I'm looking forward to next gen for one and but the one reason, right now: science fiction appears to be on the brink of conquering the industry. Established IP like Battlefield and Call of Duty are inching past the present tense, lured by the prospect of prototype, near-future weaponry. Activision and Microsoft are going head to head for dominance of the space marine premise with Destiny and Halo's new Reclaimer trilogy.
The list of contenders rolls on. Trion Worlds has teamed up with Syfy to create a Borderlands-ish MMO, Defiance, which will run alongside a television series of the same name. Sleepers like Respawn Entertainment are quietly bustling away in the corners. CD Projekt is developing an utterly lush RPG based on the Cyberpunk 2020 boardgame, set in a city of dream junkies and flying cars. LucasArts has what smells strongly like a credible Star Wars game on its hands in the shape of bounty hunter outing Star Wars 1313.
"The sandbox is as open as we can make it, the AI system - the player always has choices about how he wants to tackle it. And in Crysis 2 we added weapon customisation which adds another dimension to the freedom. So if you add that decision-making to a fairly open and flexible player-expressive sandbox DNA, this makes Crysis stand out. Because that's our heritage, the result of our investment for the last 10 years.
Newcomers to the niche will have a hard time rivalling the choice-driven play that characterises Crysis, he went on, singling out Call of Duty and Destiny in particular. "To get there, you have to build all these foundations first, and it's challenging for any new company or any company that has a certain DNA like Call of Duty to get there.
"Or Destiny, which is Bungie's new title, building on the Halo franchise - there's some DNA there that goes in this direction, but again they're much more occupied in their minds with establishing the IP, not evolving the IP. So it is possible that Crysis might be similar, but I believe that the Nanosuit and our choices will stand out."
"And as long as you do something that has high quality, and makes an emotional impact on the player - whether that's through the gameplay or the narrative or whatever it is - it could be any kind of setting," interjected Crytek's director of creative development, Rasmus Højengaard - he of "next gen consoles with pre-owned blocks would be awesome" infamy.
"And to be honest, in a way a small amount of competition or pressure is a good thing, because it forces you to think outside the box."
Hands-on time with Crysis 3 suggests that it isn't a shooter that thinks outside the box, but a shooter that attempts to merge the boxes of Crysis 1 and 2. Are you getting a good feeling? Yerli insists that Crytek's CryEngine 3 technology is "three years ahead" of its closest competitor, the Unreal Engine 4, and claims it will dominate next generation hardware. Just as long as that's also true of sci-fi at large, Cevat...
20 comments so far...
senote on 12 Feb '13 said:
Can we please just get through one week without some dev spouting nonsense and BS that they can't back up.
Waffles2541 on 12 Feb '13 said:
Don't Jinx it Yerli, you say stuff like that and you are asking to fail.
Besides, Crytek seems to be lacking something that Bungie possesses. I've played most of Crytek's games and, while I did enjoy them for their monstrous graphics and size, the game play has always been a bit on the slow and lumpy side. Bungie has a reputation with making well polished games, that focus on gameplay, story, graphics etc, whilst Crytek seems to just be obsessed with the way it looks. Crysis is not a game, it is a technological showcase, a "look what we can do with computers" thing.
And while it pains me to say it, CoD has much "smoother" game play. God I have to go and wash my mouth out now.
Waffles2541 on 12 Feb '13 said:
Oh and just to add, going into a boxed in area and the computer saying "Go here to be sneaky or Go here to be 'splodey" doesn't really create much of a sandbox, plus the AI really cannot hold a candle to Bungie's work in Halo.
Very, very true.
senote on 12 Feb '13 said:
Are there any devs that actually have a diverse catalogue of high quality titles that really deserves to be able to say what they want?
Bezza89 on 12 Feb '13 said:
Bethesda, I'd have said Bioware just before Dragon Age 2 released, Rockstar North - or any R* outfit really, Infinity ward before everyone left (so respawn) and maybe bungie - but Reach was not better than 3 or ODST, it was just ok, and as reach is their most recent title and what with their games before that getting better each iteration that's why I said maybe Bungie.
That's my pick, can't name a single bad game in the devs I've listed.
Droidsbane on 12 Feb '13 said:
Bungies games have more soul than Cryteks... they put effort in to creating a fun experience with memorable levels, stories, characters and music, wheras Crytek feel more like a slightly interactive Graphics tech demo.
FishyGinger on 13 Feb '13 said:
I preferred crysis (first one) to halo games. But then I also preferred Reach to 3 so I guess I'm just a bit weird. They could really do themselves a favour by not talking though.
CunningSmile on 13 Feb '13 said:
Yay Crytek once again proving why I hate them. I've yet to enjoy a single one of their games, they're like dating a super model; nice to look at but dead eyed and with a single figure IQ.
Please could the collective games media stop interviewing these arrogant arseholes?
msbhvn on 13 Feb '13 said:
I haven't played a single Crytek game yet, though I have Far Cry and Crysis for PC waiting to be installed. Are they really that bad? I suppose hitching their wagon to EA is making them cocky, but wait until one of their games tanks and they'll be dropped faster than a burning bag of dog s***.
CunningSmile on 13 Feb '13 said:
"Are they bad?" depends who you talk to. Some people (particularly PC playing graphics whores) think they are the best thing since sliced bread since most of their releases are designed to stretch your graphics card to the limit. Personally I find their games to be very nice to look at, but also shallow and soulless.
And the cocky has nothing to do with EA. I've always found them arrogant as far back as the first Farcry.
Bezza89 on 13 Feb '13 said:
In contrast, the games are actually quite good - though I'd say the technical sides are pretty shit as I've only played the xbox versions and it makes everything look grainy and blurry, as well as the AI being useless. Crysis 2 has one of the best stories for an FPS, it's thrilling and fun in equal parts, though in both games stealth mode overrides it a bit too much. Honestly it's quite original and I think very good compared with 'oh those pesky russians', or 'oh those pervy middle eastern types'.
I think the first is just a linear sandbox, whereas the second is a very open mission game - it's not sandboxy but it's got lots of different paths and ways of dealing with things. I'm not sure why it gets the hate, people ask for something different from fps and crysis gives it, crytek are sure arrogant, but I've not played a better campaign since. Just need to concentrate on AI and optimising the game for consoles rather than running it on high settings and letting everything suffer.
FishyGinger on 13 Feb '13 said:
I'd echo what Bezza says. The stories are fairly shallow but no more so than any other shooter and you get different ways to play it through. And I like throwing chickens at people. When I got a pc capable of running crysis 1 I never bothered with it as I assumed it was a tech demo but when I did get round to playing it I thought it was great fun.
ItchyRash on 13 Feb '13 said:
Would also have to echo Bezzas words. I think it's easy to dismiss their games as just graphics and no story but can't see how they're any less shallow than the next FPS. I found the story in both Crysis 1 and 2 to be really good. And both campaigns seemed to last longer than the current 4-6 hours that most FPS games offer. Really looking forward to 3. Would disagree with Bezza regarding the graphics for 1 on xbox. Found them amazing. When I bought a new 42 inch tv it was the first game I loaded up to have a run through that luscious green jungle. Looked amazing
Bezza89 on 13 Feb '13 said:
Yeah they look nice, but they make the game run grainy and at a low framerate. If you're into that thing anyway, which I am and am not, if it's really blurry etc it grates, but I don't need 60fps 1080p, as much as I'd love it.
CunningSmile on 14 Feb '13 said:
Maybe I just find them more shallow than other FPS games because no one else spends three years in the build up telling me that their game will change the way I viuew games and forever alter my outlook on life? If they did it like Acti and said "It's pretty shit, but it's the same shit that sells every year so why try harder?" I might come away less disappointed.
Bezza89 on 14 Feb '13 said:
Actually activision say their game will carry on the trend of being the leading form of innovation, in fact they've just said that for their next CoD, you know, CoD10 or12.
If you think companies shouldn't try to big up their games to sell more that's fine, and I do find crytek do it way too much because of their engines but it is necessary. Dead Space 'we're going to be remembered for bringing the best co-op experience you've ever seen'. Everyone does it, it's just that crytek stole your dog, or something
FishyGinger on 14 Feb '13 said:
"The Call of Duty franchise continues to set the bar for innovation and we expect a new Call of Duty game in development for 2013 to raise that bar even higher,"
I think you need to post "Where has my dog gone" posters in Cryteks offices I'm afraid. Call of duty is only just getting to the levels of innovation Duke Nukem 3d had last century, except with a worse physics engine. Most developers/publishers do it, some just annoy us individually more than others.
The only ones who seem to be different are valve, led by Gabe "wanna see half life 3? Really? Nah I don't think you do" Hippo.
CunningSmile on 14 Feb '13 said:
Don't diss Gabe. Anyone who does press releases in Hiaku form and buys pizza for protesters camped outside his office deserves respect.
FishyGinger on 14 Feb '13 said:
Oh I think he's great, just instead of saying "our game will be like the bestest ever made by anyone ever in like, ever" he seems more content to casually goad people who want it. Which doth make one chuckle so. I also couldn't remember his last name at the time of writing and Hippo seemed a good alternative.
Bezza89 on 14 Feb '13 said:
I thought it was Gary Newell?