• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Gamestar.de: The vultures are circling over Crytek [Up3: Eurogamer/Kotaku jump in]

Nirolak

Mrgrgr
That's odd considering MS have traditionally not been too concerned about owning IPs through third party relations. Maybe a change in stance since Mattrick left?
If they're not convinced in Crytek's ability to deliver quality, they presumably want the option to switch developers like they did with Crackdown or Killer Instinct.

Given how much they would likely have to invest in Ryse 2, basically they want to ensure that they can still try and get money out of the brand if Crytek launches another 60 metacritic tier title.

Or, put another way, you can only demand owning your IP if your publisher thinks that your studio is high caliber enough that it's worth letting you have it in exchange for getting to be your publisher. Crytek is not the power player in this relationship and thus IP rights are not in their favor.
 
Kudos to Razyl, here's the info from the article:

*Information is from a half dozen independent sources, according to Yerli "dramatized rumors" from disgruntled ex-employees
*Salaries are paid late and leading employees are sending applications to other studios at home and abroad
*Warface doesn't work outside of Russia, other attempts at F2P were unsuccessful
*G-face was a flop
*The development of Ryse was catastrophic: mere months before release, the title was severely behind, only with additional manpower they were able to finish it
*Disagreements with MS over the ownership of Ryse's IP could be a red flag for other publishers
*Adoption of CryEngine not going as planned, word-of-mouth at GDC was negative
*Subscription system on Steam was a reactive move, with an opaque licensing model
*Too many employees, burn-rate too high (3-5 M euro)
*"The vultures are already circling," says a leading representative for a major publisher
*Big publishers are not interested in buying outright,would rather wait for bankruptcy, sign the talent and shop the IPs
*Belarusian Free2Play giant Wargaming is listed as a possible buyer of Crytek
*Avni Yerli says a cash injection for the company is finally imminent. The contract has not been signed yet, but is as good as in the bag. "It's not all great. Our transition to Free2Play studio was not painless. But that is now behind us" he concludes
 

Denton

Member
i hope everybody finds another job but they aren't exactly worth keeping around. Their entire output is very mediocre.

The potential is there though. X-Isle blew my mind in 2000, Far Cry blew my mind in 2004 as first actual next-gen game, Crysis blew my mind in 2007 yet again. Crysis Warhead was also super awesome.
Basically they went downhill when they went console, for some reason.
 

Fractal

Banned
Modern Warfare came out the same year as Crysis and outsold it like 6:1. It's really not that baffling.
I wouldn't really call that a fair comparison. I mean, even back in 2007, CoD was a highly established IP, and Modern Warfare is a multiplatform game. Crysis was a new IP at the time, with much less marketing behind it than CoD. Furthermore, at the time, Crytek was aiming at the PC enthusiast niche, so if they were expecting anything close to MW level of sales, their expectations were highly unrealistic.
 

Nethaniah

Member
I wouldn't really call that a fair comparison. I mean, even back in 2007, CoD was a highly established IP, and Modern Warfare is a multiplatform game. Crysis was a new IP at the time, with much less marketing behind it than CoD. Furthermore, at the time, Crytek was aiming at the PC enthusiast niche, so if they were expecting anything close to MW level of sales, their expectations were highly unrealistic.

Not just unrealistic sales expectations but also hammering on about how many times the game had been pirated instead of looking at the positives like the game selling very well if only because people wanted it as a benchmark.
 

HariKari

Member
Wait.... Are you really blaming this on console development? Seriously?

Yes?

They fell down the console rabbit hole and grew too quickly in the process. Right after they did the original Crysis they rapidly expanded, resulting in Cryis 2, 3, and Ryse. As a studio, they started to crunch development times in the name of cranking things out. The resulting expansion leaves you with a lot of overhead and not much to show for it if publishers don't want more of those same games.
 

SJRB

Gold Member
Yes?

They fell down the console rabbit hole and grew too quickly in the process. Right after they did the original Crysis they rapidly expanded, resulting in Cryis 2, 3, and Ryse. As a studio, they started to crunch development times in the name of cranking things out. The resulting expansion leaves you with a lot of overhead and not much to show for it if publishers don't want more of those same games.

How are consoles to blame for any of this? If you want to play the blame game, blame the studio's management for expanding too agressively while discarting most of what made them succesful in the first place.
 

murgo

Member
Can't say I'm surprised. After Crysis everything went downhill. Crysis 2 was boring and I couldn't even bother to finish Crysis 3. And now they want to bring back Homefront.

Well, too bad. I once thought these guys would be one of the best German devs :(
 

Fractal

Banned
Wait.... Are you really blaming this on console development? Seriously?

Well... truth be told, I'd say Crytek walked into the console market highly unprepared, again with the unrealistic expectations. Back when Crysis 2 was being released, I was left with a strong impression they thought of the console marketspace as some "gold mine" where you simply release a game and sell millions in short term. These expectations of theirs were most likely fueled by CoD's success. Ironically, Crysis 2 on all 3 major platforms sold less than the original on PC only:
Wiki said:
As of June 30, 2011 over 3 million copies of the game have been sold across all platforms, which is less than Crysis on PC only.
Source
To sum things up, I wouldn't say console development is to blame here, only bad decision making on Crytek's part!
 

KORNdoggy

Member
I'm blaming it on Crytek abandoning what put them on the radar while chasing whatever is en vogue at the time and outputting mediocre games in the process.

I can't help but think they'd have output mediocre games no matter what platform they where on. Crysis 2 being the way it turned out was less to do with consoles and more to do with trends within GAMING. Ie, COD...cinematic, linear affairs. They definitely fell down a rabbit hole. Just not the one some people are claiming. Their games being on consoles was a by product of the direction they took their games. Not the reasoning behind it. They should have left the cinematic games to the developers with some actual cinematic flair.
 

cuyahoga

Dudebro, My Shit is Fucked Up So I Got to Shoot/Slice You II: It's Straight-Up Dawg Time
Yes?

They fell down the console rabbit hole and grew too quickly in the process. Right after they did the original Crysis they rapidly expanded, resulting in Cryis 2, 3, and Ryse. As a studio, they started to crunch development times in the name of cranking things out. The resulting expansion leaves you with a lot of overhead and not much to show for it if publishers don't want more of those same games.
Their current mess doesn't really have to do much with console development. Expansion was to enter global markets and make more games, not simply to help current ones get out the door.

Also, their issues are exacerbated by the fact that their dev process has historically been a mess. Their MOBA thing was supposed to be released ages ago, and it has been in development for five years or something insane, during which it was once a RPG and MMO IIRC. I recall someone saying the fact that Crytek could ship any game is "a fucking miracle."
 
It is a pity the studio has never replicated the magnificence that was Crysis 1...They should probably pair with another studio, say valve. They can create the tech, the other studio creates much of the game design.
 

RoboPlato

I'd be in the dick
I always thought that their military contracts were what was keeping them going. Did those fall through or did they just burn through all that cash?
 

takoyaki

Member
if you click on the link in the OP, there's a bit more info in German for non-subscribers.

Nach GameStar-Informationen stand das bekannteste deutsche Entwicklungsstudio Crytek im April dieses Jahres kurz vor dem Bankrott. Mitgründer Avni Yerli sagt, eine weitere Finanzierung sei gesichert – aber wie lange noch?

According to Gamestar sources, Germany's most renowned games developer Crytek was on the verge of declaring bankruptcy this very April. Co-founder Avni Yerli made clear that they were assured more financing/another round of financing - and then Gamestar ends ominously with "but for how long?"
 

Burt

Member
Been asking for years how Crytek has been able to stay in business with the sparse number of games they've put out and a reportedly Ubi-esque employee count. Always thought there was something a bit more complex behind the scenes that wasn't public that kept them going. Guess not, common sense prevails.
 

cuyahoga

Dudebro, My Shit is Fucked Up So I Got to Shoot/Slice You II: It's Straight-Up Dawg Time
Speaking further to the messy development, the number of games Crytek has cancelled in 15 years of operation is in the dozens supposedly.
 

Eusis

Member
If they're not convinced in Crytek's ability to deliver quality, they presumably want the option to switch developers like they did with Crackdown or Killer Instinct.

Given how much they would likely have to invest in Ryse 2, basically they want to ensure that they can still try and get money out of the brand if Crytek launches another 60 metacritic tier title.

Or, put another way, you can only demand owning your IP if your publisher thinks that your studio is high caliber enough that it's worth letting you have it in exchange for getting to be your publisher. Crytek is not the power player in this relationship and thus IP rights are not in their favor.
Yeah, it doesn't seem to make much sense from a business perspective, and personally it just doesn't look like an interesting enough IP to be worth keeping control over, like Destiny for Bungie (IF they do, wouldn't be surprised if they didn't with Activision but Bungie could feasibly have that clout) or something where they invested more in creating a world. Seems like a situation to cut their losses and ensure they can get food on the table because keeping that seems like an act of pure vanity. I got the impression that if they wanted to go in other directions th ey wouldn't really NEED that IP anyway.
 

Liha

Banned
I am not surprised, Crytek is one of the largest independent developers. Their fixed costs are ridiculously high and the financial reserves are not adequate.
 

Kintaro

Worships the porcelain goddess
I can't help but think they'd have output mediocre games no matter what platform they where on. Crysis 2 being the way it turned out was less to do with consoles and more to do with trends within GAMING. Ie, COD...cinematic, linear affairs.

I don't think it is out of the realm of possibility to say that those trends in gaming were caused by consoles.
 

dmr87

Member
As many others I liked Crysis and Warhead, then Crysis 2 killed it for me. That in turn made me not care about Crysis 3.
 

LTWheels

Member
If they're not convinced in Crytek's ability to deliver quality, they presumably want the option to switch developers like they did with Crackdown or Killer Instinct.

Given how much they would likely have to invest in Ryse 2, basically they want to ensure that they can still try and get money out of the brand if Crytek launches another 60 metacritic tier title.

Or, put another way, you can only demand owning your IP if your publisher thinks that your studio is high caliber enough that it's worth letting you have it in exchange for getting to be your publisher. Crytek is not the power player in this relationship and thus IP rights are not in their favor.

MS buy Ryse IP, and get Ninja Theory to make a sequel.
 

fasTRapid

Banned
Homefront 2 looks good, tho.
their studios cost relatively little because they're in cheaper parts of the world
Eh... Germany... cheap part of the world? What?

Look at Farcry4, look at Crysis3. I think I know what went wrong.
Wait! Do you think they were the ones working on Far Cry's sequels or are you just trying to compare Crysis 3 to Far Cry 4?

How is that transition from PC to consoles working out for you, Crytek?
Ugh, troll somewhere else please. Going multiplat didn't put them in this misery. Releasing one bad game after another and focusing on F2P is where they went wrong.
 
As many others I liked Crysis and Warhead, then Crysis 2 killed it for me. That in turn made me not care about Crysis 3.

Lifelong PC gamer used to love Cryteks stuff from Farcry right up to Crysis Warhead. Things started to go sour for me when Cryteks boss openly attacked PC gamers and spent most of his time deriding the PC platform. As such I only bought Crysis 2 when it was on a steam sale and was appalled at how they had butchered the Crysis franchise and turned a once fantastic open world game into a linear, boring corridor shooter (hell to this day I got so bored of Crysis 2 I never even finished it).

Then when Crysis 3 was Origin only which automatically made it a "no buy" even if I hadn't already been put off the series by Crysis 2. It is hard to fathom how a once great PC developer ended up doing console only exclusives, what a way to shit on your core customer base.

It's never nice to see people made unemployed and I don't celebrate the fact that a once premier PC develop is facing the abyss. However I certainly won't miss Cevat Yerli constantly banging on about how things are "much better" in the console world than the PC world. Funnily enough I won't miss Crytek either because they have become pretty much irrelevant to the PC gaming community.
 

Dysun

Member
They grew too fast and their games have been mediocre to bad since Crysis 1. Not all that surprising, except for CryEngine being somewhat of a flop as well
 
Surprising that Crytek would want to hold onto the Ryse IP. Do they foresee it exploding in popularity or something?

Whatever the reason, seems the smart thing to do would be to sell it for a high price to MS and use some of that money to bolster the company, if they are in financial straits.
 
Funnily enough I won't miss Crytek either because they have become pretty much irrelevant to the PC gaming community.

Crysis 3 remains the current graphical benchmark for the platform and Cryengine is being used for the biggest pc exclusive in a very long time so irrelevant seems a bit strong a word.
 
Maybe MS want to buy Ryse IP for cheap (Who would blame them) and Crytek are waiting for better price?

This is what I'm thinking. The IP isn't exactly a strong one, but they do run the risk of holding out for too long and not getting anything if they end up going the same way as THQ did...
 
Hmm, if they go under would be interesting to see who buys what especially Cytek UK and Timesplitters (would love for ninty to buy them, though I could see Sega or EA going for it more likely)
 
Even if they're not on the verge of bankruptcy what game is going to bring them back as a top developer?

They expanded WAY too fast.
 

Gaz_RB

Member
Damn, hope they manage to weather the storm. I know Crytek might be one of the least loved devs around here - but there are still great people there and I anticipate playing their next game.

Yeah I hope they pull through alright. I'm looking forward to Hunted very much.
 

Orca

Member
I liked Homefront, despite the short length of the campaign it played well enough and had a lot of good ideas mixed in with the generic bits. The multiplayer was surprisingly fun. I'm hoping the sequel will actually expand on things, not just reboot into entirely different gameplay. Hopefully they can find a way to turn things around, even if it means slimming down a bit.
 

Kimawolf

Member
Yeah guess they gambled on F2P and seem to be holding a losing hand huh? Well it sucks, I enjoyed their PC games, but they should have seen the writing on the wall when they started focusing on consoles and f2p instead of the people who brought them to the party being pc games.

And maybe they should have pushed their engine harder as a viable engine.
 
They did the Google thing of introducing G-Face, a social network nobody cared about and then tying Warface, a F2P game that might've had some chance (it wasn't very good, but it was still better than most F2P games) to the service nobody cared about, basically killing any chances it had. They're trying as hard as they can to go F2P, but i doubt they understand how F2P studios survive--by pumping out low quality products over and over eventually getting one large enough--or having all of them sum up large enough--to survive off of.

As someone who loved Crysis 2 and then went back to play their earlier titles and realized how bad Crysis 2 was in hindsight, moving to consoles really hurt them. Their strengths were in making incredibly beautiful games with little to no restrictions. By moving to consoles, they introduced hardware-based restrictions and you can see how that hurt them in the long run. Going F2P seems to be a kneejerk reaction to trends in the mobile space, and a very bad move.

TL;DR management made idiotic studio-wide changes that didn't allow them to use their strengths and eventually dooming them to a path that's very hard to profit from.
 

KaiserBecks

Member
Homefront 2 looks good, tho.
Eh... Germany... cheap part of the world? What?

Their main studio (400 people) is in Germany. That amounts to only half of their employees though.

Wait! Do you think they were the ones working on Far Cry's sequels or are you just trying to compare Crysis 3 to Far Cry 4?

He's comparing. Doesn't really matter though. IMHO, Far Cry has gotten worse over the years, just like Crysis.

Ugh, troll somewhere else please. Going multiplat didn't put them in this misery. Releasing one bad game after another and focusing on F2P is where they went wrong.

That's one way to look at it. Another one would be that they deviated too much from their original formula. When they tried to include the consoles, they couldn't continue making games the way they did before.
Of course that doesn't mean that their games had to turn out bad, but going after the larger console market definitely was a factor.
 
Top Bottom