The Future for Crytek is High-End Free-To-Play Titles

[mrpijey]

Remember that although Team Fortress 2 is free today it wasn't free before, you had to buy the game separately or through the Orange Pack to get it, so Valve got their money and then some for that game. Too bad they shot it to hell and destroyed it with a crappy achievement system and all this hat-nonsense.

As for Crytek: RIP. Even when your Crysis games were so hated (mostly by people that couldn't afford a system to run them on) I liked them. Sometimes it was nice to show what you could do with an engine and some decent hardware. But by going F2P it means we're getting some shitty console ports that are stripped to the bone, and basically Pay2Win games where you have to buy half a dozen items to get anywhere in the game.

Too bad Crytek. At least I hope someone makes a decent NON-F2P game with your engine and show you what you missed out on.

 

[Guest]

farmville!

 

[face-plants]

F2P could quite possibly be ONE (key word) of the pieces in the puzzle to cut back on piracy. At least the exaggerated piracy statistics that the industry touts now; as if each pirated game was a lost sale. Eventually the statistics they're reporting might approach the reality of how much piracy impacts the profits of software companies. When they make it free to play a game and decide if you like it BEFORE dropping any money on it, there's almost zero need to pirate it (unless they're distribution servers suck but I don't even count that as piracy).. If I had to guess, I'd say at least 25% of p2p-acquired games and apps are for this purpose...to try them out before committing to $50-60 for a game and possibly WAY more for certain applications.

 

[Guest]

As far as free to play goes, I look at it like this: Play for free if I get into it I budget it like when I play an mmo which in uk is about £7-£10, In most F2P ive tried this is plenty to get lots of stuff and get through the game and enjoy. If I cant get anything for that amount per month (Like some FB games, wtf is with that? they are the most basic games of all) I dont play the game and move on.

As for : "As is evident in Warface, our approach is to ensure the best quality, console game quality,"

No one thinks console's have the best quality, They are just cheap to set up and for people that cant be assed to learn how to set up a gaming PC which is not expensive by the way unless you go crazy.

PC all the way

 

[darkavenger123]

Free to play but bombard you with advertisment non-stop....am i rite?

 

[Massacher]

exclusive to PC, oh yes!!

 

[tenderanger]

Hey, I have been thinking about this a lot, and would like to share it with you. What if there were three options. 1st would be a lot of grinding, and you get awesome stuff for free, but have lots of ads to. 2nd option would be you can buy items on a per-item basis, and upon the first real money transaction, the game drops around half of the ads. 3rd would be, your classic premium experience, and don't need to pay for anything later, but around 40$-50$ upfront, and the money rates, etc. will be boosted, and all the ads will drop. This will present the best for every world, wouldn't it?

 

[tenderanger]

]citation][nom]hotsacoman[/nom]Actually Crytek really didn't have a choice but to go this route. To max out Crysis (ultra-high, full aa, etc) AND get a consistent 60 fps, you need a gtx 690 or high-end cards in Sli or Cfx. That's why Crysis was more of a tech demo than anything else, that and it's run-of-the-mill gameplay. Don't know if you guys remember a game from '98 called Trespasser, the Jurassic Park game that was meant to "revolutionize PC gaming". When it was released, it was in the same boat. Not even the fastest systems could run it. That, coupled with its numerous bugs and glitches made the game a disaster, even though it had some amazing innovations. Also, Cevat's statement about being next gen ready two years ago is utter nonsense. If he thinks that developers that have been around for years (Epic, Activision, etc) with innumerable game development experience can't close that gap in a short amount of time, he's out of his mind.[/citation]
No you don't need a GTX 690 to max out Crysis! Please do some research before you misinform others.

 

[rantoc]

[citation][nom]hotsacoman[/nom]Actually Crytek really didn't have a choice but to go this route. To max out Crysis (ultra-high, full aa, etc) AND get a consistent 60 fps, you need a gtx 690 or high-end cards in Sli or Cfx. That's why Crysis was more of a tech demo than anything else, that and it's run-of-the-mill gameplay.[/citation]

Actually Crysis still sells due to it, it can still play well and have gorgeous graphics. How many games have such big lifespan and still compete with current gfx? What was the problem was that even when everything was dialled down it still required a bit more than the average PC. Game-scaling is good when it goes from entry level to high-end gaming machines, making people happier to use what they got and keep the title alive for longer.

 

[syddraf]

My only problem with the free to play model is when they set the game up to encourage micro transactions. as in setting the price of decent gear and items so far out of reach you need to use real world money to acquire them. Or make the game so you have to make the same micro transaction over and over again to feel competitive. as in renting equipment in the various free to play shooters. of course you have to make your money so I can handle the first one but the concept of rental equipment peeves me in a big way.

Personally I wouldn't mind a ad supported Free to play title. Make me watch a add or two while an area loads maybe find a way to put in ad related billboards and in game objects depending on the title It wouldn't be much different than watching hulu or youtube

 

[eddieroolz]

This is very welcome news. I just hope Crytek has a way to make money from this.

 

[ivyanev]

Freemiums biggest point is that they deliver much more people for matchmaking.That makes more balanced teams and possibly lower lag due to more local players. And you could really try the game in its fullest before you decide to pay for something.

 

[r1Master]

Why don't they just put in some relevent in game advertising, such as billboards, bus stops, vending machines, rubbish, malls... store fronts in city levels... (or advertising outside the game (splash screens between levels as long as it isn't too long an advert)) and then lower the price of games by $10-$20... I don't think $40-$50 for a good game is too much. If battlefield was $40 I would have brought two copies ! ! ! So they would have made $80 from me instead of $60... oh well... seems someone things Quanity is better than sales dollars.

 

[Spartin503]

Now that's what i'm talking about!