No more PC exclusives, says Crytek CEO

Oh no nigga didn't just make a game aimed at the tiniest upper strata of PC hardware and complain that it didn't sell like a console game?
 
I seriously think piracy is overestimated by quite some margin. I would never pirate a game unless it's exceptionally old and hard to find through retail methods.
 
eh crysis was mostly pirated as a benchmark....no one liked the game that much.

selling thier games on consoles wont do a damn thing
 
Really, I cant see this working out for them. More platforms means more delays, and we KNOW some division of gamers is gonna complain of getting a watered-down port from another platform (see Halo 2 on PC, or HL2 of the original xbox).
 
I don't get why they're complaining. They could easily just make it for PC then port it over to consoles later.

And if they sped up slightly then maybe their wages wouldn't dent their pockets so much.
 
Samon said:
Try making a game that can be played on the average system.
Click to expand...

Amen to that. Crysis run like a slideshow on my machine, so I switched back to Episode 2 and Portal for some fast, smooth, sweet awesomeness.
 
I hate it when companies suffer from piracy. I kind of feel bad for CryTek.
 
Krynn72 said:
But not this. They will sell a lot more by opening themselves to consoles.
Click to expand...

what makes you think that?
the 360 cannot run the game maxed out like pc can, i mean farcry didnt even sell that well for the 360
 
Thats because farcry sucked just as bad, but wasnt advertised. Crysis would have sold like hotcakes on the 360.
 
Besides, Crysis was running in DIRECT COMPETITION to Bioshock, Call of Duty 4, Halo 3, The Orange Box, and Unreal Tournament III.

To blame poor sales because of "piracy" paints only half a picture.
 
Not to mention they could just implement some kind of steamlike system and that would probably help them (if not us, lol).
 
Javert said:
Besides, Crysis was running in DIRECT COMPETITION to Bioshock, Call of Duty 4, Halo 3, The Orange Box, and Unreal Tournament III.

To blame poor sales because of "piracy" paints only half a picture.
Click to expand...
Well Halo 3 isn't on PC yet. Crysis => PC only
 
Crysis was just darned fine. No other game will have that kind of open-ended fps gameplay and graphics in ages to come, not to mention the cinematics and as Asuka said, I feel really bad for Crytek. They should have released the game in 2008, after fixing up bugs and optimizing. They should have released it, at least for the PS3 since he himself said that the 360 can't run it, but it was possible that the PS3 could, although lack of RAM would be an issue.

Also, I have to agree with the piracy thing a little. In my country alone, there was this one shop (I'm not naming where) which sold pirated copies of Crysis, fully working for 6 Dollars. I saw it being advertised on Singapore Forums at half the price. The game must be so easy to pirate. Maybe Crytek should have steamed it?

Also, the whole point of Crysis imo was to showcase their graphics engine mostly, but they have obviously failed in getting many developers latched on. I really hope that the next game that they are making will be successful (It will be a continuation of Crysis, called Crysis Wars or something: Source: http://www.incrysis.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=559) By then, there should be cheaper but powerful systems, possibly a better console, a better graphics engine.

It's not about the game that they made. It's about the awesome engine that they have made and it's the fact that they have given good hope for PC Gaming. Respect for Crytek...although I never really liked Far Cry either
 
DEATHMASTER said:
Well Halo 3 isn't on PC yet. Crysis => PC only
Click to expand...

It was still released around that time. It wasn't only a competition of money and PC, but of time. People only had "x" time to play so many games.

So the question then became, why play a game that they KNEW their computer would either struggle with, or play with a low multi-player population.
 
Crytek: Makes an average shooter -> Doesn't sell too good -> BAAAAWWWWPiracy
 
They wouldnt be complaining if it were just a tech demo for their engine. They shouldnt expect people to pay full price for a demonstration.
 
Good, go make shitty console games, who needs ya.
 
I feel bad for them, but I'm just glad I didn't buy it after hearing all of the negative comments ever since it was released. If I would have paid $50 or $60 and it sucked, I would have felt just as ripped off as they do every time someone pirates it.


I just want to see someone play it. I almost bought it just to witness the graphics. My current computer can't even run Bioshock well yet.
 
soulslicer said:
I'd just like to ask. What part of the game did you find very bad, or too average? Not a great game, but so many parts of the game were amazing to play. They have alot of potential.
Click to expand...

Every part was average or worse. All of their "features" were just gimmicks that old and annoying after the first five minutes of using them. The suit made the game retardedly easy. The flying mission was absolutely pointless, and didnt even play well.

The only thing about it that was actually good was the graphics. And even they sucked unless you had a bleeding edge PC.
 
I doubt that everyone who downloaded Crysis, would have bought it if there would be no piracy.

Crysis became a symbol of high system requirements, and everyone wanted to try it just to see how it works, but they didn't plan to play with it.
 
Ah well, money rules the roost yet again. Imo it kindof destroys the heart of what games are now that it's massive business, yes sales drive the need for good games, but all the fun seems to slowly get sucked out of the essence of games production, and you can almost feel it in the finished piece.

I bought the game, played it, loved the immersion. I think Crytek are just whining because they arn't satisfied with the vaste amount of monies that they already have, It's like "goddamit! we could of had so much more! the pain! why!?.
 
They can go console exclusive for all I care. Far Cry was ass and Crysis wasn't much better. (and I paid for both of them)
 
soulslicer said:
It's not about the game that they made. It's about the awesome engine that they have made and it's the fact that they have given good hope for PC Gaming. Respect for Crytek...
Click to expand...
Have to disagree with this actually, considering the statement the guy made.

Developing for PC has never been about bettering or even matching console sales, since the PC games market has paled in comparison to the console market for as long as I can remember. I can't believe they're pretending they didn't know that, especially when they developed Crysis with the clear intention that it would be a tasty treat for top end PC's only. For the Crytek CEO to say they're abandoning PC exclusives and cite as a reason the fact that some console games sell more, is to send a bad message to the industry: 'We don't think PC exclusives are worth it even if they sell upwards of a million copies.'
 
I thought they were making a expansion pack for Crysis?

Due to the ending, going back to the island
 
they're making 2 more sequels

Besides, Crysis was running in DIRECT COMPETITION to Bioshock, Call of Duty 4, Halo 3, The Orange Box, and Unreal Tournament III.
Click to expand...

UT III?? Hardly competition, UT III sold terribly and crysis sold over a million copies.
 
Crysis was just bad. Outstanding visuals but lame uninspired narrative, sloppy unfinished netcode and inadequate public development tools sank it, even for enthusiasts. They made, and read this carefully: every same damn mistake they made with Farcry. Perhaps with the exception of licensing deals I'm surprised they even turned a profit. Even IF Crysis scaled enough to be played on a wide range of systems it would still have been a mediocre shooter. Crytek should just be acquired by Nvidia and start developing tech demos.

How can you look at games like Crysis as being anything but a detriment to PC Gaming? Rigid system requirements: check, dated tiresome gameplay: check, non-existent multiplay: check. Crysis is one of those games that veers PC Gaming away from the public and shoves it back towards hardware enthusiasts and niche audiences who upgrade to 500 dollar video cards every few months.

And despite all this, PC Gamer U.S. gave it a stellar review. I'm glad I didn't renew my subscription. Hell, they gave it the same score as Half-Life 2 and one damn percent ABOVE Half-Life. Astonishingly stupid.
 
I do kinda agree with you however at least crysis didn't have trigens and had quick save
 
Well, Crytek developed a game for a narrow elite of PC gamers so I, as a proud owner of a mid-range machine, feel personally excluded and slapped on my face. The same feeling I have for Alan Wake, that will be a Vista exclusive for no reason other than commercial agreements with Microsoft (XB360 is a DX9 machine, so the whole story about DX10 requirements is a blatant fairytale).
Other software developers have more respect and (in my humble opinion) have published more accessible and funny games (Bioshock, The Orange Box, Mass Effect coming to PC and so on).
Crytek has to put the blame on itself.
 
CptStern said:
I keep hearing this "crysis only runs on certain pcs" but how many hl2.netters payed for their copy of crysis vs pirated it? ...we should have a poll ..it's probably much higher than that we suspect:


http://halflife2.net/forums/showthread.php?t=94678&highlight=gaming
Click to expand...

I personally acquired Crysis from my new(ish) video card, it was bundled in. I'd never pay money for it. /saving throw

But I honestly don't pirate music/software simply because I have the money to buy the things I need.
 
If you can run HL2 you can play Crysis. I don't see what everyone's moaning about.

I think I played it with a P4 3ghz, 1GB RAM, X800 XL AGP a while ago on medium settings.

You could buy a better system than that for $100.
 
I bought Crysis on day of release, due to the demo running nicely for me on High settings for everything, with a few cvar changes taking the graphics a little higher.

I enjoyed the game quite a bit, although for Crytek to complain after selling a million of a game that needs a top end rig to play to full effect is just stupid. Also, do they think that by making games for consoles, they can do what they have been doing on the PC? There will be no "pushing technologies" on the consoles, if they don`t run well, and look half decent, they won't sell shit, so are they really going to change the whole principle that the company was built on about being at the forefront of tech, to do something they have never done before, for a system they have never developed for, for pure greed?

Probably..they did jump into bed with EA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
SpotEnemyBoats
Cevat Yerli: "Single player games need to go away."
Replies
14
Views
3K
JonnyBoy0719
JonnyBoy0719
R
My desired steambox
Replies
3
Views
2K
Pikminiman
Pikminiman
Gray Fox
Crysis Wars - free trial
Replies
4
Views
757
L3N!N
L
Evo
No Gears 2 on PC - Blame the pirates!
2
Replies
70
Views
3K
Saturos
Saturos
Back
Top