The PC Piracy Crysis-(or why Crytek are whiners)

Crytek president Cevat Yerli announced recently that piracy is driving Crytek away from PC exclusives and towards the consoles. Though Crysis sold an estimated 1.5 million copies world-wide, Crytek, based on bittorrent tracker stats, feel their game has underperformed. Read that again: based on tracker stats their game under-performed. Noting that there were approx 15-20 pirate copies for each copy sold, and acknowledging that this does not equate 1 to 1 sales, Yerli still states “sales would be double without piracy”.

I am pretty sure the music industry ran this argument about 10 years ago and it is no more valid now than then. Pirated copies do not equate lost sales. Here are some thoughts about why Crysis “underperformed”.

1) Hype

Hype is an intangible fluid thing that can teeter in an instant from “just right” to “too much” depending on the sensibilites and tastes of the desired audience. A game announced early in development can drop off the radar unless it has a killer concept that “sells itself” (Brutal Legend and Dead Space come to mind). A game relentlessly promoted can become old news before it is released (ie.Black) and have to win back flagging interest.

The hype around Crysis encapsulates many of the reasons it “underperformed”, creating a whole much less than the sum of its parts.

For almost a year prior to the release of Crysis every gaming magazine and website whored screenshots and gushed preview “news” as the tiniest detail was revealed by the developers. The message behind it all: “This game will rape your last-gen or current gen top of the line hardware.” For hardware pigs with more money than brains, this is enticing as they are the ultra hardcore, the ultra-core, and they are a niche market. Knowing that a) the game is an FPS b) is coming soon and c) will require you to upgrade your PC that was great two years ago at considerable expense is not attractive to the mainstream. Add the generic “super-soldiers vs. aliens” plot, the details of which, when revealed, failed to excite, and you have a game that is over-exposed, to say the least. It’s as if the marketing team at EA had no clue how to sell the game, other than “Hey the guys who made Far Cry are making it”. To achieve mainstream penetration hype has to amount to more than specs and a thing plot, it has to be enticing to everybody. Thus far, games that have that level of marketability are accessible in terms of gameplay, hardware and content. Crysis is none of these things.


2) Hardware Specifications

Crysis was promoted from the get-go as the next step of PC gaming, in terms of the graphics. It was promised to punish current gen hardware and was designed, like Far Cry (to a lesser extent) to be “future proof” in that not-yet-released hardware would be required to run the game at its highest capabilities. While pushing tech is a hallmark of PC gaming, Crytek overshot this mark to the extent of alienating its audience. Buying a game knowing it will run on your machine but look like crap and knowing you can’t run it all are two different things. This is a failure on the developer’s part, simply because they either overestimated the install base of hardware that could (barely) run the game acceptably or their audience’s willingness to upgrade, or both. Taking a page from Valve’s playbook would have served this game well, given that the Source engine seems to be infinitely scalable and looks great, something Crysis, and its predecessor Far Cry fail at. As point of reference, I bought Far Cry to run on an over-clocked 1.8 gig Sempron, 2 gigs DDR and an ATI 512 meg 1650 video card. This same setup carried me through Quake 4, Half Life 2 Ep 1, and F.E.A.R., though in fairness, I had bought Far Cry prior to any of these games but never finished it (it would ultimately last me through 3 different PCs). While able to play the game, it was only until I upgraded my entire system to an overclocked 2.8 gig Core 2 Duo, 2 gigs DDR (dual channel) and a PCI-E overclocked XFX 6800 (256 megs) that I would be able to play it at 30+ FPS will all the bells and whistles turned on, at my monitor’s native res of 1440 x 900. This new hand-picked and built system cost a miserly (in Pc terms) $600.

This same system would wheeze through Crysis at 960 X 600 and manage at worst 11 FPS and at best 35 FPS with all settings on low. By comparison, I finished Half-Life 2 Ep 2 on the prior machine, with only the final strider battle giving unacceptable framerates and low visual quality. With the new system, I tore through the same sequence with everything maxed out and never dipped below 30 FPS. I also beat F.E.A.R on the Sempron box, but again can now run the game at native rez with settings maxed out.

The unpalatable and frankly intimidating aspect of Crysis is that not only will the game require a $5000 dollar machine to play it max, but just to look at it you need to be running a $1000 machine built in the last 2 years. What percentage of the hundreds of millions of PC’s in North America meet the minimum specs alone? 10%? Maybe 2% meet the max and that would be a generous estimate. The absolute maximum attainable sales this game could have at and around launch would have been 2-3 million units because no one else would be able to play it even if the wanted to. Yerli feels that the exclusivity of being a PC only release should have driven more sales, while ignoring the concept that Crysis was not only PC exclusive, but exclusive to a very few PC’s.

The end result is that Crytek effectively developed their way out of the market with this game, leaving behind 75% of the install base in their wake. This is especially glaring given the Sims franchise has just reached the 100 million sales mark. While they are two different genres and two different audiences, it is a clear reminder that accessibility will trump specs any day.

3) Quality

Crysis, if you can run it, is a spectacular looking game. The enemy AI is reasonably good, the environments are detailed and beautiful and the effects used in the game are excellent. However, while it is a massive step up from Far Cry in terms of story, pacing, character animation and voice-acting, it is still a fairly run-of-the-mill by the numbers FPS.

Game quality seems to have three distinct subsets: graphics, story, and gameplay. A great game excels at all three, while a good game has two. No game can be successful resting on the laurels of only one of these subsets as Doom III and Quake 4 can attest. While the gameplay in Crysis did achieve some moments of tension and excitement, it failed to reach the heights set by games like F.E.A.R. Despite the latter’s repetitive environments and so-so story, the intense and unrelentingly gameplay, aided by superior A.I. and beautiful visuals drove sales. Crysis raises the bar in visual fidelity while being average in gameplay and story. If your game requires a significant hardware upgrade then it better be really good at least two of the above, and Crysis is not.

Comparisons to Crytek’s previous effort may well have hindered sales also. Far Cry is a beautifully rendered game, with open non-linear exploration of its environment. It has reasonably tight gameplay and A.I., however the story is just plain awful with some of the worst voice acting on record. Gamers non-plused by Far Cry may well have skipped Crysis if only because they expected more of the same. In a market where your reputation precedes you, you are only as good as your last release.

In the end, Crytek were their own worst enemies in this case and unfortunately it appears to be a lesson unlearned.