Here is the official Gamescom tech demo of Crytek´s new CRYENGINE.
I hope more studios jump on the CE bandwagon instead of always running to Unreal
I am with you!
All looked good, I agree, but one thing stood out to me... A metal bucket was blowing around in the wind, but loose cardboard wouldn't. Just seemed strange not to just make that happen for the demo.
I wish to see better indie licensing.
@NYC_Gamer: I hope more studios jump on the CE bandwagon instead of always running to Unreal that's all fine and dandy but a license per year for CE is about 1.2M if i remember correctly, and not sure about thee price of UE but engines aren't just about looks - engines can be optimised for different genres/viewpoints, believe it or not. for example you see Crysis, Far cry, sniper ghost warrior. All run on CE and all, are first person. It's possible that they are trying to broaden their engine by making third person support a thing, Ryse, Rime. But other than those to most CE games are fp. Now look at UE. Near enough ALL games that run on UE are third person. name pretty mnuch any game that is running on UE and it'll be 3rd, Gears, Army of 2 Batman series and even Murdered: Soul Suspect. so yeah, UE is made for tp support while CE focuses on 1st for the moment. more studios should - if they plan on making first person. :) Sorry to be the killjoy ;)
Me too, it should become the main engine for devs in next gen games.
I think they are. Isn't the new PS4 exclusive "Everybody returns to Rapture" using the CE?
But aren't Crytek games notorious for being resource hogs and pushing even the highest end systems to the limit? Yes, Cryengine games looks phenomenal (if you can run them,) but at such a high cost to the system, is it worth it? I was always a fan of the Source Engine, and am looking forward to more details on Valve's new iteration.
@NYC_Gamer I have to admit there for a while EVERYONE seemed to be using the Unreal engine and Every. Single. GAME. looked the same (at least to me), it didn't matter who was making it. The new thing that seems to be popular is solar flares, water droplets, sparks, dirt, smoke and whatever else the Devs can come up with obscuring your vision, I personally can't stand that, just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. I didn't finish the last Battlefield SP because of that, it seemed like every single light-source in that game was designed to blind you, it drove me absolutely nuts.
Star Citizen is using cry engine.
I think we should see much more variaty in engines next gen. There are already so many great looking engines for next gen games like the Unreal Engine, Cry Engine, Snowdrop Engine (the Division), Fox Engine (MGS5), Luminous Engine (Agni's philosophy), Panta Rhei-Engine (Deep Down) and many more.
But only Unreal and Cryengine will be licensed out of that list. The other engines are all in house.
Batman has spoken.
The CryEngine is such a BEAST. It completely blows the Unreal Engine out the water PLUS you can program for 3 platforms simultaneously on the CryEngine. Dear Devs: Use the Got Dam CryEngine cause the Unreal Engine is Real CRAP! Plus the CryEngine is good for Mods too. Look for StarCitizen (PC Exclusive) to push the boundaries of the CryEngine 3 like no game has before it in 2014
The Unreal Engine isn't crap. You can program for 3 platforms simultaniously on it as well. In fact UE had this feature before the Cry Engine. I think the Cry Engine is superior in terms of looks but the UE isn't crap.
Well unreal is half the price.
Never been a huge fan of Crytek, but CE is a great engine, much better than Unreal. Obviously we haven't seen any Unreal 4 games yet, but I doubt they're going to beat CE.
I dunno the unreal 4 demos seem to rival crysis 3 in visuals (when crysis 3 is maxxed out).
I hope both become more common. It is always better to have diversity game engine wise when possible, especially in the major AAA devs that can afford it.
I hope they don't the CE is always badly optimized for everything just look at crysis for a perfect example you get games like battlefield looking just as good and only needing half as good hardware. Why you think that is? Because the engine is a LOT better and thats because the devs are better. Theres a reason people use Crysis for benchmarking there new cards on PC and not games like battlefield. Frostbite is a lot better engine and I would prefer it in more games..
But can Crytek make a good game?
No, but they make a damn good tech demo! :P EDIT: @n4rc I was kidding lol. They've made some good games, but lately they seem to being going with style and graphics over substance and depth, in my opinion. Gameplay doesn't do it for me. It's boring to me.
i didnt find crysis to be bad... just not a huge fan of the halo-ish 30 bullets to kill someone
that's what scares me about ryse...looks great,but could end up being boring as fcuk.
We'll see if they can prove themselves with Ryse: the Son of Rome
Fuck you time spliters was pretty good and crysis 3 was better than most fps
Just wanted to clarify that 'Timesplitters' was made by 'Free Radical'. Crytek purchased them several years after.
Indeed Cytek never made it and most the free radical team have actually left Crytek now.
Looks awesome, hope it's put to good use out there when the new systems are released.
Real gamers want gameplay that challenges you if you play games with amazing graphics they normally have poor un-challenging gameplay ?? not always though ?
I'm sorry sir/miss, I don't get the relevance of your comment when it comes to what I said. I just hope developers leverage the features show effectively is all. Maybe I'm missing something.
That was great! Can't wait to see more games using this.