• 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.

Crytek: if you want to be relevant in 4 years in game dev, you'll need a VR solution

Durante

Member
I think, from the point of view of an engine company, that's a perfectly valid idea.

In fact, as an engine you really need to support VR now to stay relevant.

Reports from E3 indicate that the new Oculus CV headsets are very comfortable... 'as light as a baseball cap' (according to Norm from tested) - that most of the weight it balanced towards the crown of the head, and that there are spring elements in the part connecting the strap to the headset, that allows for the user to easily take the headset on and off without having to readjust the device every time.

It's also covered in breathable and stain/sweat/crusting resistant fabric and the IPD (distance between eyes) can be easily adjusted to best suit the user.

Given all that... it's apparent that Oculus has given significant thought and effort to ensuring that even the 'first generation' VR stuff will be highly usable right out of the gate.
They have -- and really, given how long they took for CV1 that should be expected :p
 

Flai

Member
Yeah right. I don't think that VR will be a big hit. I thought we would see games this e3... Still no games around, only a few tech demos and that was it. I really loved. Testint oculus rift, but i suppose its going to he a fad like 3d and waggling... Sadly.

There were plenty of games announced? Just because EA or Ubisoft isn't developing them doesn't mean that nobody is making them. Insomniac's Edge Of Nowhere is one example of "AAA" studio making. Crysis also announced their own VR game. Plenty of more games from bigger studios and even more from smaller studios.
 

Magnus

Member
Crytek shouldn't be telling anyone what to do in order to "stay relevant". As they have worked steadily to become not at all relevant.

Also i hope there are plenty of games that aren't vr in the future

if you want to be relevant in much more than four years in game dev, you need to make good games.

I wouldn't take advice from anyone at Crytek on this topic.

Crytek on relevancy, more at 11.

Sums it up succinctly.
 

Ushojax

Should probably not trust the 7-11 security cameras quite so much
lol

It's been more than 4 years since Crytek made a good game. As a maker of games they are already irrelevant.
 

Tripon

Member
lol

It's been more than 4 years since Crytek made a good game. As a maker of games they are already irrelevant.

Not to mention the issue with the new CryEngine that people have. I still don't get why Amazon bailed them out with an oversized contract.
 

pswii60

Member
He's right. In four years time, cutting edge games will almost all be vr.
That would require VR to have a sizeable and active userbase in 4 years time to warrant publishers to make that kind of investment.

PS4 + Morpheus realistically just doesn't have the hardware power to drive 'cutting edge' VR games. And the PC userbase alone already isn't enough to fund the budgets of AAA games, let alone when you then further limit it to whatever the PC + VR userbase will be in 4 years.

The price of entry and inconvenience will dampen the success of VR on PC, and limited hardware power on PS4.

In 4 years could we see a VR-focused PS5 launching though? I really don't see it.
 

Tathanen

Get Inside Her!
Maybe I'll be wrong, but I see no future for VR. Isolated facemask gaming does not have the market interest beyond novelty to make it, no matter whether the price goes down over time.
 

Clear

CliffyB's Cock Holster
Indeed, Crytek are amongst the very least creatively interesting developers in the AAA space. Not to mention a company that recently was close to insolvency.
 

Z3M0G

Member
What they are saying makes perfect sense... we can disregard who they are and just acknowledge what they are saying. But also don't misinterpret it... not ALL games will be VR or going towards VR in 4 years... that's not what they are saying. But everyone needs to be involved in VR 4 years from now or you will be seriously missing out...

VR will be HUGE HUGE HUGE 4 years from now. Everyone will be using it. Not just for games of course.
 

Daingurse

Member
By far my biggest concern with VR is one of comfort.

How many people will game for hours wearing those goggles?

Am I going to want to make that kind of an effort to game when I come home from work?

Yep, like am I going to have to pop dramamine before every session? Because I have issues with chronic nausea. I believe VR is the future for a lot of forms of entertainment, I just hope I'm going to fucking be able to enjoy it comfortably.

I think 4 years from now VR will be very relevant, so Crytek's statement doesn't seem off the mark. Even if the majority of games are traditional four years from now, developers will probably still want a VR solution in-place, to meet the needs of that market.
 
Crytek couldn't even pay its workers this time last year but now they're Nostradamus.

Hell the year before that they were saying F2P was the future.
 

Percy

Banned
I kind of feel like in 4 years time these will have become the kind of statements that will be haunting the likes of Crytek for the rest of their days... though in Crytek's case being around in 4 years might be an optimistic outlook.

jk
?
 

Sulik2

Member
I'm considering making a VR room for the Vive in my house. How insane is it that I can legit say that now. I think crytek is spot on, VR could very possibly be the next big thing.
 

SpartanN92

Banned
A lot of snarky, cynical and foolish responses here...

Crytek may not necessarily make your favorite games but they are FAR from irrelevant. CryEngine is pretty amazing and is going to be a huge platform for developers this gen.

As for VR it is definitely a must for tech companies to invest in. Its obviously going to be the defining feature of this generation so not investing in it is a terrible idea.
 

Clockwork5

Member
Crytek shouldn't be telling anyone what to do in order to "stay relevant". As they have worked steadily to become not at all relevant.

Also i hope there are plenty of games that aren't vr in the future

First post nailed it.

I'll take it further and say I hope a good amount of devs steer clear of VR and focus on making better video games.
 

EGM1966

Member
Crytek shouldn't be telling anyone what to do in order to "stay relevant". As they have worked steadily to become not at all relevant.

Also i hope there are plenty of games that aren't vr in the future

Came in to say exactly this. Also they're almost certainly wrong - which doesn't bode too well for them yet again.

Not saying VR won't do well - but anyone thinking in 4 years majority of videogames will be consumed via VR is drinking too much koolaid IMHO.
 
For a company that builds game engines? Yes, in four years you will likely need to be pursuing some type of VR support structure unless VR crashes and burns (which is also entirely possible).

But for a normal development company? Nah. Even if VR takes off, which it likely won't to the extremely optimistic degree a lot of people are assuming, there will always be an enormous market for non-VR games. Especially since none of the current three consoles were built to natively support VR - they don't have enough power, they're just now working on the peripheral, and they have no software support almost two years into the lifecycle. Which means, best case scenario is that the next generation of consoles, or whatever system the future holds if not consoles, is where mainstream VR for gaming might actually take off. But that's at least 4-5-6 years away before that generation even begins. And then you'd be looking at another 2-3 years of software development and hardware sales to build a library worth the price of admission.

And even then, there are way too many people who either aren't interested in, don't like, or can't physically use VR for the industry to abandon traditional gaming altogether. And, in all likelihood due to the cost and nature of the product compared to the alternative, it is far more likely that VR becomes a niche while traditional remains the mainstream rather than mainstream becoming the niche with VR taking the forefront.
 
Crytek shouldn't be telling anyone what to do in order to "stay relevant". As they have worked steadily to become not at all relevant.

Also i hope there are plenty of games that aren't vr in the future
Lol at crytek talking about being relevant. Like they know anything about being relevant.
 

kiguel182

Member
If you are taking business advice from Crytek you might have other problems other to support VR.

This is the same company that launched a f2p portal because f2p was the future. And now they are almost bankrupt.

Not the best at predicting future trends.
 

Chippiez

Banned
VR can be big. I think AR can be bigger and have many more applications than VR could. But there will always be a rather sizeable chunk of the population that does not want to stick a contraption on their head because of the effect it has on them, be it nausea, dizziness or hipsterdom.
 
Crytek is one to talk when it comes to staying relevant, and 4 years is incredibly optimistic considering the current barrier for entry. HDTV is about the closest analogue I can think of and that had a waaaaaaaay longer gestation period.
 

Theonik

Member
Why exactly four years?
2 generations of VR hardware, next-gen, new demands from audiences and developers in the case of engine making devs like Crytec, Unity and Epic. There is no other reason why all these parties are going hard on VR. When VR is mature it is too late.
 

oni-link

Member
Crytek placing the wrong bets once again.

Crytek on relevancy, more at 11.

I wouldn't take advice from anyone at Crytek on this topic.

Crytek shouldn't be telling anyone what to do in order to "stay relevant". As they have worked steadily to become not at all relevant.

Also i hope there are plenty of games that aren't vr in the future

Lol thread backfire?

if you want to be relevant in four years in game development, you have to have a VR solution

Sure, because mobile gaming isn't going to be profitable at all in 4 years time

Crytek should worry about themselves being relevant in 4 years time, or even still here, If their AAA VR game flops due to low VR headset sales they'll be in big trouble
 
lol i'm gonna grab the low hanging fruit and talk about Crytek's relevance like the engines that will power 90% of my favorite games by the end of this generation aren't already featuring VR development suites like right now
because I'm an asshole
 
Crytek always jumps on the "it's popular now put all resources on it now" bandwagon. That's a big reason they fell apart. They had a high quality PC game, then they followed the bandwagon and focused on consoles first. Then the F2P craze started and they went after it hard, making all of their studios make big budget F2P games. Then they fell apart, and now they're chasing after VR.
 
Top Bottom