Support NeoGAF

[SirIgbyCeaser]

I remember crysis being one of the most pirated games of the year, like 2 years in a row. People wanted to play it, see its graphics on their pc, and I assume a bunch of users felt like their hardware wasn't up to snuff.

I strongly believe that the pirating users might buy the game on consoles, I expect crysis 2 to do pretty well.

Maybe just as much on console as on PC. That would be a big success.

 

[subversus]

I remember crysis being one of the most pirated games of the year, like 2 years in a row. People wanted to play it, see its graphics on their pc, and I assume a bunch of users felt like their hardware wasn't up to snuff.

I strongly believe that the pirating users might buy the game on consoles, I expect crysis 2 to do pretty well.

Maybe just as much on console as on PC. That would be a big success.

What makes you believe in that?

 

[SirIgbyCeaser]

What makes you believe in that?

Brand equity, they recognize the name with quality and graphics. If you're a player who pays for his live subscription, you might want crysis 2.

And ps3 sales can't be to bad either.

 

[subversus]

Brand equity, they recognize the name with quality and graphics. If you're a player who pays for his live subscription, you might want crysis 2.

And ps3 sales can't be to bad either.

you wrote:

People wanted to play it, see its graphics on their pc, and I assume a bunch of users felt like their hardware wasn't up to snuff.

Ok, so I have a 3-year old PC that can easily run original Crysis on high (but not very high) and therefore will easily (and even better) run Crysis 2 on console graphics settings. Let's pretend I pirated Crysis 1 and played it. Can you give me any reason why should I buy Crysis 2 that will look worse and probably run worse while I can download and play a superior version for free?

 

[Grayman]

I remember crysis being one of the most pirated games of the year, like 2 years in a row. People wanted to play it, see its graphics on their pc, and I assume a bunch of users felt like their hardware wasn't up to snuff.

I strongly believe that the pirating users might buy the game on consoles, I expect crysis 2 to do pretty well.

Maybe just as much on console as on PC. That would be a big success.

were you a junior member before this post or just after it?

 

[Gully State]

Brand equity, they recognize the name with quality and graphics. If you're a player who pays for his live subscription, you might want crysis 2.

And ps3 sales can't be to bad either.

This makes no sense.

 

[-tetsuo-]

Brand equity, they recognize the name with quality and graphics. If you're a player who pays for his live subscription, you might want crysis 2.

And ps3 sales can't be to bad either.

What?

 

[shintoki]

Military and big corp contracts.

So they skipped the meal, and went right to the fucking buffet.

 

[teepo]

Once again, when the game made a profit on 1.5 million of those sales or less, and continued to sell at least 1.5 million more after that, why does it matter so much exact what the average selling price was?


1.5 million sales or more after successfully breaking even on a risky game on the supposedly "failing" platform is an amazing achievement in its own right.

first off, where are you getting these numbers because they seem like assumptions, but i'd love to be proven wrong because rarely do companies, both publishers and developers, disclose when they break even on any given product. and how a company practices for such things can often times be... misleading. such as separating costs for game development and r&d.

and going by your numbers, i can safely assume the profits haven't been good enough for keeping a company the size of crytek afloat. they are only standing because investors see potential in their future, not because of the sales of their titles on the pc platform and sure as not from their past licensing contracts for both cryengines. but i'm willing to bet that will be changing soon, hence the potential.

 

[subversus]

first off, where are you getting these numbers because they seem like assumptions, but i'd love to be proven wrong because rarely do companies, both publishers and developers, disclose when they break even on any given product. and how a company practices for such things can often times be... misleading. such as separating costs for game development and r&d.

and going by your numbers, i can safely assume the profits haven't been good enough for keeping a company the size of crytek afloat. they are only standing because investors see potential in their future, not because of the sales of their titles on the pc platform and sure as not from their past licensing contracts for both cryengines. but i'm willing to bet that will be changing soon, hence the potential.

First, they're a privately-owned company, so forget about investors.

Second, publishers usually disclose sales numbers during their investor calls at the end of each quarter. Crysis sales numbers were disclosed during one of their calls in 2008. Also they were disclosed in an official PR as I remember at the beginning of 2008. Here it is - http://kotaku.com/351661/crysis-comeback-moves-1-million-copies

And the last - it was Yerli who said that Crysis was profitable and he said it in 2008 - http://www.gamegrep.com/news/12617-crytek_spent_22_million_making_crysis_still_profitable/

Any other questions?

 

[szaromir]

I agree, I personally like it, especially after the big update a couple years ago. But lots of people were disappointed and that'd explain why he "heard it was bad." It would be odd to hear that about the original though. (Or 2004.)

Yeah, I was talking only about UT3. I played UT99 a lot.

 

[Easy_D]

How about this...

F.E.A.R for the raw satisfaction of combat
Crysis for the best open environments
STALKER for the best atmosphere

Now, someone go and splice them for the best game ever!

That would be too much goodness in one game.

 

[shuyin_]

It wasn't. Besides graphics it was craptastic.

Right, at the time you had Doom 3, which was a corridor shooter and you had Far Cry which was an open world shooter. Far Cray was the craptastic one, eh? What the fuck are you smoking?

 

[subversus]

Right, at the time you had Doom 3, which was a corridor shooter and you had Far Cry which was an open world shooter.

you say it like you can compare an open world shooter with a corridor shooter. I want to compare coffee with tea. Coffee is better than tea!

 

[shuyin_]

you say it like you can compare an open world shooter with a corridor shooter. I want to compare coffee with tea. Coffee is better than tea!

Wait what? Why the heck can't i? It's not like i'm comparing a first person shooter with a point and click adventure game. I'm comparing two shooters and i'm saying that i like the one that's open world (the fact that it has better graphics doesn't hurt either).

Now again, why can't i compare a shooter with another?

 

[zombieshavebrains]

A few months is a long time in game world.

I distinctly remember that right when it came out word was it sold very poorly - this was gleefully reported by all the American games media. CryTek bitching and whining started immediately.

It later turned out sales were decent. And like I said, Crysis has been burning steadily since.

Crisis averted.

Maybe people thought, "Meh, i'll buy it in 3 years when i have a computer that can run it."

 

[subversus]

Wait what? Why the heck can't i? It's not like i'm comparing a first person shooter with a point and click adventure game. I'm comparing two shooters and i'm saying that i like the one that's open world (the fact that it has better graphics doesn't hurt either).

Now again, why can't i compare a shooter with another?

you seem not to read my post (and the comparison) beyond the first sentence. Read it again.

 

[shuyin_]

you seem not to read my post (and the comparison) beyond the first sentence. Read it again.

You didn't read my post either Read it again, pay attention and you'll see that i can compare a shooter with another.

I understood what you meant. I just think it's stupid. What should i compare Far Cry with? GTA?

 

[Sh1ner]

Right, at the time you had Doom 3, which was a corridor shooter and you had Far Cry which was an open world shooter. Far Cray was the craptastic one, eh? What the fuck are you smoking?

Agreed, I was amazed by far cry and its AI then Doom 3 and its dumb enemies and its fifty versions of a corridor. Only annoying thing for far cry for me is it hasn't aged well cause everything looked plasticy.

 

[BobsRevenge]

Wait what? Why the heck can't i? It's not like i'm comparing a first person shooter with a point and click adventure game. I'm comparing two shooters and i'm saying that i like the one that's open world (the fact that it has better graphics doesn't hurt either).

Now again, why can't i compare a shooter with another?

Doom 3's gameplay is a lot more solid and fun than Far Cry's, especially later in the game. Past the half way point of the game I don't think any other game has kept me on my toes as much, aside from GT5 and Dead Space.

 

[Dennis]

Maybe people thought, "Meh, i'll buy it in 3 years when i have a computer that can run it."

Maybe they did. Or some did. And my worry is that the lesson CryTek learned from this is not to hurt the frail ego of PC gamers.

So we may not get a game that so entices us with a glimpse into the future as the first game.

 

[subversus]

I understood what you meant. I just think it's stupid. What should i compare Far Cry with? GTA?

you can compare Far Cry with any other open-world shooter. Like Far Cry 2, Crysis, STALKER may be.

it's not about comparison anyway, corridor shooters and open-world shooters are set to achieve different gameplay goals. You can't say that a corridor shooter is inferior to an open-world shooter because I could find a dozen arguments for the opposite and it would come down to personal tastes. And if it is just your personal prefference then there's nothing to argue about.

 

[BobsRevenge]

you can compare Far Cry with any other open-world shooter. Like Far Cry 2, Crysis, STALKER may be.

it's not about comparison anyway, corridor shooters and open-world shooters are set to achieve different gameplay goals. You can't say that a corridor shooter is inferior to an open-world shooter because I could find a dozen arguments for the opposite and it would come down to personal tastes. And if it is just your personal prefference then there's nothing to argue about.

The issue is he said Far Cry is better than Doom 3 because it isn't a corridor shooter. But he got it wrong, because corridor shooters are still hella fun and Doom 3 is awesome.

 

[Darth Kupi]

Yeah, I was talking only about UT3. I played UT99 a lot.

Screw the haters, play UT3.

On foot feels as great as UT99, plus with all the UT2004 vehicle goodness.

You'd like it, esp. if you liked UT99.

It looks good, plays well. Thats all that matters.

Epic also released a massive Titan pack/patch, sort of like the big Editor's Choice Edition pack/patch for UT2004, making it better than ever.

Doom 3's gameplay is a lot more solid and fun than Far Cry's, especially later in the game. Past the half way point of the game I don't think any other game has kept me on my toes as much, aside from GT5 and Dead Space.

Really?

I liked Doom 3 (the expansion pack...not-so-much, super shotguhn notwithstanding), but it felt to me like iD basically blew their load with the start of the game.

Everything after the first quarteer was the same grab armor/healthy/gun/ammo to spawn enemies behind you/from a sliding panel, repeated ad nauseum.

Spoiler

Hell

was fun, but then *poof* back to corridor crawling.

Quake 4's singleplayer was much more fun for me, at least they didn't consistently cheap out on the scares.

 

[dLMN8R]

first off, where are you getting these numbers because they seem like assumptions, but i'd love to be proven wrong because rarely do companies, both publishers and developers, disclose when they break even on any given product. and how a company practices for such things can often times be... misleading. such as separating costs for game development and r&d.

and going by your numbers, i can safely assume the profits haven't been good enough for keeping a company the size of crytek afloat. they are only standing because investors see potential in their future, not because of the sales of their titles on the pc platform and sure as not from their past licensing contracts for both cryengines. but i'm willing to bet that will be changing soon, hence the potential.

I posted a bunch of links earlier in the thread.

PC Gamer had an interview with Crytek in mid-2008, June/July, in that interview Crytek claimed that they had surpassed their expectations and sold more than 1.5 million copies.

Shortly after that, there was this:

http://uk.pc.ign.com/articles/899/899976p1.html

 

[kamspy]

When I bought my Crysis CE I knew I'd be lucky to even get the game to boot up. But boot it did.

I think playing the game at 11 fps made it seem a lot longer though. When I play it now it feels short. Maybe because it's so damn good. Probably because I've got the whole damn game memorized.

 

[Chiggs]

The original Far Cry was a really fun game, and it really stole a considerable amount of thunder from both Doom 3 and Half-Life 2. It's always fun to watch a brand new upstart show the veterans how its done.

Also, Far Cry on Veteran or higher is the most difficult FPS game ever made. The last 5 levels or so are unbelievably difficult. Everytime I heard one of those big Trigen guys with the rocket launchers, I would panic.

Oh! And who remembers when Crytek released the Shader Model 3 patch? I had just purchased a 6800GT and was floored by the graphics.

Spoiler

Doom III has aged better, though.

 

[kamspy]

FarCry is too damn hard on any difficulty.

 

[markao]

Military and big corp contracts.

They just released a video demo with some of that stuff


RealTime Immersive Inc. - Technology Demonstration

 

[subversus]

They just released a video demo with some of that stuff


RealTime Immersive Inc. - Technology Demonstration

Shieeeeeet. There are tons of related videos from RealTime Immersive, including SOCOM ones. Great stuff. Can't link it because I'm writing from IPad.

 

[BobsRevenge]

Really?

I liked Doom 3 (the expansion pack...not-so-much, super shotguhn notwithstanding), but it felt to me like iD basically blew their load with the start of the game.

Everything after the first quarteer was the same grab armor/healthy/gun/ammo to spawn enemies behind you/from a sliding panel, repeated ad nauseum.

Spoiler

Hell

was fun, but then *poof* back to corridor crawling.

Quake 4's singleplayer was much more fun for me, at least they didn't consistently cheap out on the scares.

The beginning sucked imo. The game got awesome when all you were doing was running around, solving simple door puzzles and killing a lot of shit. It felt like a classic corridor shooter, except everything came out of thin air so you never really knew what was going to happen. I loved that twist, it made the firefights more in your face and intense. I don't really even consider it cheap scares, because they weren't really scares past the beginning. You sort of knew shit would be coming, you just didn't know what it'd be. It kinda makes you more anxious whenever you enter a room or hallway. I really liked that tension.

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

I'm sure I'm in the minority, but FC2's MP was pretty damn fun to me. I loved that level out desert with the trains. I would camp behind the rock at the end of map where the abandoned train station was and just pick people off with the sniper rifle.

 

[MoFuzz]

Also, Far Cry on Veteran or higher is the most difficult FPS game ever made. The last 5 levels or so are unbelievably difficult. Everytime I heard one of those big Trigen guys with the rocket launchers, I would panic.

Haha, too true. You couldn't even hit and run with those guys really, it was just a matter of using as much brute force as necessary to kill them before they killed you.

 

[evil solrac v3.0]

Military and big corp contracts.

America's Army 4 to run on cryengine2????

 

[-SD-]

America's Army 4 to run on cryengine2????

If that happens it will use CryEngine 3.

 

[evil solrac v3.0]

If that happens it will use CryEngine 3.

this must be brought up to the floor for a vote!!

 

[Darth Kupi]

The beginning sucked imo. The game got awesome when all you were doing was running around, solving simple door puzzles and killing a lot of shit. It felt like a classic corridor shooter, except everything came out of thin air so you never really knew what was going to happen. I loved that twist, it made the firefights more in your face and intense. I don't really even consider it cheap scares, because they weren't really scares past the beginning. You sort of knew shit would be coming, you just didn't know what it'd be. It kinda makes you more anxious whenever you enter a room or hallway. I really liked that tension.

Yes, but it really annoyed me. I just wanted to scream "ENOUGH ALREADY!!! I STOPPED BEING SCARED BY THIS SAME TRICK 3 HOURS AGO"

Thats why I appreciated Quake 4's single player more.

You went into a large, open space, the doors locked, and enemies would spawn infront of you.

I liked the game's old-school honesty. "yo dude, i herd u liek shoting stuff. dese guys r in ur way. kill em to proceed. k. got that? we cool? awwwwright!"

With Doom3 I felt like halfway iD panicked and started telling their developers: "Tighten up the graphics on level 7! We made this engine for moody lighting dammit, we'll use it for dark corridors/swinging lights/monster closets if its the last thing we do!!!"

I still think Prey was the best use of the Doom3 engine. It had a nice balance of everything. Spooky "boo" moments, as well as cool straightforward fights on crazy gravity walkways.

Thats being said, I think the backlash against all 3 games (D3, Q4, Prey) was unwarranted.

They're fine games. Not mind-blowing, but fun nonetheless. I did get tired of seeing the D3/Q4/Prey hate.

 

[BobsRevenge]

The enemies are more fun to fight against than most in games these days though. There was a good mix, and many of them would get up in your grill really quickly and start trying to tear you apart after spawning almost right on you. So there was a lot of dodging and acrobatics revolving around you trying to outmaneuver things jumping at you or shooting plasma balls at you. Games don't really do that anymore, but imo that's probably the most fun kind of thing to fight against as far as instant gratification goes. Doom 3's fights were very intense on the hard difficulty, and you never could exactly predict how a fight would play out due to the relatively unpredictable spawning system.

 

[Tylahedras]

FarCry 2 was a very disappointing game for me. On the plus side I think that Crysis is being underrated. Looks pretty damn incredible to me. Sleeper hit material.

 

[Darth Kupi]

The enemies are more fun to fight against than most in games these days though. There was a good mix, and many of them would get up in your grill really quickly and start trying to tear you apart after spawning almost right on you. So there was a lot of dodging and acrobatics revolving around you trying to outmaneuver things jumping at you or shooting plasma balls at you. Games don't really do that anymore, but imo that's probably the most fun kind of thing to fight against as far as instant gratification goes.

Agreed.

The shotgun was delicious.

There was a certain old school fun in just holding down sprint and running right upto enemies for a shotgun blast to the face.

And fighting pinky demons especially was a blast.

Spoiler:

Spoiler

Shotgun was wayyyy overpowered! (but wayyyyy fun to use) The rest of the guns can be ignored if you want to.

Just so satisfying....

Doom 3's fights were very intense on the hard difficulty, and you never could exactly predict how a fight would play out due to the relatively unpredictable spawning system.

:/

Whaaaaa?

Did we play the same game.

The spawns were almost 100% predictable.

My hobby once I got bored of their cheap tactics was to predict the, spawns run up to them and wait face-to-face with the demon while he completed his spawn-in animation, and then fill his face with buckshot one frame of animation before he was activated.

I felt like such a jerk but it was hilarious. :lol

I tried to imagine what was going thorugh the demons' minds, while they had to do this awkward song and dance while seeing me waiting patiently holding a shotgun.

That corner with no chairs, computers or other junk blocking it? Check!

That weird wall panel that looks different from all the rest? Yep! Secret monster closet.

That raised walkway? Oh look an arch fiend. Now he'll keep spawning imps till I switch to a long-range gun or grenade him.

 

[CecilRousso]

Impressive numbers considering how much Crytek has whined over the last years over the piracy issue. The fact that they went up against both The Orange Box and Call of Duty 4, and more or less marketed the game with "your computer probably won´t be able to run this game" are not facts that they have acknowledged one bit.

That, and that they still forces everyone to deal with Securom and limited activations for the game really makes me dislike Crytek.

 

[Cronox]

Not liking that due to Yerli's bitching about the pc market, other pc developers may have had the wrong idea and not made high budget pc games. At least, that's the implication.

 

[Mr_Brit]

FarCry 2 was a very disappointing game for me. On the plus side I think that Crysis is being underrated. Looks pretty damn incredible to me. Sleeper hit material.

Crysis was hardly underrated. It's got a great metacritic score and pretty much everyone who has played it for more than one level agrees that it is an excellent game. I can see why you'd think it was due to amount of people who've never played it claiming it to be a mere tech demo. As for being a 'sleeper' hit, the sales figures/piracy figures speak for themselves, right now Crysis is one of the best known franchises in gaming.

 

[Y2Kev]

After playing Crysis, I don't take anyone commenting on shooters seriously unless they have also played it!