertainment with current titles I haven't even opened yet.

Regardless of that though I still prefer to consider my home PC as a work desk now, where I do all my Photoshop and writing, and the gaming is done in the living room on the big TV! But, as I said, that may be just me, no harm done in having a varied ecosystem.

Posted:A year ago

#23

Dominic Jakube Student

92 13 0.1

.
If your talk'in FPS which is all his company does then maybe
But if you consider sports games,arcade racers,fighting games,JRPG's and many other genrea's then he is very much mistaken.Even Bill Gates said in 90's way before Xbox when talking about pc gaming that consoles will always do boxing games better.

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Dominic Jakube on 24th February 2013 6:43am

Posted:A year ago

#24

Login or register to post

Take part in the GamesIndustry community

Register now