Crytek: Graphics Are 60% Of The Game
Crytek has always pushed the visuals of its games but in the great graphics Vs gameplay debate, Cytek boss, Cevat Yerli, believes graphics win and actually account for ’60% of the game’ and its immersion.
The guys from xbox360 caught up with Cevat Yerli to ask him one of the most debated questions in the history of gaming…
Crytek boss Cevat Yerli is – like many whose stripes rank them well outside of PR influence – a man who speaks his mind.
When asked whether he feels better graphics mean better gameplay or not, his answer surprised us.
Why? Because finally, here’s someone using common sense to reach what is in our opinion the right answer to this question.
“People say that graphics don’t matter,” says Yerli, “but play Crysis and tell me they don’t matter. It’s always been about graphics driving gameplay.”
“In Crysis 3 it’s the grass and the vegetation, the way the physics runs the grass interact and sways them in the wind. You can read when an AI enemy is running towards you just by observing the way the grass blades.
“Graphics, whether it’s lighting or shadows, puts you in a different emotional context and drives the immersion.”
“And immersion is effectively the number one thing we can use to help you buy into the world.”
“The better the graphics, the better the physics, the better the sound design, the better the technical assets and production values are – paired with the art direction, making things look spectacular and stylistic is 60 per cent of the game.”
You may, of course, disagree with him.
Senior Member
Posts: 930
Joined: 2012-11-28
Crysis had an ok story, it was good enough for me to want it to see it through. Crysis 2 was painfully boring, but it was pretty, so I stuck around for the graphics. I quit Crysis 3 having gone through around 15% of the story. The eye candy just wasn't enough to keep me going.
I cherish good storytelling and it's more important to me than eye candy, which is why I still fire up HL2 every now and then. While the visuals are now cringeworthy, the story itself is still above and beyond most contemporary titles.
Chuck Norris
Posts: 2537
Joined: 2012-02-06
Half-life 2, silent hill 2, final fantasy VII etc - those are games that pass the test of time.
I have more fun on castlevania 4 on snes than crysis 3.
I think some people overlook the joy of a great game.

Senior Member
Posts: 1396
Joined: 2008-06-09
Although graphics are rather important to me, I can also be happy with a game that hasn't got great eye candy. But if I have to choose between two games with equally great gameplay and one looks great and the other not then I go for the looks.
Senior Member
Posts: 6563
Joined: 2004-09-30
It seems true. i think the crysis series is mainly graphic less gameplay, crysis 1 was on of the worst game i ever touched, sure graphic is superbig but all other are bad. COD4 was way better than that, bioshock just rape the entire crysis series.
One of the worst series i ever seen, but graphics are pretty good.
Senior Member
Posts: 1866
Joined: 2010-08-28
I think the percentage for every game is different. I prefer gameplay/story over graphics anytime.
Crysis for example, I thought, had a nice balance between story and graphics. They gave us unreal graphics at the time while still focusing on story. Crysis 2/3 is all graphics and eye candies, which is why it got very boring very quickly for me, just run and gun. And then games like dishonored, which didn't offer next-gen graphics, but provided us with what I thought was a kickass story along with great gameplay mechanics.
I agree, I thought Crysis had better graphics in terms of realism, but Crysis 2&3 had better graphics in terms of "eyegasms", just how I look at it.