I like all the Crysis games especially 2 and 3. And now I'm playing Ryse and all I can think is wow what an underrated game. And not a QTE in sight (wtf were people talking about QTE's for? there are button prompts (which can be ignored and/or turned off completely) but no QTE's.) anyways, I digress. I think their games have a bit more raw masculine edge to them which I find refreshing after a boring day at work. What do you guys think? Crytek games underrated?
Starting to realize I really like Crytek games...
- Thread starter futurefields
- Start date
Stringjam
Golden Member
- Jun 30, 2011
- 1,871
- 33
- 91
Ah yes. Crytek.
This topic has come up many times over the years. The proponents and the criticizers.
Here's what I think about Crytek.
WAAAAY back in 2004, Yerli developed a no-excuses PC render monster that became CryEngine. FarCry was developed, and it was good.
Engine undergoes more development. SSAO and sub-surface scattering were introduced by CryEngine. AND SSS HAS YET TO BE IMPROVED UPON SINCE. Seriously. Crytek went off the charts with Crysis. PC gamers thought it was a tech demo, and a few folks appreciated it.
I for one LOVED IT. And the fact that they included the full-functioning SDK with the game? + Every AI script and entity? It was like a $30 tutorial on how to make a AAA game from start to finish. I think I spent more hours in there and had more fun than I did actually playing the game. This was what PC gaming was all about!!! In 2007, you could create a game with CE and create real-time lighting, and drop-in real-time into any scene. Something you couldn't do in UE until what...a couple years ago?
Still the best looking, most optimized, best running engine out there. The SC branch of CE is going to obliterate everything out there. 64-bit object precision and the biggest maps ever rendered.
I have the utmost respect for Crytek. I feel like they were misguided at times...missed opportunities at others, but at the core, their render is at the top. They were really focused on the engine...but needed other developers to bring the games to life. This is where things started to fall apart.
I think SC is going to save it. It's no coincidence that the engine that defined high-end PC gaming back in the day will once again define it in 2016. CryEngine was the perfect choice to bring the premier PC game back to the forefront.
Crysis and Crysis Warhead will always remain some of my favorite games in life.
This topic has come up many times over the years. The proponents and the criticizers.
Here's what I think about Crytek.
WAAAAY back in 2004, Yerli developed a no-excuses PC render monster that became CryEngine. FarCry was developed, and it was good.
Engine undergoes more development. SSAO and sub-surface scattering were introduced by CryEngine. AND SSS HAS YET TO BE IMPROVED UPON SINCE. Seriously. Crytek went off the charts with Crysis. PC gamers thought it was a tech demo, and a few folks appreciated it.
I for one LOVED IT. And the fact that they included the full-functioning SDK with the game? + Every AI script and entity? It was like a $30 tutorial on how to make a AAA game from start to finish. I think I spent more hours in there and had more fun than I did actually playing the game. This was what PC gaming was all about!!! In 2007, you could create a game with CE and create real-time lighting, and drop-in real-time into any scene. Something you couldn't do in UE until what...a couple years ago?
Still the best looking, most optimized, best running engine out there. The SC branch of CE is going to obliterate everything out there. 64-bit object precision and the biggest maps ever rendered.
I have the utmost respect for Crytek. I feel like they were misguided at times...missed opportunities at others, but at the core, their render is at the top. They were really focused on the engine...but needed other developers to bring the games to life. This is where things started to fall apart.
I think SC is going to save it. It's no coincidence that the engine that defined high-end PC gaming back in the day will once again define it in 2016. CryEngine was the perfect choice to bring the premier PC game back to the forefront.
Crysis and Crysis Warhead will always remain some of my favorite games in life.
Last edited:
Far Cry (the original) is my favorite 1st person shooter of all time. It's not a genre I play a lot, but I loved the game. Crysis was also good, but I think the suit was not as fun as using the environment for stealth, like in Far Cry. I also enjoyed Crysis 2. It looks pretty awesome in 3D too.
Rakehellion
Lifer
- Jan 15, 2013
- 12,181
- 35
- 91
Ryse was an awful game, but still one of the best looking titles for PC after all these years. Same for Crysis 3.
See I think the storytelling is pretty good too. I view them like big 80's action movies in which case they hit all the right notes.
Seriously how epic is this cutscene:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ieS5SruiyL4
I love that. I feel these games are made with much more passion than the stuff by EA/Activision etc...
Fire&Blood
Platinum Member
- Jan 13, 2009
- 2,333
- 18
- 81
Technical aspects have always been Crytek's forte but IMO, in terms of narrative, they peaked with Far Cry and Crysis. If they were a well balanced studio in all aspects of game development, they would have had an annual sequel franchise the size of Battlefield by now and pumping out the likes of TLOU on the side.
Far Cry hasn't exactly been stellar since Ubi took it and the engine over but Ubi arguably did better since.
The beginning of Crytek's decline also marked the beginning of this era:
Far Cry hasn't exactly been stellar since Ubi took it and the engine over but Ubi arguably did better since.
The beginning of Crytek's decline also marked the beginning of this era:
runzwithsizorz
Diamond Member
- Jan 24, 2002
- 3,497
- 14
- 76
Zenoth
Diamond Member
- Jan 29, 2005
- 5,202
- 216
- 106
The first Far Cry (may God have mercy upon this brand) was a good game. And contrarily to what seems to be the majority (to me anyway), I appreciated the second half of the game when the mutants start to show up. It's also a product that few PCs at the time could actually run (or run fast enough).
I still remember the clerk at my local store at the time telling me that he had many Far Cry returns due to "technical difficulties" (he actually air-quoted that himself when he described the situation). The truth is that most of the gamers that returned the game just didn't have a good enough PC to run it well, or to run it at all. But that's not the gamers' fault, because I'd argue that Far Cry pushed / forced an acceleration in hardware evolution (that many just didn't see coming, certainly including gamers themselves). That evolution would have happened over time nonetheless, but I'm just saying that Crytek just made it happen faster; the gaming industry had to actually react to the arrival of such demanding games. And yes, I know, at the time we also had Half-Life 2, but that one ran on a much more forgiving (and very optimized and modular) engine (not to mention that the physics was its main [selling] feature).
And it didn't take that long for Crytek to just repeat the accomplishment again with the first Crysis. That one surprised everyone as well. For the gamer, it was a visual spectacle the likes of which had never been seen before, anywhere (anyone with memories of the first Crysis - when it was freshly released - would still to this day remember their reaction when they saw that sunrise in the first level by the beach). For the game designer / engineer it must have been quite a revelation and a surprise. The gaming industry was shocked and once again hardware was on its knees for something like two or three years following the release of the game. How many benchmarks relied on Crysis to establish the power of a new GPU / CPU? All of them? (of course, other games were used, but we ALL looked at those Crysis scores didn't we?). And how many new generations of GPUs it took us to finally get to a point where we could run the game at maximum settings on a single card at constant smooth frame rates with anti-aliasing and all the shenanigans applied? And, perhaps more importantly, how many upgraded their entire system(s) specifically for Crysis?
I remember reading an article about Crysis (and Crytek) that argued that what they managed to do with Far Cry and Crysis (and to the PC gaming industry) was the equivalent to what id Software did with DOOM and Quake in their days. It set things in motion at an accelerated (and unprepared) pace. It took us by storm and we loved it too (well, perhaps the wallet didn't, but our brain just asked for more).
Now with all this said, I have to admit that I stopped playing Crysis 2 after what I think is the second or third "map" since I got bored of it that fast, never touched it again since. But I kept my saved game intact, I might give it another try at some point. I'm not "hating" it by the way, it just got boring; maybe I just wasn't in the mood for it at the time. As for Crysis 3, it's definitely one of the best-looking game out there right now and in my opinion the best looking Crysis game (without texture mods, because that in itself can be a complete game changer, quite literally). However, I didn't buy Crysis 3 and I have zero interest in playing it (only saw footage on YouTube and review sites, it looks awesome but the game-play doesn't pique my interest).
I really liked the first Crysis (and side note: loved the zero gravity alien level, I'm probably part of a minority on that one), and I thought that Warhead's campaign was even better in many aspects. But for now I'm "done" with the Crysis series. The CryEngine, however, is of course still very capable. It's a shame that the industry didn't end up using it to produce hundreds of games like it has been the case with the Unreal Engine since... since forever? (I.E. since the engine's existence obviously). How many games run using UE3? A crap load, can't even count them (just Google that, find a list of games powered by the Unreal Engines, not just 3.0 but even previous versions and look at your jaw drop). And how many games run with CryEngine? 15 or so? Yeah... and also, which games are powered by CryEngine? Popular ones besides... the Crysis series? Ok, we'll have Star Citizen, and yes it looks absolutely fantastic, but will it bring the massive players base like... say... Call of Duty or Halo does? Of course not.
So, now we have UE4 and Frostbite (2, 3, whichever the version is) and it does look like those two engines will be the ones running the majority of our (upcoming and future) games. And CryEngine games will occasionally pop out here and there, will always look good, and then will be forgotten in a matter of months (and that's very unfortunate).
I still remember the clerk at my local store at the time telling me that he had many Far Cry returns due to "technical difficulties" (he actually air-quoted that himself when he described the situation). The truth is that most of the gamers that returned the game just didn't have a good enough PC to run it well, or to run it at all. But that's not the gamers' fault, because I'd argue that Far Cry pushed / forced an acceleration in hardware evolution (that many just didn't see coming, certainly including gamers themselves). That evolution would have happened over time nonetheless, but I'm just saying that Crytek just made it happen faster; the gaming industry had to actually react to the arrival of such demanding games. And yes, I know, at the time we also had Half-Life 2, but that one ran on a much more forgiving (and very optimized and modular) engine (not to mention that the physics was its main [selling] feature).
And it didn't take that long for Crytek to just repeat the accomplishment again with the first Crysis. That one surprised everyone as well. For the gamer, it was a visual spectacle the likes of which had never been seen before, anywhere (anyone with memories of the first Crysis - when it was freshly released - would still to this day remember their reaction when they saw that sunrise in the first level by the beach). For the game designer / engineer it must have been quite a revelation and a surprise. The gaming industry was shocked and once again hardware was on its knees for something like two or three years following the release of the game. How many benchmarks relied on Crysis to establish the power of a new GPU / CPU? All of them? (of course, other games were used, but we ALL looked at those Crysis scores didn't we?). And how many new generations of GPUs it took us to finally get to a point where we could run the game at maximum settings on a single card at constant smooth frame rates with anti-aliasing and all the shenanigans applied? And, perhaps more importantly, how many upgraded their entire system(s) specifically for Crysis?
I remember reading an article about Crysis (and Crytek) that argued that what they managed to do with Far Cry and Crysis (and to the PC gaming industry) was the equivalent to what id Software did with DOOM and Quake in their days. It set things in motion at an accelerated (and unprepared) pace. It took us by storm and we loved it too (well, perhaps the wallet didn't, but our brain just asked for more).
Now with all this said, I have to admit that I stopped playing Crysis 2 after what I think is the second or third "map" since I got bored of it that fast, never touched it again since. But I kept my saved game intact, I might give it another try at some point. I'm not "hating" it by the way, it just got boring; maybe I just wasn't in the mood for it at the time. As for Crysis 3, it's definitely one of the best-looking game out there right now and in my opinion the best looking Crysis game (without texture mods, because that in itself can be a complete game changer, quite literally). However, I didn't buy Crysis 3 and I have zero interest in playing it (only saw footage on YouTube and review sites, it looks awesome but the game-play doesn't pique my interest).
I really liked the first Crysis (and side note: loved the zero gravity alien level, I'm probably part of a minority on that one), and I thought that Warhead's campaign was even better in many aspects. But for now I'm "done" with the Crysis series. The CryEngine, however, is of course still very capable. It's a shame that the industry didn't end up using it to produce hundreds of games like it has been the case with the Unreal Engine since... since forever? (I.E. since the engine's existence obviously). How many games run using UE3? A crap load, can't even count them (just Google that, find a list of games powered by the Unreal Engines, not just 3.0 but even previous versions and look at your jaw drop). And how many games run with CryEngine? 15 or so? Yeah... and also, which games are powered by CryEngine? Popular ones besides... the Crysis series? Ok, we'll have Star Citizen, and yes it looks absolutely fantastic, but will it bring the massive players base like... say... Call of Duty or Halo does? Of course not.
So, now we have UE4 and Frostbite (2, 3, whichever the version is) and it does look like those two engines will be the ones running the majority of our (upcoming and future) games. And CryEngine games will occasionally pop out here and there, will always look good, and then will be forgotten in a matter of months (and that's very unfortunate).
Last edited:
videogames101
Diamond Member
- Aug 24, 2005
- 6,783
- 27
- 91
Crysis was a masterpiece, mostly because of what a leap forward the engine was. I don't think it made as much money as CoD, so they probably won't do that again.
The original Crysis was outstanding. But I never managed to get into Warhead or Crysis 2, and I never bought Crysis 3. I really liked the open-world approach of the first one and the graphics were mind boggling - amazing lighting, textures, everything. A real landmark in PC gaming.
HeXen
Diamond Member
- Dec 13, 2009
- 7,835
- 38
- 91
Their engine is top shelf but their games really suck and Yerli is a hypocrite like a mofo. The problem with FC and Crysis was that everything just looked the same, rather uninspiring level design. It was far from open world, it was a very linear A to B game. Just because you can walk a 100 yards to one side or the other through the same foliage over n over didn't really make it open. Worst offense however was Crysis trilogy's horrible story...makes no sense to go from flying squids that can freeze everything in their path to bio mechanical ground troops and not freezing the planet, if you could freeze in your wake, you would own the earth.
I was referring to the dialogue and voice acting more than the flickery stuff. I love the acting in their games. Ryse is top notch in this regard as well.
I think it's worth mentioning how amazing the CryEngine worked for MMOs also. Aion and Archeage both use it, to incredible effect.
I enjoyed both, and consider Far Cry my favorite FPS game ever. And while I did enjoy Crysis, I can see why someone wouldn't have enjoyed it as much. The suit built in stealth and super powers kind of ruined the game a bit. I preferred using the environment for stealth, and not relying on a suit.
TRENDING THREADS
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 312
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter