Crytek on Games Graphically Downgraded From E3/GDC Showings: ‘The Criticism Is Misplaced’

Rok Erjavec offers a different take on E3 presentations running unbelievable visuals.

Posted By | On 20th, May. 2016 Under News

watch dogs

E3 2016 is almost here and while that means a ton of potential excitements, it’s also likely going to mean a bunch of demos and gameplay videos that might, well, stretch the truth a little. You know what we’re talking about – presentations where the visuals showcased can’t possibly be in real time and when the game is finally out, criticisms of “downgrade” get thrown around.

That being said, Crytek technical director Rok Erjavec did offer a different take on the whole phenomenon. Speaking to DSO Gaming, Erjavec was asked about his opinion on games being downgraded from their E3/GDC showcases and whether developer’s should display games that aren’t possible even on high-end rigs.

Erjavec stated, “I think in many cases, the criticism is misplaced. Trade-show demos are often carefully crafted experiences where a highly-polished single area is shown during the demo. It’s easy to blame hardware-targets when the final game isn’t quite the same – but what you are shown is a 15-minute part of the game that was built in three to six months.

“Meanwhile, the rest of the game’s 10+ hours are built over something in the range of 12 to 24 months. In many cases there was no downgrade as such – just the reality of producing much more content over what effectively amounts to (much) less time.”

That being said, he’s not a fan of showcases like this in general. “I do find gameplay showcases that aren’t running on actual hardware targets or are entirely pre-recorded a bit pointless, since games are fundamentally about interactive experiences.”

What do you think, especially with so many showcases set for E3? Let us know in the comments.

Tagged With: , , , , ,

Awesome Stuff that you might be interested in

  • davide

    I think that all VG company (not important if is Microsoft,Sony,Nintendo etc. or whatever brand) dont need show to videogamers Tech-Demos or CGI Trailers,because we don’t buy the console for tech demo we buy it for play games.
    So for me E3 need show only pure GAMEPLAY with real graphics in-game and this gameplay need run from retail standard console (i hav like E3 xbox360 with KAMEO coz they show truth gameplay),so videogamers then get what they see.
    Sadly all company no one excluded until now lies so much videogamers about this,show more cgitech demo trailer than gameplay,its marketing,this is lies to customers.
    Anyway i can accept this, if happen with Uncharted 4 or Quantum Break,that is beautiful game,and that also if not is same as the “UC4 tech demo fake graphics” they have anyway a good gfx,so i can accept sony do this with uc4,but i can’t accept if they do it with knack… or like if happen awesome tech demo and then game bad gfx for example i not hav like the killzone2 e3 tech demo coz when the game is released it’s so much downgrade gfx than it.

  • Fear Monkey

    In Ubisoft’s case, I highly disagree. I bought the game based on the E3 demo, not only because of the graphics, because of the exciting mission that was in the demo. Guess what, the location in the game was there, but the mission was completely different and not exciting at all compared to the demo. The graphics in the demo were astounding, the graphics in the final game were ok…. Ubisoft has a tendency to do this and its why I wait to buy their games rather than buy at launch after Watch Dogs.



    • Sweetbrandigirl2004

      I hear you I won’t get burned again by Ubisuck !

    • HAppY_KrAToS

      You mean Pubisoft ?
      and with their x1 – ps4 graphics parity craap, we can be sure the ps4 version will always look as bad as the x1 version.

  • James Stewart

    Its a problem with the industry in my book. Im tired of seeing reveals like what we recently saw of Battlefield and COD for the latest examples. It wasnt real gameplay for the most part just a few seconds of gameplay put around pre recorded footage then said done “in game engine” to make you think that the gameplay will look like that.

    Dont get me wrong im buying Battlefield this year and COD can go piss off in a corner for all I care releasing another futuristic exo suit boost jumping nightmare that we got 2 years in a row already. I hope COD bombs harder than ever but it wont of course they tacked on that COD 4 remaster to make sure that sales look good knowing a majority of its fans dont want the futuristic stuff but the games already in developement when Advanced Warfare sells like hotcakes but gets tons of hate so what can they do but scramble and remaster an already built game to appease the fans.

    • Judysbaskin3

      “my room mate Lori Is getting paid on the internet $98/hr”…..!ti721urtwo days ago grey MacLaren. P1 I bought after earning 18,512 was my previous month’s payout..just a little over.17k Dollars Last month..3-5 hours job a day…with weekly’s realy the simplest. job I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months. ago. and now making over hourly. 87 Dollars…Learn. More right Here !ti721u:➽:➽:.➽.➽.➽.➽ http://GlobalSuperJobsReportsEmploymentsTrendsGetPay-Hour$98…. .★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★::::::!ti721u….,….

  • Dirkster_Dude

    The idiots who complain about games shown at E3 with better graphics than they might have when finally released should find another hobby.


      very true sir

    • Sweetbrandigirl2004

      You sir are WRONG ! I expect games being shown at E3 by developers to be an HONEST representation of the game they are trying to hype me to buy. To shown me a hyped up super trailer only to short change me with a less then graphical game amounts to cheating me and other gamers.

    • Dirkster_Dude

      I’m not wrong or right I expressed an opinion. My opinion is right for me. If it doesn’t work for you that it tough s*it


    i hope so

  • Sweetbrandigirl2004

    Erjavec stated what you are shown is a 15-minute part of the game that was built in three to six months.“Meanwhile, the rest of the game’s 10+ hours are built over something in the range of 12 to 24 months. Uh ha fact they put more man hours into the 15 mins piece then they did the rest of the game amounts to a downgrade. Gamers are sick and tired of being fooled and hyped too solely in order to sell us games. Naughty Dog never has a hard time giving us games that look like their trailers so why does Ubisoft or Crytek ? I for one don’t like buying a bill of goods when I put out my hard earned $60.00 for a game. I expect the gaming companies to delver what their showing me or selling me. To shown me a hyped up super trailer only to short change me with a less then graphical game amounts to cheating me and other gamers.

  • Jason Mounce

    Maybe if developers were more transparent about their work in progress and product, and not so insecure about possible criticism, then they’d show the viewers what they’ve got and why they’re excited instead of dealing everything like a business move that’s foremost made for the investors instead of the consumers.

    Ubisoft is a prime example, they show an ‘In-Game Footage’ trailer that 2 years later gets butchered, because they’re not transparent and they only aimed to impress the investors and journalists with ‘Ubisoft Potential and skill’. This is not misplaced criticism. This is when game developers please the suits and business people before they aim to please the gamers. Naughty Dog at least knows how to please both because they don’t release buggy, broken games with a engine that is so unoptimized that the only way you can show it off is on a 2x Titan PC behind closed doors and label it ‘In-Game Footage’ to imply to the less tech-savvy dolt out there that ‘It may look like this on all platforms’.


Copyright © 2009-2017 All Rights Reserved.