Crytek To Create “Single-Player-Esque” Games For Two Players

By Ishaan . August 28, 2012 . 12:20pm

Crysis and Far Cry developer, Crytek, believe that free-to-play games are the future, and have openly voiced their intent to switch to a free-to-play model once development of Crysis 3 and Homefront is complete.

 

The catch, says Crytek founder, Cevat Yerli, is that his company will focus on high quality free-to-play games.

 

“We know that free-to-play games have a bad image,” Yerli admits to Eurogamer. “They have a bad reputation—it’s pay to win, it’s low quality. I completely get that, but we are making free-to-play that’s high quality. It’s CryEngine 3, it’s a big investment.”

 

Accompanying this increased focus on the free-to-play model will be a greater social aspect in all of Crytek’s games, Yerli says. That could include games like the next Crysis as well, even though the Crysis games are known for their single-player campaigns.

 

“We will do a single-player-esque experience,” Yerli clarifies. “But it will be for you and your friends together. Single player with two players! Story-rich experiences for at least two people. The premise I can say clearly is that free-to-play is going to be part of any business model we have going forward.”


Read more stories about & & & & on Siliconera.

  • https://twitter.com/Ni_Go_Zero_Ichi Project 2501

    So, are they done with consoles forever or what?

    • http://www.siliconera.com/ Ishaan

      No, he also argues that console manufacturers should be focusing on free-to-play as well.

  • amagidyne

    This truly will be the TECH DEMO TO END ALL TECH DEMOS.

  • Kefkiroth

    I like the way he thinks. So many F2P games I play nowadays give unnecessary advantages to paying players instead of doing it properly; making paid items purely cosmetic or not affecting competition.

  • SirRichard

    “Single player with two players”, a novel concept that we in the business call “co-operative multiplayer”.

    Sorry, that bit just gets me. And I wonder why Crytek are so gung-ho about shifting to free-to-play; are they just not making money? Last I heard Crysis 2 did fairly well for itself, despite alleged high piracy. What do they see in F2P that’s better than what they’re doing now?

    I guess if nothing else, they have an edge over other F2P games by virtue of having the Cry Engine at their beck and call and the knowledge to use it well.

    • Luna Kazemaru

       All this honestly started when someone at nexon ran their mouth saying consoles will not go far if they don’t go F2P(I think) which is just them being fat headed by all the people they make money off of even tho nexon is widely hated and well as their bad CS and easily hackable games they do nothing about.

      • LynxAmali

        -professionals developers
        -taking Nexon seriously

        MY SIDES.

        Thanks. I needed that.

        • Luna Kazemaru

           Well clearly they must have taken them seriously…sadly.

  • $30632660

    DC Universe Online is the only F2P i play right now.I played a lot of F2Ps so I know all to well their ups and downs.

    Games like DCUO are great examples of how F2Ps can be good.No unbalanced cash shop stuff, lots of content and choices for Free Players,frequent updates and the developers actually fixes the broken parts of the game and continues to balance the game.

  • malek86

    “once development of Crysis 3 and Homefront is complete.”

    Homefront? What did I miss?

    • SirRichard

      Might be referring to Homefront 2, which is being developed at Crytek’s UK studio after the original developer went under shortly after the first Homefront launched. I think it’s also using Cry Engine 3, so it’ll look spectacular if nothing else. Have a source: 
      http://www.joystiq.com/2011/09/20/homefront-2-developed-by-crytek/

  • Anthony Black

    Free to play isn’t so much hated because its “bad quality”. Lots of free to play games are pretty good quality. The main reason people hate them is because in order for the company to make money off of them, they have to offer something that costs money which gives players an incentive to pay for it. So no matter what they do, even if its not so much “pay to win” and allows all players to get the same things regardless, it’s always at least going to be “pay to win faster”, as in giving players who pay a headstart on unlocks that other players would have to spend years getting, or something of the sort.

    I’d much rather just buy a game and be done with it. Nobody is going to get any money out of me for a game I already have, and that includes DLC.

  • Kai2591

    lol are all games going to become free-to-play?
    ….hmm maybe not

  • Vampiric

    ““We know that free-to-play games have a bad image,” Yerli admits to Eurogamer. “They have a bad reputation—it’s pay to win, it’s low quality. I completely get that, but we are making free-to-play that’s high quality. It’s CryEngine 3, it’s a big investment.””

    Uh thats fact dude……they are bad quality

    just because your using your generic cry engine 3, doesnt mean the game wont be as bad as crysis 3

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/Juddgment Judgment8

    World of Tanks is one of the best games ever.

    It’s disgusting to say that every free-to-play game is low quality and “Pay2win”.

Video game stories from other sites on the web. These links leave Siliconera.

Siliconera Tests
Siliconera Videos

Popular