You can’t make the same games with Unreal Engine that you can with CryEngine – but CryEngine could replicate anything made with Unreal or other engines, argues Crytek CEO Cevat Yerli.
Might be, but Crysis 2 was plain crap
Crysis 2 was brilliant imo.
Crysis 2 was linear, repetitive and a letdown for PC gamers. Take that Quake logo off your avatar, traitor :-p
Crysis 2 is one of the worst FPS games in ten years. It is terrible, the graphics was worse than Crysis and the gameplay reminded me of some korean MMOFPS.
Cryengine = great for PC, laughable for consoles (sub hd, bad framerate, grain bug on 360)
So some people like the Crysis 2, and some people don't. Funny how that works, you know, human opinion.
Crysis 2 wasn't as good as Crysis 1, but to call it a bad game is just wrong.
laughable comments! Crysis 2 is technically a big step forward on consoles. for you PC Gamers maybe not, but really no need to call it crap. It's a great game. Best looking FPS on consoles along with the Killzone series.
I don't believe they're complaining about the graphics....well in comparison to the first on PC yeah, but more or less how the gameplay turned out
uncharted 2 was a big step ....crysis 2 only had pretty awesome visuals ..... but the game is bloody repetitive (sneak or attack) while uncharted 2 was a dynamic cinematic gameplay with movie settings to a very epic ending
And to top it off, Crysis 2 was SUB HD. Crysis 2 is no technical marvel for consoles
"Best looking FPS on consoles along with the Killzone series" Sub-HD, no AA, blurry, some jumpy framerates and screen tearing......Nope. The console versions of Crysis 2 doesn't hold a candle to several other console games. edit: It appears that another informed gamer (Persistantthug) beat me to it. Other developers make fools out of Crytech's "graphical ceiling" console game. It just goes to show that just because you can create a resource consuming engine and effects, doesn't mean you're a marvel at programming.
Can't speak from personal experience but I hear Bulletstorm PC looks pretty phenomenal.
Bulletstorm looks also awesome on consoles on a good TV with LED and things.
what does LED have to do with how good a game looks? somebody doesn't understand tv's
LED and THINGS, I have a 23" Acer TV-TFT with LED and a lot of other Specials according to colors etc. It's like day and night compared to my older HDTV which was actually pretty good. I'm glad you understand TV'S.
LED is simply the backlight method...really has nothing to do with the screen specs. It may sometimes effect the color simply due to the positioning of the lights or the type of lighting such as edge lighting. I have an older Samsung LCD with a CCFL backlight that easily competes with my new LED samsung. I also have a few Asus(Acer) monitors and 2 apple cinema displays in my home office. I'm a design professional, I work in games, and I know my equipment. Touting your screen has "LED and a lot of other Specials according to colors", doesn't really shout proficiency with the subject from your end. While your screen may look good, you have no earthly idea why. A display does not change the source. If a game is done well a good display will only enhance it. Games that are good looking will still look good across a variety of displays, including SD displays.
Bit of a correction - it certainly helps black levels when your TV has local dimming.
crysis 2 was good imo. yeah sure that it didnt have a bigger graphics jump like the first one but nonetheless it was a great game and a interesting story unlike the first one which imo didnt make sense.
i fear for them' there the wrong company to have a timesplitters ip, not even the great free radical members could save them
DUPLICATE STORY! http://n4g.com/news/806075/... How stupid is this site sometimes.
Its not :) Unreal with never be beaten in terms of flexibility and ease of Use and the quality it produces.
I dont remember Crysis 2 running at a stable frame rate at all on consoles. And the PS3 version wasnt HD (dont know about the 360 version). Unreal Engine does HD.
Yep and on 360 Crysis 2 looks like shit half way through the campaign. Theres this horrible looking grain bug that makes lines go across the screen and turns the normal small dots of grain into big rectangles essentially making the game look like it suffers from bad cable reception. I'd rather play with unreal graphics anyday - better framerate, resolution and no grain bug. The Media hasn't said anything but an 113 page thread on the 360 Crysis 2 forum demonstrates that a lot of 360 owners think the Cryengine is crap. 113 pages is A LOT of pages for a thread...Crytek totally ignored it while admiring to the bug too.
"And the PS3 version wasnt HD (dont know about the 360 version)" Both were sub-HD, PS3 version had the lower resolution.
I couldn't care what engine a game runs on. Its the vision of the devs that is the most important.
You'd still need the right tech (engine) to make your vision a reality. Games dont run on cool ideas.
Too bad most devs today don't run on vision/passion. They run on money and publisher deadlines.
I'm getting sick of Crytek's talk about the CryEngine. Just please show me something amazing already.
This is actually a duplicate from a story that was run about a month ago, so don't get angry at Crytek for talking too much. In any case, if you want to check out some amazing stuff, check out the Crymod site, specifically the CE3 Art thread. Some of the stuff in there is phenomenal. EDIT: To make it easier on you guys, here is the link to the Crymod CE3 art page: http://www.crymod.com/viewt... - I suggest you skip towards the back if you want to see the best work, but right the way through you will find amazing screens that blow any other engine out of the water.
This is why I hate Crytek, they boast all the time. It's also why I dislike Ninja theory
and Peter Molyneux
shut the fuck up and make a decent game already
Now we just need the best devs to use it! You avatar is my google chrome theme btw..
lol maybe Crytek is not very well informed, but a LOT of engines are better then UE3 ( at least on consoles, I don' t know much of PC ).
Prove it's the best by making better games Crytek. I haven't played any of your games this year except the Crysis 2 beta and the demo which was removed.
looks a lot better than the unreal engine, unreal is over used at this point, its boring and predictable
CryEngine does what UnrealEngine doesn't
Unreal Engine awesome but is getting a bit tired because everyone uses it, and not necessarily all that well. CryEngine is great as well but I feel CryTek has too much of a comfort zone. The whole jungle thing doesn't really show their potential.
On 360 CryEngine is the worst, seriously. It's the only engine that produces a weird graphical defect where lines go across the screen like a bad cable reception and the grain turns into huge rectangular blocks. There's a 113 page thread with people complaining their game looks like crap on the Crysis 2 360 forum with video proof from multiple users. Unreal looks better simply due to being much crisper and cleaner and lack major graphical bugs. Cryengine sadly kinda sucks on consoles: - 360 has grain/lines bug - PS3 sub HD
All good to do the talking crytek but end of day gamers want the games. Unreal engibe is old as dirt now but it has a massive catalogue of games to back it up, Means though its old it still is current because theres always new stuff being released for it. Cryengine outside of Crysis is still very much dead in the water except for sniper ghost warrior 2 warface and the promises.
Unreal engine is usable by nearly everyone and it is a great engine (look at Batman Arkham Asylum)
This guy can say s*** like this and get away with it. Why? Dumbasses in the media hyped up Crysis 2 by calling it the best looking game on consoles, despite evidence to the contrary....
unreal engine is shit, it was cool back in 2000 when it was relatively new, now its old and repetitive.
LMAO these guys again!!!!!!!! Hey crytek please stop talking if your engine is that amazing why does Killzone 3 blows crysis 2 away on the PS3 and Gears 3 looks miles better then crysis 2!!
If they continued with the route which they were going with with the CryEngine 2, I would agree with them. As soon as the have taken the jump to consoles, they no longer have a chance at beating the Unreal Engine.
CryEngine is dead, move on people...
Empty vessels sound more ... crytek din make this much fuss when their cryengine 2 shined ..... this time they r trying to resurrect that dead ce3 out of the shit ...
Funny, because Crysis 2 was plain garbage. How many people are playing it now? Ah, exactly. Overhyped and unexciting. There are far better shooters out there using "inferior" engines.
frostbite 2 engine does what cryengine cant!
Maybe the full quote is "CryEngine is the best engine we have made."? There are better engines made by others for sure.
I don't know what a lot of you people are complaining about with Crysis 2. I played it on the ps3 and the PC, and it was great on both. My computer isn't the best, and the PC version kicked my ass, but it was playable and fun. The ps3 version was great, and I thought the graphics was very impressive for the ps3. The only complaint I could understand is a weaker story, but that's never been the focus of Crysis. An open world game wouldn't have worked with the story. Even the multiplayer is solid; I put a good number of hours into it. Just because it's not Crysis 1 with new graphics and story doesn't mean it wasn't good.
"An open world game wouldn't have worked with the story." Do l read this correctly? All l can say is that you're terribly wrong, sir. I suggest you play Mafia immediately.
Well, yeah, I never played that, so I can't comment on that game. I just think for Crysis 2, and the story they were trying to tell and the location, this is as good as they could have done. Not to say they couldn't have improved the story or fixed the bugs from the get go, but still, I think they did fine with the game.
Well crysis 2 is currently the best looking game out there. Just look at it with Dx11 and the new Blackfire 2 mod and tell me its not mind blowing.
Crytek annoy the hell out of me. They seem convinced that the only thing that matters about a game is how impressive the engine technology is. Meanwhile, they spend all their time making (gorgeous looking) shitty games.
I can appreciate technical feats of polygon pushing but when I'm playing a game I don't give a toss what's going on under the hood.
Also, what the hell do they mean when they claim to have the "only 100% realtime engine"? There's a statement that needs some qualifiers. How are they defining realtime? Isn't *every* 3D game engine running in realtime?! Surely it's either realtime or it isn't. Is he saying their engine doesn't allow for pre-rendered cutscenes?
After talking to a developer on twitter it seems that the "100% realtime" claim is to do with the development process. Apparently you can make changes to world lighting, physics, scripting etc and see the changes in real time instantly by hitting CTRL-G.
Now I know. I wish Crytek would have qualified that before I had an aneurysm.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.