Graphics are '60% of the game,' Crytek CEO says

[mindcycle]

The graphics vs. gameplay debate has raged for some time. Unsurprisingly, the CEO of Crysis 3 developer Crytek thinks graphics top gameplay every time.

"People say that graphics don't matter, but play Crysis and tell me they don't matter. It's always been about graphics driving gameplay," CEO Cevat Yerli said.

"Graphics, whether it's lighting or shadows, puts you in a different emotional context and drives the immersion. And immersion is effectively the number one thing we can use to help you buy into the world," he told X360 Magazine.

Yerli said that better graphics make for better physics and all around game design. "Making things look spectacular and stylistic is 60 percent of the game." These comments, of course, come on the heels of Crytek's showing of the latest developments in the CryEngine 3, the company's bread & butter.

Humm... Maybe this is his justification for continuing to remake the same generic shooter, what, like 3 times in row now..?

http://www.shacknews.com/article/78715/graphics-are-60-of-the-game-crytek-ceo-says

 

[Midwayman]

If you keep in mind he's probably talking about what *sells* games he might even be underestimating.

 

[jaqie]

bejeweled. angry birds. minecraft. torchlight. terraria. kerbal space program. dwarf fortress. peggle.

and that's just off the top of my head.

The true nature of it: "Graphics are 60% of what sells our games..." (imo) because they lack true gaming greatness creation skill.

 

[Maximilian]

Meh... partially true.

Graphics//Gameplay//Story

Pick two! Very few games have all three, games with only one will suck.

 

[mindcycle]

Minecraft?

 

[Red Storm]

bejeweled. angry birds. minecraft. torchlight. terraria. kerbal space program. dwarf fortress. peggle.

and that's just off the top of my head.

The true nature of it: "Graphics are 60% of what sells our games..." (imo) because they lack true gaming greatness creation skill.

Those games aren't ugly, they just have different art styles. There's a difference between bad graphics and bad art style.

 

[jaqie]

You didn't read the posted article or the quoted parts of the post.

 

[KaOTiK]

Crytek games are about a 6/10 so that makes sense

 

[KeithTalent]

Crytek games are about a 6/10 so that makes sense

:thumbsup: http://instantrimshot.com/

KT

 

[mindcycle]

Crytek games are about a 6/10 so that makes sense

haha, agreed. I played about half of Crysis 2 then shelved it due to the extremely repetitive nature of the game. The story didn't help either.. It's essentially Crysis 1 in a different (less interesting) environment. I honestly have no idea what Crysis 3 is about but I bet it's more of same.

 

[NikolaeVarius]

Graphics are damn important for some games.

Metro 2033 or Stalker would not be as good as they are without good graphics driving a ton of immersion.

Immersion is a huge part of gaming, and graphics help immensely with that.

 

[Dankk]

The true nature of it: "Graphics are 60% of what sells our games..." (imo) because they lack true gaming greatness creation skill.

Yeah, pretty much. "CRYSIS 3 WILL MAKE YOUR VIDEO CARD MELT it's still just a generic FPS game though"

Graphics are damn important for some games.

Metro 2033 or Stalker would not be as good as they are without good graphics driving a ton of immersion.

Immersion is a huge part of gaming, and graphics help immensely with that.

I agree graphics are important... but not 60% important.

 

[blastingcap]

Not 59% or 61%, but exactly 60.0% of the game. You heard it from Crytek first.

 

[mindcycle]

I agree graphics are important... but not 60% important.

Yeah, this is how I feel too. Maybe when you're developing a generic FPS, graphics are going to be important because you have little else to give your game substance. This definitely doesn't apply to all games (or even all FPS's). IMO, this is his justification for developing the same generic shooter 3x in a row, as I mentioned above.

 

[Attic]

Graphics
Gameplay
Story

All three have to be very strong to have a solid game. Crytek obviously has overdone graphics and sacrificed gameplay and story.

For a good game i'd put it roughly at.

Graphics 20%
Gameplay 40%
Story 40%

I would put art direction into gameplay/story, not graphics,... obviously Crytek does as well.

Graphics need to be good, these days we are at a level of graphics where a lot can be done without sacrificing the rest of the game for graphics sake.

Portal Series
Minecraft
Amnesia Series
Recall back to Clive Barkers Undying, Dues Ex.... a lot of the best games were never leading edge in terms of graphics,.... they were in terms of story and gameplay.

Nother recent example is BioShock Infinite. I can run smooth on high with vysnc at 1080P on a HD5770. It was art direction combined with story that really sold the world, not raw graphics bleeding edge enhancements.

 

[darkewaffle]

Graphics don't make a game, but graphics are responsible for a huge portion of the "impression" prospective buyers get. And a game needs to make a good impression/impress people to sell.

 

[Aikouka]

Graphics don't make a game, but graphics are responsible for a huge portion of the "impression" prospective buyers get. And a game needs to make a good impression/impress people to sell.

I agree, and I think that as we play more and more games, we begin to establish expectations. I ran into this over this past weekend when I started playing Final Fantasy IX. For some reason I never played this game when it came out, but given how used we are to the present day Square-Enix entries, I'll admit that the game hasn't aged all that well! Part of me really wishes that the game looked prettier as I think it would be more immersive.

 

[Jodell88]

I agree, and I think that as we play more and more games, we begin to establish expectations. I ran into this over this past weekend when I started playing Final Fantasy IX. For some reason I never played this game when it came out, but given how used we are to the present day Square-Enix entries, I'll admit that the game hasn't aged all that well! Part of me really wishes that the game looked prettier as I think it would be more immersive.

Crappy 3d never ages well. 2D never gets old.

 

[NikolaeVarius]

Crappy 3d never ages well. 2D never gets old.

Uh huh

 

[jaqie]

Crappy 3d never ages well. 2D never gets old.

speak for yourself...

awesome way early 3D game (top gear 2 SNES)

terribad genesis 2D game (jurassic park sega genesis)

 

[cmdrdredd]

These days, if the graphics are absolute garbage I simply have a hard time playing the game. Giving screenshots of old games from 10+ years ago means nothing because at the time that was considered good and today when you play them you understand that it is not the latest technology on display.

 

[Anarchist420]

I agree with him somewhat although graphics in most games these days still suck.

Even more neglected these days is audio.

On the other hand, trying to rate games by category and weights is stupid.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I agree with him somewhat although graphics in most games these days still suck.

Even more neglected these days is audio.

On the other hand, trying to rate games by category and weights is stupid.

Audio...yes. Games that get the audio right are things like Uncharted with 7.1 LPCM. Many titles just enhance a basic stereo track and make it seem as if there's stuff surrounding you when it's just trickery. Positional audio is still pretty good with games like Skyrim though.

 

[blastingcap]

I agree with him somewhat although graphics in most games these days still suck.

Even more neglected these days is audio.

On the other hand, trying to rate games by category and weights is stupid.

I agree. Audio is super important. It's not that hard to get decent 1080p video these days with so many high-end cameras capable of it, but the moment you hear the audio you know whether it's an amateur or professional level of effort.

 

[Childs]

I agree with the title of the thread, although I haven't read the actual article. I would think even 60% is a little low. If graphics is considered a subset of art direction, I would put it at 70%. Graphics don't need to be cutting edge, because then you can't actually play the game. The graphics just can't look like crap. I have friends that I have described Minecraft to, and they were interested until they saw video of it. Then you have the flip side with something like Metro. While technically it might be better than average graphically, the performance sucks ass, and the game just feels sluggish. Art design is more important than checking off bullet points on a spec sheet.