Why does noone like the cryengine?

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: Dman877
The most popular engine to license has been the unreal engine (its been that way for a long time) because they're easy to work with and very flexible. I like what ubisoft did with farcry and it would be nice to see some games use that engine (imagine fc2 in the swiss alps or something ooh la la) but I can only surmise that its expensive or difficult to work with or something.

Personally, I love outdoor stuff a whole lot more then indoor games. FC and HL2 were 2 of the best fps I've ever played (as far as single player goes that is).

Quake 3 was very popular.
MOH series, Wolf, CoD and a fair few others that I can't be bothered to think of at the mo 😛

 

[Looney]

Originally posted by: Sureshot324
Because nobody is making singleplayer games with wide outdoor areas, they're all making ultra linear, scripted, on rails, indoor games.

I can barley think of any games at all that licensed something other than an id software engine.

Oblivion and most RPGs are outdoor games.

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: apoppin
perhaps their price is too high or the learning curve too steep or their support non-existant . .

Point of clarification, i think you mean shallow learning curve. Learning curve shows learning (on the ordinate) as a function of time (on the abscissa). A steep curve means you learn alot in a short time--easy to learn, and a shallow one means its difficult to learn--its takes longer to get to a point of knowledge relative to a steep one. Make sense?

Back to the thread: Im sure it will be used by more developers in the future.

 

[Busithoth]

Rune used unreal? Damn I loved that game. More melee!

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: apoppin
perhaps their price is too high or the learning curve too steep or their support non-existant . .

Point of clarification, i think you mean shallow learning curve. Learning curve shows learning (on the ordinate) as a function of time (on the abscissa). A steep curve means you learn alot in a short time--easy to learn, and a shallow one means its difficult to learn--its takes longer to get to a point of knowledge relative to a steep one. Make sense?

Back to the thread: Im sure it will be used by more developers in the future.

I always always under the impression that a "steep learning curve" meant that you had to learn alot in a short period of time and it was therefore hard to do.

 

[shortylickens]

I like the CryTek Engine. But I'm not making games.

I also like the Lithtech (made by Monlith) engine. These are the only games I know about that use it:

Alien Vs Predator 2
Might and Magic 9
No One lives Forever 2
Tron 2.0
I THINK Fear also uses it.

Anybody know of some others?

 

[stnicralisk]

Originally posted by: Sureshot324
Because nobody is making singleplayer games with wide outdoor areas, they're all making ultra linear, scripted, on rails, indoor games.

I can barley think of any games at all that licensed something other than an id software engine.

Oblivion, Vampire: Bloodlines, Sin... just to name a few off of the top of my head

 

[CKent]

Why does noone [sic] like the cryengine?

Because they flogged the dolphin furiously for years on a daily basis thinking about HL2 while Valve kept pushing the date back further & further, and Far Cry came out of nowhere and was a much better game. Since a good business finds out what the customer wants and gives it to them, and game devs know the kiddies will automatically be biased against anything having to do with a game better than their dream-crusher, HalfAss 2, the engine isn't popular.

 

[JACKHAMMER]

Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: apoppin
perhaps their price is too high or the learning curve too steep or their support non-existant . .

Point of clarification, i think you mean shallow learning curve. Learning curve shows learning (on the ordinate) as a function of time (on the abscissa). A steep curve means you learn alot in a short time--easy to learn, and a shallow one means its difficult to learn--its takes longer to get to a point of knowledge relative to a steep one. Make sense?

Back to the thread: Im sure it will be used by more developers in the future.

I always always under the impression that a "steep learning curve" meant that you had to learn alot in a short period of time and it was therefore hard to do.

You are correct, Homer is wrong.

 

[Maximilian]

Originally posted by: JACKHAMMER

Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: apoppin
perhaps their price is too high or the learning curve too steep or their support non-existant . .

Point of clarification, i think you mean shallow learning curve. Learning curve shows learning (on the ordinate) as a function of time (on the abscissa). A steep curve means you learn alot in a short time--easy to learn, and a shallow one means its difficult to learn--its takes longer to get to a point of knowledge relative to a steep one. Make sense?

Back to the thread: Im sure it will be used by more developers in the future.

I always always under the impression that a "steep learning curve" meant that you had to learn alot in a short period of time and it was therefore hard to do.

You are correct, Homer is wrong.

Indeed

 

[ArchAngel777]

I am not sure why the CryEngine has not caught on very well yet. There are several people licensing the technology, but I cannot get a list for you as CryTek has not published that.

The CryEngine is rumored to be priced at around $950,000 US. From what I have read, that is a good price for such an incredable engine. I am not sure on the Doom3 or Source licensing fees. I believe Unreal 2 engine is also pretty low cost, being that they have such a large list of licensees.

The new LithTech engine looks really cool too.