Crytek have always pushed the boundaries for gaming visuals. Just take a look at the Crysis series, you can’t deny that they all look stunning. However, each game has – you could argue – always managed to fail to deliver a solid gaming experience.
CEO of Crytek, Cevat Yerli, has very boldly claimed that graphics “matter” and account for “60% of the game”. He further adds “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.”
I find it hard to believe that audio, the underlying plot, the way the game plays and character performances can only account for 40% of a game. Immersion, in my opinion, is all about these things, not just about the visuals.
With so many retro games still being played today, and re-releases popping up on the store week in week out, it’s easy to work out that graphics really don’t matter at all!
Do graphics matter to you – as much in the way Yerli claims, that is?
Source: Xbox 360 Magazine
The Lone Steven
And for me, that is why i will never buy any of their games as they seem to focus on graphics. Personally, i think graphics only make up 10% of the game. The gameplay, the plot, the atmosphere, the soundtrack make up the majority of the game. In fact, if graphic did determine whether a game was good or not, i would have a lot of rubbish games. That is not the case. Take a look at Dark Souls. Graphically, it’s average but it is excellent and uses it’s atmosphere, brutal gameplay and soundtrack to engage the player.
Graphics should never be the focus of a game as chances are, it will be crap and a chore to play. You can have the worst looking game but it can be excellent whilst you can have the best looking game that turns out to be shit. If you play games for graphics, you are shortsighted and must not enjoy any games that you previously played a few years ago.
Bilbo_bobbins
Says it all about their games to be honest.
The Von Braun
Having recently played Crysis from start to finish Crytek seemed to spend 80% of the resources on the game engine, then thought about putting in as many cliched elements as they could with it, i mean i thought the whole point was that via the super suit, you were this uber weapon, yet they were more than happy to throw in the usual jump in that tank and get blasting Son, stuff when it suited (no pun intended).
Of course graphics matter, stepping out into Oblivion for the 1st time this gen, or playing something like MOH:A.A for the 1st time many years ago, the sense of awe given by what the graphics engine was doing, should’nt be under-estimated and take away the physics and utter carnage of say Burnout Revenge and i’d end up getting bored very quickly.
But ever since the Dreamcast hit, with it’s crisp resolution, rich textures etc, it’s not so much better visuals i’ve been longing for-give me a rich 3D world to explore, a stable frame rate and ensure game does’nt crash (Skyrim started doing that to me at the mo.) and i’m happy, what i long to see is advances in game A.I, which are long over-due.
PC owners could point me to any number of games on the platform with much higher resolution, draw distance, far better textures, lighting, what not than say Demon’s Souls on PS3, but i’ve yet to find such a rich gaming experience, bosses that really struck a sense of F**K ME!!!!! look at the size of that damn thing or made me feel guilty for killing a character (The Maiden) and i still choke up every time i see Lisa’s scene in PS1 Silent Hill.
The visual impact of Crysis soon wore off, so i was looking for a game that’d grab me and could be the start of my entry into this much hyped series, having played the 1st game, i know it’ll be my last.All fur coat and no knickers.
ico
Hmmm. The ravings of a man who knows his team can do graphics well but mediocrity in other aspects. Good old fashioned gameplay is where it’s at and storline where appropriate. If it’s got decent graphics well that is a pleasant bonus.