Crytek Boss Says Crysis 2 "Backfired A Little Bit"

The first Crysis was tailored directly towards the glorious PC master race. So the fact the sequel pared back the hardware demands in favour of something that would run on a console did not go down well.

The game's reception reflects this, and has perhaps led to a reassessment of the decision, Crytek boss Cevat Yerli telling Gamasutra "Crysis 1's intention was, if I were to play it three years later, it looks great. And it does, actually, it fulfilled that. But it made it difficult for entry-level players. So with Crysis 2, we took a different direction, and it backfired a little bit."

Next week's DX11 upgrade, for instance, is being viewed by Crytek as an olive branch of sorts, Yerli adding "This is much more like a gift to the high-end community. And I think gamers will appreciate that. It lifts up Crysis 2 and gives a sneak peak of how PC gaming will evolve in the future, if you support a high-end preference."

It'll be interesting to see if in the future people are saying "but will it run Crysis 2?" like they said "but will it run Crysis?" Because I've got a feeling they might be saying "but will it run Battlefield 3?" instead.

Crytek's Expensive 'Gift' To Its High-End Players [Gamasutra]


Comments

    I reckon Metro 2033 holds the candle for "will it run" :P

    "PC master race" is a phrase I'm totally jack of reading.

      I doubt your reading this on your xbox.

        I'm reading this on a macbook pro, which I run dualbooting with windows 7. I finished Crysis 2, Portal 2 and Metro 2033 on this machine. I played the co-op component of Portal 2 on PS3. The difference between using a technology and openly declaring your subjective preference as dogma should be apparent here. It's all a bit divisive and silly.

          Confused by what you are getting at... are you saying Macintoshes aren't personal computers?

      Regardless of whether you're sick of it or not, undoubtedly it really is the master race. xbox and playstation (wii is not even worthy to call a console), take steps in development. When they take a step, they just sit there for a few years becoming dated in the process.

      PC gaming is evolution. It develops constantly rather then baying for the next release. You have to buy models.

        Sales are higher on PS3 and Xbox due to lower levels of piracy and the "it just works when I put it in the damn machine" advantage.

        Crytek hedged their bets on high end PC tech, then did a 180 and tried to get everyone to play it, thus losing their high end niche. I can see why they did it; it just sucks that they seemingly alienate their high end fanbase whilst doing so.

    whenever I read "PC master race" I think of this:

    http://watchoutfor.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/south-park-nerd.jpg

    master race indeed...

      Though that is just as applicable to console gamers. I agree that the title really needs to be dropped though. Why not just say PC gamers, or PC enthusiasts?

        Because it's not funny.

        Because the constant, pompous, arrogant pronouncements about the indisputable superiority of PC gaming over all other forms of gaming (and, quite possibly, all other forms of entertainment, art, and culture judging by the way some of them bang on about it) by so many of them means that the phrase is quite apt (in an ironic/sarcastic way).

      It's gonna be the wow guy It's gonna be the wow guy It's gonna be the wow guy.
      *clicks link*
      we have a wiener!

      It's rather ironic that the picture people always seem to associate with it infact has absolutly sh♥t all to do with any of the perks to a Good Gaming PC.

      WoW doesn't require a so called master race PC hell. It barely requires a Ps3/360 equivilant PC to run.

      All that illustrates is a moron who plays way to much of the one game. And i know plenty of console gamers who still live with there parents and spend all their spare time on CoD.

      It's a picture of a game nerd nothing more nothing less.

      Though master race is a sh♥tty term i think. I'm just of the opinion if the tech is there we should use it not sit around twiddling our thumbs because the last system can't use it

      What you've linked there best describes a hard core gamer: focusing heavily on one game and/or being an early adopted of the latest and greatest games.

      PC Master Race has nothing to do with the amount of playing one does.

      It has EVERYTHING to do with the higher technicality of games available on the PC platform as well as the numerous performance and control benefits afforded to that platform (you can still plug a 360 controller into a PC so don't even go there).

      "PC Master Race" is appropriate. Butthurt Consolefans will Butthurt.

    How do people design, produce and publish a game without possibly predicting that sort of reaction?

    I'm genuinely confused. Do they not read previews and fan concerns? Do they not think about the ramifications of design choices? Or do they think the game will be good enough to mollify any objectors?

    I don't particularly have an interest in Crysis or the company, but I'd love to know how a game developer (and the publisher, for that matter) can spend tens of millions of dollars on a game and completely fail to predict a negative backlash.

      It's a catch-22 though.

      Make a game that is absolutely flawless on PC and runs like crap or looks like crap on consoles, get flamed.

      Make a game that looks really good on PC but cut certain corners to deliver a similar performance on consoles as well, get flamed.

        twas only a catch 22 because they made it one though.

        They chose to take Crysis 2 to consoles. Which basically means they placed themselves in a catch 22.

        If they had made a console and PC game that wasn't called crysis no one would of cared.

        Instead they chose to sell a product that one might see as inferior to the original. It would kinda be like going to buy a car and being told that all those nice new features have been removed because they will be able to sell more of them that way

    I'm a fan of 'PC master race'. It implies that we are elitist... which is true. I happen to like being elitist TYVM.

    But yeah, it's kind of ironic that Crytek switched to console development after Crysis 1 didnt sell as much as they'd hoped ('only' a couple million units) and yet this has made them bomb even further.

    That's the thing about elitists, you don't piss them off, BECAUSE THEY ARE ELITIST! Crytek is going to have a hard time trying to win back the PC master race afterthis

    The only good thing out of this (I hope) is that FarCry 3 will take its place as a benchmark game. If its designed for consoles as well it wont be.

    Maybe PC's are getting so good that benchmarking is becoming redundant? Otherwise it will go in another direction, segmented benchmarks. For example Arma 2 is a MASSIVE CPU hog, an excellent graphics card will give a slight boost, a CPU upgrade will give a huge boost in frames (Dual core = 20fps, quad core = 40fps).

    So Arma 3 for CPU benchmarking, Farcry 3 for Graphics?

      Don't bet on Farcry 3. It too has been made for Consoles first...

    Off topic, but I've got Crysis 2 on ps3, and I have to say the quality difference really is noticable compared to what pc footage looks like. Not to say its bad, its probably one of the better looking ps3 games out there at the moment. But the demo videos of the perks are all quite flash, but when I actually use them, I can't help but feel a little jibbed that my game doesn't look that way. Its mostly framerate I think, those vids seems way too smooth.

    Further off topic, I feel as though CoD has killed FPS multiplayer on the ps3. While Crysis 2 offered something genuinely different and interesting (despite what the forums say about the multiplayer being broken, I think it was quite good), only 1 other person I know picked up the game at all. Despite me telling them it was worth checking out, they're all waitiing for MW3. And it feels like the community has died as a result, which I think is a shame, since the game is actually pretty good.

    Just my 2 cents.

      yeah you only gotta look at killzone 3 for evidence of that.

      Killzone 2 had it's own MP and IMO it was awesome because it was different and it was fun. Go to killzone 3 all the awesome things that were in KZ 2 have been removed for the sake of making a CoD clone.

      Not to mention it ends on a bloody turret section :(

    Interesting seeing E3 this year and even the console lovers over at GameTrailers mention that the PC had a very good showing at the conference. Maybe some developers are seriously hating the current console generation for holding the industry back this long. I think Crytek is already on record to saying this.

    Also Battlefield 3 being demonstrated on a PC was a nice change. I think we're really starting to see a significant difference in the final look of PC and console products as we enter the final stages of this console cycle.

    Just to add to this PC master race crap, overclocking and modding. I have a modded and overclocked serious PC and I get mods for games like Fallout etc to make them more complete and fix developer issues. This is another benefit that the medium affords ONTOP of the face I can go get say Diablo 2 and Baulder Gate 2 and install is whenever I want. It's the nest gaming platform is your willing to spend a little bit more for it than a console
    FYI. I have every console from Mega Drive onwards..

      Don't we all see the master race thing as a bit of a joke though.

      We are really more like gearhead's instead of just buying that stock car that was in front of the dealership, we went and built our own cars and tricked them out and then get excited about the fruits of our labor.

      But then we essentially get told we are only allowed to drive in a circle because the stock car can't handle sharp turn's at high speeds.

      Thing is most of the time PC gamers are angry about the same thing console gamers would be angry about if it happened to them.

      If a game was ported from PC to console, and was terribly optimised for controllers but sweet for Mouse+keyboard they would go nut's.

      Much in the same way they have gone nuts about Duke Nukem's load times and graphics.

      Anyone will complain when they feel they are being given a subpar experience. It just so happens to be though that many times the subpar experience on PC seems to be directly related to poor porting or console limitations

      I mean i'm still waiting for the control fix patch for Dungeon siege 3 because in their wisdom they provided not only a poor control scheme they also neglected to allow any remapping of the controls.

      which again is a shame because like crysis the franchise exist's because of the PC market and in their effort to go after the console dollars(which i am all for) they seem to have forgotten/neglected there roots.

      They can go after the console money all they want in fact i would prefer they did, just don't compromise anyone's gaming experience to do it wether it be between 360 to PS3 or both to PC. Ensure the game runs well on all the platforms. some would say they would end up with 3 version's of the same game, but is that really a bad thing.

      Theres already some evidence that the console and PC versions of BF3 have level design disparities. Which i think is a positive, wouldn't mind jumping in the PS3 co-op on it as well as having my PC copy

    "Crytek Boss Says Crysis 2 "Backfired A Little Bit""

    Bit of an understatement really, Crytek pissed on their core fan base, lost their position as the developers of the absolute pinnacle of graphics technology, and made a sequel that is inferior to the original, in terms of game play, polish, and graphics.

    When they took it off Steam, is when they really pissed me off.

    Crytek shouldn't have lied about putting PCs "first" with Crysis 2 in the first place. And it never would have blown up this big if they'd released a new franchise with outdated platforms in mind.

    PC gamers aren't completely irrational, they just expect not to be conned out of 60 bucks by misleading promises of DX11.

    Regardless of the technical complaints (this patch still won't fix the dodgy AI and no destructable environments), they aren't going to be able to fix the continuity, now. The original Crysis plot had flying, tentacled aliens with ice powers. We're not seeing any of that in this game. Poor sequel, should've retained the original concepts.

    I dislike all fanboys. But pc fanboys have to be the worst of all by far. I'm a console gamer. Always have been since I was a kid. I game on consoles because I choose to and enjoy it much more.
    There's nothing really on pc that interests me, besides the civilization games. But a big reason why I don't game on pc is because I can't stand the community. They come across as so arrogant.
    I do agree that the next gen consoles should be launched very soon (if not already) But they are still producing great games. Especially for something that is 5 years old now.
    Just don't understand why people find the need to put others down because of what platform they choose to game on. Pc gamers enjoy their pcs and console gamers (like me) enjoy their consoles

      Here's the best analogy I can think of for the behaviour you're seeing: Restaurant dining.

      A PC gamer is like a rich person who regularly visits the Ritz. The console gamer is a college student who can't afford the Ritz (ie: specs can't run an original PC game at max quality), but sure loves his McDonalds. And that's great - both are happy in their environment, and may even swap from time to time to satisfy a craving.

      But when a PC gamer pays $90 for a meal at the Ritz, what they expect is fine cuisine, not a re-heated Big Mac Meal.

      For many PC-gamers, with new release games, this is the exact experience we get. Eg: Deadspace is amazing on the 360, but little better than microwave-reheated maccas by comparison on the PC. ...But still paying the premium prices.

      Force Unleashed, Hunted, Resident Evil, and now Crysis 2... This is happening all too often. Sometimes a port is not an obscene piece of trash that no-one spent any time on (Fable III), but these are exceptions, not the rule.

    My main objection to Crysis 2 is them marketing it as a multiplayer game.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now