| Page 1 of 2 |
Kaltern
Posts: 5859
Location: Lockerbie, Scotland
|
 Posted: Mon, 6th Oct 2014 20:50 Post subject: Crytek: its getting increasingly hard to wow people... |
|
 |
...with graphics
| Quote: | Crysis and Ryse: Son of Rome developer are amongst the better looking games in the industry thanks to the proprietary CryEngine. In an interview with DSO Gaming the developer says that it's not as easy to impress players with beautiful graphics as it used to be.
"As opposed to the times of the original Crysis, we as an industry have reached a quality level now where it is getting increasingly more difficult to really wow people," Crytek’s principal rendering engineer Nicolas Schulz told DSOGaming in an interview. "That said, there’s still enough areas to explore and we will definitely keep pushing the boundaries as much as possible."
Schulz also discussed the limitations of high-end PC graphics processing units (GPUs) and the current generation of consoles. On PC, he said, the current generation of high-end GPUs is still far from being able to reach 60 frames-per-second at 4K resolution, which is four times the amount of pixels that need to be shaded compared to 1080p.
"This is very quickly saturating the available bandwidth," Schulz said. "The consoles are clearly behind high-spec GPUs in terms of raw horsepower, however on the positive side, they share the same modern architecture which enables a wealth of interesting optimization techniques." |
Source: http://www.dsogaming.com/interviews/crytek-talks-ryse-tech-consoles-vs-pc-textures-resolution-mantle-vram-specs-lod-solution
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tonizito
VIP Member
Posts: 51416
Location: Portugal, the shithole of Europe.
|
| Posted: Mon, 6th Oct 2014 20:59 Post subject: |
|
|
wanktek 
| boundle (thoughts on cracking AITD) wrote: | | i guess thouth if without a legit key the installation was rolling back we are all fucking then |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 6th Oct 2014 21:25 Post subject: |
|
|
So they have finally realised they might have to use a bit of creativity in their games... That could be a problem for them.
Ryzen 5 5600, ASUS ROG STRIX B550-F GAMING WIFI II, Corsair Vengeance RGB RT 32GB 3600MHz C16, MSI RTX 5070 Ti Ventus 3X OC , Corsair RMx Series RM750x. AOC AGON AG324UX - 4K 144Hz 1ms
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73200
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Mon, 6th Oct 2014 22:01 Post subject: |
|
|
Make a good game. That will wow me enough. 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 6th Oct 2014 23:39 Post subject: |
|
|
Crytek's problem is the idea that good graphics equals much many polygons.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
3E74
Posts: 2559
Location: feels wrong
|
| Posted: Tue, 7th Oct 2014 00:23 Post subject: |
|
|
Dear Crytek....
look at Vanishing of ethan carter..
runs like heaven, looks like heaven and is made on an old UE3 engine in dx9....
its not our fault, ur creativity is so bland....
..:: Life - A sexually transmitted disease which always ends in death. There is currently no known cure::.. 
Last edited by 3E74 on Tue, 7th Oct 2014 22:32; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 7th Oct 2014 12:46 Post subject: |
|
|
Well, I've just been majorly wowed by Alien Isolation. Maybe it takes more than a capable engine?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 7th Oct 2014 13:26 Post subject: |
|
|
One look at certain franchises and their monetary success tells me that it's still "not hard enough"...
2011 - 2016 Build • Fractal Design R5 Titanium (Window) • i5-2500K @ 4,5GHz • Corsair Hydro h115i • ASRock Fatal1ty P67 Performance • 2x4Gb G.Skill Ripjaws F3-10666CL9-4GBRL • EVGA GeForce GTX 970 SSC ACX 2.0+ • Corsair RM550(W) PSU • 2x Samsung 850 Evo (120gb/500gb) •
2018 - x Build • Fractal Design Define R6 Gunmetal • Intel Core i9 9900K • Corsair H150i Pro RGB AIO • Asus ROG MAXIMUS XI HERO • 2x16Gb Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR4-3200 • EVGA GeForce GTX 970 SSC ACX 2.0+ • Corsair HX850i PSU • 1x Samsung 970 Evo M.2, 1x Samsung 860 Evo SATA, 1x Samsung 850 Evo SATA •
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sausje
Banned
Posts: 17716
Location: Limboland, Netherlands
|
| Posted: Tue, 7th Oct 2014 14:21 Post subject: |
|
|
| 3E74 wrote: | Dear Crytek....
look at Vanishing of ethan carter..
runs like heaven, looks like heaven and is dx9....
its not our fault, ur creativity is so bland.... |
With Cryengine 3 they have one of the most optimized DX11 engines out there, so what's your point
Proud member of Frustrated Association of International Losers Failing Against the Gifted and Superior (F.A.I.L.F.A.G.S)
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 7th Oct 2014 14:28 Post subject: |
|
|
It really is hard. People are spoiled and games require more and more budget to make em look better. Near impossible budgets. That's why games are so bad recently.. because they need to sell to all people so no risks can be taken
3080 | ps5 pro
Sin317-"im 31 years old and still surprised at how much shit comes out of my ass actually ..."
SteamDRM-"Call of Duty is the symbol of the true perfection in every aspect. Call of Duty games are like Mozart's/Beethoven's symphonies"
deadpoetic-"are you new to the cyberspace?"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Tue, 7th Oct 2014 14:41 Post subject: |
|
|
| KillerCrocker wrote: | | It really is hard. People are spoiled and games require more and more budget to make em look better. Near impossible budgets. That's why games are so bad recently.. because they need to sell to all people so no risks can be taken |
*looks at Divinity: Original Sin*
*looks at Wasteland 2*
*looks at Transistor*
No, not really. You do realise a game doesn't need to sell 10 million to break even, right? Dark Souls was profitable at 1 million sales already.
#1: games do not get higher development budgets now than they did a decade ago. Some do, but majority don't. Marketing is where they lose their money.
#2: up until very recent, no effort went into making shit look good with most "AAA" developers. Indie developers still take pride in their art and presentation. And it's only very recent (last 18 months or so) that some "mainstream" developers have started doing the same again. Bioshock comes to mind.
#3: people are spoiled? With what? Call of Doody 27? Gears of Bore 7? Halol 9? Those are the ones selling millions and millions to the sheep.
#4: need to spend money to make them look better? Really? Right now there are far more choices in capable engines than 10 years ago, let alone 20 years ago. CE3, UE3/UE4, Unity are all very easy to get started with. As long as the assets you feed them are of decent quality, it'll look great. But there's the issue: the assets have been limited because certain platforms couldn't handle things bigger than a matchbox. And then there's the rehashing of assets, like in CoD. Half the textures are simply copied over from 6 years ago. That sure costs a lot of time and money. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tonizito
VIP Member
Posts: 51416
Location: Portugal, the shithole of Europe.
|
| Posted: Tue, 7th Oct 2014 14:54 Post subject: |
|
|
But haroldo, imagine those with cryengine 3 and proper motion durr, they would be much more AMAZOMG 
...oh and don't forget to lower the difficulty to 3yo level ofc 
| boundle (thoughts on cracking AITD) wrote: | | i guess thouth if without a legit key the installation was rolling back we are all fucking then |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73200
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Tue, 7th Oct 2014 21:42 Post subject: |
|
|
| sausje wrote: | | With Cryengine 3 they have one of the most optimized DX11 engines out there, so what's your point |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sausje
Banned
Posts: 17716
Location: Limboland, Netherlands
|
| Posted: Tue, 7th Oct 2014 21:45 Post subject: |
|
|
| LeoNatan wrote: | | sausje wrote: | | With Cryengine 3 they have one of the most optimized DX11 engines out there, so what's your point |
|
Care to elaborate your retarded smiley? Or just being a cunt as usual?
Proud member of Frustrated Association of International Losers Failing Against the Gifted and Superior (F.A.I.L.F.A.G.S)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 7th Oct 2014 21:46 Post subject: |
|
|
| Werelds wrote: | | KillerCrocker wrote: | | It really is hard. People are spoiled and games require more and more budget to make em look better. Near impossible budgets. That's why games are so bad recently.. because they need to sell to all people so no risks can be taken |
*looks at Divinity: Original Sin*
*looks at Wasteland 2*
*looks at Transistor*
No, not really. You do realise a game doesn't need to sell 10 million to break even, right? Dark Souls was profitable at 1 million sales already.
#1: games do not get higher development budgets now than they did a decade ago. Some do, but majority don't. Marketing is where they lose their money.
#2: up until very recent, no effort went into making shit look good with most "AAA" developers. Indie developers still take pride in their art and presentation. And it's only very recent (last 18 months or so) that some "mainstream" developers have started doing the same again. Bioshock comes to mind.
#3: people are spoiled? With what? Call of Doody 27? Gears of Bore 7? Halol 9? Those are the ones selling millions and millions to the sheep.
#4: need to spend money to make them look better? Really? Right now there are far more choices in capable engines than 10 years ago, let alone 20 years ago. CE3, UE3/UE4, Unity are all very easy to get started with. As long as the assets you feed them are of decent quality, it'll look great. But there's the issue: the assets have been limited because certain platforms couldn't handle things bigger than a matchbox. And then there's the rehashing of assets, like in CoD. Half the textures are simply copied over from 6 years ago. That sure costs a lot of time and money. |
pardon me but You examples are rather poor. Wasteland2 is pure shit.
Divinity is not for everyone.
Transistor is isometric indie game. Enough it enough
And games are getting MORE expensive to make. That is a fact. Games now cost like 100 million to make (for proper aaa title) and are expected to sell in millions of copies (look at tomb raider's dumb square enix).
Making aaa game was not as expensive years ago. Now that every fingernail needs to be done with humanlike precision, more time is needed, more skill, more people... more money
3080 | ps5 pro
Sin317-"im 31 years old and still surprised at how much shit comes out of my ass actually ..."
SteamDRM-"Call of Duty is the symbol of the true perfection in every aspect. Call of Duty games are like Mozart's/Beethoven's symphonies"
deadpoetic-"are you new to the cyberspace?"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 7th Oct 2014 21:54 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 7th Oct 2014 21:57 Post subject: |
|
|
| KillerCrocker wrote: | | Werelds wrote: | | KillerCrocker wrote: | | It really is hard. People are spoiled and games require more and more budget to make em look better. Near impossible budgets. That's why games are so bad recently.. because they need to sell to all people so no risks can be taken |
*looks at Divinity: Original Sin*
*looks at Wasteland 2*
*looks at Transistor*
No, not really. You do realise a game doesn't need to sell 10 million to break even, right? Dark Souls was profitable at 1 million sales already.
#1: games do not get higher development budgets now than they did a decade ago. Some do, but majority don't. Marketing is where they lose their money.
#2: up until very recent, no effort went into making shit look good with most "AAA" developers. Indie developers still take pride in their art and presentation. And it's only very recent (last 18 months or so) that some "mainstream" developers have started doing the same again. Bioshock comes to mind.
#3: people are spoiled? With what? Call of Doody 27? Gears of Bore 7? Halol 9? Those are the ones selling millions and millions to the sheep.
#4: need to spend money to make them look better? Really? Right now there are far more choices in capable engines than 10 years ago, let alone 20 years ago. CE3, UE3/UE4, Unity are all very easy to get started with. As long as the assets you feed them are of decent quality, it'll look great. But there's the issue: the assets have been limited because certain platforms couldn't handle things bigger than a matchbox. And then there's the rehashing of assets, like in CoD. Half the textures are simply copied over from 6 years ago. That sure costs a lot of time and money. |
pardon me but You examples are rather poor. Wasteland2 is pure shit.
Divinity is not for everyone.
Transistor is isometric indie game. Enough it enough
And games are getting MORE expensive to make. That is a fact. Games now cost like 100 million to make (for proper aaa title) and are expected to sell in millions of copies (look at tomb raider's dumb square enix).
Making aaa game was not as expensive years ago. Now that every fingernail needs to be done with humanlike precision, more time is needed, more skill, more people... more money |
Where did you get those numbers from? 100 Million to make a triple-A game, is marketing added to that number?
Those three games were made under 10 million and not only have they sold well but they are also quite good (well, haven't played transistor but the other two).
If anything, indie games prove that they don't have to sell in the millions to make a profit and/or be good. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tonizito
VIP Member
Posts: 51416
Location: Portugal, the shithole of Europe.
|
| Posted: Tue, 7th Oct 2014 22:07 Post subject: |
|
|
I'd rather have/support games like divinity/W2/transistor etc in which, IMO, I can see that the developer made the game for themselves as much as for the audience that craves for those than the usually soulless triple-A crap made for mass appeal and that supposedly cannot be made under $100M.
| boundle (thoughts on cracking AITD) wrote: | | i guess thouth if without a legit key the installation was rolling back we are all fucking then |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 7th Oct 2014 22:12 Post subject: |
|
|
| KillerCrocker wrote: |
Wasteland2 is pure shit. |
wat
| Quote: | | Transistor is isometric indie game. Enough it enough |
No, enough is not enough. Enough Gears of Brown, that's enough. Enough Cowadoody, that's enough. Enough delightful indie games? No, enough is not enough.
| Quote: | | And games are getting MORE expensive to make. That is a fact. Games now cost like 100 million to make (for proper aaa title) and are expected to sell in millions of copies (look at tomb raider's dumb square enix). |
I disagree, no, it's not a fact. It's marketing is getting more costly.. with publishers spending $50-100m on advertising, the games themselves aren't and Tomb Raider didn't cost $100m to make, of that I'm certain. The reason why it needed to sell so much was because SE are greedy and because they spent a disgusting amount on marketing.
| Quote: | | Now that every fingernail needs to be done with humanlike precision, more time is needed, more skill, more people... more money |
wat
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 7th Oct 2014 22:18 Post subject: |
|
|
| KillerCrocker wrote: | oh cmon. Dont analyse every word. You know what I mean 
ok. and btw... Wasteland 2 might not be shit... but some aspects of it are very shit. |
But that doesn't make the whole game shit, as you said. o.O
Sure, I agree that the graphics could be better (D:OS was great) but that doesn't make the game bad. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Morphineus
VIP Member
Posts: 24883
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Tue, 7th Oct 2014 22:20 Post subject: |
|
|
| KillerCrocker wrote: |
pardon me but You examples are rather poor. Wasteland2 is pure shit.
Divinity is not for everyone.
Transistor is isometric indie game. Enough it enough
|
So you have bad taste... what else is new?! 
I don't like the game that is Transistor, but the style they chose is done well.
For Wasteland and Divinity... Crytek couldn't make an interesting world like that if they'd tried.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
matta666
Posts: 1061
Location: Manchester
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
matta666
Posts: 1061
Location: Manchester
|
| Posted: Tue, 7th Oct 2014 22:51 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
matta666
Posts: 1061
Location: Manchester
|
| Posted: Tue, 7th Oct 2014 22:58 Post subject: |
|
|
yeah I really like the idea of it tbh.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tonizito
VIP Member
Posts: 51416
Location: Portugal, the shithole of Europe.
|
| Posted: Tue, 7th Oct 2014 22:59 Post subject: |
|
|
Unfortunately no one blew $50M in advertising for it 
| boundle (thoughts on cracking AITD) wrote: | | i guess thouth if without a legit key the installation was rolling back we are all fucking then |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Tue, 7th Oct 2014 23:48 Post subject: |
|
|
| KillerCrocker wrote: | | Werelds wrote: | | KillerCrocker wrote: | | It really is hard. People are spoiled and games require more and more budget to make em look better. Near impossible budgets. That's why games are so bad recently.. because they need to sell to all people so no risks can be taken |
*looks at Divinity: Original Sin*
*looks at Wasteland 2*
*looks at Transistor*
No, not really. You do realise a game doesn't need to sell 10 million to break even, right? Dark Souls was profitable at 1 million sales already.
#1: games do not get higher development budgets now than they did a decade ago. Some do, but majority don't. Marketing is where they lose their money.
#2: up until very recent, no effort went into making shit look good with most "AAA" developers. Indie developers still take pride in their art and presentation. And it's only very recent (last 18 months or so) that some "mainstream" developers have started doing the same again. Bioshock comes to mind.
#3: people are spoiled? With what? Call of Doody 27? Gears of Bore 7? Halol 9? Those are the ones selling millions and millions to the sheep.
#4: need to spend money to make them look better? Really? Right now there are far more choices in capable engines than 10 years ago, let alone 20 years ago. CE3, UE3/UE4, Unity are all very easy to get started with. As long as the assets you feed them are of decent quality, it'll look great. But there's the issue: the assets have been limited because certain platforms couldn't handle things bigger than a matchbox. And then there's the rehashing of assets, like in CoD. Half the textures are simply copied over from 6 years ago. That sure costs a lot of time and money. |
pardon me but You examples are rather poor. Wasteland2 is pure shit.
Divinity is not for everyone.
Transistor is isometric indie game. Enough it enough
And games are getting MORE expensive to make. That is a fact. Games now cost like 100 million to make (for proper aaa title) and are expected to sell in millions of copies (look at tomb raider's dumb square enix).
Making aaa game was not as expensive years ago. Now that every fingernail needs to be done with humanlike precision, more time is needed, more skill, more people... more money |
You say my examples are poor, yet you quote with a 100 million game? Please, what game would that be? Tomb Raider? That's $100m including marketing. But okay, want some AAA examples?
HL2 was estimated to be on a $40m budget. Elite Dangerous is doing its thing on probably about £25m (about $40m give or take). Star Citizen, which has an exceptional budget by any standard according to anyone in the industry? $55m. Or shall I go back a few years, pick one of your favourites? Gears of Bore 2 cost $12m - which is actually a 100% confirmed figure, because Sweeney said this in a presentation. The Witcher 2? About 25 million zloty, or $7.5m. Beyond: Two Souls? €20 or $27m.
But let me take one from "your" side of the story, Bioshock Infinite was reported to have cost $200m. Problem #1 was that that was a financial impossibility since Irrational, 2K and Take-Two _all_ were in financial trouble during the game's development. Problem #2 with that figure is that Ken Levine explicitly DENIED it. $100m would've already been hard for them, they simply didn't have that kind of cash available. Or do you think every game gets made by having investor rounds?
Do I really need to go on? Games do not cost anywhere NEAR $100m to make. $50m is already an exceptional budget. Just think about it for a second. Let's say a game takes 4 years to make (which is one more than the average AAA game, two more than a doody game). Let's say rent, utilities and what not for whatever building they work in is $30000 per month (let's just go with crazy numbers) - that's $1.44m over 4 years. So now let's say they employ 100 people to work on it, each getting $100k per year. That's $40m - $41.44m total. For FOUR years. With 100 people making 100 grand every year. Do you realise how fucking INSANE $100m sounds?
So that $100m for Tomb Raider? That comes out to 200 people working on it for 5 years, each being paid $100k. Tomb Raider's costs (or GTA V for example) will be higher than the average AAA game because both of them were delayed and took awfully long, but $100m is far from a typical AAA budget. And mind you, when a company like Ubisoft says they have 300 people on it, what they mean is 50 well paid people and 250 interns. That's how the industry works. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 2 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
