Hi guys, after a quick read of http://www.gamesas.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=23013 it got me thinking, due to CE3 was shown to have all these wondrous features touted by Cevat have they shot themselves in the foot with trying get developers to use the engine.
Yes it may be going free in the summer but how much of a useful tool can it be! I say this as there was bugs that needed to be patched on consoles and it was a hefty size couple of patches from what I have seen and also that the pc version after 2 patches is still very buggy (not talking about mp as that hasn't anythin to do with the engine per say).

If I had a business and I wanted to use a good game engine would I go with a unknown engine that has proved to be buggy and unreliable and could not deliver or use and already existing one which has had updates ie source or UE,

Due to this buggy release, yes it could be down to laziness or time constraints, without being in crytek I won't know however common sense shows this is the worst type of selling of an games engine . Crysis 2 was their showcase for the engine yet when push comes to shove after a delay and very buggy release it may have hindered it.

What are your thoughts, do you reckon its hindered its industry use.

First off, the engine and the bugs aren't neccessarily related. They may be but it's likely that the bugs are on the developer-side of things. Secondly, CE3 is hardly unknown. CE3 is the evolution of CE2 which made huge waves in the development community but never took off as a third-party tool.

If a developer looks at CE3 and says "Well, won't be using that since Crysis 2 has bugs" then they're morons that probably don't have the intelligence to be developers in the first place.

I think Crysis did not fit into the agenda of the elites and was pushed out early into production so that the game would quickly die off and be forgotten.

Main reason why COD is so succesful. Marketing and well, sheep.

First off, the engine and the bugs aren't neccessarily related. They may be but it's likely that the bugs are on the developer-side of things. Secondly, CE3 is hardly unknown. CE3 is the evolution of CE2 which made huge waves in the development community but never took off as a third-party tool.

If a developer looks at CE3 and says "Well, won't be using that since Crysis 2 has bugs" then they're morons that probably don't have the intelligence to be developers in the first place.

True but when you look at it as business sense ie no common sense whatsoever you only look at statistics and as many pro crytek fans on here state, crytek went for the most viable money gaming platform which is consoles.

Now keeping this money mindset going, if a developer can't even use their own engine that they themselves created which leans they should know it off by heart and yet still release a some what broken game, how difficult must the engine be to work with.

Would you as a potential game publisher want you dev project to use this unknown engine which has not been tested by other devs and only results show a buggy game from using the engine or would you use one that was known and support by many business.

This is where I believe they shot themselves in the foot as they really needed a game that used the engine to be perfect and almost bug free, (I know not 100% can be removed). This could also be an incentive of why they announced not long ago it would be free due to they know their showcase game would not be perfect to sell their engine

crysis 2 is still the best damn thing on consoles.........So most of the devs will adopt it

Plenty of third party developers using CE3 for a wide range of uses. C2 isn't the only thing CE3 is capable of. Do some research.

I have a question. Crysis 2 was supposed to be released last year but got delayed. Killzone 3 was released at the end of February, and Homefront was supposed to be released soon after. Not to mention Brink and Duke Nukem Forever were finally launching soon. So with Crysis 2 delayed and Crytek probably needing more time, my question is this:

Do you think EA forced Crytek to release the game as it is as they'd had enough of development, or do you think Crytek looked at the game as it was with its issues and told EA it was time to release?

I don't know whether they were pushed into it, after all, they had quite alot of time to develop the game. Plus, if the game is buggy/glitchy then its not the engines fault, but more on the developers side. But it depends really.

As for CE3, we haven't seen the full potential yet, we've probably only seen half of it. Most likely someone will come along and make something pretty damn amazing. Be it modders or developers, at the end of the day, this engine can achieve things other engines may not easily achieve quickly and easily.

Crysis 2 was the first game to show off some of CE3's potential. They may continue to do it more in the future, or other developers may end up making great use of it.

You also have to take into account that CE2 was a big hit, but had many problems. CE3 is generally CE2, only with many, many fixes as well as some new minor features.