By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Nintendo should buy Crytek

Zekkyou said:
I expect Crytek's technical skill would be somewhat wasted on the WiiU... :p

It would be interesting to see what they could do though. They've pretty much always built their games around high power gear, so working exclusively with low tier hardware like like the WiiU would be a pretty big change.

I think you might be looking at this from the wrong perspective.

Nintendo have a tendency to have their hand in development of the hardware for their system in a way that neither of the others do - that is, where Sony might use their computer division's "Cell" processor, it's just a regular Cell processor. Both of them tend to go for relatively "stock-standard" parts, while Nintendo tends to want something specifically designed for what they're doing with their system.

Now imagine them working with Crytek's guidance on what functionality needs to be in the next system. Crytek would know exactly what kinds of computations need to be fast, etc, to optimise the system for their kinds of engines. So it's possible that the union of Nintendo and Crytek would result in the development of new hardware optimised for gaming in a way that no previous hardware has been. And then Crytek would be able to develop for that new hardware, and do so exclusively, thus eliminating their need to handle many different architectures.

 

That being said, I feel I need to ask - is Crytek actually up for sale? That is, what is the motivation for this discussion? We started discussing the idea of Nintendo buying Capcom because Capcom just changed their position on share buyouts by other companies. Has Crytek done something like this, or is this all mere wishful thinking?



Around the Network

I only want Nintendo to buy Crytek for TimeSplitters!



                
       ---Member of the official Squeezol Fanclub---

Let's be honest. What else is Nintendo going to do with all their cash reserves other than buying other studios?



Nobody should buy Crytek. Their games just aren't good.



    

NNID: FrequentFlyer54

According to some of you, Nintendo should buy the whole world... -__-



Around the Network
MoHasanie said:
Nobody should buy Crytek. Their games just aren't good.


It's not about the games, it's about the engine and human resources.



Aielyn said:
Zekkyou said:
I expect Crytek's technical skill would be somewhat wasted on the WiiU... :p

It would be interesting to see what they could do though. They've pretty much always built their games around high power gear, so working exclusively with low tier hardware like like the WiiU would be a pretty big change.

I think you might be looking at this from the wrong perspective.

Nintendo have a tendency to have their hand in development of the hardware for their system in a way that neither of the others do - that is, where Sony might use their computer division's "Cell" processor, it's just a regular Cell processor. Both of them tend to go for relatively "stock-standard" parts, while Nintendo tends to want something specifically designed for what they're doing with their system.

Now imagine them working with Crytek's guidance on what functionality needs to be in the next system. Crytek would know exactly what kinds of computations need to be fast, etc, to optimise the system for their kinds of engines. So it's possible that the union of Nintendo and Crytek would result in the development of new hardware optimised for gaming in a way that no previous hardware has been. And then Crytek would be able to develop for that new hardware, and do so exclusively, thus eliminating their need to handle many different architectures.

You mean, the same way Sony worked with their dev teams and 3rd parties to make PS4? ;)

Honestly, I don't see why Nintendo would need Crytek for that.



Hynad said:
According to some of you, Nintendo should buy the whole world... -__-

Not the whole world, just the best parts.



HoloDust said:
Aielyn said:
I think you might be looking at this from the wrong perspective.

Nintendo have a tendency to have their hand in development of the hardware for their system in a way that neither of the others do - that is, where Sony might use their computer division's "Cell" processor, it's just a regular Cell processor. Both of them tend to go for relatively "stock-standard" parts, while Nintendo tends to want something specifically designed for what they're doing with their system.

Now imagine them working with Crytek's guidance on what functionality needs to be in the next system. Crytek would know exactly what kinds of computations need to be fast, etc, to optimise the system for their kinds of engines. So it's possible that the union of Nintendo and Crytek would result in the development of new hardware optimised for gaming in a way that no previous hardware has been. And then Crytek would be able to develop for that new hardware, and do so exclusively, thus eliminating their need to handle many different architectures.

You mean, the same way Sony worked with their dev teams and 3rd parties to make PS4? ;)

Honestly, I don't see why Nintendo would need Crytek for that.

Sony consulted their dev teams and 3rd parties to determine what hardware to put into the system, but I'm talking about design of the parts. Nintendo's CPU, GPU, etc, are all custom designs each time, while PlayStation CPUs tend to be mostly stock-standard with just a bit of tweaking. This is especially true in the current generation, where the PS4 (and Xbox One) internals have been identified as regular PC components except for a few small tweaks.

I'm talking about Nintendo having an engine development team advise them on the exact functionalities of the hardware - not like "should have motion controls", but like "should have an operation on the CPU that does THIS", or "This particular operation should be made faster if possible".



Aielyn said:
HoloDust said:
Aielyn said:
I think you might be looking at this from the wrong perspective.

Nintendo have a tendency to have their hand in development of the hardware for their system in a way that neither of the others do - that is, where Sony might use their computer division's "Cell" processor, it's just a regular Cell processor. Both of them tend to go for relatively "stock-standard" parts, while Nintendo tends to want something specifically designed for what they're doing with their system.

Now imagine them working with Crytek's guidance on what functionality needs to be in the next system. Crytek would know exactly what kinds of computations need to be fast, etc, to optimise the system for their kinds of engines. So it's possible that the union of Nintendo and Crytek would result in the development of new hardware optimised for gaming in a way that no previous hardware has been. And then Crytek would be able to develop for that new hardware, and do so exclusively, thus eliminating their need to handle many different architectures.

You mean, the same way Sony worked with their dev teams and 3rd parties to make PS4? ;)

Honestly, I don't see why Nintendo would need Crytek for that.

Sony consulted their dev teams and 3rd parties to determine what hardware to put into the system, but I'm talking about design of the parts. Nintendo's CPU, GPU, etc, are all custom designs each time, while PlayStation CPUs tend to be mostly stock-standard with just a bit of tweaking. This is especially true in the current generation, where the PS4 (and Xbox One) internals have been identified as regular PC components except for a few small tweaks.

I'm talking about Nintendo having an engine development team advise them on the exact functionalities of the hardware - not like "should have motion controls", but like "should have an operation on the CPU that does THIS", or "This particular operation should be made faster if possible".

What makes you think that ICE team wasn't advising Cerny's team when they were designing PS4? Or MS teams doing the same for XOne? While they might have what appear to be regular PC parts inside (though that's not completely true), they each have specific architectures that are fine tuned according to what both companies believed is the best...just like Nintendo designed WiiU.

As I said, they do not need Crytek for that, unless you think their tech group is that behind the current curve.