Crytek’s Artists Showcase CRYENGINE With New Beautiful Forest Maps

CRYENGINE V is currently available to everyone and Crytek’s artists have been experimenting with it. Crytek’s Lighting Artist, Damian Stempniewski, showcased a Forest map CRYENGINE V mostly for testing overcast lighting with SVOGI. On the other hand, Crytek’s Principal 3D Artist / Principal Environment Artist, Finn Meinert Matthiesen, showcased the Fog Lighting effects of CRYENGINE. Enjoy!

damian-stempniewski-l-forest-001damian-stempniewski-l-forest-002
Damian Stempniewski

finn-meinert-matthiesen-cryengine-jungle-light-01finn-meinert-matthiesen-cryengine-jungle-light-02Finn Meinert Matthiesen

32 thoughts on “Crytek’s Artists Showcase CRYENGINE With New Beautiful Forest Maps”

  1. Crytek’s version of SVOGI is called SVOTI, just for the record.

    Also, Nines, I’m assuming you’re going to click the article & scroll down to the comments section, so;

    Found something interesting; check out the CryEngine-powered “Miscreated”, reportedly the first “CryEngine SVOTI-powered Game.” Interestingly enough, the Developers are claiming it doesn’t harm performance, actually, some people are getting boosts from it;

    “This is incorrect information.

    Maybe for SVOGI but this post is on SVOTI from Crytek. SVOTI has no performance issues from the scene being large or small. We use SVOTI on Miscreated and surprisingly users are reporting better framerates than without SVOTI.

    With SVOTI the world is broken up into a grid as you move through the world the svoti works it’s magic on the grid closest to you. There is no need to render occlusion 10 miles away so it’s only rendered where it’s needed.”

    Seems like Crytek may have actually scored where Epic Games missed.

    P.S. Kingdom Come Deliverance uses it too, as of version 0.5. Sweet.

    1. Cryengine V introduced a lot of fixes to SVOTI which I have listed below. (These are taken from the documentation/release notes)

      SVOGI<–This is what Crytek calls it.

      Fixed: Specular on Eye and Hair Shaders.

      Fixed: Materials memory leaks.

      Fixed: Flickering in multi-GPU mode and fixed point lights support.

      Fixed: Crash on material check-out.

      Fixed: False occlusion from clip volumes.

      Fixed: Potential render target stack corruption.

      Fixed: Missing light bounce form terrain.

      Fixed: LowSpecMode parameter added into sys_spec_Shading.cfg

        1. Well I think they could technically get away with it being called either. Total/Global… these seem more like marketing terms for different variations of the same overall illumination algorithm.

    2. The beauty of this thing is that, from what I understand, it doesn’t require any special actions to be done. It means that every CryEngine 4+ game can use it. There IS a performance loss, judging by the report of the guy who tested it in Kingdom Come (about 6%).

        1. I guess it was enough for Epic to remove it entirely from the engine. Epic didn’t want to give such advantage to PC versions, and 6% is something consoles cannot afford.

          1. According to Crytek themselves the render time is 4-5ms on an Xbox One. When most games target 30 (33s) you can easily use it. Even just using AO only nets good results for 2ms of time. Which a title expensive for AO.

            These numbers are from 2 years ago, too.

          2. Epic’s solution was nowhere near this efficient. They dropped it because it was a performance drop of around 10-20 fps.

          3. Yeah, I had a feeling that the fps drop was much more significant on UE4.

            Still, that’s not a good excuse for removing the feature. Good PC configs still would have been able to afford. Not to say that unlike Crytek they had all the money in the world to make it efficient.

          4. I think Epic has a new technique in the works – DFGI. Sounds pretty interesting but I’m not sure what advantages it has over LPV.

            “The core idea is that each mesh has its own a voxel grid, and each voxel stores the signed distance to the closest piece of geometry. This allows for accelerated ray casting or cone tracing since at each point it is possible to look up the distance a ray or cone is allowed to
            travel further without hitting any geometry. Distance field global
            illumination is still heavily work in progress with unclear commitment
            on the side of Epic Games. In addition, memory consumption and runtime performance are still likely to be an issue for more complex scenes.”

          5. I’m curios how every more or less big engine managed to get good dynamic GI support, except UE4. Epic didn’t have any financial problems, and the amount of money they made from the last gen should be insane.

            Anyway, seems like the only real advantage that DFGI has over LPV is that it’s probably going to be finished someday. LPV was a Lionhead’s solution, and now it’s closed. Also, from what I was able to gather from the Epic forums, LPV works only with directional lighting.

            There is also VXGI, which looks like another Nvidia proprietary sh!t that’s gonna cause a lot of pain to AMD, as well as “old” Nvidia chips (like Kepler is currently suffering from their “opimization”). But like the other solutions it’s also “in progress”, and on the top of that, not very good performance wise.

      1. I wish the devs of State of Decay would implement it in their game but they seem to have completely abandoned any future support for their product.

  2. although it looks impressive.. let’s get real. framerate is more important than this to me. i think DICE Frostbite Engine 3 is good enough. Dragon Age Inquisition looks superbly stunning. And i get 60FPS on 1440p. Can’t argue about the quality of gameplay, but that game looks just so good.

    1. Unreal engine 4 shows some great graphic demos where its running easily at 90+ fps with just a 970 at 1440P, never say good enough and imo graphics in the frostbite engine 3 look a little last gen and next gen.

    2. According to Damian (he guy who made the forest scene above) “The scene is running at 50-60fps on Alienware 15 R2 laptop” so this is REALLY good performance.

  3. Good grief I really want this. Hopefully Crytek can stop constantly bungling their registration issues so I can actually log in and download the damn thing.

  4. Such a gorgeous engine. Many games should’ve have used this engine instead of updating/creating their own.

      1. His brain malfunctioned as he thought he commented on a forest rendered in Unreal Engine 4 where his comment actually would’ve made sense.

      1. You all took my comment in a negative way. I meant they always use forests to demonstrate their technical achievements because they are good at that area .take far cry as an example , they made that game from a simple tech demo which supposed to show the engine rendering capabilities . they always used forests. I didn’t mean their forests are not realistic. After all I am a hard core crysis fan who enjoyed forest in crysis 1

        1. Well the reason they use forests is because thats probably the single most difficult thing to realistically render since theres thousands of objects randomly scattered and can show off how nicely light can pass through trees and whatnot.

        2. “Skogar är alltid en svaghet för dom”. By looking at the sentence structure I would guess that you might be scandinavian?

  5. very nice. what are the minimum specs to enjoy this art in motion though ? after all that’s what game engines are all about.

  6. This engine is amazing. And of course the artists who did these maps are very skilled. The result looks insanely good.

  7. CryEngine has a look that Unreal Engine just can’t reach!
    Just too damn natural and realistic…Mind-blowing!!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *