Responding:

- Who told you that? As an example, there's a lot of whining from console players through Gamespot/Eurogamer/Shacknews etc. comments. I don't know about forums since I don't have a console, so I don't care. Don't make them look so dumb, not all console players are rich little kids who buy whatever comes out. But most of them are, that's why consoles bring more money than the PC . Let's hope they grow up and find out they're playing the same stuff over and over. On that day games will get better, or sell less
- A bad looking game is a bad looking game, the platform doesn't matter
- "Certain hardware"... PC hardware is not "certain" enough? Come on, these days we have two brands of videocards and two brands of processors plus a uniform environment (Directx). Things were a lot more fragmented in the MS-DOS days. "Much easier to develop"... This is machine and machine-knowledge dependent, plus you have to pay for and learn how to use the development kit in conjunction with a few programming languages. It's the same on the PC using Directx, and the Directx SDK is free. That's why many not so rich, independent developers prefer the PC over consoles. Finally, "much less bugs" depends on how skilled the development team is, not which platform you use.
- We really don't have serious statistics about that. Piracy is a threat, it's always been since the Commodore 64 days, but it's equally true that, sometimes, companies use it as an excuse to cancel PC games like Alan Wake
I shouldn't have mentioned that about piracy. In fact piracy is not a problem, but it is used from developers as an excuse. In reality very few of those who run a game pirated would have actually purchased it if piracy was not an option. The vast majority would just not play it instead.

Appart from that what are you trying to say? You even dought that PC developing isn't far more complicated than console? Unless you do it console-style, it is.

- There are at least 2 operating systems they need to take into account, Win XP & Vista/7 (not to mention Linux).
- There are 32 & 64 bit systems. Far Cry & Crysis 1 were the only ones I've seen supporting 64-bit, while Crysis Warhead (and Crysis 2?) dumbed it, probably deciding that the juice is not worth the sqeeze.
- More than one DIRECTX paths are required, unless you do the classical shader-model-3.0-for-all
- Detailed options for the graphics details are required with variety of resolutions due to the different performance levels of different video card hardware
- Higher bug probability or more difficult to avoid the bugs.

If you are to do serious PC game development you need to build a new game engine once every other year, in order to odopt the new DIRECTX technologies. Console developers just built a game engine once and more or less use it all time time. Pretty much like the Call of Duty developers. Without seriously updating their game engine, they release a new title every year and make millions. CRYTEK has made 3 major PC game titles so far and to do so, it came with a new game engine with every new game. And their titles take a lot more than a year to develop

Crytek has put the C2 launch to a whole NEW MAX LEVEL.
The released a broken game
0 response
Didnt learn from previous mistakes/bugs (demo)
Made promises where everybody now is very sceptic if it wil ever come.

Very true, unfortunately.

bugs like melee that stops working, the stupid drm bugs, the anti hacking failure, the whole not supporting sli graphics card and stuff like that arent because of the wide range of pc hardware/software but rather because of the last minute console port and just simply not having enough time to test and optimise..

Partly Crytek's fault for not starting on the pc and also EA's fault for being such a dike.

Sounds true. This is common with the PC plattform. So many different hardware & OS combinations and most are only happy if the game is designed in the way of maximizing the abilities of their own. If you focus on massly available hardware, you get complains from people with modern-expensive hardware who is not fully-utilized. If you focus of high-tech hardware, you get complains from those that don't have it and hate the idea of upgrading their hardware every year to play PC games maxed-out.


There comes a time when older hardware needs to be left in the dust. Why should market norms be forever saddled with 5-year hardware and poorly configured OS's. If you don't want to ride the treadmill that leaps forward every year then find another hobby. Having said this I agree that a range of older hardware should, and can be supported.

Developers didn't fall in love with consoles for nothing. Consoles have:

- No such whinning
- No "deep anolysis" of the actual image quality (Personally I consider the effort of maximizing D3D9 IQ useless)
- Certain hardware, much easier to develop and with much less bugs
- Less piracy


A certain portion of every demographic is going to whine about something, no matter what.

We have every right to "deep anolysis" when it comes to visuals. In my case it comes from spending almost $1500 for cards and water blocks last refit. Remember, the OEM's sell us video hardware based on the simple principle of "more equals better."

My box is as stable as I can make it because I take my gaming very seriously, and can't abide "problems." If Crytek, etc. can't hit the mark for people like me they have much larger problems.

Then come up with a minimally invasive form of DRM that WORKS.

Now, I was under the impression that Cryengine 3 and Crysis 2 would be an effort to make a game that would "please everyone". This is something I've never seen happening before and would be very ambitious, not to mention costly.


If they can't do it right, they should give up on PC gaming. But that won't happen, right? They want every dime they can get, even if they have to screw over the oldest electronic gamers, PC folks.

It would involve console developing and a full DX9-DX10-DX11 path for the PC and the DX11 and DX10 paths to be utilised in a way of making a real-difference when you turned them on (like it happens with Crysis 1) and tax the high-end video cards accordingly.


So? If companies like Crytek don't have the right people on staff to get the job done then bring in some new tools AND people.

@OP
I think you fail to understand that Crytek promised A LOT to the PC community. They delivered little of what they promised.
The game just falls into your generic cross-platform game, graphics, game play (I don't even know what the hell they were thinking with the story but that could be fixed perhaps in Crysis 3...maybe). They may have designed CryEngine3 to be able to scale up to high PC standards and as low as Xbox360 capabilities and it may be better then CryEngine 2 but they seem to have forgotten the scaling up part, and the better than CryEngine 2 part.
They promised to it would be a PC game first, which means, you build it around PC. Stating it would going to be also on consoles, takeing the statement from my previous sentance, it suggests they would then scale it down for console play.
It is at best a severe lack of clarification and at worst an outright lie. People have the right to be angery with Crytek and EA. They were not given what was hyped and promised. We paid money for this game and did not get what was promised. This isn't a matter of bugs (however some are rediculous oversights) it is a matter of stating their product is something that it is not.

I mean, I've never seen a company being so insulted and hated for a game like Crytek is for C2. When you read this forum there are so many complaints, so many requests and nothing. Before the game was released on the market they had so much to say but now when people bought this game and realized it's full of bugs and they demand it to be fixed I see no response, absolute ignorance. I can't **** believe this!
How can they let this happen and I'm not talking about some meaningless company they are huge and worldwide recognized.
Perhaps they will make some patch and fix this and that but come on Crytek SILENCE IS NOT THE ANSWER!
Is it really so hard to say something officially and let people know what is going to happen? Don't we deserve a little bit of respect?


You clearly never were on the Bad Company 2 forums on release.This forum here is like heaven against what happenend there..... ^^


But i agree with you. ^^

I mean, I've never seen a company being so insulted and hated for a game like Crytek is for C2. When you read this forum there are so many complaints, so many requests and nothing. Before the game was released on the market they had so much to say but now when people bought this game and realized it's full of bugs and they demand it to be fixed I see no response, absolute ignorance. I can't **** believe this!
How can they let this happen and I'm not talking about some meaningless company they are huge and worldwide recognized.
Perhaps they will make some patch and fix this and that but come on Crytek SILENCE IS NOT THE ANSWER!
Is it really so hard to say something officially and let people know what is going to happen? Don't we deserve a little bit of respect?


You clearly never were on the Bad Company 2 UK forums on release.This forum here is like heaven against what happenend there..... ^^


But i agree with you. ^^

In all honesty, I believe we should be complaining, yes,... but not so much to crytek. In the end it's EA that forces a release date and they don't care if crytek wants to give us a great PC game or not. They decide, it's time to make money of consoles. Release it by this time and day, or else!
That's how things work. I don't believe for a second that crytek would release a game in this state (mp that is) and on purpose, if they were their own publisher. Maybe they should consider publishing their own games.

In all honesty, I believe we should be complaining, yes,... but not so much to crytek. In the end it's EA that forces a release date and they don't care if crytek wants to give us a great PC game or not. They decide, it's time to make money of consoles. Release it by this time and day, or else!
That's how things work. I don't believe for a second that crytek would release a game in this state (mp that is) and on purpose, if they were their own publisher. Maybe they should consider publishing their own games.
The thing is, publishers take the brunt of the development costs. Developing for consoles is very expensive, and publishing is too. It doesn't make sense for relatively small businesses like Crytek to pay for all aspects, they would struggle big time to stay afloat.

Sure, I understand that there is more business stuff going on,... but if the company is doing well enough to have several offices world-wide, they could also publish. They are well known already. Valve wasn't half as big when they published their first own game.

Sure, I understand that there is more business stuff going on,... but if the company is doing well enough to have several offices world-wide, they could also publish. They are well known already. Valve wasn't half as big when they published their first own game.
They weren't developing for three seperate next-gen platforms at the time either.

You're still missing my point... I doubt any of this was purposely done by crytek and we should be a little less hard with them. If it were up to them, I'm confident we would have had a much more polished game a couple of months later.
I'm also unhappy about some things, but overall I think it's still a great game. I just wish it wouldn't be up to the publishers all the time, as all AAA titles these days get rushed out to make money, rather than delivering quality.