No console's like 360 do not get map editing. Stop trying to deprive the PC community from it. You guys got an early demo as it is. Crysis 2 is meant to be a PC game. If you want to map edit Get a PC and get Crysis 2 for the PC. No money for a PC ? Well get a Job, ask your Mom or dad or something.

Should I mention the cancer and the punching thing again? ... naw maybe not (its back on page 9)

How is wondering if I'm going to get something or not depriving anybody else of anything? I just want to hear one or two words, Yes or No, From the Developers. Not from you because OBVIOUSLY you don't know what they are doing.

If Crysis 2 was meant to be a PC game it would ONLY be coming out on the PC. It's not. It's coming out on the PS3 and 360 as well. And you will have to get used to it, because that makes it a what? ... Come on, I know you know, I can see those gears in your head a-turnin'!! IT MAKES IT A VIDEOGAME FOR EVERYONE

And it's not that I can't afford a new rig... its that I don't want a new one. If I thought that the game wasn't going to be worth getting on the console at all, I probably wouldn't be here asking about having a feature added into it for the version I do want.

If Devs start giving the consoles a dumbed-down version of the editor, you can bet your ass they'll give the PC the same editor. Generally speaking. Which is anyway a pointless discussion, Crytek won't bother creating a new editor for the consoles.

The constant argument is "You don't know what the devs are thinking, so let them answer my question."

If the people stating that are so confident that the other people are wrong about the plans, then why do the need the question answered?

I vote that Crytek should go for it, and include a "map editor" that's watered down enough to run on the console. It could look like a monochrome version of the blocks my son plays with. The quality of placing elements would probably leave you looking like a doom map with mismatched textures.

Yeah, I don't know that the devs wouldn't bother wasting resources pointlessly to create a watered-down editor that is only going to make console players bich that it's nowhere near as useful as the PC version.

The constant argument is "You don't know what the devs are thinking, so let them answer my question."

If the people stating that are so confident that the other people are wrong about the plans, then why do the need the question answered?

I vote that Crytek should go for it, and include a "map editor" that's watered down enough to run on the console. It could look like a monochrome version of the blocks my son plays with. The quality of placing elements would probably leave you looking like a doom map with mismatched textures.

Man that was hillarious:D

Did anyone actually in those interviews (that you didn't include links to and I would like to read or see) actually say that it was impossible, or just that it was harder to run? Because to me, harder to run doesn't mean impossible to run... I mean honestly... all this negativity. where are all the "glass is half full' PC gamers...

Also, how do you know what they can't do with their own crap? Don't you think that MAYBE they could make a simplified one that COULD work on the consoles? And you know, I'd be fine with that. It's like you guys think that the same exact editor on the PC would also be one on the consoles... OBVIOUSLY they would have to change it, but don't you think that if they are planning it that they would have thought of a way to get it to work? As I've said before, give me a few 1, 2, and 3 room buildings and ladders and I'll freakin' make you a map shaped like a cake, that plays well AND is tasty too. All I want to know is whether or not, from their own mouths, it will be an option.

Although they didnt say "A console editor is impossible", they very clearly implied that you need a fairly powerful system to run the editor (i.e. a 64-bit system, 4gb ram, etc.). This has been said a few times:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdonrcwLJPo&hd=1 @ around 5:41
There was another video on the Nvidia site, but it seems to have dissapeared. The only version I can find has the end cut of where they talk about the requirements (it was in the Q+A).

I still find it amusing how people totally disregard the hardware that they've got Crysis 2 running on. Crysis 2 JUST BARELY runs on consoles. They've said this. Both consoles are at 100% usage. They've worked with sony, they've worked with MS, etc. to get the maximum out of the hardware. They've also said (and we know from sandbox 1 and 2) that the editor is FAR harder to run than the game itself. Put 2 and 2 together and you'll see that it just cant happen. The hardware simply isnt there. Maybe if the consoles were from 2007 or 2008 it could be done, but they're not. They're from ~2005-2006. And have almost non-existent ram.

Maybe if you looked into how CE3 actually works, or had experience with CE2 or even CE1 you'd see that it just cant be done on sub-500mb ram systems.

@JingleHell
IF by "watered down" you mean only be able to see a grey screen, then yea, sure. If you mean you want to actually see ANYTHING or do ANYTHING, then no. Cant be done. Not enough ram.

Question how much ram do u need to get cryengine 2 to work well.I have like 4 gigs in my system but sometimes lags like hell and im wondering if its ram or if its something else

@JingleHell
IF by "watered down" you mean only be able to see a grey screen, then yea, sure. If you mean you want to actually see ANYTHING or do ANYTHING, then no. Cant be done. Not enough ram.


I was thinking the editor would look something like this:

ahahahahahaahahahahahah.epic picture

Listen if RAMs the issue then there a few ways to get around that.

1. Shrink the available area down
2. Limit the number of available objects
3. No scriptable elements, except Multiplayer objectives and spawns
4. Set the objects in to packages to minimize how many textures you load
5. limit number of peaceable objects
6. limit rotation and position values, ie instead of going out 3 or for decimal places go 1 or 2
7. disable fluid mechanics while editing
8. don't load sounds while editing
9. disable dynamic lighting while editing
10. make use of the hard drive and allocate a gig or 2 for page file swap space
11. don't even load the textures while in the editor
12. Disable the 3D in the editor

From what I can tell the full Sandbox takes the 4 gigs of RAM, but that's not saying that a stripped down version couldn't run with less. The fact is this engine is way more efficient that the previous Cryengines. Throw on top of that the live create that they are using updates in real time meaning all of the assets are loaded and being manipulated showing that it is more than just possible. To me there is no reason why a stripped down version wouldn't work on the PS3 or 360, except for they didn't have the budget/time for it.

Listen if RAMs the issue then there a few ways to get around that.

1. Shrink the available area down
2. Limit the number of available objects
3. No scriptable elements, except Multiplayer objectives and spawns
4. Set the objects in to packages to minimize how many textures you load
5. limit number of peaceable objects
6. limit rotation and position values, ie instead of going out 3 or for decimal places go 1 or 2
7. disable fluid mechanics while editing
8. don't load sounds while editing
9. disable dynamic lighting while editing
10. make use of the hard drive and allocate a gig or 2 for page file swap space
11. don't even load the textures while in the editor
12. Disable the 3D in the editor

From what I can tell the full Sandbox takes the 4 gigs of RAM, but that's not saying that a stripped down version couldn't run with less. The fact is this engine is way more efficient that the previous Cryengines. Throw on top of that the live create that they are using updates in real time meaning all of the assets are loaded and being manipulated showing that it is more than just possible. To me there is no reason why a stripped down version wouldn't work on the PS3 or 360, except for they didn't have the budget/time for it.

Wow, I was right, that WOULD look just like Crystal Castle. Given that a significant portion of their playerbase would get a 0% benefit from a console editor (all us PC guys), it would be kind of silly to try and make us pay for it.

Sandbox, being real tools (meaning I can't do s**t with them), is a lot less development work than a giant custom interface, and a "Sandbox lite, half the calories, none of the quality" editor. Sandbox would be a considerably smaller jump from the stuff the devs work with.

Hey, everyone's already b**ching about how this game has copied CoD...Mind as well take a hint from Reach and throw a forge in there.
How many people have actually played forge here anyways?

I'm not saying ditch the Sandbox for PC just give the console players an editor, reality is it's less likely that MS or Sony will allow PC content to pour onto their networks. Believe it or not it would be easier to program a whole new game than deal with those legal departments. And than your saying that if you play on console you have to buy the game twice to make content? Consumers would never go along with that, I mean what if I said the PC editor is now $60 on top of the game, do you think that would go over well. Realistically there will close to 4 million console players and probably 500,000 PC players, if I were Crytek I would be paying a little more attention to console guys and less to us PC guys (yeah I plan on playing this on PC).

Also it's the act of creating levels they want, PC players don't understand what console players want and console players don't understand what PC players want. To be frank about I played FC2 on PC and 360 and the care and attention to detail was on the 360, in fact I would dare some of the 360 maps from FC2 could be held up as some of the most creative and well thought out FPS maps ever, armature or professional. Most of these guys are artist not programmers, they don't want a complicated SDK they just want to be able to manipulate terrain and place objects, it's more so the processes than the outcome for them.

Nice post.

The simple fact is it can't be done the console players want an answer from Crytek, hell just because they won't buy it on 360 doesn't mean they wouldn't buy it on PC if they knew for sure. Most of these guys would have to shell out large sums of money though for new rigs and they're apprehensive about that but it's not out of the question for at least half of them. I mean put yourselves in their shows for a second, you just want to know if it's there or not, and with the video that included the live create it looks like it could, and how many times Crytek has said if it's on 1 platform it's on all 3, these guys just want confirmation. If you don't believe me go into the FCmaps forums and ask them the majority of the people on that site are console players, and yeah most of them would prefer 360/PS3 (due to the fact they have more friends on console) but some are willing to go PC. For all of the guys sitting on the fence for which version they want to get they deserve an answer.

Just a note, i read from pages 1 - 8 and then skipped the rest, its ALL the same.
Over and over and over and over again, people repeating the same things, I mean give it a break.

I have a few points to make, if thats OK with you guys?
(I don't really care if it is OK)
_______________________________________________________________________

#1
All of the people who keep mentioning the fact that the SANDBOX (all of them) would not run on a console due to hardware limitations (as well as other such problems) and that this is the reason there is a 0% chance of the SANDBOX being present in the console version of the game, you are right.
However what you fail to realize is that most console gamers aren't asking for the full SANDBOX editor all they want is a simple MAP EDITOR (like the one present in Farcry, I know about the stuff to do with their partnership with Ubisoft etc and how they are no longer in that partnership and the fact that Farcry was made on a different engine, blah blah blah). Most PC gamers who look at the argument for having a MAP EDITOR on the console immediately assume that console gamers want full access to the SANDBOX, which in most cases they don't, simple?
Seems so to me anyway.

I'm not saying it wouldn't take time money and effort to make, but expanding the life of the game as well as Crytek's respect amongst the massive console community seems to make it worth while to me. Hell, as suggested somewhere in this thread its worth bit of extra cash were it to be released as DLC after the games initial release. (and again as suggested in this thread) Even a tool that allows content sharing between platforms is better than nothing at all, even if you have to pay a subscription or some kind of fee.

_______________________________________________________________________

#2
It really pisses me off when PC gamers boast about the how superior their rigs are to outdated console hardware and how PC gaming is far superior to Console gaming, i mean fair enough the technological aspect of the play might be better quality but i know for sure i'd prefer to play Crysis 2 with a console community at least most of them don't have their man parts jammed into their disc trays.
Don't get me wrong i have a pretty decent PC and i do like playing games on it but i don't rub it in people faces because i can run Crysis on the -SUPER GOD- setting and they don't have an uber pc with 50,000000GB of RAM that can.
I mean i think if you have the money to afford a good rig then sure get one, but think about how privileged you are to have it, it doesn't give you the right to boast and if you do I think your probably compensating for something. Yeah I think its cool that PC's can push the limits of technology and get the best results, it doesn't mean you have to be a dike about it to everyone less privileged than you.

memo:
Don't be a dike just because you can.
_______________________________________________________________________

#3
It also really annoys me when they (Crysis/Crytek PC fan-boys) say how they are annoyed that Crytek have moved to multi-platform production and that they have not remained loyal to their original fanbase and that Crysis 2 has been dumbed down to please the masses ETC.
WAH! WAH!
And you say that console gamers are whiny little kids?
Yeah OK Crysis was a PC exclusive franchise, but if you haven't noticed the world (most of it at least) is in the middle of a huge recession and the studios have to make money somewhere and it isn't like everyone owns a high powered gaming rig is it?
While on the other hand millions upon millions own a console, 360, PS3 even the Wii (not that the Wii is know for its graphical sophistication) this in simple words is
"where the money is" thinking that Crytek would ignore this and stick to the PC community is almost as stupid as a console gamer suggesting that the SANDBOX (not a MAP EDITOR) (if Crytek wanted to release it) would work on a console.
_______________________________________________________________________

In all honesty i think the main reason PC Gamers dislike the idea of a console MAP EDITOR (NOT THE SANDBOX) is that they don't like the idea of sharing Crytek (partly because of point #2 (above) and its products with the Console community FULL STOP .

Sorry if i did't read anything that touches on these points before, but after reading 8 pages of (pretty much) the same posts (content wise) over and over i got bored.

And if anybody posts after reading this post saying anything along the lines of: 'But the SANDBOX can't run on consoles because of system requirements and controller setup'.
I will officially rage quit life.

We could have let this thread die. But you bumped it.

Why.

WHY.

Also, as I've said before, even a super-dumbed down editor wouldnt work. There isnt physically enough ram to even LOAD a map, let alone ANYTHING. I've explained before, lets say they manage to get the same in-game efficiency into this mystical console-editor. Well, great, you have maybe 10mb of ram overhead. And thats WITH level streaming.

THERE.
ISNT.
ENOUGH.
RAM.
TO.
DO.
ANYTHING.

Why cant people understand this.


Just someone please explain how a game which already has an almost ZERO ram overhead could stand to load a library of objects. Really. I want to know what makes you (anyone) think that this is even possible.

We could have let this thread die. But you bumped it.

Why.

WHY.

Also, as I've said before, even a super-dumbed down editor wouldnt work. There isnt physically enough ram to even LOAD a map, let alone ANYTHING. I've explained before, lets say they manage to get the same in-game efficiency into this mystical console-editor. Well, great, you have maybe 10mb of ram overhead. And thats WITH level streaming.

THERE.
ISNT.
ENOUGH.
RAM.
TO.
DO.
ANYTHING.

Why cant people understand this.


Just someone please explain how a game which already has an almost ZERO ram overhead could stand to load a library of objects. Really. I want to know what makes you (anyone) think that this is even possible.

Just let the topic die

Maybe I don't want it to die? :p

But the sandbox can't run on consoles because... did it work?

did what work?

Hmmm the post from the guy threatening to ragequit life if someone said something about sandbox not working on consoles again seems to have vanished. Puts me rather out of context.

Buy a pc ,use the sdk to create maps,transfer them to the hdd of your console,upload them to xboxlive .OOPPPS confilict you cant do that ,the only thing u can do is keep paying 60$ a year for a service that is a total joke!(flame post:E)/sarcasm

And if anybody posts after reading this post saying anything along the lines of: 'But the SANDBOX can't run on consoles because of system requirements and controller setup'.
I will officially rage quit life.


But the SANDBOX can't run on consoles because of system requirements and controller setup.

PS. Do it with a shotgun mouthwash.

I was going to keep silent until all of the MP demo grievousness were addressed but what the hell we can start back up. When it comes to the Sandbox it can't run on console, but that doesn't mean an editor can't, simple fact is that the same program can use less resources on a console just because you don't have load the parameters for all available hardware and multiple operating systems, you just load in for one set of hardware and one OS, if you need proof of this just look at the resources being used by any game that's multiplatform the PC version typically use 2-4 times the amount with a 10%-50% improvement in graphics and sound. A perfect example is FC2's editor it takes between 1-2 gigs to run properly but it runs fine on console according to your logic this is impossible, the fact is the program is optimized to run on the limited resources of the console, BTW so is Cryengine 3.

The controller is such a BS argument too, do a comparison of the maps for FC2 on PC and console you'll find time and time again the console people keep up and most of the time surpass them in design for gameplay and cosmetic. I think this has something to do with a quote from Orson Wells "the enemy of art is the lack of limitation" or something like that.

Bottom line is none of the guys arguing the side of the console getting an editor are saying that it's a walk in the park and easily done. We're just saying it is possible with some creative use of software with in the limits of the hardware. This unlike you guys saying it's 100% impossible to do. Simply put I believe the programmers at Crytek are very intelligent and creative, and I think if anyone can do it they will, but I also respect them enough to tell us if they can't they can't.

I to am a fan of editors and I hope they have one in crysis for 360