If Skyrim were on CryEngine...

Post » Wed May 16, 2012 12:43 pm

Would Cryengine even support a game with the Content of a TES game?

Crysis isn't exactly stuffed full of things to do or complicated NPC's.
User avatar
kristy dunn
 
Posts: 3410
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:08 am

Post » Wed May 16, 2012 1:12 am

If it was based on that engine no one would have a computer that would be able to run it.

So many clueless people here, Cryengine is easily maxed out and could eb for years on PC..............
User avatar
Causon-Chambers
 
Posts: 3503
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 11:47 pm

Post » Wed May 16, 2012 1:34 pm

So many clueless people here, Cryengine is easily maxed out and could eb for years on PC..............

Easily?

Possible, yes. Easily, no.
Not everyone has the coin to do it.
User avatar
N3T4
 
Posts: 3428
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 8:36 pm

Post » Wed May 16, 2012 12:59 am

So many clueless people here, Cryengine is easily maxed out and could eb for years on PC..............
And not to forget that it actually IS possible to adjust graphics settings.
User avatar
Calum Campbell
 
Posts: 3574
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 7:55 am

Post » Wed May 16, 2012 5:07 am

My PC is around (or slightly over) 4 years old. Why assume everyone upgrades every other week :(
User avatar
A Lo RIkIton'ton
 
Posts: 3404
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 7:22 pm

Post » Wed May 16, 2012 2:14 pm

And not to forget that it actually IS possible to adjust graphics settings.

Then you might as well have a console :P
User avatar
OTTO
 
Posts: 3367
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 6:22 pm

Post » Tue May 15, 2012 9:37 pm

Anyway Since I use cryengine quite a lot I guess I can answer by saying that the Cryengine is first of all a free SDK that anyone can download and use to make their own game , then there is coding and database missing to create a RPG system , but nothing is impossible if you can code it by yourself as the original cryesis game is a FPS oriented game ....

The environments in Cryengine can be quite bigger than Elderscrolls because you can reach to create even 8x8 kms sized areas comparing with the 3.8x3.8 of skyrim size but the differene is in resolution , crysis is 1 pixel 1 m skyrim 1pixel 1.8 m so if I double the res of cryengine I can create areas as big as 16 kms with the same texture terrain res of skyrim , the only drawback is that atm Cryengine has not a fully dynamic weather system and night day cycle is based on only one kind of day type , sure you can script in rain and weather but not change much the llunar phases , how the sky changes etc ...

it doesn't have normal mapping for distant terrain lods that seem skyrim is having but for some reason the distant landscape in crysis still look better , even not using the normal maps , the use f them on large scale maps woudl help a lot to save fps ...

I am not sure that skyrim does have occlusion boxes , cryengine does and it serves to be able to erase from rendering all the objects covered by another object thissaves also a lot of fps so .. is very well optimized provided that you create any object in game with that perspective ...

it also allows to create smooth interior exterior transition removing the need of loading different areas and interrupting so the game ...


the detailing is exceptional as it allows up to 6 different lod levels with equally scaled textures...

the materials are awesome as allow a lot more effects , maps and what more ....

the lightning ofc is top of the art with skyrim only now making the "entrance" in the dynamic shadows and lightning system ...


Also due to the lack ( atm ) of a streaming world solution it is not really possible to make use of the 8x8 areas and parts of them need to be loaded in a different game level , so the true openworld experience is available only to an extet in cryengine , let's call them open levels than open world ...

for this last woudl need a cell loading system similar to Skyrim and normal maps for distant terrain lods...
User avatar
Nims
 
Posts: 3352
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 3:29 pm

Post » Tue May 15, 2012 9:55 pm

Easily?

Possible, yes. Easily, no.
Not everyone has the coin to do it.

Umm yes easily, Crysis can be maxed out on a 2 gen old GPU....................... it's not 2008 anymore. My old 4870 can be had for 40 bucks maxes out crysis.
User avatar
Lou
 
Posts: 3518
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 6:56 pm

Post » Wed May 16, 2012 2:01 pm

Actually I think those videos you listed look worse than Skyrim. This is what I would want Skyrim to look like: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8Re377ol0g

However, honestly, after a lot of tweaks I think I've managed to make my Skyrim look quite "eye-melting" in any case:
http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/2299/screenshot2060.png
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/3852/screenshot15287.png
http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/1753/screenshot12860.png
User avatar
Jessica Nash
 
Posts: 3424
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 10:18 pm

Post » Wed May 16, 2012 7:08 am

Who gives a [censored] about graphics?

I'm tired of hearing this. Why is this such a popular meme to say? It's not true. Tons of people care about graphics. That's how come graphics technology advances over time, because people care. That's how come dedicated video cards even exist in the first place, because people care. That's why the 360 doesn't look like the n64, because people care.

Graphics are as important as sound, interface, price, and story. The game is only as strong as its weakest element.
User avatar
Penny Wills
 
Posts: 3474
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 6:16 pm

Post » Tue May 15, 2012 11:05 pm

Thanks for that Prometheus.
User avatar
Chloe Yarnall
 
Posts: 3461
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 3:26 am

Post » Wed May 16, 2012 4:04 am

Would like a TES game on Frostbite 2.

So we actually can chop some trees for wood, and if you miss a swing with your waraxe and hit a table it actually destroys it. And much more cool features will be possible.
User avatar
SamanthaLove
 
Posts: 3565
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:54 am

Post » Wed May 16, 2012 12:32 am

cryo engine is for realistic looks.. im glad skyrim looks the way it looks.. less realistic, more epic. In other words less oblivionish mroe morrowindish..
User avatar
Mandi Norton
 
Posts: 3451
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 2:43 pm

Post » Wed May 16, 2012 12:45 pm

cryo engine is for realistic looks.. im glad skyrim looks the way it looks.. less realistic, more epic. In other words less oblivionish mroe morrowindish..

Graphical quality doesn't mean Art quality.
User avatar
Kelvin Diaz
 
Posts: 3214
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 5:16 pm

Post » Wed May 16, 2012 9:34 am

Once you enable tree shadows in Skyrim, it's a different game. Nowhere near as "flat" looking. I'm very happy with the way it looks.

It's amazing how one little tweak can just make it pop huh?
User avatar
Marnesia Steele
 
Posts: 3398
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 10:11 pm

Post » Wed May 16, 2012 3:31 am

And you probably realize the first Cryengine wasn't for consoles, right?

Actually, I am very happy with the way Skyrim looks.
Firstly...I agree with the above comment! :D

Secondly...

Graphics should be the last thing on a developers mind when they create a game! story, content, and gameplay should be first on the list...and for the record...Skyrim looks beautiful just the way it is. :tes:

Graphics can go svck some skooma. :P
User avatar
Katy Hogben
 
Posts: 3457
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 12:20 am

Post » Tue May 15, 2012 10:04 pm

If it where on cryengine it wouldn't have any rpg elements...

You have no idea what you are talking about.

And don't fall for the "YOU NEED A 1000 DOLLAR COMPUTER TO RUN CRYSIS LULZ" garbage. That was true, four years ago. Any mid range computer can max Crysis these days.
User avatar
Matt Bigelow
 
Posts: 3350
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 6:36 pm

Post » Wed May 16, 2012 1:32 am

Sorry but the nature in those videos look like [censored] and doesnt fit in at all. Apparently good graphics=bloom everywhere, i would not have bought skyrim if it looked like that.
User avatar
P PoLlo
 
Posts: 3408
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:05 am

Post » Wed May 16, 2012 8:21 am

Seriously...we need to get off the "graphics make a game" kick. It's annoying...and honestly...truly shows that you don't care about the game at all. You are only playing it because it "looks pretty". =/
User avatar
Astargoth Rockin' Design
 
Posts: 3450
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 2:51 pm

Post » Wed May 16, 2012 12:51 pm

For those who cry about requirements please take into consideration that you can lower graphical settings
Such look is for those who have machine to run something like this
I personally think that every new game simply must have Ultra graphical settings that can be achieved only by high-end hardware available on release date
And not because of poor optimizing (like it happens usually :( ), but because game looks incredible

If you don't have coin/time to get best gear, switch to low or medium settings and play game that still looks good
But if you have powerful gaming PC then you should be given option to use it on full extent (high and ultra settings)

basically such gradation
low-console level (minimum requirements and quality)
medium- for average PCs
high- for good gaming PCs
ultra- for high-end gaming PCs
and I don't mean only requirements, but also quality
User avatar
Laura Cartwright
 
Posts: 3483
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 6:12 pm

Post » Wed May 16, 2012 12:54 am

You are only playing it because it "looks pretty". =/

so?
User avatar
Janine Rose
 
Posts: 3428
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 6:59 pm

Post » Wed May 16, 2012 7:25 am

I'm tired of hearing this. Why is this such a popular meme to say? It's not true. Tons of people care about graphics. That's how come graphics technology advances over time, because people care. That's how come dedicated video cards even exist in the first place, because people care. That's why the 360 doesn't look like the n64, because people care.

Graphics are as important as sound, interface, price, and story. The game is only as strong as its weakest element.
Opinions.
For some it's all about the graphics, everything else is secondary. (Minority).
For some it's all about the story / plot / gameplay. (Minority).
For everyone else it's somewhere in the middle.
Graphics, for me, mean very little (not nothing, I obviously want a carrot to look like a carrot...), I prefer the other aspects of gaming, plot, gameplay etc but then again when I was growing up I had the Atari 2600 and thought it was awesome at the time (Qbert ftw). I have an imagination, I can fill in the blanks as and when required.
Graphics technology advances for numerous reasons, only one of which is because some people care.
User avatar
Blackdrak
 
Posts: 3451
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 11:40 pm

Post » Tue May 15, 2012 10:38 pm

It might look something like this:

http://youtu.be/62hLTIWsRXs

Hmm. Don't really like the rock textures or water ripple in that one. Too "noisy".

The third one has a nice landscape vista, but it's "dull". Very good techically, but no art direction - no soul.

Skyrim.... yeah, the textures at point blank range can be poor. And those shadows need some work. But the long-range, wide-view landscapes? Just stunning. My folder of world screenshots keeps growing ever larger. :tongue:
User avatar
Heather Kush
 
Posts: 3456
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 10:05 pm

Post » Wed May 16, 2012 9:08 am

I'm tired of hearing this. Why is this such a popular meme to say? It's not true. Tons of people care about graphics. That's how come graphics technology advances over time, because people care. That's how come dedicated video cards even exist in the first place, because people care. That's why the 360 doesn't look like the n64, because people care.

Graphics are as important as sound, interface, price, and story. The game is only as strong as its weakest element.
There is a difference between graphics and aesthetics. Graphics meaning basically graphical fidelity counting as the lighting, polygon count ect.. and aesthetics meaning the art direction. To most people who think they care about graphics its actually the aesthetics people care about. You can have all the polygons you want but if there is no clear art direction everything just falls flat. This is why 2d games like bastion and planescape torment can look so good and some modern 3d games look so bad. Many modern shooters have high fidelity but everything just looks brown : /.
User avatar
leigh stewart
 
Posts: 3415
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 8:59 am

Post » Wed May 16, 2012 8:31 am

If Skyrim used CryEngine, I would not play it. Photo-Realism does not equal good graphics, if I want Photo-Realism, I'll go outside. I care more about art-style, Skyrim looks 100 times better than anything you could ever show me in CryEngine. Why? Because everything looks unique, with it's own style. It looks like a unique, living alien world that isn't the same freaking forest I've seen a million times before.

Also, CryEngine is only for good graphics on a technical level. It can't produce good AI, thousands of things being rendered with their AI constantly running, in a world the size of Skyrim. There is only one thing CryEngine can do, make shooter games look nice so you forget the game flat out svckS. (Even then, it didn't work very well.)
User avatar
Chase McAbee
 
Posts: 3315
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 5:59 am

PreviousNext

Return to V - Skyrim