Crytek to end PC exclusivity because of piracy

After five months on the market, the picture of Crysis’ retail performance looks clear as artfully normal-mapped mud. In December last year, the NPD group issued a report saying the game was selling poorly. Then, in February, Electronic Arts triumphantly announced that Crysis had “exceeded expectations” and sold one million copies in less than three months.

Now, Shacknews reports that the game’s developer has decided to abandon PC exclusivity because of disappointing sales. In an interview with PC Play Magazine, Crytek CEO Cevat Yerli stated, “Similar games [to Crysis] on consoles sell factors of 4-5 more. It was a big lesson for us and I believe we won’t have PC exclusives as we did with Crysis in future.” Yerli laid the blame for the sales gap entirely on piracy. “We seem to lead the charts in piracy by a large margin, a chart leading that is not desirable. I believe that’s the core problem of PC Gaming, piracy. To the degree PC Gamers that pirate games inherently destroy the platform,” he told PC Play.

Interestingly, Yerli didn’t mention the possibility that Crysis‘ hefty system requirements might have been a factor. His interview reminds us of a blog post by indie game publishing house CEO Brad Wardell, who said developing titles for the “hardcore gamer” market is a poor business decision because that market is too small and swarming with pirates. Wardell explained, “Anyone who keeps track of how many PCs the ‘Gamer PC’ vendors sell each year could tell you that it’s insane to develop a game explicitly for hard core gamers. . . . I think people would be shocked to find out how few hard core gamers there really are out there. . . . The number of high end graphics cards sold each year isn’t a trade secret.”

Comments closed
    • l33t-g4m3r
    • 12 years ago

    §[<http://forums.sinsofasolarempire.com/post.aspx?postid=303512<]§ "Recently there has been a lot of talk about how piracy affects PC gaming. And if you listen to game developers, it apparently is a foregone conclusion - if a high quality PC game doesn't sell as many copies as it should, it must be because of piracy. Now, I don't like piracy at all. It really bugs me when I see my game up on some torrent site just on the principle of the matter. And piracy certainly does cost sales. But arguing that piracy is the primary factor in lower sales of well made games? I don't think so. People who never buy software aren't lost sales."

    • sdack
    • 12 years ago

    Before the gaming industry or Hollywood can blame piracy they should first change the images that they create of pirates. If not then I am sure that these industries will end up in Davy Jones locker!

    • Prototype
    • 12 years ago

    Perhaps some people don’t understand how the world works. Everything is based on economics. If something is not profitable, it won’t float. Not every company in the world is a ‘Microsoft’ who has billions in the bank. Some comanies cannot bounce back from poor sales and such. They really do need those sales that are taken away by piracy.

    So of course any company doing bad in sales will try and point the finger at piracy. While not the full picture (and sometimes a copout), usually this is at least partly true. When major games come out, with demo’s avalible, there should be little reason to pirate anything.

    If anyone needs to ‘try before you buy’ that’s what demo’s are for. Yet there is still lots of piracy of PC games, because the reality of the situation is people pirate because they know they can get away with it. It’s a selfish reason, helping nothing and no one but themselves.

    This is entertainment, a ‘want’. It’s not food, water or air. Games are not a ‘need’, or some birthright. People who claim “I wasn’t going to buy it anyways” are just making excuses. If someone isn’t going to buy it anyways, why do they somehow get the privledge of obtaining and playing the game for ‘free’ while everyone else is paying for it and driving the industry.

    People who pay for their games grow the industry. The companies see where the money is coming from and make more games like that. Try the demo; if no demo is out then don’t buy the game. Or if someone resorts to pirating to try some game, at the very least be reasonable and buy the games you like.

    But lets face it, if everyone really followed such a creed, ‘buy what you like’, less complaining about piracy would be going on. Far too often people easily dupe themselves into thinking “I don’t like this game enough to buy it”. Selfishness is just apart of human nature and that’s why companies haven’t left it in the hands of the consumer, why there is anti-piracy measures, etc.

      • MadManOriginal
      • 12 years ago

      The ‘I wasn’t going to buy it anyway’ people are just exposing themselves as pathetic morons at worst or digital packtrats at best. If it’s not worth buying and not worth waiting a month or two for a sale when you can get recent release games for ~$30 often then why the heck have it at all? It’s like those idiots that buy stuff with coupons or on sale even though they wouldn’t have anyway. ‘Look at how much I “saved”‘ :rolleyes:

    • sreams
    • 12 years ago

    What’s sad is the fact that as soon as a game’s author blames piracy, many people simply stop thinking and stop considering any other possibilities for slow sales. “Piracy” is the magic word that removes all blame from the game’s producer and lays it entirely on consumers. It’s this kind of crap logic that results in DRM and other invasive anti-piracy measures that ultimately cost consumers even more money.

    As for Crysis, all I know is that I read the reviews and tried the demo, and I have no interest in it. Far Cry was a far better game, and I bought that one. But then…. according to Crytek, that lost sale must be attributed to piracy.

    • ThorAxe
    • 12 years ago

    This is somewhat bemusing since there were *[<90 MILLION sales of discrete graphics cards in 2007 with an Average sale price of $257<]*. Surely some of those cards were bought to play games with? HALO 3 is rendered at 1152x640 but no one complains about that. For a laugh I ran the demo of Crysis at HIGH in DX10 @ 1152x864 (a fair bit higher than HALO) and it averaged 51FPS with a minimum of 30FPS, though this was on a 8800GTX SLI system. However it looked far, far better than HALO 3.

      • l33t-g4m3r
      • 12 years ago

      I think you are totally missing the point/misunderstanding the issue.
      Halo3 has nothing to do with PC owners.
      Console people do not care about resolution as much as PC owners.
      BTW, on this website there was a thread with people complaining about the res in halo. I can see why, since this is a PC oriented website.
      Don’t compare PC users with Consolers, it isn’t an accurate comparison.

      Your statement on the playability of Crysis, basically explains why crysis sucks.

      *Requires SLI.
      Most PC users could care less about SLI, and don’t have Vista.
      consoles don’t have this problem. all xbox users have the same specs.

      *Ultra mode is not playable @ 1600×1200 or 1920×1200 even with SLI, that’s what most gamers want to play games at.
      If you have to compromise with the highest end system, there is something wrong with the game.

      *Crysis is too generic.
      PC gamers have high standards, crysis does not meet them.
      While Halo and Crysis suck, Half-Life 2, Stalker, and Solar Empire are considered good.
      Console ports, and generic rehash games do not sell on the PC.
      If you like generic lukewarm games, you might as well just switch to the xbox, and stay away from the PC.

        • ThorAxe
        • 12 years ago

        If you know what you are doing then a card like the 8800GTX will play Crysis just fine with a few tweaked settings in a custom cfg at High Quality.

        Oh and by the way there is no ‘Ultra mode’, it is called ‘Very High’ and a simple hack can enable this in XP.

        As for Crysis being boring, did you actually play it all the way through? I did, and for the most part it was great.

        It seems I was not alone as Metacritic gives it an average score of 91%, somewhat more than Sins of a Solar Empire and STALKER, I guess they must be worse than a generic lukewarm game.

        Please check your facts before making rediculous statements as you just come off looking like a console gamer.

    • sdack
    • 12 years ago

    It is getting sad. I recognize Crytek as a specialist in 1st Person Shooters and that they have developed one of the best if not the best 3D graphics engine on the market. It is true that the hardware requirements are very high but it also means that the game is not really here yet. Once more people posses the required hardware the more will buy the game. However, if they blame piracy for it and start looking greedily at the console market then that will be the end of their technology lead. Then they are looking for the market lead. Only on a platform as open as the PC will it be possible to develope games that exceed the normal. If they change this then they have to lower the ambition of their developers and produce games that run on everything.The managers are selling out the recognition the company has received so far.

    Lets hope when they sell 4-5 times more copies that everyone within Crytek will be as happy as the manager who made the decision. What is so great about Crysis anyway? …

    • Ruiner
    • 12 years ago

    This reminds me of the film studios unhappy with kids texting/IMing during lousy movies ‘stealing’ even the opening weekend from them. If a game sucks, word gets out fast.

      • Krogoth
      • 12 years ago

      Word of mouth has been doing that for years. IM and text messaging just makes it much easier to grab a larger audience.

    • albundy
    • 12 years ago

    ok…and what console does crytek think their new games will run on? i highly doubt they will put out a choppy unoptimized game (like they have done previously) as it will 110% likely get nuked by the console company before it even hits the shelves, so this all just a load of cr@p to me. and to blame it on piracy? every software developer can use that excuse. just dont forget the cost of developing it on and for diffrent platforms…hehehe >:)

    • ish718
    • 12 years ago

    Oh yeah, complain about the sales of a game that is poorly optimized and requires a high end system to actually enjoy it.
    I wouldn’t care if crytek stopped making games for PC entirely…

      • l33t-g4m3r
      • 12 years ago

      I agree, if all the greedy, uncaring, crap companies left, stardock would have more room to breathe, maybe become the biggest pc game producer in the industry.
      if you vote with your wallet, stardock is in, crytek out.

      I like companies that care about their customers, and are willing to honestly produce a quality product.

      GPG, while I like supreme commander, may not be getting another sale from me, considering that they aren’t supporting forged alliance.
      Forged alliance has a ton of bugs, and AI issues, that are being completely ignored, while they are planning to release their next expansion instead.
      I won’t buy it until Forged Alliance is patched and working 100%.

      The community may have made workarounds, and an unofficial patch, but it’s GPG’s responsibility not theirs, and it still doesn’t really fix the underlying issues(afaik).

        • Krogoth
        • 12 years ago

        Yep, FA has mostly gameplay related issues.

        The most glaring one are late-game strategies. They made value-ground experiments and nukes as the only viable solutions. The other ones are far too expensive and time consuming to be worth against a competent opponent.

    • MadManOriginal
    • 12 years ago

    Maybe your game is a poorly programmed pos that has no replay value and too high system requirements? Noo it has to be *someone else’s* fault. Great to see the American blame-someone-else attitude expanding overseas *sigh*

    On a less sarcastic note maybe the genre they’re pushing is just stangant on the PC. There are certain types of games, most notably ‘strategy’ (which are often tactical but anyway) that I could not see playing on a console.

    • yogibbear
    • 12 years ago

    If only integrated intel GPUs were half decent, then more people would be capable of running games in the current generation of PC games. Stupid stupid intel. Seriously ~$50 bucks more or something on a motherboard with a better integrated GPU instead of the stupid crap intel makes would drastically increase the potential customers to all PC game developers. The number of times on game forums someone comes on and asks in the tech support why their game won’t run and has an integrated GPU is dumbfounding.

      • Saber Cherry
      • 12 years ago

      Yep. Intel’s shortsightedness is killing its own market for CPUs… since every graphics chip it sells creates a GPU-limited computer.

      • odizzido
      • 12 years ago

      Believe it or not, but some people don’t buy computers for games. I run a “crappy” intel GPU and am quite happy with it.

      • MixedPower
      • 12 years ago

      Why would you want to spend an extra $50 on better integrated graphics when you could get an 8500GT for that price that would be faster than any graphics system you could logically fit onto a motherboard?

        • Saber Cherry
        • 12 years ago

        Because you pulled $50 out of your rear? Boards with integrated graphics already cost more than they would otherwise… by a few dollars. Boards that target gamers don’t have integrated graphics, or have it disabled.

        Intel motherboards could have integrated graphics 4x as fast with working drivers, at the same price, if Intel had only allocated an extra few $million to R&D. With $billions/year of profit, they have chosen instead to supply garbage. If, in addition to extra R&D, you increased the cost of a motherboard with integrated graphics by $10, it could be on par with a 8500GT and have 256MB dedicated VRAM.

        As it stands, anyone who buys a computer with Intel integrated graphics, and does not know anything about computers (like how to upgrade one, or that it is even possible), can and will go out and buy some random DX9 game. It won’t run, and they’ll return it. This kills the PC game industry.

          • DrDillyBar
          • 12 years ago

          Hope we’re getting a review of the x3500/4500.

          • green
          • 12 years ago

          i would have thought people buying a computer with intel integrated graphics were doing so en-masse. and that they’re going into businesses as windows/office machines. or into libraries as basic internet access machines. which really helps in those situations deterring people from doing things like, i dunno, playing CoD during office work hours, or hogging a computer so you can do a 40 man WoW raid in a library.

          and people that are getting these machine in their homes are getting exactly what they paid for when they told the person they were buying it from that they wanted a super cheap computer to run MS office and use the internet.

          it’s like blaming GM for chucking in a 1.2L engine in a small cheap hatch then complaining it can’t hit 130mph so that it struggles on the highways/autobahns/freeways

    • Ashbringer
    • 12 years ago

    Yes please start making games for consoles. My hacked Xbox 360 is just waiting, and no mod chip was required to do it.

    Put all your eggs in one basket and it’ll just get easier for the pirates.

    • Krogoth
    • 12 years ago

    Yet, another crier that picks on the industry’s favorite scapegoat. Rather then accepting the reality that gaming PC industry is not what it quite was back during golden days.

    It also does not help that you develop a game that way ahead of the curve for majority of gaming market. Much less unable to be played on current generation of gaming console. Eye candy can only get you so far without having solid gameplay behind it.

    Earth to Crytek, you were too freaking ambitious for you own good. Just take it like a man and learn from mistakes of Crysis.

    • dano1122
    • 12 years ago

    because its easier to make money creating crappy games for a console for kiddies to buy than for a pc where the audience is more mature and picky about crappy games… it’s all about the money, not making good games, to folks that use this bs

    • odizzido
    • 12 years ago

    I hope they go for good. Less garbage to filter through to find something good.

    I find it really funny though. The game wasn’t a very good FPS, and it ran on only a few systems at playable frame rates. Not only did they limit their market with stupid system requirements, but they limited their market with a boring as hell game.

    • Saber Cherry
    • 12 years ago

    I think Crytek made the right decision. Compared to the PC, consoles sell far more copies of crappy games.

      • MattMojo
      • 12 years ago

      Nice one… got a good laugh from that one….

      It’s true they do sell more crappy games on consoles and in larger quantities.

      Mojo

    • Pettytheft
    • 12 years ago

    What’s with all you people crying about how it’s the games fault. If they were the first developer to cry foul then you might have merit.
    §[<https://techreport.com/discussions.x/13940<]§ There is Infinity Ward talking about their hugely popular, well received, incredibly fun game getting pirated like crazy. Back in the day Piracy meant buying a game, making copies and manually distributing them to yourfriends. Then it was downloading from some BBS which was a nightmare and expensive. Then you had newsgroups with manual searches, missing bits of data rendering your entire download invalid not to mention everything was split into 5 meg files. These all required the user to have a firm grasp on computers. I'm not even going to get into how everyone had dialup. Now it's 6Mbps internet service and google seaches for a torrent file. Download, double click ,wake up and here is your game. It's far too easy these days. Not to mention the game is usually available before it comes out in stores. With all of these developers crying foul some of you still want to blame the gamemakers despite the evidence. Get over it and buy more games. I bet half the people complaining have their torrent client running in the background.

      • gtoulouzas
      • 12 years ago

      Warez sites are filled with all sorts of spyware/porn clients/dialers and virii. Assuming pirates wade through the sea of malware, they’re still going to have to download several gigabytes worth of data, which might not work, will almost certainly lack multiplayer capabilities, and will not accept patches. Cryptic error messages, wrong localization and unexpected crashes are also usual among “warez” releases.

      So, no, I don’t think it’s quite as straightforward or easy as you suggest (thankfully, if I may add). As for your accusation that critical responses to Crytek’s claims come from pirates, I’m afraid that is an ad-hominem that is unworthy of a retort.

        • TREE
        • 12 years ago

        lol, no its not mate, most pirates dont visit §[<http://www.porn<]§+freegames.com if you find "warez" then its no surprise. Most pirated games are not "Warez", rather just an image of the CD with a crack added.

        • SPOOFE
        • 12 years ago

        All of your contentions are ridiculously minor in the wake of “it’s free” and “it’s easy”. You actually think downloading several gigabytes of data is a deterrent to game piracy? Have you even looked at hard drive prices lately? Did you miss his point about faster Internet service than ever before?

      • Rza79
      • 12 years ago

      Exactly what i was thinking.
      As a kid i used to get copies of games on floppies. Now with my 20Mbps line, it takes less than an hour to get an iso of whatever including crack. No searching, no warez, no nothing.
      But since i’m working, i’m buying the games i like.
      I don’t understand people blaming ‘bad coding’ the problem. UT3 also didn’t sell too good on the PC. Also bad coding? Do you even know how to code? Did you see the source code?
      Personally i think Crysis must have good coding. Show me any other game with this kind of physics. You can break anything, take anything, shoot through stuff, wind, … It’s their own physics code. No Havok or Ageia.
      I booted Far Cry again to compare. The difference is like night and day.

        • Kurotetsu
        • 12 years ago

        I don’t think its a matter of bad code. Crysis is simply the representative of next gen vid cards, basically, the game nothing can currently run effectively (well, the definition of ‘effectively’ varies wildly between people; there are those who believe Crysis runs effectively already). Before Crysis, F.E.A.R. was that game. Then the Geforce 8 series came out and bent it over. I imagine the same will happen when the Radeon 4000s and the GT200 cards come out.

        I own Serious Sam, FEAR, its expansions, and Rainbow Six: Vegas (hopefully I’ll be adding Orange Box to this list soon). I played Crysis for a bit, and it didn’t offer anything that I didn’t already have with those games. Yeah, its beautiful, no doubt. But then, I think FEAR is beautiful too, and it has awesome gameplay on top of it, something Crysis decidedly lacked. Every review I’ve seen of Crysis says the same thing; awesome graphics. Gameplay? Multiplayer? Replayability? Not so much.

        Games that are not fun will not sell. For some bizarre reason some people translate this as PC gamers being pissed that everything is moving over to console. Game makers translate this as ‘RARGH! PIRATES!’. When I look at Sins of a Solar Empire (a low-budget game with no copy protection which sold 100,000 copies in its first three weeks, not counting download sales), and Orange Box (whose PC sales actually beat console sales last I checked), then I see the above interpretations, my internal bullshit alarm goes off.

        Oh, and yes, I imagine 100,000 in three weeks is pitiful next to console game sales…if you ignore the number of console users next to PC users.

    • Krazeee
    • 12 years ago

    I want to know how they know it’s piracy that’s killing them. provoko posted some stats from piratebay, so it could be taken as a possible indicator of the whole picture, but either way, they don’t really have any proof that piracy is the major cause. Quite to the contrary, information such as provoko’s post show that, compared to other games, piracy is having a relatively small impact on their sales.

    First they say it’s selling poorly, then they say it’s exceeding expectations, then they say it’s not selling as well as they wanted and blame the gamers for it. Smart idea, make unfounded accusations at the very demographic you’re trying to sell to.

    Everybody’s said it already. The game doesn’t sell cuz it ain’t worth it. Not to me anyways. I don’t have to play a game with every detail cranked to 11, but I’m not gonna play a game at 1024×768 and medium details just to get 30+ fps, especially when it’s major (and seemingly only) draw is eye candy. Every other game allows me to blow stuff to bits. Remember Red Faction? Got to blow walls and stuff up in that too. Give me a detailed story and a reason to try something other than headshotting the enemy into oblivion to complete the level. /end rant

    • gtoulouzas
    • 12 years ago

    While we’re at it, does that mean EA’s “1 million sales” figure for Crysis was bunk? I have trouble imagining the developers being dissatisfied with such a number.

    • A_Pickle
    • 12 years ago

    I think a company should try to make good games before they can lament about how “piracy” is the problem.

    I’m also inclined to note that the only whiners on the PC side of things are the companies that have released games on optical media bound to a CD key. Yeah, that protection scheme works, after all. It hasn’t been circumvented every time in the last… ohh… decade.

    Dumbasses.

    • derFunkenstein
    • 12 years ago

    that’s really poor taste of them to want to chase the money in console gaming but blame PC piracy…in other words, i don’t think it’s piracy, I think it’s their desire for more money.

      • Meadows
      • 12 years ago

      They worked a lot on a game for which they weren’t payed well enough. Speaks for itself why they want more for that job.

    • MixedPower
    • 12 years ago

    If it were me making the game, I honestly wouldn’t have even bothered with a PC version. Compared to their PC counterparts, console versions sell for higher prices, practically guarantee a lot more sales (UT3 for example sold 110,000 copies on PS3 compared to 34,000 copies on PC in the month after each one’s release), and (I imagine) are easier to develop.

    Quite frankly, I’m surprised that there are still as many companies as there are making PC games that aren’t just half-assed ports of the console version [cough]Lost Planet[/cough]. Regardless of whether or not piracy has a significant affect on PC game sales, the fact is that the market for PC games is much smaller than that of console games, and all the whining gamers in the world who complain about studios lying about piracy and abandoning them won’t change a thing.

      • gtoulouzas
      • 12 years ago

      1995 called. It wanted its PC gaming doom and gloom rants back. 🙂

      The PC gaming market is profitable, and as such, viable. I don’t think any amount of console fanboy whine is going to change that. PC gamers have been told they are “in denial” over the system’s demise as a gaming platform for the past, what, twenty years now?

      Heck, I even remember an EIDOS executive predicting that the PC would “stop being a viable gaming platform within the next 18 months”.

      That was in 2000.

        • MixedPower
        • 12 years ago

        I agree that PCs are profitable and viable and will be so for the foreseeable future, but they aren’t nearly as profitable as consoles are and will be. I’m not trying to spread doom and gloom, I’m just saying that gamers shouldn’t be complaining about developers moving to cross-platform development when that’s where the money’s at.

        q[<1995 called. It wanted its PC gaming doom and gloom rants back. :-)<]q It called me, too. It wants its lame, overused joke back. 😉

    • deinabog
    • 12 years ago

    While I have Crysis and do enjoy playing the game the system requirements are unforgivable. That’s the real reason Crytek is looking at consoles.

    • PRIME1
    • 12 years ago

    What’s Crysis going to run at on a 360? 480i with no AA?

    Program a better game and get better sales.

    I think the Wii has proven that eye candy is not a top priority in selling a game.

    They should have tweaked the game to run/play well and left the uber eye candy and bloated code to a tech demo.

    • StashTheVampede
    • 12 years ago

    The … REAL problem is that it is very difficult to “buy” sales, today.

    Let’s step back in the “pre internet” time machine and look at what advertising did when a stinker was coming to the box office or your local B&M shelves: they would advertise the SHIT out of it.

    That advertisement would buy them enough sales to be #1 on the charts for maybe 1-2 weeks, it would cover the costs of the film (domestically) and THEN the sales would drop once enough word of mouth got around. Once “word of mouth” became “the internet”, I’m sure it has been more difficult to buy the #1 box office spot.

    Take this problem to PC games and the results are the same. A huge marketing blitz won’t sell the game like wildfire (like it once did). Get a number of sites a copy and let ’em run on about how bad the game is and you aren’t look at PC sales, period. If the game was great, people would buy AND pirate it! Since the game is bad, it is either worth pirating or isn’t worthy at all.

    Buying off a few review sites would have sold Crysis more copies. It still would have flopped on the shelves once enough bloggers got their hands on it.

    • Silus
    • 12 years ago

    Well, I enjoyed Crysis. It was a good game and it was worth what I payed for it. Being a PC exclusive was a bonus, in a sea of crappy console ports for the PC and console only titles. And because of that, I’m sadden by what Crytek said. Yet another developer that’s going to dedicate its efforts to consoles and that means very, very low quality for PC Games…

    There’s a plus though. I won’t be spending more money on PC Games, if all I get are console ports. In fact, according to what some of these developers have been saying about piracy, I must be the only schmuck still buying PC Games…

    • no51
    • 12 years ago

    /[<"Similar games [to Crysis] on consoles sell factors of 4-5 more. It was a big lesson for us and I believe we won't have PC exclusives as we did with Crysis in future."<]/ Trans: GIMME MOAR MONIEZ!!! I believe Brad Wardell (of Stardock/Sins fame) said on the GFW Radio Podcast a while ago (4/2/08) that it's not that pirates are killing pc gaming, it's that the expectations of devs/pubs have greatly increased. They all want to be the next Halo or WoW. Of course the system requirements didn't help much. I bought only 2 FPS's in Q4-07, and that was the Orange Box and Bioshock. I'm burned out on FPS for a bit.

    • ew
    • 12 years ago

    Translation:

    Crytek to end PC exclusivity because PC market not big enough to support sucky games.

    • swaaye
    • 12 years ago

    I think the game didn’t build up excitement very well in its marketing. It was advertised mostly as a sort of techdemo FPS, basically. That doesn’t appeal to very many people. Certainly not a significant part of the “new MMO world” we live in now. PC gaming may have 10x the audience compared to the ’90s, but that audience isn’t significantly hardcore FPSers.

    When I think about why I bought the game, it comes down to a few reasons 1) sandbox FPS 2) single player focus 3) cool AI 4) techdemo. These are not reasons that the mass market shares, I’m sure, upon seeing which games do sell well.

    Piracy is a lame scapegoat. It’s not as if piracy is new or exclusive to PCs. Maybe their game is ideal for some console “simplification” so the 360/PS3 audience has access to it though. That audience seems to demand a hell of a lot less from their game selection.

    • bdwilcox
    • 12 years ago

    The 100 people who could run Crysis at high settings in DX10 with anisotropic and AA turned on.
    §[<http://www.top500.org/list/2007/11/100<]§ And they wonder why it didn't sell...

    • provoko
    • 12 years ago

    This is such a joke, a cop out really. Blizzard and EA games sell multiple times over Crysis or even Crytek as a whole. I never pirated or bought Crysis, because it sucks! Plain and simple.

    So I did a little test on searching piratebay and counted the uploads and downloads:

    Test 1: Crysis = 1600+ uploads/downloads
    Test 2: Sims 2 = 3300+
    Test 3: COD 4 = 3400+
    Test 4: Orange box = 400+

    If I made a pie chart that had sale figures on top of pirated downloads, crysis would be at the bottom and all the other companies would show a huge difference between legal & illegal methods…. meaning crysis sucks so much it’s not even worth downloading illegally.

    Orange box still sells very well and it’s digitally downloadable which shows the easier you make a game available, the better the sales will be… or that pirates are lazy, haha. Also the orange box is just an awesome value, so there’s no reason to get it illegally, it’s actually worth the $$ compared to other games.

    crytek = fail
    piracy = fail
    Buy the game if you like it.

    • DASQ
    • 12 years ago

    They’re going to waste so much money trying to get Crysis optimized for consoles. It’ll end up being a mediocre experience with limbs and appendages lopped off here or there.

    Although it might do quite well, especially when the star of console FPS is the Goddamn crappy Halo series.

    Seriously. I never understand why so many people drooled over that game. It DEFINES generic FPS gameplay.

      • FubbHead
      • 12 years ago

      Amen to that!

      • d0g_p00p
      • 12 years ago

      I agree. Halo total garbage. I think why it was so well received was because it was one of the first “real FPS” on a console and when they released multi-player deathmatch it once again was console players first time to play it. Of course us “pc gamers” have been playing deathmatch and FPS game for millions of years prior to Halo.

      • DrDillyBar
      • 12 years ago

      Hey! 1 was awesome. 2 was ok. 3; skipped that gen.

    • Spotpuff
    • 12 years ago

    I had 0 interest in playing this game pirated or otherwise. I’ve played far too many FPS games that are just carbon copies of each other with nicer graphics and shinier things. Boring.

      • CB5000
      • 12 years ago

      I totally agree. I played the Demo and I almost fell asleep. Sure it’s pretty but what else is there??? The game play is just the same as the older FPS’s…

        • swaaye
        • 12 years ago

        which other FPSs, exactly? The only game that’s really similar is Far Cry, AFAIK.

        Unless you aren’t a fan of FPS gaming and are powered by different gaming desires than folks who are, I’m not sure what’s wrong with the first half of Crysis. I *[

          • CB5000
          • 12 years ago

          I love FPS’s ever since wolfenstein 3D… now that’s a classic. I loved Doom and Doom 2… addicted to quake 2 multiplayer and CTF…. played counterstrike to death… Team Fortess, and half-life2 was great. Then there was FEAR and a ton of others…. Having played pretty much all the FPS’s that’s ever come out, Crysis doesn’t offer anything new for me gameplay wise… NOTHING! O_O…. which is why I don’t like it 🙂

            • swaaye
            • 12 years ago

            So, you are a linear corridor shooter fan. Now those are the games I am sick of. I’ve played them too, going back to Wolf3D just like you.

            Crysis may be as linear as any other game, but it sure does a nice job of giving the player some options. It is apparent that some folks aren’t looking for this type of experience though.

            • CB5000
            • 12 years ago

            For me the best thus far was Call of Duty 4 because it gave me an immersive experience and had a realistic look and feel to it. Crysis to me feels like an arcade game. You can like crysis all you want and I don’t see why you are trying to persuade others to like it.

            • swaaye
            • 12 years ago

            What’s realistic about CoD4? It’s not realistic at all. It’s as linear as HL2. It has spawn points. I didn’t get anywhere in that one and IMO it’s the derivative shooter of the day.

            Apparently multiplayer is fun though.

            Why am I “trying to convince others”? Well, because you came over and announced how Crysis is a crap techdemo. I chose to respond. I’d call it a 50% crap techdemo, because the first half of the game was some of the best FPS gaming I’ve ever played. It’s an evolved Far Cry, which itself was excellent for the first half of the game. heh.

            • CB5000
            • 12 years ago

            I was just merely agreeing with the first person who started this thread tree.

            What’s realistic about a guy running around in the jungle mostly by himself with an ultra expensive body armor killing koreans and aliens? I’m sorry it just feels too juvenile for me.

            Sure Cod4 is scripted but it had a movie-like experience and it had a really good story and great characters.

            • swaaye
            • 12 years ago

            Well, running around shooting folks is rather juvenile in general, regardless of the setting. At least it’s just a game, I guess.

            What I liked about Crysis:

            – the freedom of the environment (yes it’s still linear in the end)
            – the simulation of various ballistics aspects (body armor, muzzle velocity, etc)
            – the cool suit and the tactical choices it presented
            – various vehicles. Like 5 in the beginning of the game alone.
            – environmental simulation (cover under foliage, water, wind, light)
            – graphics because they have the guts to push technology forward instead of going after what works for my mother’s comp’s IGP
            – some of the storyline and some of the characters
            – the AI’s interactivity, group coordination and adaptiveness (even if quirky)

            • CB5000
            • 12 years ago

            I thought the ballistics were completely unrealistic. A person with bodyarmor can’t take that many bullets from an assault rifle in the torso and still be standing. You need at least a type III armor to stop those kinds of bullets and those enemies sure were not wearing something bulky like that. That was main pet peeve with HL2 as well. Even the most advanced armor only provide single hit protection against high velocity rounds. That part was realistic on all the incarnations of CoD.

          • Forge
          • 12 years ago

          WTF are you talking about??? The only game similar to Crysis is Far Cry?? WTF!?! Far Cry is nigh-identical to ALMOST EVERY FPS EVER MADE!!!

          It’s really a symptom of the genre: You can only make a FPS so many ways.

          Get gun. Shoot bad guy. Find health. Repeat.

            • TREE
            • 12 years ago

            You got to admit though, it is pretty unique in the way that you can shoot chickens, and do a bit of landscaping with the trees !

    • aleckermit
    • 12 years ago

    That’s stupid. Majority of PC gamers don’t even know how to pirate games.

    I just learned how like this year, and I’ve been a PC gamer for years and years.

    I didn’t buy the game cause I hate playing games at lower than highest possible settings, and with my current 8600GTS I can’t play crysis at high enough visual quality.

    Downloading a pirated Crysis would just take too long for me, and of course the MP wouldn’t work on the Crytek servers. Waste of time.

    If you have the money to buy a computer with the hardware to play Crysis properly, then you won’t mind spending $50 for Crysis.

      • NeXus 6
      • 12 years ago

      Hardware is harder to steal unless you work at a place that sells it and you don’t get caught. But, it’s too risky for most people.

      PC games are free for the taking at a torrent or newsgroup site near you.

      • pixel_junkie
      • 12 years ago

      “/[

    • PrincipalSkinner
    • 12 years ago

    Bunch of crybabies and whiners. There will always be piracy, PC or console, no matter. I sure as hell would not have seen Crysis if it there were no pirates and I’m not some stupid kid bragging with pirated software. I can’t blow away so much money on a single piece of software that will serve me for 20 hours or so. So is it better that I don’t play the game at all than pirate it? There are many many people like me.

    • morphine
    • 12 years ago

    Oh, you mean that a tech demo that few could properly run and even fewer were willing to pay for didn’t sell?

    !!!SHOCKER!!!

    • Forge
    • 12 years ago

    I thank Crysis for having had me in their Crysis MP beta.

    I think Crysis should go back and reread the feedback I submitted after my first and only day of testing.

    IIRC, it was something like this:

    System requirements/loading too high.
    Eye candy nice, but not proportional to system thrashing.
    WTF is the objective? I can’t figure out what I’m supposed to be doing, and neither can any of my teammates.
    I’m not having any fun. I would not buy this.

      • Joshvar
      • 12 years ago

      It’s a sad fact that once things hit the beta stage, getting developers to change functionality is quite nearly impossible. Hence why I’m fearing what I’m hearing about Quake Live 🙁

        • Forge
        • 12 years ago

        Well yeah. My point wasn’t that they should have changed things, it was far too late for that.

        My point was that piracy hurts worst those titles that aren’t worth buying.

        If no one pirated it, sales would be X. Since the guy down the hall downloaded it, played it, and lamented the loss of his .10$ DVDR, you really start to wonder if dropping 50$ on it is a good idea. If losing .10$ for it = whining, wouldn’t 50$ for it = hara-kiri??

        Thus sales are X -1 and dropping.

        The games that are really good *benefit* from piracy.

        Playing UT2K3 at a LAN party was *awesome*. Copy promptly ordered.
        UT3 at a LAN was likewise a blast. Copy ordered.
        Company of Heroes was not so much fun SP, but the MP was r0x0r. Ordered.

        Getting an idea of the pattern? If software houses really want to increase sales, they should look to things like the UT franchise, not things like Far Cry/Crysis. Hell, look at Serious Sam!! The game had effectively zero copy protection, but was not widely pirated. It was affordable and more importantly, it was FUN.

          • bdwilcox
          • 12 years ago

          Serious Sam and Serious Sam: The Second Encounter were a blast. Plus, they had co-op mode which is pretty unique nowadays.

            • ludi
            • 12 years ago

            Funny you should mention those…I’m actually playing through Serious Sam SE right now, again, because I got temporarily board of TF2 (plus Valve’s latest round of major updates has temporarily inflicted an auger-type fastening device upon the pooch). That game is a kick and a half even now, especially since the designers like to play evil mind-games with ya.

            Oddly enough, Serious Sam 2 had substantial visual improvements, even more weapons…an excessive emphasis on puzzle solving with fewer clever tricks and a slightly less frenetic motif…and cost more than its predecessors and sold poorly. I imagine there’s some sort of lesson in that.

            • l33t-g4m3r
            • 12 years ago

            sam2 wasn’t nearly as good.
            It doesn’t have great netcode, and features that should have initially been in the game, were added in later with patches.
            The general style of the game was geared toward younger people, eg: the stupid midgets.

            basically, it wasn’t a worthy sequel.
            If it was named something else, and properly marketed toward the younger demographic they were catering to, it might have sold better.

            • bdwilcox
            • 12 years ago

            I was totally turned off to Serious Sam 2 by the demo they released. With all the bright, shiny colors, it looks like they should have called it Serious Sam 2: the Candy Land Encounter. But if Ludi says there were tricks and puzzles, maybe I’ll pick up a copy and check it out, though.

            • l33t-g4m3r
            • 12 years ago

            If you didn’t like the demo, you won’t like the full game.
            your first impression was the correct one, and is exactly why ssam2 didn’t do as well as the original ones.
            if you can pick up a copy around 10-15$, it might be worth trying if you’re really interested, but for the most part I’d say you’d be wasting your time/money.

            • ludi
            • 12 years ago

            I meant more puzzles but with less cleverness — mouse in a maze type garbage where the whole point is just to make you solve it with nothing but cheap cheese at the end. I enjoyed the game because it still had a lot of the personality of FE and SE (with even BIGGER open spaces in places), plus there are times when grabbing the biggest gun available and blasting a nonstop stream of enemies, DOOM “Nightmare” style, just does the trick. SS2 deals that out in spades if you select maximum difficulty.

            But if you disliked the SS2 demo, I would recommend going back and playing FE and SE again if you’ve got that kind of hanerkin’.

      • l33t-g4m3r
      • 12 years ago

      what I think is wrong with crysis:

      * made for high end systems that most people don’t have.
      SLI and Vista is necessary for the full experience.
      (how many people have both Vista and SLI?)

      * poor coding. very bloated, not optimized very well.
      it should have been released with the second patch, and it still needs work.

      *gameplay, ai, and storyline.
      they all were mediocre, and the “to be continued” ending pissed me off.
      all this tech, large maps, and no coop. unforgivable.
      nothing like paying 50$ for an unfinished game.

      The truth?
      Crytek didn’t care about PC gamers from the beginning.
      They just wanted to make a tech-demo, and that’s what they did.

    • SecretMaster
    • 12 years ago

    I haven’t seen this much denial since *insert obligatory Family Guy cutscene*

    • eloj
    • 12 years ago

    I haven’t even bothered with the demo (there’s a demo, right?). I think ‘piracy’ is likely #3 on their list of problems, after ‘insane system reqs’ (perception due to self-induced hype) and ‘shooter saturation’.

    • indeego
    • 12 years ago

    I bought it on day of release, played for 2-3 weeks (3 times through taking different paths each time.) Had a blast, and felt I got my money’s worth and more.

    Yeah they should just release on steam. All games should have a similar distribution setup. I haven’t bought retail in like 5 yearsg{<.<}g

      • BenBasson
      • 12 years ago

      Amen to that. My basic reaction to new game releases is “can I get it on Steam?”, and if the answer turns out to be “no”, then it has to be extra special to warrant any further effort on my part.

        • no51
        • 12 years ago

        I like having boxes. I got the Prey collectors box for the same price as Steam. Granted it’s just having extra useless crap, but I feel I got a better value. I don’t get why I have to pay the same price for online vs. retail. There’s less middlemen in the chain, so the wealth isn’t getting spread around. It’s commies like you that are the cause of the economic slump!

        • MattMojo
        • 12 years ago

        /[<"Amen to that. My basic reaction to new game releases is "can I get it on Steam?", and if the answer turns out to be "no", then it has to be extra special to warrant any further effort on my part."<]/ Totally agree. I love Steam and what they have brought to the PC gaming arena. Digital distributions by other people (D2Drive...) do not stop piracy but the Steam model seems to work quite well and it is effortless for the end user ---- not to mention you don't have to worry about all that safedisc and root kit crap they try to pull on retail versions. +1 for Steam and their Orange Box! Mojo

          • ludi
          • 12 years ago

          What I like about Steam is not the digital distribution model for new games, but the way they’ve streamlined the update process. Quake/2/3A + TCs, Half-Life + TCs, always the same thing — a patch download comes out, and every server hosting it is swamped for three days. If you were lucky, you might be able to get far enough into an FTP site to locate the file name, then plug it into a search engine and /[

    • highlandr
    • 12 years ago

    Funny, my reason for not buying was completely different – I tried the demo, and it didn’t work with my machine. The game wasn’t interesting enough for me to try and troubleshoot, so I play Sins of a Solar Empire instead.

    • DrDillyBar
    • 12 years ago

    Just distribute it with Steam if you REALLY believe it’s piracy.

      • Silus
      • 12 years ago

      As long as retail options remain valid, sure, use Steam. But if everyone starts to limit choices, just like Valve did, then they lost a customer…just like Valve did.

    • Fighthouse
    • 12 years ago

    Crytek to end PC exclusivity because of -[

      • Meadows
      • 12 years ago

      How I was going to say that.

    • zaeric19
    • 12 years ago

    But who will make video benchmarks now?

      • provoko
      • 12 years ago

      Haha! I liked that one.

      • CB5000
      • 12 years ago

      LMAO!!! ROFL!! That’s great! Seriously… it really is just a graphics benchmark. Plus they really just shot themselves in the foot because of their insane system requirements practically excludes about 80% of all the PC owners, while maybe 5% can play it optimally.

        • swaaye
        • 12 years ago

        Damn am I sick of hearing this crap. I played this game for a bit on a $100 GeForce 8600GT. Guess what? It’s quite playable if you can get over your greedy needs to have everything for cheap (i.e. run at something like 1280×720 HQ instead of 1920×1200 VHQ).

          • Saber Cherry
          • 12 years ago

          Your computer is easily in the top 20%, performance-wise, of computers in use. So, um… what was the ‘crap’? For reference, I’m using a 6200, and I’m only using it because my Radeon 9800 burnt out. And yet, I bet MY computer is in the upper 20% of computers still in use. Not of “gaming desktops sold since January 2007″… but when you include even fairly current laptops, desktops from 5 years ago, and most of the computers less modern countries (outside North America, West Europe, Australia/NZ, and Japan)… the situation changes.

          I know of a lot of people who actively play WoW on computers that could never run Crysis at any setting. And of course, most graphics chips in use today are integrated.

          So, think before you accuse people of spewing crap.

            • CB5000
            • 12 years ago

            That’s true. Only about less than 10% of all PC’s that’s running right now in the world can run dx10 graphics. WoW on the other hand can run on about 50-60% of computers that’s running right now. Even with people with discreet video cards still have old gen geforce 6, radeon 9800 pros’ and haven’t upgraded.

            • swaaye
            • 12 years ago

            What I’m sick of is the crap spewing forth about how a video card to play Crysis affordably doesn’t exist. That is bullshit. There are $70 cards that will play this game fine.

            I don’t really care what WoW players do with their comps. They usually don’t even care about the hardware anyway and are just gaming because WoW exists. And most of the WoW people I know don’t want to play a FPS anyway.

            • CB5000
            • 12 years ago

            a 70$ video card will not play this game fine. By fine I mean at least 30 fps average on medium quality with at least 1280×1024 resolution. Anything less and the game looks terrible and you’re killing the main feature of the game… the “looks” 😉

            • swaaye
            • 12 years ago

            Well, it comes down to what you are willing to pay to play, I guess. I played the game a bit on a overclocked 8600GT, which is down to around $70-80 now. It worked well enough for me. I even had it at 1680×1050 at parts.

            You could step up a few bucks to a 9600GT and play it much better. The options are definitely out there.

            The game runs better on current hardware than Unreal ran on my Voodoo1 in 1998. I suppose folks moaned about that too, though. Oh no.

            • poulpy
            • 12 years ago

            Unreal is quite a good example actually as AFAIK people were saying the Unreal Engine was slow as shit and heavily CPU dependend back then.
            The game ran alright on Medium details with voodoo1 IIRC and smooth as butter with my Voodoo2 🙂

            • Saber Cherry
            • 12 years ago

            But video cards don’t increase in performance at 125% per year any more – more like 25%. Crysis will be long forgotten when the average computer can play it “smooth as butter”… although by that time, it may no longer be compatible with the current operating systems and APIs.

            Since few people play it, Crysis would be forgotten already if it wasn’t for video card reviewers.

            • poulpy
            • 12 years ago

            Sorry if it wasn’t clear but I was on the “Crysis is kind of a pig” side 🙂
            And back then my Voodoo2 cost me an arm and a leg to get the creamy smoothness stuff..

    • Kurotetsu
    • 12 years ago

    <Most_of_the_PC_World> This game is pretty worthless as anything but a video card benchmark. *nobody buys*

    <Crytek> RARGH! PIRATES!

    <Sins_of_a_Solar_Empire> Hey guys. I’m slim, sexy, and electronic crack all rolled into one!

    <Most_of_the_PC_World> !!! *everybody buys*

    <Crytek> RARGH! PIRATES! *shoots self in face in blind rage*

      • DrDillyBar
      • 12 years ago

      Sins of a Solar Empire r0x0rz!

        • Joshvar
        • 12 years ago

        I gotta try this game; I downloaded the demo and haven’t hit it yet. Civ 4 *STILL* has me by the balls.

          • DrDillyBar
          • 12 years ago

          I still play Civ4 too. Doesn’t help that the end turn button is Red and flashes. Hard to stop clicking it that way.

            • Flying Fox
            • 12 years ago

            Just… one… more… turn…

        • no51
        • 12 years ago

        I had a game that was going on for a full 30+ hours (5 stars, 60+ planets) till I stupidly updated the game and now it won’t read.

          • DrDillyBar
          • 12 years ago

          Next time I make a silly huge system I have to remember to make lane travel reasonably quick. That was my mistake last time. 😉

          • moshpit
          • 12 years ago

          I too have a 30+ hour game running.

    • cegras
    • 12 years ago

    Yeah, it’s because Crysis multiplayer is fail and horrible.

    If you want to sell a PC game, it’s simple – give it a multiplayer worth paying for, because CD-keys that are validated properly will thwart pirates.

    • BoBzeBuilder
    • 12 years ago

    That game was nothing but eye-candy that ran like crap on most systems. Ofcourse it will have poor sales.

      • holophrastic
      • 12 years ago

      And that’s why the move to consoles. Those consoles get to promiss things like consistent performance. What the Crytek people don’t realize is that the upper performance bound is incredibly low.

      But hey, that’s how sales works. Promiss to solve the problem, usually by creating other problems.

      • Nutmeg
      • 12 years ago

      QFT
      It was basically a tech demo.

    • ludi
    • 12 years ago

    If at first you don’t succeed…scapegoat!

    Once your game gets a reputation for being a poor experience because it goes way overboard at some points and chokes high-end systems, then /[

      • provoko
      • 12 years ago

      Extreme scapegoat. I can’t believe they came up with so many excuses.

        • ssidbroadcast
        • 12 years ago

        CryTek: Maximum Scapegoat.

      • Meadows
      • 12 years ago

      I thought 2 GiB of DDR2, a cheap Core 2 Duo or Athlon64 X2 and a GeForce 9600, or cheaper yet, the 8800 GS (or 9600 GSO) makes for a PC that is in the middle as far as gaming PCs go – and, believe it or not, it plays Crysis. Not just in any way, either.

      *[

        • ludi
        • 12 years ago

        I wandered partway into the demo on a lesser system than that, and it was playable with reduced settings. I didn’t buy it because the gaming experience, IMO, wasn’t substantially improved over FarCry and the HUD interfacing was too complex. Since I didn’t get the full version, I had to follow the performance question into the forums to find out that it has a few levels with bad chokepoints.

          • Meadows
          • 12 years ago

          The HUD interfacing was too complex, right?
          What games have you been playing before? Mario?

            • ludi
            • 12 years ago

            When playing an FPS, I have a standard keyboard and mouse layout that I use every time for all motion, primary and secondary fire, jump, crouch, use, reload, and weapon cycle. I don’t mind having to flesh out a couple other buttons for a game’s specialty features, but if I have to learn more than two or three new buttons to get to major features of the gameplay experience, I quickly lose interest. Especially now that I have a full-time job and friends with interests outside of video gaming, hence my game time is limited and more sporatic.

            I don’t buy cars with seventy dashboard buttons, either.

            Deus Ex got it right: there were a LOT of elements in that game, since it was a heavily RPG’d FPS, and you could configure hotbuttons to dive directly into the submenus for items etc. if that was your style. But it was possible to access and then scroll through /[

      • aleckermit
      • 12 years ago

      Agreed. Scapegoat.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This