CryEngine 3 - Possible?

[Lady Kyrah 1110]

Once a cheat, always a cheat. Can we get a pre-emptive ban over here ffs?

Dude are you for real? :D

I used to cheat a lot in Counter strike 1.6, old times.

[pxxl 259]

Dude are you for real? :D

I used to cheat a lot in Counter strike 1.6, old times.

I'm sorry for you.

[whatbadguy 21]

I see where you're getting at, Oshi.. since you've continuously stated the fact that CryEngines drag and drop functionality why not make it on GameMaker 8 or FPS Creator 10 - It's so easy...

[govnogaming 52]

True, however, since he has already stated he would like to move towards a standalone game eventually this would seem to be a great engine to move into when that happens as he will then have a whole team and plenty of financial backing to do whatever he likes. He is already guaranteed to sell many many many copies of his game no matter what he decides to do so he can therefore easily acquire financial support to develop on a better engine.

The only reason DayZ isn't standalone yet is because he's still trying to convince Bohemia to let him use their engine. Obviously creating a standalone on a game like this would take years if he had to change engines, which is exactly why he wants to keep using Bohemia's engine.

[Shag 90]

the vehicle phycis system is a thing of beauty!

One day all games will be equal to this - I want to live forever :D

[dennisho1234 2]

I dont know how to not support this post..

[dustylion@gmail.com 14]

Does Cry Engine 3 have the ability to render 225 km^2 maps seamlessly? (No load screens while traveling). Can its networking infastructure support a Hive and servers with +50 player slots?

I honestly don't know, I haven't been watching the engine. But these are all things that most First Person Shooter render engines can't handle. They're designed for smaller more detailed spaces.

[chickenfeed 17]

No, definately not. People don't seem to realise that 99% of DayZ is actually content from ArmA. Apart from a few models, DayZ is entirely code, created in ArmA's 'language'. You can't simply throw the code into another engine. Rocket has already said that DayZ works fine in ArmA 3, moving to a new engine (Completely removing everything that makes DayZ what it is) will take years of development. And, it's already been said, games are going to be released very soon that completely copy DayZ and will steal any potential sales: Look at War-Z (http://www.pcgamer.com/2012/07/19/the-war-z-announced-zombie-survival-shooter-mmo-with-strong-parallels-to-day-z/), it couldn't be any more of a DayZ clone.

Moving to another engine would be the death of DayZ, there is no question about that.

[Derpaholic 6]

So one of the biggest hurdles in playing DayZ is the engine. I love DayZ, from the aesthetics to the intensity. Saying that, I don’t think I’m alone when I say that Arma 2, or at least the Real Virtuality Engine, seems to be holding the game back from wacky stuff like doors opening and breaking legs to other problems like incredibly poor optimization that causes, even good machines, to run horribly. There are a lot of other engines that could be used, but the one that stands out to me is CryEngine 3, as it is free to develop on and take 20% when you release the game full.

I am, by any persons standards, NOT a game developer. One thing I have done, however, is download the

CryEngine 3 SDK and messed around with it. I’ve created landscapes that are larger than Chernarus and easily made forests that look amazing. The one thing I love about this engine is the versatility, ease-of-use and the real-time editing.

There are things I see, being developed for CryEngine 3, that blow my mind and make me wonder how amazing a game like DayZ could be on this game. Although it might change some play styles and ways we do things, I think DayZ would be better for it. I’m not sure if Rocket has some kind of affinity for Real Virtuality, or it was just the engine he chose because it is so realism based, but I can’t imagine there is anything it can do that can’t be done in CryEngine 3.

Things like real-time vegetation:

Could you imagine a world where the year-long cycle lasts a 60 days? Depending on what time you play on, the world could be completely different. You could have lots of long grass to crawl through in February but by the end of March it could be a pretty barren landscape and you’d need to move differently.

Vehicles are so much more immersive and take locational damage (you can pop tires, etc.) and with mods like the above (or even a simplified version) you could get very immersive and real things happening in games, rather than what we have now where you can throw a grenade at a car, it’ll explode, but the car will sit there for a few seconds until it randomly combusts.

CryEngine 3 has a pretty great showcase of games that have been made on it also, which show how versatile an engine it can be. Of course, we have Crysis 1 and 2, which show how we can go from urban landscapes to forests but also we have games such as Nexuiz that are quake-like shooter games. which couldn’t be more different than Crysis was and shows that latency and hit-detection isn’t a huge issue.

Even MMORPG games, which rely heavily on being able to put many players on on server and include a in-depth inventory system, are being developed such as Cabal 2, Archeage and AION.

Games like Sniper: Ghost Warrior 2 have a bullet cam that is very pretty. Could you imagine DayZ being able to give you replays of your kills with a bullet cam? Maybe this idea isn’t for everyone, but it’s something that could be done within the engine.

So that’s my attempt at turning you guys onto CryEngine. I don’t work for CryTek or have ever communicated with them, I’ve just faffed around in the engine a little bit and have been blown away by how good it is and that even someone like me could learn how to use it without much trouble.

sorry man i think it would be too different. Sure the currrent engine has some issues, but there would be more problems converting the game to cryengine. Don't get me wrong i love cryengine and im a total Crysis Freak but, it seems as though it would be too combat oriented and not the strategy and realism that DayZ currently has. I have to say if it did work out that way and ran well I would eat a baby to see it happen.

[ToasterDiagramm 62]

If a move to a new engine was made.. would it be the same DayZ we all know and love? I think not.

You can change the feel of the whole game with something as major as an engine change.

I thought the same. You can tell which Call Of Duty game was made with which engine due to their feel to them. The Modern Warfare games look all the same and different from World At War and Black Ops, because those two groups use two different engines.

I can imagine that Battlefield's Frostbyte Engine would fit DayZ (minus BF3 lense flare frenzy). It always felt more rough and dirty to me than the Cry Engine. The destructable environment also makes a more immersive gaming experience. It's not about big buildings blowing up, but more about the little things here.

Apart from a few models, DayZ is entirely code, created in ArmA's 'language'. You can't simply throw the code into another engine. Rocket has already said that DayZ works fine in ArmA 3,

It does? Well now I don't see any reason for a new engine. However I see another reason to buy Arma 3....

Edited July 19, 2012 by ToasterDiagramm

[Ejaculacid 19]

The only reason DayZ isn't standalone yet is because he's still trying to convince Bohemia to let him use their engine. Obviously creating a standalone on a game like this would take years if he had to change engines, which is exactly why he wants to keep using Bohemia's engine.

No it wouldn't take years to get an alpha up.

[playfuldesk 7]

Bump!

[vier0hr 21]

The Arma II engine is going to stay if Rocket can help it. He says he likes the engine and how it workds and that it is very versatile. Plus look at all he has done on it already. He would have to start from scratch with a frsh engine.

[domistyle 221]

CryEngine 3 is able to manage maps with a size of around 68644km², which is about 300x the size of the current map.

I am unsure about the netcode though.

But I pretty much don't care which engine it uses as long as the gameplay is fun. And that is still the case with DayZ, even with the ArmA II engine.

Edited July 20, 2012 by DomiStyle

[blaf 63]

Most of you know nothing about game development and modding but come give "enlightened opinion" about this or that engine based on pictures, videos and tech demos, graphics rarely have anything to do with the engine, and everything to do with the art team who produced the assets for the demonstration.

This

[Quaby 93]

The cryengine is excellent, and the arma engine sucks ass. When it goes standalone, it needs a new engine, and cryengine is a great one. Honestly, my pc can run crysis and it looks good, whereas it can barely run arma and it looks like shit.

[darrkbeast 0]

To late zombie game is being devoleped on the cry 3 enigne. Infact there are quite a few games being made that look to be copying day z. I say focus on thie engine and wait and see how the rest turn out.

[Lady Kyrah 1110]

Sometimes i wish there was another option beside "You have my beans".

Tincan to the face maybe :emptycan:

[doom4mr 135]

its all looks good when you watching engine demo, 2 car collisions etc, its not running under super heavy load of complete game and multiplayer.

when you building a game with tons of code, models etc, only then you can see what the engine is really capable of.

[CHOSENMARINE 43]

It would be so much work for the developers. They would need to start from scratch aaaaaaall over again. not only that, because they are using the Cry engine 3, 50% of the money they make off of the game would be ripped out of their hands and never seen again.

[hazedaze 89]

theres no way to simulate a world like dayz's (arma II engine) with cry3. also bullet ballistic on cryengine suck. multiplayer code suck. dayz went crazy popular in 2 months not becouse of graphics, gameplay. every game looking good these days, shiny textures bla bla but gameplay = shit. making great ultra realistic graphics with awful gameplay doesnt mean shit. its been few years they have been doing that. look what happen a mod full with bugs topped them all. they should keep this engine imo just make standalone for the dayz game.

Edited July 20, 2012 by hazedaze

[MinxinG 50]

theres no way to simulate a world like dayz's (arma II engine) with cry3. also bullet ballistic on cryengine suck. multiplayer code suck. dayz went crazy popular in 2 months not becouse of graphics, gameplay. every game looking good these days, shiny textures bla bla but gameplay = shit. making great ultra realistic graphics with awful gameplay doesnt mean shit. its been few years they have been doing that. look what happen a mod full with bugs topped them all. they should keep this engine imo just make standalone for the dayz game.

You surely don't know what you are taking about... CryEngine can yes have a good gameplay IF you know how to code, and plus it has better graphics and physics than ArmA 2 Engine and it's a lot more optimized(FPS) than Real Virtuality...

Once I created a big ass huge with about 150 AI and around 45 FPS playing on medium, playing ARMA 2 with ALL low settings with 266 zombies, I get arround 25-30 MAX

Edited July 21, 2012 by MinxinG

[oshi7 365]

Why do people keep on mentioned the net code? Net code is hardly fantastic in DayZ currently (Desyncs are a huge issue with PvP right now) and the CE3 engine can go from MMORPG to Quake-style games so the net code is very good and with the proper use of portals (not valve portals, different kind) you can have a huge (bigger than 225km²) seamless world and even transition from server to server without the client (ie. us players) ever knowing about it.

Also people keep talking about "the look" of DayZ and Arma, which can be added. Even the free-look and ballistics can be added to CE3 if someone wishes it to be.

Also Rocket would have to "start over" no matter what if he went stand-alone, especially if he wants to maintain control of his game. If he begins using assets and other things from Arma (that isn't just the engine) then he'll probably 'owe' something to BIS, which is what he has been avoiding at all costs as it is.

I think people assume that because its the Cryengine, that the gameplay absolutely has to be similar to Crysis or other arcade shooters that use that engine, which really is not the case.

I just think that Crysis can immerse me with its graphics a little better than Arma can. In DayZ, whilst it can look beautiful, I don't often feel like I'm in a jungle or a city, I feel like I'm in a lite version of a forest or city. Sure, my opinion is influenced by the "prettyness" of CE3, but I think that graphics are very, very important for immersion (of course game play should trump everything, I play Dwarf Fortress, for example) and, from what I've seen of CE3, it could create environments and movements that are far more grabbing than DayZ/Arma 2 currently is as you could create very intricate interior environments as well as forests and mountainsides.

I never expected this post to change Rockets mind, I was just putting it out there. I can't help but dislike Real Virtuality, although I'm fully willing to accept that I could be completely wrong and DayZ owes it success to being on the RV engine, because of some mixture of certain aspects of the engine and feel of Arma.

[ravenger 10]

cryengine looks great and i know rocket wants to stick with BIS i think cryengine would be the best thing for days

[Zetal 90]

I don't much know about whether an Engine change is the best choice here, but I do know that the current engine is...well, I try to avoid blunt language when I can, but it's atrocious. I have what would typically be considered a semi-high-end gaming PC, and I can blast through pretty much any game on high settings with at least 50 FPS. Arma 2 gives me around 30, with medium settings, and according to systems requirements lab (http://www.systemrequirementslab.com/cyri/) I can't run Arma 3 at all, due to my video cards VRAM. For those curious, here are my specs:

Phenom II X4 965 Processor

8 GB ram

Radeon HD 6800 Series Display

etc.

and yet I get cruddy gameplay like this, even in standard ArmA? Something needs to be changed, Rocket... =\

(FPS taken from Singleplayer -> Scenarios -> Benchmark 02)