GCA 2008: Crytek's Yerli on gaming graphics' future

Cofounder and president of Crysis studio discusses why style trumps looks, what tomorrow's games will look like, and why the next visual leap won't happen until 2012.

When it comes to graphical finesse, few games in recent times have matched the looks of developer Crytek's Crysis and the just-released Crysis Warhead. The German company has been at the bleeding edge of graphics with its Cry Engine, although the assumption that all Crytek games need uber-ninja PCs to run properly is something the company's been trying to shake. GameSpot AU caught up with Crytek president and cofounder Cevat Yerli at last week's Games Conference Asia 2008, with Yerli outlining his views on what the future will hold for game graphics. Yerli said that the next leap in graphics would come with the next generation of games consoles sometime after 2012, and that gamers shouldn't expect titles to look much better than they do now in the next few years to come.

GameSpot AU: You say a US$600 PC can run Crysis Warhead. So you think it's a misconception that your company only makes games for high-end machines?

Cevat Yerli: There's a misconception about that for sure. Our intent was that Crysis actually scaled for the future. That inherently means when you play Crysis today, and try to maximise it out, then your game will run slow on PCs (unless you have a really high-end PC today). But even then you didn't need to spend that much--about US$1200 on a PC to play Crysis at very high settings on a system you optimised yourself.

The misconception was a backlash on us and our intent, which was benevolent in itself, which was to serve the gamer a game that can provide you now with a good experience and in one year or two years later, you can still play Crysis and it gets better. When I play a game, and then I play it a year later, the game gets old on me. The core gameplay is of course timeless, but the visuals get old. I wanted to make sure that [Crysis'] core gameplay and the visuals grow with you. So the intent was benevolent, but there was a backlash because people tried to max it out. In retrospect, I think it would have been better to not have very high settings available for Crysis, and have an expansion pack or patch to unlock very high settings later on down the track. That would have not made people scream that they could not max out.

It was difficult for us because people were saying you should make games for now and not the future. I disagree--I'm a gamer, and I will always prefer a game that grows with me.

GS AU: When will the next major upgrade in visuals happen?

CY: The next graphics breakthrough will come in 2011/12, especially because it will be linked to next-generation consoles. I think the PlayStation 4, or the Xbox 720, and the PC generation that equals that will see a renaissance kicking in that will allow us to effectively deliver visuals that will rival offline CGI productions right now. With that, you'll see a variety of visual styles and identities, as well as techniques used to make more creative images than we have seen today.

GS AU: So does that mean the games of today will be visually as good looking as we can expect to see for the next few years?

CY: For the next two to three years, for sure, yes. There will be some refinements here and there: We [are limited] by the PS3 and 360 hardware, but maybe on the PC we can scale some more. This will bridge the gap to some degree between current and next-gen on the PC without any new code. The possibilities we have are limited right now by the console generations.

GS AU: So what happens in the next three years? Where's the focus?

CY: You have to differentiate in physics, special effects and AI. And especially art style as a visual identity. If you want create an identity, you have to think what are my opportunities and the given constraints? How do I differentiate myself most? It might be sound. It might be physics. With physics and AI, there's still technical innovation possible. You can innovate with AI a lot, because it really doesn't cost that much CPU. Physics are the same--you can do a lot of physical improvements for any arbitrary game genre to actually make the immersion factor better. It's about being more believable in the future rather than being realistic. If you are believable, then people will enjoy your game more.

GS AU: So in the fight between style and realism, style should win out?

CY: Yes. Branding style is the first and foremost thing you should think about from a creative point of view.

GS AU: You've mentioned that the next-gen for Crytek starts in 2009? What does that mean?

CY: What that means is none of it will be visible in a commercial game. We may disclose it at conferences and start licensing beforehand and whatnot. What I mean is we won't see games ship until 2012, because for a next-gen game to ship then, we have to start developing in 2009/10. So we have to start the next-gen now. We are laying the groundwork by researching the fundamentals right now. So we'll start in 2009, probably start disclosing it at conferences in 2010, and 2012 will probably be when the first title ships.

GS AU: So what will games of 2012 look like?

CY: In realism, you may see another jump, but it won't be much more. You'll see much more reflections happening--that's an area that's underdeveloped in games. Reflections allow us to portray chrome, mirror, and glass in a more believable way. In an urban environment, reflections are the key ingredient in that shading, so you need a solution for that. You'll also see improvements in lighting. By 2012 you'll also have unique geometries and textures, and real-time reflections happening that will impact a lot of how you play a game. In style, it might be that games become the same quality as Pixar or DreamWorks productions--that means super-rich colours, high-end animations which stretch to accentuate motion, over-stylised shapes. We'll see much more diverse visual development than we're seeing in today. So by then, maybe five out of 10 games will be looking really different, whereas today eight out of 10 look very similar.

GS AU: Cevat Yerli, thanks for your time.

98 Comments

  • Caml10

    Posted Jan 24, 2009 2:40 pm PT

    Make that Xbox 720 Crysis, Crytek said they wouldn't port it to current consoles, if at all.

  • taino1128

    Posted Jan 5, 2009 1:21 pm PT

    I have to wait until 2012 for a Xbox 360 Crysis, damn

  • amycasey2

    Posted Dec 29, 2008 10:12 pm PT

    I waited a year to buy this game just for the reason he talks about. I didn't think my desktop could run it without looking like a slide show. For the record, I have a $500 Dell with a very modest AMD X2 5000 CPU, 2GB RAM with a XFX 8600 slightly overclocked. It runs Crysis at 20-40 fps at mid settings with no AA. The game looks amazing at mid settings, and with a new GPU, it'll look even better.

  • death5ter

    Posted Oct 30, 2008 8:17 pm PT

    so much for graphical gaming prowess, they should focus on the gameplay somehow...

  • lobsterbushcrab

    Posted Oct 25, 2008 11:37 am PT

    2012 pfffffft, has he looked at how fast technology is moving?

  • DamageIncM

    Posted Oct 15, 2008 1:51 am PT

    Of course Crytek themselves had the devices to run at the highest settings, they can easily use the best parts and if not just soup it up to get the best performance.
    As the goal was, they intended to create a great engine to be used for more than just a current game.
    So for more games in the couple of next years, without it getting too old.
    So they will have had to have the privileges to get it all to work or you can't just say "OK, there are extra high settings, we didn't try it, but just ship it.".

    It's in people's nature most of the time to push everything to "the best possible", which includes pushing games to their limits while getting angry if it doesn't work.
    Just lower and tweak the settings a bit until it works, that's what I'm like.
    And if it won't work, I know I'll have to wait until I have a better system.

  • yzfrider16

    Posted Oct 13, 2008 10:04 pm PT

    Who wouldn't believe that a nearly 600 dollar rig couldn't play warhead? Warhead is better optimized than the original Cysis. My system when new was worth around a grand...(8800GTS 512, Core 2 E6750, 2 gig ram) but now if look hard enough, these parts are dirt cheap compared to what I payed for them. Now I could build this system for b/t 6 or 7 hundred. I play cysis using DX9 with the ultra high looking hacks. Plays great. And all Yerli meant is that it could be played on low or medium. 600 bucks? No problem.

  • Sid_Spartan

    Posted Oct 10, 2008 8:50 am PT

    Well considering the present graphics generation,i find the game's graphics superb.Its a common sense that to play next-gen games you need to have atleast a powerful GPU like Geforce 8800GT.There's no need to mumble if some1ne is trying to play crysis with Ge force less than 8 series.To play it at xtreme settings u need to have 9800GT or above.I agree with Yeril that the higher graphics games can be launched at present.

  • jackarus

    Posted Sep 30, 2008 12:19 pm PT

    i was wondering, can the crew at crytek play crysis on very settings?
    because if they did, be awesome to see it run properly.
    and if they can't, how do they know it works?

  • 50centrulezz

    Posted Sep 27, 2008 11:59 am PT

    I agree with champmanfan even though I played this game and liked it. Some games today just focus on grafix and nuthing else.

  • champmanfan

    Posted Sep 26, 2008 6:51 pm PT

    This smacks of desperation of them saying a $600 PC can play Crysis Warhead because only if you have a urber PC can you gain anything out of the game at decent settings to keep the games fps playable. If the casual gamer with the $600+ PC can play this then the lost revenue through people giving it a miss because of the bad scalability of Crysis, they will think this applies also to Crysis Warhead. Mud sticks.

    Come 2012 when its photo realistic, yeah, I'd love to give it a go. Maybe we'll only need a 16-core PC by then with a couple of GPUs doing 4 teraflops each (Ati's 4870 does 1.5 teraflops at present). But seriously, is that all gaming is about, photo realism? Look at this example from XFire's Home page of the most played games now with average gfx (from top to bottom): World of Warcraft, Call of Duty 2 Multiplayer, Counter-Strike: Source, Warcraft III - The Frozen Throne, etc...

    As they say, nice graphics, shame about the bad storyline, which is why I'm not buying this & waiting for FarCry2. Its less of a tech demo & more involved gameplay.

  • ChristianKiss

    Posted Sep 25, 2008 10:44 am PT

    In a game, everything works together to build its quality: gameplay, sounds, replay value and, naturally, graphics. In my point of view, Cevat Yerli is completely right. He didn't forget to mention about the AI, which plays an important role no matter the game in question.

    By now, it's hard to imagine a visually better game than Crysis and its sequel. Although I ain't a big fan of Far Cry or Crysis, I respect Crytek as much I respect id Software and Blizzard. You know, QUALITY games.

  • thenewau25

    Posted Sep 25, 2008 10:16 am PT

    nah far cry 2

  • CureForLiving

    Posted Sep 25, 2008 4:57 am PT

    Well good graphics are good, but gameplay always make a game good or bad, although terrible graphics are still off putting. Crysis could have been a lot better if they had spent less time on graphics and more on actual gameplay (including sandbox gameplay). At least in Warhead they're trying to improve on the gameplay.

  • PSdual_wielder

    Posted Sep 24, 2008 11:33 pm PT

    What all of the industry is talking about right now makes the current generation a really intermediary period for games. Even though the time frame itself will still have the same 6 year period just like every other generation, the jump in dealing with graphics and the much larger amount of coding is just obscene for those guys to get used to. Maybe by the time this "next" generation comes around, everything will start to stable down like the movie industry now have.

  • irilthor

    Posted Sep 24, 2008 9:11 pm PT

    i bought a 600 euro pc last week and i really have to turn the settings down alot (to blurry vision) to get it running smoothly... i will try again with my next pc i guess

  • Gamingcucumber

    Posted Sep 24, 2008 10:37 am PT

    Talk about thinking "inside the box". Literally making the game after the hardware and not the other way around.

  • Ult_iMate

    Posted Sep 24, 2008 10:05 am PT

    aDhAmMe13 wrote:
    "but what's crysis without high-end smooth graphix??"

    that's right. Critek tried to replace mediocre gameplay and awful storyline with life-like graphics and life-like physics. On the other hand Bioshock and Portals offered fascinating and innovative gameplay. Also they looked great because of good graphical design.
    Actually a game doesn't need a high-end graphics to be interesting and good-looking. Take Sam & Max or Tension (Turgor) for instance.

  • aDhAmMe13

    Posted Sep 24, 2008 9:44 am PT

    but what's crysis without high-end smooth graphix?? i mean, c'mon! u either use it on a high-end pc or just don't...

  • Ult_iMate

    Posted Sep 24, 2008 9:10 am PT

    Games are for creating virtual worlds that are only limited with creator's imagination. Virtual reality can be based on any rules you like - there should be no boundaries in creativity.
    And yet they still stuck with life-like graphics and life-like physics to make yet another first person shooter, where you have to point at a target and click it up to the death. With linear level design and 4 to 5 hours of gameplay. Total absence of imagination.
    How absolutely boring.

Check Prices: $29.92 – 31.99

advertisement
advertisement
Click Here

Related Unions

Game Stats

  • Rank:
    584 of 79,656
    (up by 44)
    PC Rank:
    198 of 12,652
    Highest Rank:
    1 in 2008
    Tracking:
    4,276 Track It»
    Wishlists:
    2,076 Wish It»
  • Player Reviews:
    282
    Player Ratings:
    5423
    Users Now Playing:
    1,009
  • Number of Players:

    1 Player, 16 Online

  • Top 5 User Tags:
    1. crysis warhead
    2. crysis
    3. warhead
    4. crytek
    5. fps
  • Mature Rating Description

    Titles rated M (Mature) have content that may be suitable for persons ages 17 and older. Titles in this category may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content and/or strong language. Learn more

Games you may like…

Users who looked at content for this game also looked at these games.

See More Similar Games