Crytek: Graphics Are “60% Of The Game”

X360: Crytek has always pushed the visuals of its games but in the great graphics Vs gameplay debate, Cytek boss, Cevat Yerli, believes graphics win and actually account for ’60% of the game’ and its immersion.

[Snookies12]

If you're speaking technically, then yes. If you're saying they're 60% of the fun, then no lol. Just no...

[Gazondaily]

"“People say that graphics don’t matter,” says Yerli, “but play Crysis and tell me they don’t matter. It’s always been about graphics driving gameplay."

And therein lies the problem. It should always be about the gameplay driving not only the graphics, but the physics, sounds etc.

I understand where he is coming from though and if you see Crysis running on a high spec PC you really have no choice but to be wowed by what is on-screen. The visuals do pull you into the world but the driving force is always the gameplay. If the graphics are 60% of your game, you're doing something wrong.

[Utalkin2me]

I agree with you septic. So if graphics are 60%, so would that mean gameplay is 20% and story is 20%. If so that's tuuuurrible..

[Autodidactdystopia]

you guys know what einstein was famous for?

Its all frekin relative.

1 Crysis has terrible gameplay but relative to me its great gameplay.

2 Crysis has Incredible graphics but relative to me they could be better

3 Crysis has great physics but relative to me they took the update speed from c1 and cut it into a 3rd on the physics end

4 Everyone in this "small" culture on n4g seems to live in a bubble one where the crysis series is a terrible franchise known only for what they seem to think is horrible unoptimised code.
but relative to the rest of the world crysis is a game like any other and some people are gonna like it and others aren't,

5 Crysis series is an overall bad game besides the graphics cause they should only be like 20 percent of the game. but relative to anyone exposed to the outside world n4g is a ps3/4 circle jerk and anything that technically wipes the floor with all of the exclusives you guys are used to rubbing in the faces of say x360 owners must be attacked logically or illogically and rationalized

one
comment
after
another

and you all are about to prove it (-_-)

[Calm Down Sunshine]

@Autodidactdystopia

I don't think Einstein's theory of relativity means what you think it means.

What you're looking for is the word "opinion", I believe.

[Autodidactdystopia]

Dude Relativity literally means Relativity.

Einstien perfected the math.

Relativity in short is how two people reconcile their world if their relative nature to the thing they are observing is different.

cant believe you dont see the metaphore.

1 person in the n4g ecosystem sees the world one way one person more predominantly exposed to the outside world sees the world another way.(obvious differences in preference and taste aside)

1 person inside a high energy state for example say the speed of light sees time as as literally stopped. One person more predonminantly not traveling at the speed of light experiences time "relatively" (theres that word again) slowly.

Why exactly do you think it is called the theory of relativity and what exactly do you think that that means?

I see you took the illogical route.----------------Click Here-----↓

[grailly]

yes, everyone has a different opinion, I don't know why you felt compelled to bring Einstein into this, it doesn't make you more right.

he discovered relativity in physics. I'm pretty sure people were aware of relativity of opinion way before him.

Edit: your username is relevant...

[HammadTheBeast]

Minecraft sold more than his "60%" better game.

[brave27heart]

And therin lies the reason that Crytek are a second tier developer instead of an elite one. Until you understand the balance of graphics and gameplay you'll never make a game regarded as one of the greats.

Heres a hint. Its not 60% graphics.

Crytek make decent games, but they'll never make anything that would be considered a game of the year contender with their current attitude.

[cyguration]

@Autodidactdystopia

I don't mean to put you in your place, because you obviously think you're a very pedantically inclined mind, but your insistence on incorrectly using Einstein's relativity into this conversion is a gross misuse of the terminology.

If, for discussion purposes, you wanted a more apt reference (one that speaks more dynamically to the inclusion of fun versus graphics versus gameplay versus perception of the aforementioned) you would have sided toward's Immanuel Kant's apriori, to which a certain individual's taste in knowledge or experience (intrinsic or otherwise) would determine the outcome of their perception of a thing.

Ultimately, I still love the original X-Com even though the graphics were never good (even back when it released). However, it was the intention of a foreboding atmosphere and outcome of a terrifying alien invasion fused with the deep gameplay mechanics that made it worthwhile.

For people who don't like or appreciate the experience of the [game's] mechanics or the play experience itself, then the garbage Yerli is spouting holds some weight.

[Ricdog]

@cyguration

He was in his right to bring Einstein's name into his discussion, so much as it was for dramatic effect.

Kant's apriori???? You mean his idealism. Which is actually due more uncontrollable acts of the mind interferring with sensory information more than ones taste.

[starchild]

I don't know. I play games not so much because they offer some sort of gameplay hook, but more because they are these amazing virtual worlds to explore and immerse myself in.

Sound and graphics are extremely important in achieving this.

[Campy da Camper]

Forget Kant, Thales nailed this issue 2 milenia ago.

[Ritsujun]

Without good graphics, Crysis series sucked.
With good graphics, Crysis series STILL sucked.
Fact.

[BattleAxe]

Crytek: Graphics Are “60% Of The Game”

Yeah...Crytek's story writers better remember that. They probably spend more time under Cevat Yerli's desk, waiting for the graphics to finish up before Cevat will let them out.

[Sy_Wolf]

I played Crysis fully maxed out and it seems like graphics are much more then 60% of that game. Which is why I never finished it.

[MikeMyers]

Graphics only give a first impression. Without great gameplay and a great story you'll lose interest quickly. Are graphics why Angry Birds so well? What about Diablo III and Minecraft? Even a game like Gran Turismo 5 has awesome graphics but people buy it mainly for the gameplay. Crysis is not excelling in any area besides graphics which is why gamers are getting bored with it. The graphics did carry it on the PC because people wanted to test their systems.

[JONESY6]

Angry Birds and Minecraft have a charming art style. They are easy on the eyes. Graphics are extremely important for impressions and appeal.

[TopDudeMan]

I'd maybe put it at about 15% of my enjoyment.

[Baka-akaB]

" “but play Crysis and tell me they don’t matter. It’s always been about graphics driving gameplay." "

Well i did and your Crysis games are quite boring and uneven in quality .

I'm usually a advocate that graphics , art and presentation are as important as gameplay . But good graphics with absence of real artistry and with a just ok gameplay dont do it for me

[sobekflakmonkey]

Same here, I've played all the crysis games on PC Maxed out, and I've gotten bored of them, I still haven't beaten the first one, it's just a horribly written and boring game, and the graphics are not all that good when maxed out...sorry fanboys, it was an poorly optimized game and that's about it, and for Crysis 2 and 3, I maxed them out, there are some amazing looking parts for sure especially in the 3rd...but holly shit was I ever just begging for the game to end, not to mention the series has never had great animations, or sound design...

[CalvinKlein]

You cant play Graphics. Gameplay is 100% of the game. Graphics is in the Video part. I know gameplay is more important too because you dont need great visuals to play a good game, but wont usually play a crappy one that looks good. I think his percentage is off a bit.

I stopped playing crysis 2 SP at the beginning when it was boring. It was right around the time some enemies chased me and I thought they were being smart and not following but when I looked they were just bunched together stuck at the bottom of the stairs because tehy couldnt walk up 5 stairs. Maybe its because I played on xbox instead of pc, but Im sure xbox can handle ai that can walk up stairs.

[Donnieboi]

Ever notice that this team has never made a noteworthy game in their entire career?

[Calm Down Sunshine]

That's a rather ludicrous statement. The original Crysis was and still is a beast.

Edit: May I add that I'm not excusing the other poor-effort games they've made, but to say they've never made a noteworthy game seems harsh.

[Autodidactdystopia]

yeah man, thats not really true at all.

[Baka-akaB]

Not really they still made Farcry . Was a graphics beast AND TONS of fun , unlike crysis .

[jimbobwahey]

Yeah, Crytek put out crappy games. The original Crysis is the best thing that they've ever done, and even then it was just average at best.

[delboy]

Graphic are important and good but only when is coming from Sony.
Sony4G

[BlackTar187]

Pointless comment i removed.

[NukaCola]

All I here from these eye candy idiots is graphics graphics graphics. Visually they look great but they have no soul or originality. Crytec is a company of tech demo engineers, hardly game developers.

[tristanwerbe]

Crysis is a fun game though and a good looking one

[JC_Denton]

Which is why Crytek has yet to make one game that immerses me in any way at all.

[Persistantthug]

Just sayin.

[showtimefolks]

Ok so now some won't like this but that's true maybe not 60% but at least 50%

Gameplay matters but having great graphics makes playing more fun, MGS4,UC,Infamous some of the best games of this gen for me personally had great graphics

Now fallout is my favorite and graphics weren't top notch yet the game was a lot of fun(fallout 3, FO:new Vegas not as much for me personally)

If graphics don't matter than why do game companies show tech demoes of what is possible during console reveals? Newer engines always means better graphics and more horsepower

[suzanne3n]

like Sandra answered I'm alarmed that some one can make $8756 in 4 weeks on the computer. have you read this web link::::::::::>:) http://qr.net/kh4s

[codename13]

well ... that explains why their AI development is worst xD

[Dailynch]

I think i'm with him on this one, graphics do drive gameplay, especially when it comes to immersion. Otherwise why would we all be so excited about the next-gen and the endless list of new possibilities it provides.

[krazykombatant]

um because of physics, bigger player counts etc...

[HammadTheBeast]

Minecraft, Terraria, Journey (style was great), and others come to mind, all of which have done better than Cryteks games.

[showtimefolks]

You mean to tell me journey doesn't look stunning?

[Walker]

lol, most essential part of the game is GAMEPLAY, after that Story and after those sound/graphics !

Gameplay and Story are 90% of the game .

[KwietStorm_BLM]

Nothing is 90% of the game.

[rodiabloalmeida]

So where is the other 40% in Crysis games? I knew it was missing something.

[Highlife]

^ this

[LackTrue4K]

"That" ^^^

[Snookies12]

These ^^^^^

[DanyBrown]

those^^

[Ezz2013]

they are coming in DLCs

[NateCole]

Yes it is important but not 60% important.

Truth is all aspect of a game is important. From gameplay to story to sound to graphics to physics etc.

You guys have have only graphics or only gameplay games. I want all.

[Xenial]

Graphics do matter, but gameplay is just as, if not more important. Unfortunately for Yerli, his games lack great gameplay. -_-

[Zechs34]

Borderlands 1 or 2 or Far Cry 2 or 3, both have "worse" graphics (as stated by several people) and are 100 times the games either Crysis' are.

As I have always said, these guys just dont know when to shut up.

"Look at our coolest bestest engine which will melt your faces"

"Our games will burn houses down because of how hot your elite uber PC will struggle to run our horribly optimized game"

Now that their games have failed to be the best thing since sliced bread, "oh but graphics are only about 60% important..."

GTFO

[Mustang300C2012]

Agree completely. It comes down to personal opinion. If the 60% 40% whatever was working then more should be playing the game. The gameplay in the long run is what keeps people coming back. If you don't have that with the eye candy then it doesn't matter how great the graphics are.

[Baka-akaB]

Worse graphics , only in the technical still . Part of graphics isnt just raw horsepower and effects .

The art and design count as much and all those games provides that in spades compared to crysis

[SirBradders]

So how comes games from the 90's entertain me 100% more than 90% of crytek games.

Im sorry but graphics is down to personal opinion, i do love a graphically rich game but gameplay is no1 for me if something is not enjoyable to play then how can you then appreciate the other concepts thereafter.

[Campy da Camper]

Agreed. Infamous is a perfect example. Not the best looking game but holy smokes I couldn't put down the controller. It led me to day 1 purchase on the 2nd one and a purchase of FoB. Good devs get my money. Games like Crysis; red box gets my money.

[-Gespenst-]

Of course graphics are important, but that doesn't mean they have to be super ridiculously realistic like Crysis.

It all depends on what kind of game you want to make- not all games have to be realistic.

For instance, the grahpics in Chrono Trigger are lovely, evocative and so memorable, but they're only like 16-bit. Then you have games like El Shaddai and Okami- not as realistic as Crysis obviously, but they still achieve a very memorable and beautiful game.

Crytek seem to think that graphics HAVE to be as complex as their own, but that's really narrow-minded and just not true. There are plenty of games with much more effective and memorable visuals than Crysis will ever have. Design and imagination is also a key part of this.

Crysis games pretty much epitomise the problem plaguing this generation of games- lots of surface and spectacle- barely any substance (that or the substance is pretty subpar)

[LightofDarkness]

Without graphics, there would be no gameplay. That's true. And he's sort of right in what he's saying, like it or not. But you shouldn't be developing gameplay around your graphics or just to show off your technical prowess; the graphics should be defined by the kind of game you want people to play. Games like Wind Waker get this sort of thing perfectly right. Obviously, a realistic shooter should strive for a realistic presentation on-screen, but Crysis is just tech-porn. The game is designed around them trying to show off as much of their engine's capabilities as possible; the gameplay is seemingly an afterthought, it's only there so you have some sense purpose as you "OOH" and "AHH" at the pretty things they want to show you.

That said, people like Crytek are important because they really try to push the boundaries of what we can do technically with the best hardware available. They may not make the best games in the world, but they keep us moving towards that horizon and can sometimes inspire other developers to try harder with their own presentation (by either trying to best them technically or demonstrate the superiority of stylization over photo-realism).

There's a reason why I still play Megaman and back things like Shovel Knight: these games still have great visual design and feedback on-screen and this is additive to the gameplay experience, despite being technically dated. The graphics suit the gameplay perfectly, no more, no less. If Crytek want to make better games, they should take note.

[Mustang300C2012]

See it is this sh*t right here that I am talking about. A perfect example is going from Crysis 1 to Crysis 2. Look how you went from open world with graphics and gameplay to corridor enclosed worlds with graphics driving the game. I enjoyed both games but liked Crysis story, gameplay and graphic combination over the sequel.

[Tultras]

Graphics are just icing on the cake.

A game with great graphics, but horrendous gameplay is like;
'Food which looks great but tastes horrible. '

[Imalwaysright]

No, its not the graphics that allow for better gameplay, its the engines that allow for better gameplay. You can have a game that looks like a PSone title with the same exact gameplay that we see on games like BF3 or Crysis.

[Iltapalanyymi]

No. Graphics are like 1% of the game. They don't mean shit. Suuure don't get me wrong i like if a game has nice graphics but still they don't mean anything. Good story comes always first.

[Mikefizzled]

Borderlands 1 had a pretty weak story but it was still a great game. I think if they had gone for realism like first intended it would of been much less fun.

[Kenshin_BATT0USAI]

Basically this translates to "The most important part of a game is the part we say it is. PLEASE BUY CRYSIS, LOOK AT ALL THE GRAPHICS"

[FreakdoutKid]

50/50 for me

[Summons75]

No not really gameplay comes before everything followed by story which is equally important. Graphics do NOT make a game, good story will sell the game and good gameplay will keep gamers playing.

[Imalwaysright]

Exactly. That is why many gamers have MGS or FF7 on their top 5 games and almost none have Crysis on their top 5 games. Personally I never saw anyone putting Crysis on their top 5 or even top 10 games.

[Ingram]

crytek aren't very good handling and understanding percentages guys, you've got to excuse Yerli.

[Inception]

Is that so? Than why i've had moreeee fun playing Demon/Dark Souls, Bioshock, or Persona 4 than playing Crysis.

[US8F]

Crytek excell at graphics and fail at everything else. crytek the next movie studio anyone?

[cleft5]

That explains why Crysis 3 was a buggy mess.

[jut420]

Graphics definitely matter a lot to me, but if there was one thing that was the majority of the game, it'd be the gameplay, which is probably why I didn't have much fun playing Crysis 2, which led me to not pick up 3.

[Vladplaya]

Well if we go with Crysis 3, then no, because despite good graphics, that game was pretty mediocre.

[EverydayGuy]

Should of stayed PC exclusive.

[ExCest]

I see no reason. People wanted Crysis on consoles, people get Crysis on their consoles.

Also, the money factor.

[guitar_nerd_23]

Lol so THAT's why Crisis is only 40% fun....

[pertson09]

Crytek, graphics? nah, he meant more like benchmark tools and tech demos masked as gameplay.

[IIJOSEPHXII]

I think Crytek needs a new boss. There are many elements that go to making a game, so if gfx takes up 60% of their resorces then all the other elements have to compete for the remaining 40%. Not good.

[InTheLab]

Amazing how David Cage gets nailed for talking about conveying emotions with improved tech and how it adds to gameplay, but this guy...literally says the dumbest s*** in the industry and everyone just says "Oh Crytek, you silly boys..." and that's that.

[Studio-YaMi]

I agree with you ! Cage has a point,in his type of games you NEED good graphics to show better facial expressions which are the game driven through and feels much better with & at least Cage does GREAT games !

On the other hand you have Crytek,developers who are ONLY about making bench mark graphics & eye candy textures but when it comes to their games & gameplay,their games don't hold a candle to other shooters in the market.

Story & Gameplay > Graphics

Of course it's always welcomed to have great graphics along with great story & gameplay but to sacrifice gameplay & story just keep more focus on "AWESOME GRAPHICS" ... then NO !

And that's what Crytek is ALL about .. #dealwithit !

[Tultras]

I beg to differ, I say they're 99% graphics.

Ever seen Crytek brag or talk about anything about their games other than the exceptional graphics they will provide? Yeah me neither.

With that said, their games are really gorgeous. :)

[Zepherite]

So why was Crysis 3 rubbish then?

[Saryk]

I want good graphics, but not interested in seeing fly shit on the windshield, if you get my meaning. If the game is good, has a good story and decent graphics, I’m happy. But I wouldn’t play a good game with bad graphics!

[tubers]

Dedicating development to graphics is pretty big deal.. Else we're back to text based games..

[dennett316]

Fun to play always, ALWAYS trumps graphical quality. Having both is awesome, but a visually appealing game with crappy gameplay will not do well.
I'd also argue that good art design is also preferable to sheer graphical fidelity or muscle - sterile environments and character design, nicely rendered, is still sterile and dull. Too many devs get hung up on realism and technical grunt, and many games just simply don't have that touch of personality or magic that games like Rayman Origins, Okami, Mad World, Luigi's Mansion 2 etc. have.

[Jek_Porkins]

The Crysis games look great, but are boring and not really even games I've ever completed. Graphics are kind of important, but we've hit a point with technology where everything is looking pretty damn good as it is, but if the gameplay mechanics and story aren't good, I'll pass on a game with great graphics every single time.

[gedden7]

Good Developer Company but yet another STUPID comment...

If this was true no one would like mine craft, mobile games, the sims, the Wii ect..... AND KILL ZONE AND BF3 would the ONLY games we play..

Graphics are important but 60%... HELL no! I'd rather play a game that HAS AWESOME Gameplay and Controls is so so graphics any day.. Thats why I don't mind my purchase of the Wii U and will be still playing my Xbox 360 well into 2014 or so

[GiantFriendlyCrab]

25% graphics
50% gameplay
25% story

Gameplay - can be tweaked but if its just solid enough then people will still play it.

Story - is an add on, if its good its good, if its great thats even better.. If it sucks then it could kill the reason to play it even if the gameplay was perfect.

Graphics - are a bonus. Adds nothing but can take away alot.

[grassyknoll]

I can name dozens of games on the Super Nintendo better than Crysis (100's if we're talking Crysis 2 or 3). Says it all really.

[listenkids]

So, 100% for Crytek.

[isyourhouseonfire]

If every version of Far Cry is just a graphical update of the previous version... Doesn't that make graphics 100% of the game?

[Novistador]

And this is why Crisis games are some of the most boring games to play... yea it looks great but... bland story... bland character... bland weapons and abilities.... just overall just a meh game. It does look good though lol

[aman84r]

People commenting here negatively are the same who complain about COD not changing its graphics.

[Baka-akaB]

that because some of you guys can't realize there is a need for both gameplay and graphics and wanna see a contradiction instead .

Who the hell decided that CoD needed to looks like the same sh*t because of the need of 60fps ? Plenty other stuff were possible . Even a dissapointing game like Rage show that you can do 60 fps with better graphics and a new engine .

Not only Cod stagnated for a long time in gameplay , it didnt even bother updating much its graphics .

That's the beef people got with it . Not some either graphics OR gameplay pseudo war . It's lazy or greedy folks like crytek and activision that assume it can only be one or the other in excess

[coolbeans]

"Who the hell decided that CoD needed to looks like the same sh*t because of the need of 60fps ?"

Well...probably the developers thought it appropriate since it fits perfectly for its twitch style of FPS gameplay. And given all the over-the-top stuff on screen, I don't see how this-gen consoles could maintain great textures and that framerate.

Although it was great to see RAGE tackle that problem, let's not pretend that framerate would be consistent if a huge "setpiece" moment was demanded from it. (Still think the game is great though)

[Baka-akaB]

The important thing is Rage showed one could do better at 60 fps . A rage engine game could hypothetically sport those effects you listed with a downgrade in graphic fidelity , while still looking way better than cod .

And again it was only an example on some alternative trial on a 60 fps first person shooter .

I very much doubt current and recent cod title is the absolute best possible with that restriction .

[coolbeans]

"A rage engine game could hypothetically sport those effects you listed with a downgrade in graphic fidelity , while still looking way better than cod ."

That would be more due to art style than anything else. And no, to think the extravagant Michael Bay moments, down to the very minutiae, can produce something WAY better than CoD is fantasy for this gen consoles.

What could make you so convinced CoD's consistent 60fps through elaborate set pieces isn't the graphical limit under those standards when developers have had the chance to prove that since 2007?

[MuhammadJA]

They're right. It's funny how most of the time people say that gameplay is more important than graphics, but when a new game or system announced, the first thing they scream is "graphics!graphics!" . And this always comes from console gamers.

[SpecialK]

Its all important.

To say graphics arn't important or are beneath other aspects isn't really correct.

Graphics attribute to the graphical style of a game, which will play a deciding role in the character, feel and identity of a game.

Its the first thing you see, the first thing you notice, and instantly upon seeing it before playing the game, youve formed a judgment.

Realistic? good animations? realism vs stylized?

Graphics and gameplay are intrinsically linked, and unless both get equal and detailed attention, the game fails.

[SpiralTear]

I politely disagree.

While graphics are generally the typical outlet for a game's "first impression", they do not determine the structure or design of a game. In fact, the graphics sense of first impression seems more like a commercial element, because you can't identify with the game's structure/design without actually playing the game.

Graphics are not anywhere near the level of importance of the game itself. You can have as many blades of grass or beads of sweat that anyone could ever ask for, but if they are simply for show or cosmetics, their meaning is empty and pointless.

I'm not saying that graphics have no effect on the game, but Crytek is dead wrong on this.

[KontryBoy706]

"85%" of HIS games....

[FAT MAN GO BOOM]

Mine Craft proves that WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!!

[Tommymk2]

Graphics don't make a game , gameplay does

[Jakens]

What they said...

"but play Crysis and tell me they don’t matter. It’s always been about graphics driving gameplay".

What I heard...

"I'm in the mood for a big fight".

[tigertron]

Graphics are 100% of the game, otherwise you wouldn't be able to see anything. :P

[kingPoS]

That's like saying cars/games are powered by oil/graphics . While that may be technically true. What really makes them go is the potency derived from gasoline/innovative concepts.

[silvacrest]

no wonder 40% of crysis 3 is just average

[Soldierone]

This is the flawed logic of current generation games. Everyone wants the "best looking" or "most realistic" game and it makes them boring. Honestly Crysis gets boring at certain points, the second didn't improve it a whole lot either.

Visually awesome, fun wise? Don't really feel like playing it again.....

[faraany33k]

Play pong you whinny grannies. Let the world move forward and you stick to your Final Fantasy 7's.

[Dubaman]

Graphics help with immersion and what not, but gameplay will always be the most important aspect of any game. Card games pretty much prove that though taking graphics over gameplay may prove to make a 'Successful' a game..but will it be a 'Great' game?

[KillrateOmega]

They're aesthetically VERY pleasing, but lack any significant amount of soul or originality. After all, there's a reason why you don't judge a book by it's cover: what's inside is worth so much more.

This article might as well have been titled, "I, Cevat Yerli, believe that the most important of any game is the part that my company's games soley excel in."

[dafegamer]

. http://x.vukajlija.com/var/...

[Tikicobra]

That statement explains why Crysis was such a mediocre game wrapped in pretty graphics.

[AlucardFury]

I'm satisfied with that number

[Godmars290]

Go home Crytek. You're drunk.

[ifritAlkhemyst]

I actually like all 3 of the Crysis games but this dude just doesn't get it. I played Hotline Miami for nearly 20 hours. I played Crysis 3 for about 10.

[Kevlar009]

If I said "people don't like me because I'm a good person, but because I have lots of money", is that really a good thing to admit?

The Crytek of today wouldn't survive in 20 years (when every console has the best graphocs possible). They pretty much admitted that Crysis has little substance, just pretty colors

[ReubenPatrick]

That's just wrong on so many levels it's hard to even elaborate why.

[cyclindk]

Well... if they knew that then you'd think they'd be able to work on that other 40 percent a little bit more.

[hellvaguy]

Ok when your paying a premium for a game, you want both gameplay and graphics. Few would ever pay $60 for one or the other. Why bother trying to break down the percentages?

Let's use another example: would you really have a 350lb girlfriend (graphics), that has an awesome personality (gameplay)? Doubtful....

[Kratoscar2008]

By this logic FFXIII is the best game ever because its graphics...... wait NO!

[hellvaguy]

At the time it was selling millions in the 90's, it did have cutting edge graphics + the fun gameplay. Still need both.

[Kratoscar2008]

SE was known for having both.

[Mr Tretton]

I'll agree with this...but the other 40 percent needs to be really good though.

[AO1JMM]

You can tell who read the article and who didn't in here.

[FlyingFoxy]

this is why crytek fail, release new games all the time that run crap even on high end hardware..

[soethuaung]

story-50%
gameplay-20%
graphic-30%
i still playing metalgearsolid3 although its graphic is out of date compare with today,
storyline is the central theme of a game i think...

[Drainage]

crysis 2/3 had pretty good online mp fun and good campaign. people who say stupid shit like 'good graphics, shit gameplay, boring , tech demo' are fucking ignorant or they just suck so bad they say it sucks.

[AKS]

I think Crytek needs to hire some good PR people to talk for them.

[Zha1tan]

lol please make an above average game before talking crytek.

the most promising game made on the cry engine isn't even by crytek, It is Star Citezen and everyone should check it out.

[nix]

so stoopid.

[mediate-this]

If i shell out good money, i expect great graphics and great game play, why cant i have both? Fluidity, immersion, frames per second. The game should be a package and judged on those merits.

Not, it has great graphics but the game play sucks. Thats my opionion.

[Dfooster]

I played crysis 2 and it looked pretty but I can't remember much about the game to be honest. Read into that what you like.

[Subzero200]

"Graphics Are “60% Of The Game"

i guess that's why the other 40% of their games suck.

[TheKayle1]

well is inevitable that the sense of the sight...is one of the most important and with the hearing nowdays is the only thing that make our game "immersive" all the rest is fantasy ...i know that is hard for me to explain this concept in a good english but ill try

what is the difference between a book and a movie? ...9 on 10 times the book is better coz let u dream about all the things...a good movie need to replicate with total accuracy the book or will be trashed like "oh the book is better than the movie"....and we know there r millions of example like this but take for example the movies the lord of the rings ...for who had read the book ...we all know the book is x10 more deep than the movie..but STILL the movie is great...and also if TELL LOTS LESS...put u in a context where u can live inside that world...coz the visuals recreate ina perfect way the mood..that Tolkien was writing in the book

this dont mean that the storyline or all the others aspect must be low.in a game.BUT a videogame like a movie isnt based on trying to imaginate the things... ...(in the meaning that the brain shoulnd not try to create the context for u).u SHOULD just live in the context and the story the devs wanna u live.....imagine a surivor horror game...not using graphics..could make be scary? no never...shadows softlight scary characters...fast coming sound make u scary ....

in this meaning yeah 60% of a videogame must recreate the most good context where a story can be developed....or still will be better to close the console/pc and read a book

now look at this.....i played this when i was young and for me was great..is wolfenstein 3d
http://www.fpsteam.it/img20...

now this is a nowday fps (this kz4 game)
http://media1.gameinformer....

well the concept is the same...but theres no way where wolfstain is more immersive than kz4 if not dont watching the what u see...and just using the brain to imaginate what u WOULD SEE.....the brain work in this way....where u cant have ur brain start to do the things for u......but if u have it..well thats better......the hard thing is to make such good things to dont make the brain start to imaginate for u.....when this happen a game did his job good ( as a movie)

i dont understand why ppl need to attack everything ...without making a elaboration of what ppl try to say....

bah anyway this is my point of view

[hiredhelp]

Here we go again hate on crytek yehhhhh.
Listen up ppl its the same CEO ranting his mouth for last 9months he knows nothing he's a CEO not a developer.
So stop the hate for crytek fact is crysis isn't for everyone thoes who like it great thoes who don't fair enough. but that a reason to knock crytek cos some self up himself Pr***k CEO Talking trash no.
And here's the thing crytek can make games other than crysis how do you think far cry started out more open world way before crysis 1.

[Nivalis]

Everyone's a hypocrit, people with capable machines champion graphics as being important, everyone without champions gameplay as more important, but in the end both are just as important as each other, screw one up and the other falls.

So how are they hypocrits?, Well the most vocal "gameplay over graphics" are the nintendo fans, insisting that while the wii was behind majorly graphically, they didn't care because the gameplay was there, yet when a game on the wiiu is better graphically than the 360/ps3 version (need for speed), suddenly it's now a big deal to them to point that out.

Everyone's a hypocrit when it comes to debates.

[Duxer]

They say that because their games have no innovative gameplay or story whatsoever.

[all_clear]

not necessarily

[FAT MAN GO BOOM]

So wrong, they could not be further from the truth...
Game Play is what makes or breaks a game...

Look at games like minecraft.. it is selling millions...
and it is sure not because of graphics...