Crysis and UT3 tank

[The Madman]

I'm not surprised about Crysis. The developers knew they were targetting a smaller niche market, 'hardcore fps PC gamers' with their game. They couldn't have expected massive sales. Crysis itself is quite good, but it was more or less a tech demo so they could show off the Crytek engine to other developers and publishers who might consider buying it for their own games. That's where the real money is at!

Low sales for Crysis don't surprise me at all... Unreal Tournament 3 on the other hand is a bit of a low blow.

I own UT3, I love it! For all those complaining about 'consolization' the fact is that while the menu is definently messy, the gameplay itself is as solid as ever and tends to remind me more of 1999's UT than UT2k4. I don't see why people keep saying it's all that different, gameplay wise, it's more of the same except better looking. My only major complaint is that compared to the massive library of maps UT2k4 has, UT3 feels more limited. But then again most UT2k4 deathmatch just seemed to be endless DM-Rankin anyway and I'm all about the Deathmatch. UT3 isn't that different, which obviously means that people who disliked the UT series in the past still wont find something to love here, but fans oughta be overjoyed. I can even show you a video demonstrating how similar it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsJaznqV5PE

However the game is just selling terribly on the PC, and I can't help but feel it's less that "Epic has betrayed the PC" as just about every forum from here to Gamespot or even Gametrailers likes to say regularly, so much as PC gamers has abandoned Epic for having the 'nerve' to dare try and make a console version and give it top effort. The game is selling poorly on PC, the community is acting rotten and rather than encourage the game PC gamers have been bashing it left and right.

PC may have made Epic what they are today, it's true, but when a relationship goes sour the only smart thing to do is leave it. If this keeps up, I expect Epic will likely simply cease to support PC altogether and focus more on consoles. After all, it only makes sense.

 

[Count_de_Monet]

I, personally, haven't played an Unreal game since the original UT and my beloved low grav instagib games. I played UT2k4 for about a week then put it down and never picked it up again so I'll ignore that portion of the post.

Crysis, on the other hand, really had me ready to buy it with the demo. I loved the suit powers, I loved the sneaking around, I loved cloaking and blowing people away with the shotgun and yet I was still apprehensive. I have no idea if I'm allowed to say this but...I pirated Crysis to make sure it could actually run on my PC after what I'm now calling the "Bioshock Debacle" (the demo ran but the real game was slower than my grandmother without her walker) and, of course, it ran like crap. After toning the game waaaaay down I was able to play pretty far into the game and I was having fun until I found out a super-strong soldier with special strength enhancing suit powers couldn't hold a damn sniper rifle steady and that made it very difficult to kill anything since every enemy in the game needed to be shot in the head or they wouldn't die. Seriously, though, you could empty two clips of ammo into a Korean's chest and he would shake it off and charge you once he stood back up... I don't care if you're on meth, steroids, and have Robocop-esque body armor you don't get up from 60 bullets in the chest.

So, in order:
1. It's impossible to run Crysis for the average gamer.
2. The gameplay is so annoying it makes me cry because Crysis could have attained a level of immersion that is rare in games.
3. The AI is great because they do cover each other, they do throw nades somewhat intelligently, fan out and surround you, try to flank you, and react fairly intelligently when being shot at. Unfortunately every third enemy gets stuck in a pathing loop and they can take enough bullets to put Rambo and John McClane to shame.
4. Aliens have been done to death. Crysis would have been much better if it was set like a Rainbow 6 game or even as a true sandbox instead of a directed semi-sandbox.

 

[werepossum]

I don't know about overall sales, but in our small office there are four gamers. One is XBox 360-only, and one recently upgraded to 2000-era hardware and couldn't hope to play it. My boss has it and loves it, but his rig (Q6600 and 8500 GT) can only play it at Low settings and it doesn't look like anything special. He really likes the gameplay though.

Crysis is on my Christmas list and She Who Must Be Obeyed has already purchased both Crysis and COD4. I'm upgrading my CPU/Mobo/RAM, but I just bought my X1950XT five or six months ago and I just can't see upgrading again this soon. I'm going to start with COD4, plus I've still got Stalker and Swat 4 ($6 at Big Lot's) and its expansion pack I'll probably play before I load Crysis. Nonetheless, I bought it (well, SWMBO bought it at my request) because I think it's important to support the cutting-edge developers. I'll probably just wait until I don't wince to replace my video card with an 8800GT or newer before I play it.

Doom 3 was similar - its highest setting required a video card that literally no one made at the time - but it scaled pretty good. I played it through until I reached Hell (got pretty boring from that point to me), then months later when I upgraded I played it again at the higher settings. (I still can't play at the highest settings - that requires a 512MB video card!)

UT3 to me is pretty much as everyone described - a prettier version of UT2K4. With all the free maps and mods, not exactly a crushing demand for a newer version. It's not my kind of game anyway (nor is GOW), but Epic will still make a good profit from UT3 engine licensing.

So I can understand why neither Crysis nor UT3 was a big seller. I just hope it doesn't kill PC development.

 

[Vigormortis]

So I can understand why neither Crysis nor UT3 was a big seller. I just hope it doesn't kill PC development.

Kill PC developement, with the likes of Valve, Blizzard, Relic, Maxis and other such companies around? I highly doubt. You're giving Epic and Crytek WAY too much credit. (especially Epic, talentless bastards) The fact is, there's only one thing that is trully important with any game engine. Scalability. Make an engine as advanced and decked out as you will, but neglect to have it scale down enough to run on current-gen and even slightly older machines and you've just shot yourself in the foot. This is why Source was so successful, it scaled beautifully and is still being upgraded with bells and whistles that even new engines don't have. That said, ID's new Tech5 engine is looking intriguing. Their new hyper-texture technology could prove to be revolutionary. Maybe.

 

[p1ne]

I just wrote a huge post about UT3 and lost it all because I accidentally hit the "back" button on my mouse. Seriously. It was like 8 paragraphs. I just about had an aneurysm.

Long story short:

UT3 is a fun game with a horrible GUI, bad PR, no marketing, too many bugs, that departs too much from the 2k* series and has no coherent feel to its visual/conceptual design. The high required specs don't help either.

I think the game will succeed in one way or another in the long term because it has a very dedicated hardcore community, mostly composed of converted UT99 players. The game is more like the original Unreal Tournament than the other sequels, and original UT players tend to like it a lot. I am one of those and I think it's a really fun game. Despite my extreme disappointment by Epic's apparent disdain towards their fans and disinterest in turning out a polished product, I'll play it because it's really the only game in its class these days, and I love it.

 

[J.theYellow]

Told you so. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.50673]

Crysis might have more hope as a licensable engine, but thus far the most awesome thing I've seen with it is the barrel physics video. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YG5qDeWHNmk]

 

[KaynSlamdyke]

You're giving Epic and Crytek WAY too much credit. (especially Epic, talentless bastards)

Hey now, you're being a bit unfair.
Jazz Jackrabbit was one of the most awesome games ever created for the PC.

 

[Malidictuim]

I'd like to point out that I can run Crysis on max XP settings without any trouble, and I have a pre-made Dell from this year (2 gig ram, 128mb nVidia GeForce 8800, Intel core duo). I find it hard to believe that my pre-made and unmodified Dell can run it but other, more decked out computers can't.

Oh, and I agree with KaynSlamdyke. Jazz Jackrabbit rules the fucking world.
If you can find a better game I wi -- Wait, that's impossible.
Jazz Jackrabbit is the best! End of story!

 

[Copter400]

Maybe if they concentrated more on actual gameplay and concept rather than working with the hardware guys to reap in the juicy rainbow harvest (Australian currency is such that you can apply nursery rhymes about rainbows to it and still be more or less accurate), the games wouldn't have been such a financial failure.

 

[the_carrot]

128mb nVidia GeForce 8800

 

[jezcentral]

These games were trying to compete with next-gen console graphics, but at the moment it is too expensive to do this for the mainstream. The end result is these games are just tech demos to other developers looking to license a game engine. 2009 will be the year the mainstream PC beats console graphics as a matter of course, and until then graphics-vampires like Crysis and UT3 will under-sell. (Mainstream PCs already can in 2007, but it will take a couple of years to get the numbers up).

(N.B. Once mainstream PCs overtake consoles they will then have about 5 years where they are used to develop new tech for the next console generation).

J

 

[dan_the_manatee]

I'm not sure UT3 will be a failed 360 port; I suspect MS will watch and see how it operates on the PS3 before deciding whether to change their procedures regarding modding and uploading content to XBL (hell, Forge does it with Halo3, so I don't see the major issue).
Anyway, the PS3 tools don't actually work, so it's a moot point.

I don't think we'll ever see keyboard and mouse support on the 360; it makes it too much like a PC. MS haven't been trying to replace PCs with the 360, they're dreaming of having both as part of a network. Sony see the PS3 as the replacement for Media Centre PCs + 360s, but from what I've heard about the PS3's media handling, they're a ways off yet. However, with icnreasing amounts of RTS ports for the 360, it would be REALLY nice if they replaced the left analog stick with tracker ball for a little more sensitive control. The tech is easy, the profile of the controller wouldn't change, and there's no reason why it wouldn't compete with a mouse in an FPS.

As an adjunct to the mouse vs pad debate, anyone ever played Halo on a PC? It's a bit awkward trying to melee, shoot and grenade. Not enough damn buttons on the mouse...

Back on topic, do the UT3 figures include downloaded games? I've seen it advertised for DL purchase a lot more than I've seen it advertised as boxed, and considering that high speed internet is an absolute pre-requisite for that game, direct-to-drive is an easy option.

 

[raankh]

The headline for this anandtech article says it all:
NVIDIA's 3-way SLI: Can we finally play Crysis? [http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3183]

Seems to me, speaking as a professional software developer and computer scientist, that Crytek needs a lesson on the Pareto principle [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimization_%28computer_science%29].

Ok, maybe that was a bit harsh, but anyways.

(Oh, and to answer the question in that headline if you can't be bothered: No, we can't.)

 

[sathie]

Crysis plays fine and looks fine on low on my 7600GT. I enjoyed the game, and while I did think it looked rather bland, I had to stop and think that this game was looking as good on low as most games do on high.

I think if reviewers had taken the time to review it with lesser spec machines on low settings, then the game would be doing much better in sales.

Crytek are a bit daft to go for such insanely demanding graphics when their audiences' hardware can't handle it, but they've shown what's possible (if a bit unrealistic) on today's top hardware. Congratulations to them for that.

 

[raankh]

Well, seeing that the article is from a hardware site, of course they're talking about maxing all the settings. The hype focussed alot on the technical aspects, so if even the enthusiasts can't play it as it's "meant to be", that's something of a marketing misfire. Not too good to alienate your target audience, as has been pointed out above.

Makes me really wonder what the hell the devs are running it on. Maybe two QuadroFX 5600G 1.5GB in SLI can play it? Heh, $12000 for your vga cards alone, anyone? (oh, and j/k, realized someone might take me seriously)

 

[Axulciex]

Crysis runs a stable 35-50 fps on my rig in 1650x1050, hybrid of high and very high settings.
You have to know how to tweak it and get all the right drivers etc.

I'm sure crytek got a huge pay out from Nvidia and Intel for all the Graphics enthusiasts who dished out money on new hardware for crysis. The game cost alot to develop, but almost all of that money went into the amazing engine which is already cross-platform compatible.
They're going to make a load licensing it.
Everyones being a bit harsh on poor crysis I think :S hype generated impossible expectations. Its a few years ahead of its time in gameplay and graphics.

AS for UT3, I love it as well. Great lan game to tag through the campaign, good improvement in all areas except the omission of invasion.

Strange things said in the thread; consoles beating pc graphics till 2009? eh? I have a bodged up machine with a 8600gt that runs gears of war in 1900x1200. Its made of old parts but it would only cost around $700-$800 aus.
$6000.00 dollars worth of hardware to be cool? exaggerations like this just sound ridiculous, if your talking US dollars then even more ridiculous. I spent $2800 aus on my main system and its rather high end, and that was in June(was a bit cheaper because I bought it in Hong Kong, the holiday that pays for itself)

to raankh; the QuadroFX cards are for production 3d rendering, not games. one of them wouldn't even perform as good as a 7800gt in games.

Sorry about the long post I hate them too.

EDIT: had to comment on the above post. Cod4 next step in gaming? its a corridor shooter disguised as a tactical shooter, Once you get past the cinematic polish its shit boring; I actually fell asleep a few times during the sp campaign. Cod is the blond bimbo of gaming; other games are more attractive and intelligent but most people only look for the superficial features. rant over.

 

[Flogger]

I agree with Axulciex, everyone is being too harsh on Crysis. Calling it a mere 'tech demo' is entirely untrue. You can get a PC for around £600 these days which will be able to play Crysis with a good FPS. And the level design, cutscenes, and even the story - some of the detail of it - is some of the best I've ever seen in a game. After all, what FPS has a storyline that doesn't involve shooting aliens/monsters/people?
There is a simple reason for console games outselling PC games; marketing. Consoles are mass-market; they are cheap and simple to use. Games cost a lot more on consoles, however, than they do on PC - the major console games often cost about £50 while PC games cost around £25, half of that. But look at Halo 3 - Microsoft poured thousands upon thousands into marketing what is essentially an average game, but it still becomes one of the best selling games of all time. I'll wager with anyone that if COD4 was a PC-only game, it wouldn't be half as well-known as it currently is.