Great googlely mooglely! 800? Really? That seems like a hell of a lot of people for them to have considering they've never been a massively successful company. Epic and VALVe only have 160 and 330 people respectively.Crytech has 800 employees.
\threadUnity for the low end, Unreal for the high end. Between those two it's hard to see other engine vendors doing well, especially with a clause like this:
"5.1. You may distribute and sell UGC but only on the UGC Marketplace designated by Crytek"
So, no Steam, GoG, Amazon, Green Man, or using your own website? No KickStarter games unless you can somehow get bulk UGC codes for your rewards?
Also, with Unity you can create games for Android, consoles, even the PS Vita.
\thread
Why is no one using our great engine that we made so impractical to use?
1.10. “UGC Marketplace”: the platform(s) designated by Crytek where the distribution and sale of UGC is admissible. Crytek reserves the right to remove UGC from the UGC Marketplace at any time at its sole discretion.
Probably because people don't think.
You are assuming that there is only one license, which involves a 10/mo license fee and gives no support to the developer.
You might consider that there are other licenses available, which might cost more money, not require sale on Crytek's store, and offer technical support, maybe?
All those big games which are for sale on other services probably have "proper" licenses, not the pokey subscription license that you are quoting from.
You are ALSO assuming, dumbly, that there is only one license available. This is ONE license, not ALL licenses. There are going to be OTHER Cryengine licenses with entirely different terms and conditions and cost and royalty structures which are designed for "real" games from "proper" developers, aka people who can pay money up front and want to, for example, release their games on consoles and have access to the source code AND support. The EULA for the subscription engine is ridiculous and no developer who is publishing a game with their own IP and spending hundreds of thousands, or millions, of dollars would EVER agree to the EULA for the indie cheap subscription version because it is obscenely restrictive and gives Crytek every right to destroy their game.
Seriously people. USE YOUR GODDAMN BRAINS.
/thread my ass. Idiots.
It's not shooting yourself in the foot if you never had feet to begin with. Far Cry and CryEngine 1 was developed in the time Id tech. Showplace game that made people run over and adopt their engine. No mater how complicated or little support was involved. Any decent game had to bend these engines so much that they weren't even recognizable and by the time a game came out using that engine another sweet one was on the horizon because it took so long make something decent out of it.And you some how thinks that's a good thing when you compare it to other engines out there? Cryengine's EAAS was simply a half ass response to UE4 subscription plan.
Crytek is shooting themselves in the foot with what they are doing to their community.
Because people are morons.
You are ALSO assuming, dumbly, that there is only one license available. This is ONE license, not ALL licenses. There are going to be OTHER Cryengine licenses with entirely different terms and conditions and cost and royalty structures which are designed for "real" games from "proper" developers, aka people who can pay money up front and want to, for example, release their games on consoles and have access to the source code AND support. The EULA for the subscription engine is ridiculous and no developer who is publishing a game with their own IP and spending hundreds of thousands, or millions, of dollars would EVER agree to the EULA for the indie cheap subscription version because it is obscenely restrictive and gives Crytek every right to destroy their game.
Seriously people. USE YOUR GODDAMN BRAINS.
/thread my ass. Idiots.
I still think Crysis 3 has the best graphics/performance of any game out there, so it's a shame the engine hasn't been utilized much.
Crytek denies "verge of bankruptcy" claim
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-06-23-crysis-developer-crytek-claims-bankrupt-report-is-false
One thing to keep in mind is that a lot of what makes these games look good is due to the artists.
One thing to keep in mind is that a lot of what makes these games look good is due to the artists.
That is true the assetts are #1. However I really like Crytek's shaders. Their object based motion blur is the best in the business. And their parralax occlusion mapping is outstanding.
You guys are hyperanalyzing everything. Plenty of games were made with Crytek's engine. To date, there has never been more games being actively developed using Crytek's engine, Star Citizen being one of them. Crytek's own titles sold well and for the most part did well critically.
People talk about Ryse but as a release title it still sold 3-4 times what it probably would have sold otherwise. It was a big commercial success in spite of it being a meh game.
On the surface, Crytek has had lots of success and there is no reason they should be on thin ice financially. Even with all those questioning their engine licensing practices, crappy license criteria doesn't account for a whole company going bankrupt.
My opinion is that it wasn't necessarily completely market conditions, but mismanagement that put this company in danger. I think this is just another example of a trend happening in recent years where developers pump very large amounts of cash into projects and then miss the bar commercially and/or critically.
As a gamer, I prefer high production value as much as the next gamer, but when you spend 66 million to make Crysis 3, triple the amount of the original, there is no way all that extra money converts directly into a game three times better than the original.
You guys are hyperanalyzing everything. Plenty of games were made with Crytek's engine. To date, there has never been more games being actively developed using Crytek's engine, Star Citizen being one of them. Crytek's own titles sold well and for the most part did well critically.
On the surface, Crytek has had lots of success and there is no reason they should be on thin ice financially. Even with all those questioning their engine licensing practices, crappy license criteria doesn't account for a whole company going bankrupt.
Go to Crytek Wiki. Read back on the point about them having 800 employees. Look back at their "successes". They might be the size of UBI or EA but 800 employees. Yet in 10 years has released only a handful of minor successes. In the time one studio (lets used Visceral) in EA to release 3 games, you have Crytek with 9 Viscerals releasing 2. To top it off the weakest Deadspace sold more then the last 3 titles from Crytek combined. That game was considered a disappointment and the Franchise is being shelved for a bit. But for a whole company of 800 employees over the course of 6 years, that is considered a success?
All that proves is that there were numerous mismanaged and/or badly thought out projects that contributed to the fall of Crytek.