Cry Engine: Success or Failure

CryEngine: Success or Failure

  • Belongs in the 3D engine Hall of Fame

    Votes: 104 60.5%
  • Can't Compete with the Big-Boys

    Votes: 18 10.5%
  • Magic 8-Ball Says: Unclear Now...Ask Again Later

    Votes: 50 29.1%

  • Total voters
    172
Redsniper said:
Where is the great singleplayer engine, shittiest multiplayer netcode ever option?

That would be the "C&C:Generals"-option, right?
 
Staples said:
EA buying the world again? Not surprising.

And for you guys who don't know, the UE3 has been licenced for at least 20 games. D3 for maybe 3 or 4 but they are all ID games (and thus not sold a license), Source 2 games that I know of and Cry engine zero.

Well the source engine has been used in two other games which is more than the D3 engines been used for thus far. Its been used for Chronicles of Riddick and whatever that Vampire game was.
 
Sir-Fragalot said:
Well the source engine has been used in two other games which is more than the D3 engines been used for thus far. Its been used for Chronicles of Riddick and whatever that Vampire game was.

I don't see anywhere where the Riddick game used the source engine. I call Bologna
 
Sir-Fragalot said:
Well the source engine has been used in two other games which is more than the D3 engines been used for thus far. Its been used for Chronicles of Riddick and whatever that Vampire game was.


Riddick used the overhauled Enclave engine, it was their own engine, it was also OpenGL....
 
DragonNOA1 said:
I don't see anywhere where the Riddick game used the source engine. I call Bologna

I remember reading that it did. Although when I hit the web looking for proof, I couldn't find anything concrete. So I don't know. If it doesn't then the Source engine has been used in one other game. Which still means that its been used more than the Cry Engine and more than the Doom 3 engine. Although when Q4 hits the shelves they'll be equal in that reguard.
 
I think Far Cry is a great game. Great to look at and play. I will say however the end of the game was so freaking hard that I am now bald.
 
planetary said:
I will say however the end of the game was so freaking hard that I am now bald.

If you are a woman that would be hilarious. As for now that is mildly amusing.
 
I do agree the engine was quite good, but the game itself left a lot to be desired. It also had a serious sam feel to it for some reason. I would like see somone who knows what they're doing have a field with it. I bet somthing cool could be done with it.
 
DragonNOA1 said:
If you are a woman that would be hilarious. As for now that is mildly amusing.
I am not a woman. I love women, but I am not one of them.
 
What the hell is peoples problems with far Cry?

I found the game itself to be a lot more fun the most other fps games, you actually had AI that could be worth a damn, you had open enviroments instead of closed linear spaces.

The story was the only thing that was lacking, but most fps games have shits for stories too.

So tell me, what made far cry (the game, not the engine) so "bad?"

I liked far crys gameplay over many other general fps's of that year and before.
 
All of these newer games are eye candy and they all have a few great weapons to handle, but they all have minor issues which we can all live with......

Far Cry - AI is not good, maps are nice, sniper rifle is great
Doom - every corner, same old same old (but fun nonetheless)
HL2 - not much to complain about except the MP
BF2 - same choppy crap as its predecessor, and it seems to have been put out before it was ready (but alot fun to play)

My dad bought me a commodore 64 back in the days, so they are all awesome compared to the shit games on the 5 1/4" floppies some of us had to endure....oh, and the 64 cost him 2800 Cdn at that time...... :D
 
planetary said:
I am not a woman. I love women, but I am not one of them.

Damn I was hoping to see pics of a bald woman.

Bald_Woman34.jpg
 
Stiler said:
What the hell is peoples problems with far Cry?

I found the game itself to be a lot more fun the most other fps games, you actually had AI that could be worth a damn, you had open enviroments instead of closed linear spaces.

The story was the only thing that was lacking, but most fps games have shits for stories too.

So tell me, what made far cry (the game, not the engine) so "bad?"

I liked far crys gameplay over many other general fps's of that year and before.

Like most FPS's the AI detracted from the game, they were to easy, it was almost like serious sam, except they actually used team work. I do have to say though, it had a really nice feature like the original delta force, as you stated, the non-linear maps, as well as being able to choose what direction you attack from. But the bumbling on the AI part kind of defeated that bcause you can go in guns blazing and chances are you will win out.
 
My opinion is that the engine is an outstanding sucess. It came from an unknown developer out of the blue. It smacked around pretty much all other games at the time. The draw depth of it is simply amazing. What other game gives you such lush outdoor environments and allows you to snipe someone from almost a killometer away?

If you're talking about the engine being sucessful as in an id engine that is sold off to make countless games...well, I doubt we'll see a ton of Cryengine games. But the fact that an unknown company pulled off such a huge, sucessful game, with ZERO pre-release hype has impressed me.
 
S1nF1xx said:
My opinion is that the engine is an outstanding sucess. It came from an unknown developer out of the blue. It smacked around pretty much all other games at the time. The draw depth of it is simply amazing. What other game gives you such lush outdoor environments and allows you to snipe someone from almost a killometer away?

If you're talking about the engine being sucessful as in an id engine that is sold off to make countless games...well, I doubt we'll see a ton of Cryengine games. But the fact that an unknown company pulled off such a huge, sucessful game, with ZERO pre-release hype has impressed me.

Totally agree. I hope that they can keep this going, it's like seeing the rise of id all over again.
 
AI dumb?

uhh.....I found it quite a lot more challenging as opposed to a lot of other fps's.

They used teamworked, they looked for you, noises played a part, etc.

Too easy? I didn't find it as easy as most other fps games.
 
To the people that hate the game, did you guys buy it or just play the demo. I'm sure someone out there has only played the demo and is trying to talk smackpops.
 
I bought it, really looked foward to it, played 3 hours into it, the AI just made me bored of it. Liked the engine though.
 
My reaons why I didn't like Far Cry.

AI, lame characters and story, incredibly stupid damage models, horrible vehicle physics..ect ect.

The eyecandy was nice, everything else was lame.
 
I think Return to Mysterious Island uses the Cry Engine, at least it looks similar.
 
I voted for the magic 8 ball because I wasnt sure. In my opinion the engine is only a success if it goes on to be used in many games. I havent heard of any games using the cry engine yet. I loved the long draw distances but that alone isnt going to make it a good engine.

And is it just me or are a lot of people noticing that games developers are making their own engines for every single new game out now days. I wish that developers would re use engines from time to time to cut development times. Maybee we would see more innovative games come along if they could spend less time building new engines and more time working on gameplay. Granted I dont know of any engine that could have pulled off far cry so they had no choice but to make one. Or they could have heavily modified and existing engine. A lot of the next gen games are using unreal engine now so I guess they are starting to get out of that rut again.
 
Genocidal[v2] said:
My reaons why I didn't like Far Cry.

AI, lame characters and story, incredibly stupid damage models, horrible vehicle physics..ect ect.

The eyecandy was nice, everything else was lame.

I don't understand why you would say any of the things you just said. I think the only thing you said that was correct was that "the eye candy was nice.", other than that, I don't know where you are coming from.
 
I thought it was a great engine and a good game in single player mode. I played online for all of about 15 minutes.
 
planetary said:
I don't understand why you would say any of the things you just said. I think the only thing you said that was correct was that "the eye candy was nice.", other than that, I don't know where you are coming from.

Really.....horrible damage? we actually got freaking wounds on bodies among other things....and most of the damage for the people I felt was done great, though some mutants (that could take clips + to take down) got a bit annoying.
 
planetary said:
I don't understand why you would say any of the things you just said. I think the only thing you said that was correct was that "the eye candy was nice.", other than that, I don't know where you are coming from.
The horrible vehicle physics was correct too. I am not sure if it was the physics but driving anything in that game felt just horrible. For such a good game, I don't know how they could have implemented possibly the worst driving experience this decade.
 
Back
Top