Crytek reportedly at risk to go bankrupt.

[Guest Generallee]

( •_•) Well it seems like .. ( •_•)>⌐□-□

 

.. they're in a Crysis 

 

(⌐□_□)

 

[Echodamus]

I hope so.

To be fair Crysis lost its way when it was adopted for consoles. IMO we haven't had a new game worthy of the Crysis franchise since Warhead/Warhammer 

[That Norwegian Guy]

CryTek have never made a good game, just a bunch of tech demos. Their engine is decent. Not a big loss if they go, Star Citizen already got their engine so whatever.

[Avcn42]

Surprised no one mentioned Star Citizen.

Maybe that guy from Crytek who works with Chris Roberts can get a little help from the SC community?

But seriously, if Crytek is gone...what happens to the glorious CryEngine?

EDIT: Ok, it has been mentioned twice, I'm blind

[Sammael]

mantle on linux and maybe OSX one API thats consistent across all platforms  would make game devs very happy

 

That might be enough to get nvidia to support it, if mantle got implemented on both linux and more importantly, osx, nvidia would fight to be competitive on apple notebooks with their gpus.

[RelentlessAF]

Most will choose to use what they are familiar with like the Unreal Engine rather than learn a new engine that will basically do the same job.

Cry Engine is more powerful and more capable of creating more impressive games. The problem is it isn't user-friendly and takes awhile to learn, companies can't take a 2-3 month hiatus just for everyone to learn the capabilities of Cry Engine. If they could, we would have much nicer looking games. All at the level of Crysis or maybe even more. Just imagine if Battlefield was made on Cry Engine or if Watch_Dogs was.

[RelentlessAF]

CryTek have never made a good game, just a bunch of tech demos. Their engine is decent. Not a big loss if they go, Star Citizen already got their engine so whatever.

Their engine is much better than the Unreal Engine... or any available engine for that matter.

[Xorbot]

I am a game programmer.  I've used many engines including the CryEngine, Unreal Engine, and Unity.  I've even modded the DOOM engine back in high school.  I've also made my own engines for systems like Game Boy Advance and PSP.

 

One of the possible reasons why CryEngine was not widely adopted can be summed up in the following simile: make a big diarrhea on the floor, vomit on it, then poor rotten eggs on top.  This is what the source code of the CryEngine looks like if it were made significantly prettier.  Unity is a bad engine in terms of performance since it is meant to cover everything under the sun, which makes it the current generation of Flash, whereby we see "artist" games, where they have no business scripting games and the outcome is a lackluster, lifeless game.  However, the one thing that Unity has is that it is insanely easy to learn and produce something very fast.  This is not the case with CryEngine.

 

So we have two extremes here: CryEngine's final games look quite awesome, but only if you were one of the original programmers who knows how to navigate the mess of hell.  Unity will never be used to make the next awesome CryEngine-looking game, but you can produce something in it because it is monumentally easy to use.  If only there were an engine with the best parts of both Unity and CryEngine.

[That Norwegian Guy]

Their engine is much better than the Unreal Engine... or any available engine for that matter.

 

There is no "best engine". Developers will choose the "right engine" for their project. That is rarely CryEngine, because of its cumbersome nature. And CryEngine is notoriously awful to work with.

[Guest Kloaked]

Cry Engine is more powerful and more capable of creating more impressive games. The problem is it isn't user-friendly and takes awhile to learn, companies can't take a 2-3 month hiatus just for everyone to learn the capabilities of Cry Engine. If they could, we would have much nicer looking games. All at the level of Crysis or maybe even more. Just imagine if Battlefield was made on Cry Engine or if Watch_Dogs was.

 

If Watch Dogs was made on CryEngine, we'd still have gotten a gimped version of it on PC.

[Hidden Orange]

CryTek have never made a good game, just a bunch of tech demos. Their engine is decent. Not a big loss if they go, Star Citizen already got their engine so whatever.

They made the first Far Cry game if that counts since it lead to a fantastic series that Ubisoft continued.

[RelentlessAF]

There is no "best engine". Developers will choose the "right engine" for their project. That is rarely CryEngine, because of its cumbersome nature. And CryEngine is notoriously awful to work with.

By graphical fidelity and capabilities it is the best, Unreal is only used so much for it's simplistic nature, Cry Engine can do everything Unreal can do it's just not as user-friendly. You can learn to use it it's just not 12-year-old pick up and create fantastic games easy like Unreal is.

 

EDIT: Even Unity 3D could be a replacement for Unreal as it can do that same things as well it just takes more Dev effort.

[RelentlessAF]

If Watch Dogs was made on CryEngine, we'd still have gotten a gimped version of it on PC.

BUT it would still look pretty snazzy seeing as Crysis 3 even on low looks pretty nice.

[IPCharger]

No, I'm asking why does everything in Crysis 2 need to be shiny, and it looks like that was brought over to Crysis 3 as well.

I can't say anything about Crysis 1 because I didn't play it, but I found the campaign in Crysis 3 much more enjoyable and a big improvement over Crysis 2.

[Guest Kloaked]

BUT it would still look pretty snazzy seeing as Crysis 3 even on low looks pretty nice.

 

#truefacts

[totjup5]

Well, considering they haven't released a good game since Crysis 1, i'm not surprised.

[BloodySinner]

I reckon crysis 3 was under rated and should have been far more popular, I liked it more than most of the cods over the last few years, and they sell way better...

 

Origin exclusivity hurt it. It should have been on Steam.

[Imaginaerum]

Origin exclusivity hurt it. It should have been on Steam.

I don't think that would have made much difference, the Crysis games have always been known to be toys more than actual games. When Crysis 1 came out I didn't know a single person who owned it or had played it, but they all knew what it was because of "Can you run Crysis?" Most of them couldn't, so there's that.

[That Norwegian Guy]

They made the first Far Cry game if that counts since it lead to a fantastic series that Ubisoft continued.

 

Felt like a tech demo to me, pretty graphics and new shiny physX for the time, but utterly boring and repetitive as a game, just like all the Crysis games.

[Plasma]

now we know why world of warships is taking so long they are waiting to buy tech

[LePawel]

now we know why world of warships is taking so long they are waiting to buy tech

They already told us in some video they have havok up and running in their labs in WoT, with (finally) multi core support.

CryEngine could give them a good graphics/performance boost, and possibly open doors for infantry in future projects.

I would still prefer larger maps and more players per match.