Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:
Greenbelt, MD 08/22

Regularly scheduled events

Crytek's Demo Doubts

Develop quotes Crytek CEO Cevat Yerli saying he's not sure there will be a Crysis 2 demo, and expressing skepticism about the future of free game demos everywhere. "Thatís something we need to think about, because we havenít fully decided on this yet," he said. "But whether we do have a demo or not, do I think companies need to release so many demos? I think that weíll see more and more games not carrying a demo in the future, because it becomes prohibitively expensive." Crytek's publisher EA recently revealed they are contemplating prerelease paid DLC, which sounds like paid-for demos, and Yerli suggests this is an effort at improving the industry, rather than EA's bottom line. "I think EAís strategy is interesting, overall. The thing is, every time we see a publisher doing something to improve the industry, making things more commercially viable and actually increasing the market, people instantly think this is only some money-hungry ploy," he tells them. "Really, what this is, is an attempt to salvage a problem. The industry is still losing a lot of money to piracy as the market becomes more online-based. So itís encouraging to see strategies outlined to combat this."

View
85 Replies. 5 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 ] Older >

85. Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts Apr 19, 2010, 13:59 Surf
 
@Siapnar

"And let me guess, regardless of all of it's horrible game-breaking downfalls, you were and still are playing it every day.
Definitely not worth the money, though. Right...
Idiot.
Avatar 26019"

Uh, no I do not play this game every day as I rather have the complexity of BF2 over the eye candy of BC2. Is BC2 a bad game? No, it loads fast, plays great, looks incredible but has near zero ability to get people organized unless you use Skype or another similar product and play with a bunch of people.

I never said it was a horrible game, it was a game released in Beta for sure (I played the Beta) and it's front end sucks compared to say Tribes 2 which to me still has the best front end for matching people ever made.

It's 2010, there is no excuse for a broken and nearly unusable front end.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
84. Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts Apr 19, 2010, 01:04 wtf_man
 
Jerykk wrote on Apr 19, 2010, 00:14:
People can't choose to lower their standards and they can't force themselves to find things enjoyable.

Great way to sum up what I was trying to say.

I won't lower my standards just because the industry is doing so (except on the eye-candy front).
 
Avatar 19499
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
83. Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts Apr 19, 2010, 00:29 Jerykk
 
Lol, hard for me to think of clearly superior technically superior pc port, most are actually terrible ports that just insult pc gamers.

You must not be thinking very hard. Higher resolutions + higher AA + higher AF + higher framerates + faster load times + mouse/keyboard for shooters = technically superior. It's really not hard for a PC port to be technically superior, which is why the vast majority of PC ports are indeed technically superior to their console equivalents.

Now, if you're comparing ports to games designed specifically for the PC, that's another matter entirely. But comparing PC versions of multiplatform games to the console versions... yeah, PC wins 99% of the time.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
82. Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts Apr 19, 2010, 00:24 KilrathiAce
 
finga wrote on Apr 18, 2010, 05:59:
No wonder technically-superior PC ports sell a tenth of the console editions of games.

Lol, hard for me to think of clearly superior technically superior pc port, most are actually terrible ports that just insult pc gamers.
 
Avatar 7413
 
"On 2646.215 I myself attacked & destroyed TCS Tiger's Claw in my Jalthi heavy fighter"
Bakhtosh Redclaw Nar Kiranka
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
81. Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts Apr 19, 2010, 00:14 Jerykk
 
Today, depth and complexity are most definitely back-burnered to things like graphics and story. Is this inherently a bad thing? No. More complexity and more depth isn't universally better for every type of gamer.

Of course. However, most of the gamers who have been playing games since the 80s and 90s liked those games because of their depth and complexity. It's not unreasonable for them to be disappointed by the lack of depth and complexity in modern games.

Newer fresher content has come out before the previous content has any time to cement itself in anyones mind.

That's where the lack of innovation comes in. There are plenty of untapped genres and ideas in the videogame industry. However, publishers would rather continue milking their shooter franchises, which is why we have so many generic and forgettable games these days. They might have great presentations and mainstream appeal but none will ever be known for really advancing the medium as a whole.

I find myself more consistently gaming today than I ever did even as a kid.

Exact opposite here. I find myself less and less interested in games these days. When I was younger, I would play everything. Now I can't be bothered. Most games have become so formulaic and dumbed down that very few games actually interest me.

There are no bragging rights to be had in being perpetually miserable and impossible to please, so why would anyone want to be like that?

You act like it's a conscious decision. People can't choose to lower their standards and they can't force themselves to find things enjoyable. The cynicism you see from veteran, hardcore gamers is the natural result of gaming being dumbed down. The core values that we held dear are no longer relevant in today's market.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
80. Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts Apr 18, 2010, 23:27 Ray Marden
 
In summary, you were being hateful and cynical of Blue's? See, that kind of breaks apart your integrity...

Back to demos, I keep thinking about the various things I buy and so many of them have much more appealing incentives to use and buy them: trials, options to return for various reasons, significantly lower cost of entry, robust alternative methods of delivery, federal regualtions, state regulations, used/second-hand markets, high industry standards of customer satisfaction and enticement, higher quality, higher integrity sources of review, watchdog groups, etc.

I think that avoiding the demonstration for games is both a sign of blatant greed as well as a direct disregard for what games are. Again, this is a product that we see, hear, read, has as much potential for emotion as anything else, and is something that we can - its greatest strength - directly control. Lump those all together and it's quite the potentially amazing package, but we're just supposed to take the word of a fairly immature, increasingly greedy, and fairly dishonest industy?

Demos help me avoid what I consider bad games. Due to no direct financial cost, demos have repeatedly helped me try out new franchises/concepts/genres I might have otherwise skipped. The industry has numerous barries with returning bad/poor products, especially on the PC side of things. When I have potential concerns, a demo significantly helps me sort out their validity or inaccuracy.

Pushing the cessation of demos is not exactly a "win" for the end user, especially not one with such wide range of tastes and expectations as myself. Additionally, I don't think the industry has been particularly beholden to the end user as of late.

And they want to do less? Or even charge me for this service? That's a bitter pill for me to swallow and I will simply react by being even more cautious with my purchases as well as doing my best to push down the purchase prices as much as I can.
Though I have more money available now, crap like this makes me less generous with it.
Saddened by any that emrace this,
Ray
 
Avatar 2647
 
Everything is awesome!!!
http://shoutengine.com/GarnettonGames/
I love you, mom.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
79. Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts Apr 18, 2010, 22:45 NKD
 
Creston wrote on Apr 18, 2010, 18:43:
Why are you still here? I keep wondering about this. All you ever do is whine about how the comments boards here are so fucking bad and awful, and you do that over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.

Not sure what you mean. I was replying to someone else who said all PC gamers were hateful and cynical. I was merely correcting him and letting him know that Blue's was not representative of the average PC gamer.
 
Avatar 43041
 
If you don't like where gaming is heading, stop giving your money to the people who are taking it in that direction.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
78. Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts Apr 18, 2010, 21:15 wtf_man
 
NKD wrote on Apr 18, 2010, 16:07:
But my whole point is that there is a lot to like too. There have never been this many easily available free games for the PC. Sure, most lack the polish of a top tier release, but they are very fun and don't cost a dime. There are plenty of fun quality triple A titles too. How do I know this? Look at what people bitch at around here "Waah, Cover system. Waah regenerating health. Waah DRM." If thats all they can find to bitch about, then developers are doing their jobs right.

Uhm... what free games are you referring to? Flash Web Browser games? F2Play MMO's? (That aren't really free - Micro Transactions to do anything worthwhile). What does that have to do with commercial games that are sold for the PC?

NKD wrote on Apr 18, 2010, 16:07:
Conversely, there was a lot of garbage in the 80s and 90s. It wasn't all pretty ponies.

I never said there wasn't any garbage back then. But there was a lot less (compared to today's games)... and you got way more value for your money with most of them. - Without the pretty Eye-candy because back then they didn't have the pretty Eye-candy and HAD to make games with substance, or they wouldn't sell.

NKD wrote on Apr 18, 2010, 16:07:
The problem is people only remember the games they enjoyed, so as time goes on, the past looks better and better because every year we forget the more forgetable titles, and remember only the classics. There was just as much unplayable crap, percentage wise, as there is today.

Well I disagree. I already admitted that there was crap back then too... but there was a lot less (ratio-wise). Mainly because a good chunk of today's games are poor console ports created for the "A.D.D. Entitlement Generation". And guess what... since they are so into "Entitlements"... they're the ones pirating games while us old farts actually buy them. (Way to piss off the paying customers that are so "niche", as you put it)

NKD wrote on Apr 18, 2010, 16:07:
As far as games costing $30, most mainstream titles cost $50 or more even in the early 90s, and were much cheaper to create. You didn't have a 100 person team creating a game.If anything, relative to development cost and the median income in the US, games are cheaper now than they have ever been.

They shouldn't NEED a 100 man team to make a game. With all the middle-ware tools in these modern engines, they should be able to make decent games with half the resources they use. Unfortunately... they concentrate most of their investment on eye-candy, and no substance... and wonder why PC gamers snub their noses at their games.

NKD wrote on Apr 18, 2010, 16:07:
I just don't think things are as terrible as people make them out to be. It all just smells like bitter tears over the fact that someones niche pasttime got turned into a mainstream form of entertainment.

This is no different than your parents or grandparents telling you your music is bad and you should feel bad. Remember how you felt? "They are just stubborn and stuck in their ways."

People around here are quickly becoming their parents and grandparents, only the 21st century equivalent.

So, because older gamers see a lot less value for their money compared to 15-20 years ago, we're "stubborn and stuck in our ways", and need to "get with the times"???

/ROFL

Uhm... no.

I'm a consumer. I expect a certain level of value for my purchase. I expect to be treated as a customer and not a criminal. I expect that the seller of the product respects my property (my machine) and privacy. I expect that when I purchase something for the platform I will utilize the product on... that is was DESIGNED for that platform. I expect to not be forced into another platform because the company may feel that it is more profitable. I expect any form of entertainment that I choose (TV, Movies, Music, Games, etc.) to have a certain level of quality that has been the norm for years (or I don't purchase them).

If that's an "Old Fart way of thinking"... then I'm guilty.

/shrug

This comment was edited on Apr 18, 2010, 21:26.
 
Avatar 19499
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
77. Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts Apr 18, 2010, 20:31 Kxmode
 
I own 250 shares of a fund that I believe owns several thousand shares of Electronic Arts. So by proxy I own EA shares. As a shareholder and not a video gamer this is worst idea ever. You can't release a product to the masses without letting them try it first. Everything you buy in the real world you can demo first. EVERYTHING. I don't care if it is cost prohibitive to make a demo... YOU MAKE A DEMO. That is all.

Signed, An Angry Investor Brood
 
Avatar 18786
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
76. Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts Apr 18, 2010, 18:43 Creston
 
NKD wrote on Apr 18, 2010, 10:54:
finga wrote on Apr 18, 2010, 05:59:
Because you hate everything, including each other. The cynicism and mistrust of everyone around you means fewer sales in a bunch of ways. No wonder technically-superior PC ports sell a tenth of the console editions of games.

Well, I don't think Blue's News is representative of PC gamers. I've been gaming primarily on my PC since the 80s and I have somehow avoided becoming some jaded and cynical crybaby.

Most of the vocal commenters here aren't really gamers at all. Just bitter old ex-gamers who are this generations version of the creepy old man who lives in the rundown house bitching at the neighborhood kids to get off his lawn and giving nasty looks to neighbors who might walk by.

You'll notice if you spend some time here that it's really just the same 5 or 6 people bitching in every comment thread about everything. Look at a more mainstream gaming site and the mood is considerably more positive and the discussion far more constructive.

One guy here has a sig that says something like "The unhappiest most bitter gamers in the world are at Blue's News." This rings true more and more every day.

Why are you still here? I keep wondering about this. All you ever do is whine about how the comments boards here are so fucking bad and awful, and you do that over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.

I'll take the negative vocal commenters over you and your ilk. At least they talk about games every once in awhile. All you ever do is whine about someone.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
75. Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts Apr 18, 2010, 18:12 heroin
 
The video game industry is just like every industry. Enshrouded by lawyers and investors; trying to fight off "piracy" instead of embracing the importance of copying and sharing.

That's fine though. But, you know what is going to happen. EA will try to become more "cost effective" with their development studios, lay off people who are the most creative and well paid. Hire lots of interns who burn out rapidly in turn the game suffers delays and in the end the studio goes out of commission.

All the while, just like the music industry has been the last ten years - the independent scene will have been thriving with creativity and innovation, releasing demos & mods and even though EA will want to buy them out and burn them down for their bottom line - a lot of independent studios these days are content to remain so. They care about their visions and that is what will make them successful (and maybe working another fulltime job) not a 30 million dollar marketing scheme.

So take that! No one needs big corporate publishers. So, %$^& EM.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
74. Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts Apr 18, 2010, 17:52 NKD
 
Jerykk wrote on Apr 18, 2010, 17:21:
Make no mistake, there have been lots of good games released in the past decade. But how many of these would be considered classics?

But again, you're judging the games of today by the standards of yesterday. That's the same as the example I gave earlier of your parents or grandparents telling you how bad your favorite music is. Your music doesn't fall into what their standards were of quality music.

Today, depth and complexity are most definitely back-burnered to things like graphics and story. Is this inherently a bad thing? No. More complexity and more depth isn't universally better for every type of gamer.

I love a complex and deep game, but I don't expect a developer to give up most of their sales in order to make it. The industry can't go backwards. It can't go back to surviving on 100,000 sales, nor can it go back to spending 1% of their current budget on making games. You may not place a lot of emphasis on graphics or style, but gamers of today, as a whole, will not play a game that looks like it was made in someones garage.

Games with a lot of complexity are now a niche market, the same way simulators are now a niche market. We won't see a lot of super deep games, and fewer still will be Triple-A titles. The average gamer has changed, so the average game will change, and so will the average standard for what is a good or bad game.

As far as how many "classics" there are, this isn't just a gaming thing. In todays world we're in a "content overload." We consume so many forms of information and entertainment, sometimes simultaneously, that it's very hard for them to stand out. Newer fresher content has come out before the previous content has any time to cement itself in anyones mind.

There are no more classics because the instant gratification nature of the Internet-connected world places less emphasis on individual titles and more on the sum total of what we can experience.

I find myself more consistently gaming today than I ever did even as a kid. So when people around here sound like they are perpetually 5 minutes from throwing their PC out the window, I can't understand why.

I play a lot of games and enjoy the vast majority of them. If that says I have low standards then so be it. There are no bragging rights to be had in being perpetually miserable and impossible to please, so why would anyone want to be like that?
 
Avatar 43041
 
If you don't like where gaming is heading, stop giving your money to the people who are taking it in that direction.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
73. Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts Apr 18, 2010, 17:21 Jerykk
 
The problem is people only remember the games they enjoyed, so as time goes on, the past looks better and better because every year we forget the more forgetable titles, and remember only the classics. There was just as much unplayable crap, percentage wise, as there is today.

The big difference is that the good games were a lot better ten years ago. Publishers actually took risks and developers made innovative and unique games. More importantly, they made games that they would want to play themselves, as opposed to the current trend of making whatever sells most (a.k.a. shooters). Will we ever see another Tribes? No, but we will see a whole bunch of generic, pseudo-realistic military shooters. Will we ever see another System Shock? No, but we will see some "survival horror" games that are basically just shooters with extra gore. Will we ever see another Planescape: Torment? No, but we will see a bunch of action games with light RPG elements.

In attempt to cater to the broadest audience, games have become incredibly streamlined and oversimplified. As a result, meaningful depth and challenge have been removed. Just look at Splinter Cell: Conviction, R6: Vegas, GRAW, Deus Ex 2, Assassin's Creed, etc. There's a definite focus on style over substance, with players being able to do stuff that looks cool but requires only minimal interaction or skill.

Make no mistake, there have been lots of good games released in the past decade. But how many of these would be considered classics?
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
72. Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts Apr 18, 2010, 16:16 space captain
 
NKD wrote on Apr 18, 2010, 16:07:
I just don't think things are as terrible as people make them out to be. It all just smells like bitter tears over the fact that someones niche pasttime got turned into a mainstream form of entertainment.

This is no different than your parents or grandparents telling you your music is bad and you should feel bad. Remember how you felt? "They are just stubborn and stuck in their ways."

People around here are quickly becoming their parents and grandparents, only the 21st century equivalent.
you sound very bitter about this, especially your idea that people want to make you "feel bad".. dont worry about all that, just be superior to it
 
Go forth, and kill!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
71. Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts Apr 18, 2010, 16:07 NKD
 
wtf_man wrote on Apr 18, 2010, 15:12:
I've been playing games since the 80s too, and there's a lot to "bitch about".

But my whole point is that there is a lot to like too. There have never been this many easily available free games for the PC. Sure, most lack the polish of a top tier release, but they are very fun and don't cost a dime. There are plenty of fun quality triple A titles too. How do I know this? Look at what people bitch at around here "Waah, Cover system. Waah regenerating health. Waah DRM." If thats all they can find to bitch about, then developers are doing their jobs right.

Conversely, there was a lot of garbage in the 80s and 90s. It wasn't all pretty ponies.

The problem is people only remember the games they enjoyed, so as time goes on, the past looks better and better because every year we forget the more forgetable titles, and remember only the classics. There was just as much unplayable crap, percentage wise, as there is today.

As far as games costing $30, most mainstream titles cost $50 or more even in the early 90s, and were much cheaper to create. You didn't have a 100 person team creating a game.If anything, relative to development cost and the median income in the US, games are cheaper now than they have ever been.

I just don't think things are as terrible as people make them out to be. It all just smells like bitter tears over the fact that someones niche pasttime got turned into a mainstream form of entertainment.

This is no different than your parents or grandparents telling you your music is bad and you should feel bad. Remember how you felt? "They are just stubborn and stuck in their ways."

People around here are quickly becoming their parents and grandparents, only the 21st century equivalent.
 
Avatar 43041
 
If you don't like where gaming is heading, stop giving your money to the people who are taking it in that direction.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
70. Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts Apr 18, 2010, 15:32 space captain
 
Well, I don't think Blue's News is representative of PC gamers. I've been gaming primarily on my PC since the 80s and I have somehow avoided becoming some jaded and cynical crybaby.

Most of the vocal commenters here aren't really gamers at all. Just bitter old ex-gamers who are this generations version of the creepy old man who lives in the rundown house bitching at the neighborhood kids to get off his lawn and giving nasty looks to neighbors who might walk by.

You'll notice if you spend some time here that it's really just the same 5 or 6 people bitching in every comment thread about everything. Look at a more mainstream gaming site and the mood is considerably more positive and the discussion far more constructive.

One guy here has a sig that says something like "The unhappiest most bitter gamers in the world are at Blue's News." This rings true more and more every day.

maybe if you cry some more everything will fix itself.. oh wait, you are being positive and happy instead of a cynical crybaby - nevermind, you're already there
 
Go forth, and kill!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
69. Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts Apr 18, 2010, 15:12 wtf_man
 
NKD wrote on Apr 18, 2010, 10:54:
Well, I don't think Blue's News is representative of PC gamers. I've been gaming primarily on my PC since the 80s and I have somehow avoided becoming some jaded and cynical crybaby.

Wow. That's a blanket statement.

I've been playing games since the 80s too, and there's a lot to "bitch about".

Late-80s and Early 90s games averaged 40 hours plus of gameplay for $30.

Nowadays you get 10-15 hours for $50+ with lack of gameplay depth and all eye-candy. (Although there are few exceptions)

You also weren't treated like a criminal back then. Yes, there was copy protection, but nothing like having a company "IN CONTROL" of your install. (Activation, install limits, constant internet connection for single player games, rootkits that blacklist what you can or can't run on YOUR computer, phone-home ware that transmits data (and you don't know what is being sent), etc. etc. etc.)

If you are happy with what "mainstream PC gaming" has become... then that's your business.

But calling the rest of us "Cynical Crybabies" is fairly uncalled for.

For me... it's the principles.
I do not shell out money for shallow games that are extremely short and pretty much nothing but eye-candy. I also do not shell out money for games that try to have the Publishers in control of MY MACHINE or Software installs. *I* control what goes on MY machine, and the sooner the Publishers get that through their thick fuckin' skulls... the better. Period!
 
Avatar 19499
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
68. Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts Apr 18, 2010, 14:34 JohnnyRotten
 
Jim wrote on Apr 18, 2010, 14:27:
why is it that with record sales the past year the focus now shifts from the customers instead to "piracy" and how much more money they could possibly be making?

pirates don't pay shiz for games and are not going to pay anything no matter what measures are enacted. as a customer I am becoming increasingly offended at the abusive measures being tossed our way.

Because this really isn't an honest conversation about piracy. It's really about monetizing everything you can, and hiding behind the boogieman-de-jure as the excuse. It's pretty much SOP for everything these days.

Won't someone think of the children?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
67. Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts Apr 18, 2010, 14:27 Jim
 
why is it that with record sales the past year the focus now shifts from the customers instead to "piracy" and how much more money they could possibly be making?

pirates don't pay shiz for games and are not going to pay anything no matter what measures are enacted. as a customer I am becoming increasingly offended at the abusive measures being tossed our way.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
66. Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts Apr 18, 2010, 12:08 ColoradoHoudini
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Apr 17, 2010, 19:17:
Thats pretty much how i see it as well, in the age of walkthroughs on youtube it takes 10 seconds to see how good or bad a game is. Saves you time of downloading and installing a 2gb demo and saves you space to boot.

Heck, you can judge most games by their screenshots and gameplay videos.

You're just the kind of rube that these back alley publishers/devs are banking on.
---------
Anyone remember the "CS killer" called: Devastation?
Hahaha... good lord man. Tons of hype, and in no way did that game deliver.. the demo was horrid, but had you been one of the sheep that only read previews and looked at screenshots, you would've been all in.
------------
for me:
no demo = I "sample" the game elsewhere first..then make a buying decision.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
85 Replies. 5 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo