Crytek Boss Says Visuals Are "60% of the Game"

[Best of the 3]

While I think his opinion will be met with opposition I kind of want to agree with him to an extent. Graphics is one of the reasons why I will initially pick up a game. Oooh, this looks pretty, I'll give it a whirl. No I don't think graphics alone make a great game but they certainly do help, and they really help in convincing me to pick the game up.

 

[Your Fearless Captain]

If you interpret what he said as visual style is 60% of immersion then for some people that's probably true. Although if you take it at face value then a game with really good graphics but crappy, repetitive game play it would probably still get a 6/10 at least from most reviewers.

 

[Kungfu_Teddybear]

I've never been more immersed in a video game than I have with Morrowind, and that game looks like ass.

 

[Your Fearless Captain]

"Cevat Yerli, the CEO of Crytek, says that great graphics are the key to immersion in a videogame."

Tell that to every Morrowind player. Even Silent Hill 1 stomps on Crysis in the immersion department, and that game is FUGLY.

I'm going to have to agree that artstyle is more far more important than graphics, especially to help a game age. The Spyro games from the Playstation still look great, and those games are around 15 years old. By the year 2020, Team Fortress 2 will look a LOT better than the Crysis games.

I thought the first Crysis was a very immerse game. And I thought the game play was great most of the time. And I love the story.

Dumping on Crysis seems to be a thing that people do a lot here.

 

[Xanadu84]

This is sad because I actually like Crysis games...

Anyways, yeah, BS. Crysis IS a game that utilizes cutting edge graphic to great effect. I'd say that they actually make games that rely on graphics to deliver a fun experience more than nearly any other game. It seems weird to throw percentages around, but I'd say that just Crysis is like...30% the graphics. And that is incredibly high. Most AAA games like this are probably 10-15% the graphics, If I'm generous. And once you get to smaller games, it can be completely insignificant.

Id like to imagine that at Crytek, there is some group of harried developers constantly rolling their eyes at the manchild, "Bro-gamer" mentality of some people at the top, trying to keep their heads down, getting no respect, but being the heart and soul of the company as they do there best to interject a strong aesthetic, story, and gameplay into the Crysis games. Because I havn't played 3, but the other ones were fun, had fun if completely uninspired stories and settings, and Crysis 2 was actually pretty from an art direction sense.

 

[F1ak3r]

Graphics are important because sight is the main sense we use when playing the vast majority of games, and it's how we engage in the gameplay. In a game like Crysis, yeah, that probably is 60% of the experience. Within his narrow field, Yerli's totally correct.

I don't like that "good graphics" is used, in many circles, to mean "ultra-realistic GPU-killing graphics". To me, good graphics are ones that suit the style of the game, provide gameplay-enhancing feedback, immerse me and don't make me want to gouge my eyes out with a spoon. So if I'm playing Colossal Cave in Helvetica, yeah, I'd consider that good graphics, and I'd agree that they're an important part of the experience (if maybe not 60%... but I'd quit on account of bad graphics ruining my experience if it was in Comic Sans). =)

 

[Froggy Slayer]

Depends on the game, really. Some are really supported by their graphics; Crysis especially was built up mainly around how nice it looked (and how nice it still looks). I never really saw anything wrong with graphics being a big part of the immersion of a game, but I do take issue when people say that the graphics are important to all games. I mean, look at Dwarf Fortress.

 

[senobit]

It's not surprising that the head of Crytek would say something like this, having the shiniest looking games has been there way of standing out in the saturated FPS market.

If he means the visual presentation then I can understand where he's coming from - games like super meat boy and hotline miami look great but are graphically quite simple but there look really adds to the game. But if means that every game needs to be attempting to melt my graphics cards using AA & AF x1000 etc then he's just chatting shit to get more PR for crysis 3

 

[OManoghue]

Callin' some bullshit on this one. He's just butt hurt because no one at Crytek can write a coherent sentence for their games.

 

[Snowblindblitz]

FTL and Bastion would like to stomp your silly shoot-em to the ground and laugh at it.

Dark Souls wants to give you a hint on making an atmosphere, basically, ya didn't.

 

[Something Amyss]

I'd say it's 80% if you're a PC gamer.

My most played games of this gen include Saints Row 2 and Samurai Warriors 2. Yeah, I don't give a damn about graphics as long as I can tell friend from foe and the like.

Edit: if, not of.

 

[Edl01]

Minecraft.
That is all.

 

[Wuvlycuddles]

Oh who let the ceo out in public again?

They've been speaking to people!

You know they shouldn't do that, it only makes them look silly!

 

[Casual Shinji]

He must've used that new swanky game rating machine that's on the market.

I've gots to get me one of those.

 

[commasplice]

I mean. I'd totally play Crysis to test out his theory, but my computer can't run it . . . which is the main downside to top-notch visuals in my book; I don't have a super-great computer. That all-important 60% of the game makes 100% of the game inaccessible to me.

All that aside, stunning graphics really only help to create a cinematic experience, not necessarily an immersive one. Would you really try to argue that Donkey Kong and Pac Man are less immersive than Final Fantasy XIII? I think AT BEST, all three games are on the same level. At worst, FF13 is far less immersive because its focus on making the characters look realistic while failing to build real personality behind them just highlights how fake and plasticine they really are. It's like the game is telling you, "Hey, you're playing pretend with department store manikins!" Moreover, the mediocre gameplay just kind of . . . highlights how shit everything else is. At least in Donkey Kong, I'm so preoccupied with jumping over barrels that I don't really care that DK looks like he's in the middle of a seizure.

 

[Gearhead mk2]

At any rate, raw graphical quality means very little in comparison to style. The Walking Dead and Team Fortress 2 are not advanced in their graphics, but their style makes them look a hell of a lot better than the average shooter with lots of polygons.

I played TWD with everything but the textures on low, and honestly, I think it actually looked BETTER then with all the bells and whistles on. I treid them all on, and I didn't like that suddenly the light looked organic and natural, because it clashed with how cartoony and un-natural everything else looked.

OT: Well, he is right. %60 of the budget and disc space probably goes to graphical power nowadays. Thing is, it shouldn't be that way. As long as the art style is good and I can still tell what's going on, I'd be fine with Gamecube or even PSP level graphics. Focus on the game, the story and the visual design. How many polygons you have shouldn't be a focus of your game, so stop trying to render every sweat drop in 1080p 3D HD etc etc.

 

[Snotnarok]

I think we all value different things when going into a game but graphics always matter no matter how hard people want to think it. Nintendo fans with their Wii were saying graphics don't matter, then got super excited when Zelda Ocarina of Time was getting a texture and now Wind Waker is getting a slight touch up and it's the same deal.

Personally: I like things to move nicely and have a solid art direction. I can't play the original Deus Ex, the way characters move is just so awkward and strange but it's a great game and I had a blast watching an LP. Not to say graphics are what make me play but ...certainly have some drive behind it.

 

[Something Amyss]

I think we all value different things when going into a game but graphics always matter no matter how hard people want to think it. Nintendo fans with their Wii were saying graphics don't matter, then got super excited when Zelda Ocarina of Time was getting a texture and now Wind Waker is getting a slight touch up and it's the same deal.

On the flip side, thing that a slight graphical touchup is generally enough. That doesn't really say much about the importance of graphics.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Mr. Yerli, you are full of shit. At least 60% so.

Minecraft lacks for most of what you describe, and yet it is wildly successful.
Team Fortress 2 adopts a cartoony style devoid of that, and is still one of the most popular online games 6 years after its launch.