Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Crytek: PC Gaming is doomed, we only sold a million copies

RookRook Registered User regular
edited May 2008 in Games and Technology
Seems like Crytek is jumping on the multiplatform development train and announcing that Crysis was there last exclusive title.

http://www.videogaming247.com/2008/04/29/no-more-pc-exclusives-says-crytek-ceo/

“We are suffering currently from the huge piracy that is encompassing Crysis,” he said. “We seem to lead the charts in piracy by a large margin, a [situation] that is not desirable.”

He added: “I believe that’s the core problem of PC gaming: piracy… PC gamers that pirate games inherently destroy the platform. Similar games on consoles sell factors of 4-5 more. It was a big lesson for us and I believe we wont have PC exclusives as we did with Crysis in future. We are going to support PC, but not exclusive any more.”


Although, honestly, I kinda wonder at the legitamacy of that statement.

So, is this another nail in the now steel coffin, or just another illustration of how redundent PC/360/PS3 are compared to each other.

Rook on
«13456713

Posts

  • slash000slash000 Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    slash000 wrote: »
    Whatever. If the world is changing so that a person can buy a console and get more games on it, as opposed to dealing with the upgrade/hw/compatibility/driver/d-x issues of PC gaming to get said games, then I'm all for it. So long as the consoles onto which they arrive stay at more reasonable price levels.

    Consoles have always had more games.


    I'll just say that that is open to debate, because it is not what I meant. I meant that if more once-PC-exclusive developers are starting to put their games on consoles as well as PCs, then I'm good with that.

  • DravalenDravalen Registered User
    edited April 2008
    Crysis didn't fail because of piracy. It speced out of the market.

    Look at any decently selling PC game and you'll see that it runs on a wide range of machines, WoW, HL2, etc all run well on sub-par machines.

  • DisruptorX2DisruptorX2 Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    slash000 wrote: »
    slash000 wrote: »
    Whatever. If the world is changing so that a person can buy a console and get more games on it, as opposed to dealing with the upgrade/hw/compatibility/driver/d-x issues of PC gaming to get said games, then I'm all for it. So long as the consoles onto which they arrive stay at more reasonable price levels.

    Consoles have always had more games.


    I'll just say that that is open to debate, because it is not what I meant. I meant that if more once-PC-exclusive developers are starting to put their games on consoles as well as PCs, then I'm good with that.

    Well, its all opinion and all, but Epic, Crytek, and Bioware not being PC exclusive means very little to me.

    1208768734831.jpg
  • widowsonwidowson Registered User
    edited April 2008
    slash000 wrote: »
    Whatever. If the world is changing so that a person can buy a console and get more games on it, as opposed to dealing with the upgrade/hw/compatibility/driver/d-x issues of PC gaming to get said games, then I'm all for it. So long as the consoles onto which they arrive stay at more reasonable price levels.


    This.

    The issue isn't piracy, it's cost and ease of use for many people.

    Even though console games get patched, you don't have to hunt for patches, the console tells you you need one then gets it and installs it for you.

    Hell, if my 360 allowed a mouse/keyboard combo......

    -I owe nothing to Women's Lib.

    Margaret Thatcher
  • Regicid3Regicid3 Registered User
    edited April 2008
    We're not going to do this again, are we? It's already been said but one million for a glorified tech demo? That is good. Look at the companies complaining . . . if Valve starts saying something then we might have a problem.

  • RakaiRakai Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Valve, despite having expressed disdain for consoles, doesn't make PC exclusive games either. Even they don't think it's worth it to go PC exclusive.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]XBL: Rakayn | PS3: Rakayn | Steam ID
  • SaniusSanius Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    widowson wrote: »
    slash000 wrote: »
    Whatever. If the world is changing so that a person can buy a console and get more games on it, as opposed to dealing with the upgrade/hw/compatibility/driver/d-x issues of PC gaming to get said games, then I'm all for it. So long as the consoles onto which they arrive stay at more reasonable price levels.
    Hell, if my 360 allowed a mouse/keyboard combo......
    That wouldn't work for me; the fun in the PC comes from being a central hub for everything I want, and it's usually user-created from VoIP to the games (mod content). I can't get any of that on a console. But i'm a very small percentage of video game players, it's just something i've enjoyed since I was three.

  • slash000slash000 Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    On the bright side, console gamers should start getting the true "spiritual sequels" to FarCry, instead of that stuff being cooked up by a bunch of hacks over at Ubisoft....

  • DisruptorX2DisruptorX2 Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    The only stuff that matters being on the PC are niche strategy and RPG titles. And there's not much chance of that stuff going on console. I can't even think of a hardcore console strategy series, other than Romance of the Three Kingdoms.

    1208768734831.jpg
  • subediisubedii Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    The thing is, if the figures are still standing around a million, it was easily outsold by STALKER (around 1.65 mil units), a game that was ridiculously buggy on release (er, wait, it still is isn't it? ) and far more niche, but actually ran on computers other than HAL.

    Piracy, definitely a problem with the platform. But I think they were dreaming if they didn't think they'd already specced themselves out of most of the market before then.

  • SueveSueve Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Eh Blud, just put your shit on steam.

    Sell hella much, ya heard?

  • RookRook Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    I'm pretty sure that stalker number is pure bollocks.

  • subediisubedii Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Rook wrote: »
    I'm pretty sure that stalker number is pure bollocks.

    I thought it was the Witcher number that was made up? IIRC it sold around 800,000 in the soviet and commonwealth states, and the rest was spread globally.

    Either way though, I think Cervat Yerli is dreaming if he thinks that Crysis would have sold 4x - 5x as many units on console. You're talking in the region of 6-7 million units. Given the time that Crysis was released as it was (CoD4, Halo 3, Orange Box) I'd estimate more like 2-3 million at the most. Of course, it was also competing against CoD4 and Orange Box on PC.

    I really did think that 1 million was a good number to sell given the circumstances surrounding the game. Maybe I'm just pessimistic about that and he's right about it all being piracy, but I'm not so sure.

  • TelMarineTelMarine Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    the whole "you need a crazy PC to run this game" that flew around whether it was true or not (I still haven't played it) definitely hurt this game. It is interesting to see how stuff really is changing. A while ago, people were upgrading specifically for Doom, Quake, and other titles. Upgrading just for one game. Obviously way back then it was a bit different, you didn't have so many titles saturating the market (and those games really expanded a genre). Even as recent as four years ago, lots of people upgraded for half-life 2 and doom3. Now it seems much less people are willing to do that. Why? A number of things. Titles being rehashed with less content then the predecessor and running worse. Your customers are just going to figure "well this game plays pretty much the same as the old one, but it runs much worse. Why bother upgrade when I can play the old one still at a great framerate?" That is one issue. Two, the glutton of bad console parts with ridiculous system requirements have given the impression that a lot of PC games require a fuckton of stuff when they really don't. Now obviously some PC games require a lot as well, but a lot them scale quite well. Not so much with the console ports.

    You could talk about so many reasons why things are the way they are now compared to 5-10 years ago. With all this developer groaning, that gets plastered on every gaming news site as if it was the next biggest thing, it is almost like a bandwagon. One big company starts, the rest follow through. Obviously they are entitled to their opinions sure. Yet I think they need to re-think how they develop a game. You can't throw out a super graphical heavy title with a shittastic framerate and then (if its a sequel) have less content then before. That isn't going to fly. Why bother buy the new edition then? They are shooting themselves in the foot. Tone down the graphics a little bit, get rid of the console centric 30fps cap and make a good gameplay experience instead of so much focus on the visual experience. People are getting over graphics much faster than before I'd say. Once that wares off quickly, they are given a game that runs like crap and doesn't play well. That needs to be fixed.

  • RookRook Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    The witcher number was definitely a mistake. But every story about stalker sales leads back to this snippet which makes me pretty suspect. THQs 2008 financial report comes out next wednesday.

  • Saul MaloneSaul Malone Registered User
    edited April 2008
    So let me get this straight, You released an admittedly pretty cardboard cutout of your previous game that could only run on the top five percentile of computers and you are bitching about selling more than enough games to make a profit? Go fuck yourself Crytek, the problem isn't piracy its you.

  • DaemonionDaemonion Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Chris Taylor and Crytek?

    OH NOES, PC!

    <img class=" title=":lol:" class="bbcode_smiley" />

    Strain 121 wrote: »
    Spoiler:

    LURK mod for SoC|Backloggery|XBL|XFire|Steam|Zune
  • MinionOfCthulhuMinionOfCthulhu Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    So let me get this straight, You released an admittedly pretty cardboard cutout of your previous game that could only run on the top five percentile of computers and you are bitching about selling more than enough games to make a profit? Go fuck yourself Crytek, the problem isn't piracy its you.

    This is pretty much what I was going to say. Except I'd mention a bit more about how Crysis isn't really a great game on top of needing a super rig to play it.

    mgssig.jpg1152dt.gif
  • subediisubedii Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    So let me get this straight, You released an admittedly pretty cardboard cutout of your previous game that could only run on the top five percentile of computers and you are bitching about selling more than enough games to make a profit? Go fuck yourself Crytek, the problem isn't piracy its you.

    This is pretty much what I was going to say. Except I'd mention a bit more about how Crysis isn't really a great game on top of needing a super rig to play it.

    Personally I'd disagree there since I think it's a stellar game and there aren't many FPS's that try to give the kind of sandbox action that Crysis did.

    I will agree about the super rig.

  • subediisubedii Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Daemonion wrote: »
    Chris Taylor and Crytek?

    OH NOES, PC!

    <img class=" title=":lol:" class="bbcode_smiley" />

    You missed out CliffyB and Infinity Ward.

    Actually Chris Taylor is going the digital route now. Guess who's going to be distributing his next game? You might be surprised.

  • -SPI--SPI- Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Wow, you market your game specifically to a small segment of the consumer base (people with super high end rigs) and then it doesn't sell as well as you'd hoped? WHAT A FUCKING SHOCK!

  • SpoitSpoit *twitch twitch* Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    OK, I won't deny that it does realitically require a computer made in at least 2006 to run "well", but how many people complaining about things other than hardware requirements actually played it? Compared to Bioshock, or even CoD4, in terms of solid gameplay, it was by far the best SP FPS released last holidays.

    And if you actually read the article, a lot of it is in rather broken english, so I'm not entirely sure that they're actually saying that all their future games will be multiplatform, as much as that they decided that they needed to expand into the console arena. We've known about the later for at least half a year (their secret PS3 project).

    Also,
    Crysis as we have seen is impossible. Crysis would have to be largely changed to bring it to Xbox 360 or Playstation 3. Crysis is designed to be PC Exclusive. Our internal focus is not linked to bring Crysis to consoles.

    camo_sig2.png
  • CymoroCymoro Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    -SPI- wrote: »
    Wow, you market your game specifically to a small segment of the consumer base (people with super high end rigs) and then it doesn't sell as well as you'd hoped? WHAT A FUCKING SHOCK!

    Your avatar and sig are awesome.

    i am perpetual, i make the country clean
  • subediisubedii Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Spoit wrote: »
    OK, I won't deny that it does realitically require a computer made in at least 2006 to run "well", but how many people complaining about things other than hardware requirements actually played it? Compared to Bioshock, or even CoD4, in terms of solid gameplay, it was by far the best SP FPS released last holidays.

    That's really debatable. Sure I loved it, but I know plenty of people with whom the style of gameplay just didn't click, either because they weren't interested in the more dynamic, less scripted singleplayer, or just some other reason. For me, I knew I wanted it as soon as I played the demo (and ran through it like 3-4 times, just trying things different ways. That was pretty rare for me with FPS's ).
    And if you actually read the article, a lot of it is in rather broken english, so I'm not entirely sure that they're actually saying that all their future games will be multiplatform, as much as that they decided that they needed to expand into the console arena. We've known about the later for at least half a year (their secret PS3 project).

    Also,
    Crysis as we have seen is impossible. Crysis would have to be largely changed to bring it to Xbox 360 or Playstation 3. Crysis is designed to be PC Exclusive. Our internal focus is not linked to bring Crysis to consoles.

    I reckon they mean what's been said there. That quote is from ages ago before they were really looking at consoles with any seriousness. These days the comments seem to be far more positive about just what they can put on the 360 / PS3. Of course, time will tell how well the game survives the translation.

  • SpoitSpoit *twitch twitch* Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    That quote was from the article, like 2 questions after the one in the OP

    camo_sig2.png
  • subediisubedii Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Spoit wrote: »
    That quote was from the article, like 2 questions after the one in the OP

    You're right, my bad.

  • DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    So a PC game containing a new franchise from a largely unknown developer with absurdly high system requirements sold relatively poorly, or rather, not poorly at all but its budget was so fucking oversized that a million copies wasn't enough to break even.

    Clearly PC gaming is dying. I'll inform Blizzard.

    Well, hey, at least Stardock and Blizzard are getting the picture: reasonable system requirements, no draconian copy protection, and fun gameplay equal money.

    vvvvvv-dithw.png
  • DisDis Registered User
    edited April 2008
    PC Game Developers are stupid...
    Just because someone buys a 8800GT to play Crysis doesn't mean they will buy Crysis...

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • SpoitSpoit *twitch twitch* Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    At least Crytek realizes that there's a difference between planning games for the PC and consoles, unlike epic or most of the other multiplatform PC releases, which just map the controls to the keyboard and, if we're lucky, redo the UI a bit

    camo_sig2.png
  • DaemonionDaemonion Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    I actually liked Crysis. Well, the demo at least. I don't want to buy the game until I can fully realize the visuals. I wish more developers took Stardock's approach ...

    Strain 121 wrote: »
    Spoiler:

    LURK mod for SoC|Backloggery|XBL|XFire|Steam|Zune
  • MistaCreepyMistaCreepy Registered User
    edited April 2008
    WARNING WARNING!! Incoming crappy console oriented UI's and shitty framerates!

    Ugh. This gen has made me hate video games more than any other and Ive been playing since the NES dropped. :(

    PS3: MistaCreepy::Steam: MistaCreepy::360: Dead and I don't feel like paying to fix it.
  • DisruptorX2DisruptorX2 Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    WARNING WARNING!! Incoming crappy console oriented UI's and shitty framerates!

    Ugh. This gen has made me hate video games more than any other and Ive been playing since the NES dropped. :(

    Probably because you are playing the exact same games as last gen, but with less features and new graphics engines.

    1208768734831.jpg
  • subediisubedii Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    WARNING WARNING!! Incoming crappy console oriented UI's and shitty framerates!

    Ugh. This gen has made me hate video games more than any other and Ive been playing since the NES dropped. :(

    What sucks even more is that the original UT had the best interface out of the entire series. Simple, direct and to the point, standard window / file manager style interface that let you tweak whatever you wanted instantly.

    Even when UT2003 / 4 wasn't on the consoles they still decided to change and make it worse. And UT3's was a bit of a travesty to be honest.

    Gears of War I was OK with since there wasn't really much tweaking to do. But no push to talk? That's just standard surely? Oh, and also, having to bring down the command console in order to send text messages. Oh well, at least the option was there I suppose, even if it wasn't documented.

  • poshnialloposhniallo Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    I just read the Stardock essay harvest mentioned here. It seems to cover this pretty clearly.

    http://forums.sinsofasolarempire.com/post.aspx?postid=303512

    I figure I could take a bear.
  • Regicid3Regicid3 Registered User
    edited April 2008
    Rakai wrote: »
    Valve, despite having expressed disdain for consoles, doesn't make PC exclusive games either. Even they don't think it's worth it to go PC exclusive.

    Yes but they're not "abloo abloo abloo piracy abloo abloo abloo".

  • StollsStolls Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    As long as PC gaming's long-impending doom doesn't come before Stalker: Clear Sky or the big Witcher patch next month, I'll find a way to deal with it.

    I enjoyed Crysis a lot. Yeah, it's Far Cry 1.5, but I liked Far Cry; yes, even when the trigens started showing up. Still, I really can't imagine this being a huge surprise to Crytek. The game was geared towards those with well-above-average rigs (though it scales decently, but the visuals were obviously emphasized), and frankly, not as many people can afford to keep up. The question is, how long is it going to take developers used to big-budget projects to learn to live cheaply?

    Who knows. But I honestly think if the PC market fails - and I mean actually fails, as opposed to just being downsized or whatever - it'll only be because gaming as a whole isn't far behind. Probably because we'll be too busy bracing for the inevitable war with China after America annexes Canada and the European Union dissolves, all just prior to an exchange of nuclear missiles.
    Spoiler:

  • subediisubedii Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    We'll still need games to play whilst we're whiling away the hours in the Vaults. Of course, by that stage development will have regressed and we'd probably have to start with Pong all over again.

  • harvestharvest By birthright, a stupendous badass.Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    poshniallo wrote: »
    I just read the Stardock essay harvest mentioned here. It seems to cover this pretty clearly.

    http://forums.sinsofasolarempire.com/post.aspx?postid=303512

    Thanks for linking this, sorry that I couldn't be bothered to do it myself :P

    steam_sig.png
  • JasconiusJasconius sword criminal Flo-ridaRegistered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Why don't they just put their games on Steam, isn't Steam a pretty major deterrent of piracy because of the user account system?

    My company is looking for a remote short term (3-6 mo) contractor with remarkable JS and CSS experience who has worked in a team environment at least once before. If you are or know someone who is, PM me for details.
  • PancakePancake Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Jasconius wrote: »
    Why don't they just put their games on Steam, isn't Steam a pretty major deterrent of piracy because of the user account system?

    Well, for one thing, EA was their publisher for Crysis.

    Their only other game is already on Steam, but who knows where they're going from there? If they stick with EA, they definitely won't be putting their games on Steam any time soon if ever.

    wAgWt.jpg
«13456713
Sign In or Register to comment.