“CryEngine is the best engine,” does what Unreal can’t – Crytek
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.
(Cevat Yerli, Cryengine 3, Crytek, Epic, PC, PS3, Unreal Engine 3 , Xbox 360)
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.
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.
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
"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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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....
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
40°
120°
180°
90°
Ad 
40°
20°
40°
40°
40°
Crysis 2 was brilliant imo.
Take that Quake logo off your avatar, traitor :-p
And to top it off,
Crysis 2 was SUB HD.
Crysis 2 is no technical marvel for consoles
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.
somebody doesn't understand tv's
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.
http://n4g.com/news/806075/...
How stupid is this site sometimes.
Unreal Engine does HD.
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.
Both were sub-HD, PS3 version had the lower resolution.
Its the vision of the devs that is the most important.
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.
You avatar is my google chrome theme btw..
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.
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
CryEngine is dead, move on people...
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.
Do l read this correctly? All l can say is that you're terribly wrong, sir. I suggest you play Mafia immediately.
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?
Now I know. I wish Crytek would have qualified that before I had an aneurysm.