Crytek blows its own trumpet over the impressive CryEngine used to power Crysis 2.
well that's nice
Doesn't matter how much real time it has. Crysis 2 was a horrible way to showcase it. I mean they built a ferrari concept and mass produced a ford taurus with a ferrari paint job.
You base this on..what? Biased opinion?
Well, Crysis 2 could have looked better on PC. Crytek kinda messed that up. Now, back to what they said about being "100% real time". They're speaking about development. Otherwise it makes very little sense.
except for real time ambient occlusion. even on max settings. problem, crytek?
Isnt Metal Gear Solid Real Time Everything?
Crytek: The developers who personify the belief that graphics can compensate for a mediocre game. They can tout their engine all they want, let's see if they have the skill to make a decent game that doesn't just rely on looking pretty.
No engine is 100% real time or they're all 100% real time. What I mean by this is that real time is instantaneous and nothing in software is instantaneous. Calculations must be made prior to any actual reaction to a character's actions. Otherwise, the only way to look at it is that the code is processed in real time, which is the same as most engines out there. I think they meant to say that they are the fastest as presenting actions in real time and not that they are "the only engine on the planet, including Unity and Epic, that is 100 percent real time." In general, I would not call them the fastest, either. They base these "calculations" on closed environment demonstrations, such as the physics demos they have become known for, and not real-world applications in video games. Especially multi-player video games. Considering the need to process the graphics utilized, a lot of other games tend to have faster response time to a player's actions than CryEngine.
are you serious
Completely serious. Tired of developers making crap up. 100% real time? Impossible. There is latency in every single game out there. It is impossible for them to claim 100% real time, meaning no latency in response to a player's actions. Furthermore, the world they create isn't 100% real time either. They use the exact same 2D textures overlayed with 2d visual effects in the background to simulate 3D worlds as everyone else. Their statement makes no sense. It's like those damn commercials for those sunglasses that allow you to see the world in HD! Yeah, last time I checked, we already did that.
What the hell? You had 10 bubbles an hour ago. What happened?
their engine is capable of pulling everything off in real time like ray tracing etc. they didn't say that they used it C2 just that the engine could do it...
Can I have some of your bubbles?
Just remember people, this person is a moderator... Mate, you clearly have no idea what you are talking about in this case, yet you have the hide to get angry at Crytek for making stuff up. Here, i'll try and explain what is meant by real time. Originally, all lighting/shadowing was pre baked into the textures, so in other words not real time at all. All of the lighting effects where designed by artists, and werent being computed by the system. The next step was dynamic lighting, which is where light sources directly illuminate and cast shadows. However, these systems didn't allow for light volume bounce. What I mean by this is that a light source only illuminates things in its direct line of site. Imagine a light shining through a window, with this sort of system it won't light up the whole room, only what the light hits. Thus, an artist would still have to bake into assets indirect lighting. CryENGINE3 is currently the only available engine (although Frostbite 2 also has this ability) which features light volume bounce, allowing for indirect lighting without an artist having to bake that into a texture. This is known as GI or Global Illumination. CryENGINE3 also does al sorts of things like defections, light shafts, light bending (such as through water or ice) in real time, almost no other engine has any of these abilities. Real Time does not mean in no time at all, lol.
Then you just don't know what real time actually means, everything is done realtime so calculated/processed in the response to player action, the world is build when you look at it, effects , shadows etc. are not pre-rendered, pre-generated. Real time doesn't mean you have no delay, you have delay in engine response if your pc it to weak.
Speed definitely is a factor in real time simulations, as is the ability for processes to be completed on time and in the right order. You should know that while they may have an engine capable of performing soft real time simulations, their games on consoles are not processed in that manner in entirety. It's highly unlikely they are all in real time even on the PC. The reason is because there isn't enough processing power to handle it and maintain a worthwhile framerate, absence of screen tearing, and similar processing issues. They even halt and ignore certain constraints in order to prioritize others, such as when there are a lot of AI elements occuring at once or an increase in particle effects. This is extremely noticeable on multiplayer, where you can see a degrade in shadow and lighting updates as they are not being fully processed in real time since those processes are often halted or skipped in performing regular updates in order to enable enough overhead for more important actions (physics is primary over lighting and particle effects).
@cgoodno, What you and everyone else are probably missing (and I don't blame you, as the "article" is very misleading) is that Crytek was refering to game development: Game development in Cryengine 3 is done in real time: what you see is what you get on multiple outputs simultaneously (console, PC). With UDK (Unreal) and most other engines it's not the same: you create a level, and then before the game is rendered and ready to be played things need to compile and lighting needs to be "baked" into the scene. Thus, for every small change an artist/designer does to the level, you need to wait for that process to complete. For rapid development this can be a real pain, and the removal of that pain is one serious advantage of Cryengine 3.
Dude ur looking at it all wrong there not talking about instantaneouysly doing it.. what there on about if they change the game in the engine the game changes whereas other engines you wuould have to re-upload the game again to add some small files whereas the crytek engine does this for you, ver quickly
CryEngine has always been a phenomenal beast in graphical power. This guys know how to push to the limits. ( Crysis , Crysis 2 looked amazing on consoles ) Unreal & frostbite is great too.
Oh god here we go again , crysis shooting some damn leaves and branches in every level makes this game so state of the art..LMAO NOT! IMHO the only time i was amazed in Cysis was when the Volcano erupted and It was time to to drive thoose tank ,THE ONLY!!! just another shooter... Never ever a Doom or a unreal or a half Life... let this game rest and go away already.. now wheres Doom 4!!!!!!!
Too bad the gameplay sucks
was boring. Its like dating the pretty gilr who is very bad in bed wasn't mgs4 in real time now i am a moron when it comes to these things but i remember all the cut scenes and gameplay was the same?
Why not the "Universe"?? Sounds even more high-flown.
care to elaborate? real time lighting real time physics blah blah blah just Do Not say "100 percent real time" and not go into detail for the sake of the readers. CryEngine 3 doesn't have Real Time destruction so i would say Frostbite 2.0 is the only 100 percent real-time engine on the planet. I like the CryEngine 3 but seeing Crytek are such a bunch of pricks.....I see why so few Devs use Cryteks products.
They mean there's absolutely no baking involved with the engine. You can just make changes/additions to the map geometry, then jump right into the game and see how it looks with no delay. Frostbite 2, Unreal 3, etc all require a certain degree of pre-computation from what I've read.
But there is absolutely baking involved. They pre-compile all physics elements, lighting elements, and the like. The only difference is that they don't re-compile those the way Unreal 3 does it and Frostbite 2 has to recompile since many world elements are destructible. But, if you change any of those elements, re-compile is required. The reason why they don't need to re-compile? Because they don't do anything outside of the norm with the world to start with. Not a good way of promoting the engine.
Nope, it's all real time. It's obviously simplified, but it's still real time.
@cgoodno I thought real time meant that everything was done in engine and nothing was prescripted. Such as shadows that are placed as textures or physics. Never heard of that in order for it to be real time it had to be done instantaneously. IDK maybe I'm wrong.
It actually does have real time destruction, it just isnt as extensively used as in say Frostbite based Battlefields.
there is a reason why the US ARMY preferred this engine over all others! BF3 engine is crap. but the game itself is cool!
Are you serious?
( . ) ( . )
( . Y . ) ive got bigger tits
Unreal Engine 3 is Awful than CryEngine 3 on consoles.
So what if it is cryteks!?Unreal is the easiest engine to use and unity is the best when it comes to working with multiple platforms with a small amount of time. At the end of the day it does not matter how big the canvas is ie(feature rich an engine is) if the very artist can't make use the space(multiple platforms) and display artistic creativity and innovation(gameplay). Last I remember Cryengine3 did not Push PC,PS3&Xbox360 to its limits and neither did crysis2. hmm... Jack of all trades and master of none comes to mind. No in fact when I look at it PC has BF3.PS3 has its exclusives and Xbox 360 also has its exclusives. So in other words your engine and games aint no Mona Lisa in the musem of gaming.
. I think Cry 3 will take over most of the console market since I haven't seen any thing on consoles as good as this... http://youtu.be/kF67XFXq_ys As for destruction...anybody could do that with any engine, that's a decision the dev has to make...Crysis 2 had destruction, where appropriate since there is a limit on resources.... http://youtu.be/mW8bMnkZozQ Epic has maybe the best engine going if you want a steam-punk inspired game like Bioshock or as Mass Effect or Mirrors edge showed, it's versatility is unquestionable. Gears 3 will impress on consoles or anywhere else... http://youtu.be/efYjoNaEA5c Maybe under the radar is Metro 2033 that has a fantastic game engine and will surprise many in 2012...Metro 2033 on 360 was great, Metro 2033: the last light will shock and awe...as always hit the HD...this one is a looker... http://youtu.be/AvhxaKQSMUE The Tomb Raider demo at E3 showed they mean business and it was running on 360... http://youtu.be/wDFigGBbXuE Far cry 3 is open world and beautiful... http://youtu.be/9t5JUqHjdx4 As you can see a lot to look forward to. Frostbite 2 has been shown but at this point is a tech demo as the true pecs have been kept secret...regardless, because of their stupidity, delusional nonsense like their claims of a next gen engine in the current gen, they should be ignored until they show proper game play footage. NOBODY has played their single player campaign trailers in REAL TIME...until they do, they are fake or playing on a ridiculous set up. Many journalists have asked but they are not available...O_o
meh Beard engine is best ever! - http://www.youtube.com/watc...
I do know that ALL console engines(except cryengine 3) use some prebaked/precaluclated effects such as lighting, physics,destruction, skyboxes, post processing effects such as SSAO, water effects, weather effects and shadows. this is what developers have to do because consoles are simply too weak @Jijoro gears 3s version of unreal still has some prebaked/precalculated effects all console engines aside from cryengine 3 do NOT do everything in real time because consoles are simply too weak
@ qwertyz what you said contradicts the first part of your statement because if console are too weak, there is no way they could run cryengine in real time.
Gears engine is better http://www.youtube.com/watc... MP Spoiler
Too bad the game sucks
When they can improve their crap AI they will have something to brag about, until then its just pretty.
Oh be quiet. You can talk about the engine all you like but Crysis 2 sucked donkey balls. Crysis 1 was way better. In fact Crysis 1 would of showcased the strengths of the engine better (if there are any).
Why should I care if the engine is real time or not? I wish companies would stop promoting ENGINES and start making FUN GAMES! Crysis 2 just wasn't fun, so I couldn't care less about what is real time and what's not. By the way... Am I the only one who doesn't care what the graphic designers are doing behind the scenes to make the games look good. If it looks decent, who cares what technology they're using. I don't give a damn if Killzone 3's shadows are baked in.. that game looks AMAAAAAAZING and it plays amazing as well... so it's not real time... big deal. Graphics do not equal a good game.
Developers go on in this fashion because they think its what all of us gamers want to hear, and it is to a small extent, but not as important as they think.
Lol, this is from am interview for Develop magazine, which is actually a magazine FOR DEVELOPERS, not consumers.
I tell you, realtime is a lot of fun. and pretty to look at. Real time lighting look more interesting, physics and destruction to look natural and different each time you do something. say shoot a barrel or kicking in a door. or simply just moving your character around. So personally I look forward to next gen because I hope there will be much more real time stuff, one of my favourite games of this gen is Killzone 2 because I never knew entirely what would happen each time I went through it. the acts and behaviour of the higs, the way they fell and how so many things was actually dynamic and real like. Unpredictable! And regarding Crysis 2 it fails at being all real time seeing how it features baked effects and scripted scenes. Every time there is an article or something about tech there is always someone there to bitch about how tech doesnt matter. It does or else we would still all be playing canny 2D sidescrollers. REAL TIME stuff affects gameplay and experience a lot! LMAO. :)
As if that crytek's statement was true??.. yes??... Oh wait, look over there!!!.. a Battlefield 3 trailer, it was awesome
Got crazy destruction ? No ? then STFU.
go play crysis 2 and see for yourself.
Im sorry but that is some terrible writing, how many times can the author repeat himself?????
Well there is baking in crysis 2 and on the scale of crysis 2 this is impossible especcialy with AO and calculating light bounces in real time, yer right. It takes my 6 core pc hours to calculate light bounces in unity and bake it. I call BS.
I'm making a mod for the original Crysis engine and I can attest to it being 100 percent real-time. What we have been able to achieve has been incredible compared to anything we could have put out in another engine. I have access to the newest Cryengine through school as well. I have been fooling around with it quite a bit and the possibilities seem to be endless.
Germans make top-notch technology. What else is new? Are there others? Sure. But you'll be seeing a lot of this engine the rest of this gen and alot of next gen.
Are they synthesizing dialogs too?
Cysis 2 looks like crap on 360 after that first night time raining level - the grain turns into huge blocks and waves start going across the screen. Crytek has nothing to be proud of.
why do people care
Isn't the source engine also completely real time? And its been around for some time. Way to go making stuff up
Stop not knowing things.
Why is Crytek to obsessed with graphics?
Because they're pretty much the best at them?
^ Carmack is more of an engineer than a graphics person. He'll create some amazing tech so that artists can make a game pretty, though. Big difference.