Each person here can achieve a totally different look to others because of the shader editor. The real work here actually begins after one imports their asset in engine. But in CE all the work you can do is to assemble pieces and enjoy what crytek has already decided for you.
Edit: These discussions are pointless I just hope some day CE is again worth working with. It was good comparing to UE3, but UE4… no.
Same, the cgf tool never really got working well with Maya and I don’t/can’t afford Max so mostly I leave Cryengine alone. I did have a play with the SDK but wasn’t that impressed for what I needed. Each to their own as I know there are some decent projects on the newer SDK.
Actually you can import FBX files directly into cryengine.
You have the data cache but having to commit to a filetype like fbx will be larger than my source ma/mb file I build off of anyways for the cgf file in CE. The biggest fear I have is in regard to fbx and not being able to save corrupt files. With the Maya Ascii I can go in and rewrite the text to save a file if need-be. Is partly why I favor to ma if given the choice for archive. I do find it nice you can swap filetypes using the cache only though. Suppose it rewrites the header in some way. I remember I couldnt find any details regarding that bit of information.
The big catch that everyone complains about being that you must possess max/maya. Recently Blender has been able to convert so the free option is there but unfortunately not fully maintained. In the past update they did work on the side to resolve some RC issues that “dwhite” was having on his end. Reality is that the RC outside of Max uses DAE as the intermediate format to compile to the files (cgf/chr/skin/cga).
Many on the CE forums have been vocal for fbx support. I kind of have become indifferent due to my use of source app files (mb/ma) to control my source instead of a filetype that wont even transfer constraints or curves properly. I know I am in the minority with this feeling though. When shipping anything to clients or dev partners I always supply the single source build and the compiled assets that minimize size. A good example would be a 2k tiff file that is compiled down to dds that can go from 4mb to 170kb in size. Inside of the RC you can control compression and mips quite thoroughly but most skip this level of tweaking on CE devs as far as I know. It will always be a push/pull situation but over time file sizes really take their toll on large devs with many assets.
I would say the engine has remained the same in ease of use for beginners. I have serious hours using it so most errors I have already solved many years ago. I also do my best on their forums to help others solve issues as well.
I am not going to stand here and proclaim either engine better. In terms of my archvis I have used UE4 every time and it beats CE by miles. To repeat as stated before the exterior results and sss aren’t up to par yet so I withhold much of my character work to CE. That and optimizations or Alembic support keep me carrying on with the CE dev. I don’t doubt that they will resolve both of these in due time. They update regularly and I really enjoy their support.
Will MayaLT`s game-exporter work for importing .FBX direct into CryEngine?
As stated in the previous posting I made it will ingest any fbx but is limited to render geometry. You could always build it in Maya and then use the CryBlend Exporter to get the cgfs. Maya LT is a decent deal but until Crytek tackles all formats in fbx and makes them compatible with their optimized formats I would not use the fbx pipe for anything but screenshots.
I know there is polycount-limit in MayaLT. I use it for low-poly assets. It has been suggested a idea for an “Send to CryEngine” in MayaLT and have passed to the MayaLT team. More than that I dont know.
Currently it uses DAE to go to CE. When they have full fbx supports this could be possible. The send to command in the Autodesk apps i figure uses fbx for translation. I know it well given my Maya to Motionbuilder work. You wont get Autodesk writing it first though since the plugin is mll and Autodesk cant hack that open. Wish i could help and like you i would have to wait. In that position i would stick to Unreal. Like how for certain work i use Unreal and my dev i use CE. I wrote why earlier. Same case but in yours it would be different reasons.
Until Cryteck brings full FBX support as good as UE4, they have no chance.
The big nail in the coffin will be when UE4 matches their opaque shaders (specifically skin) and also optimizes outdoor foliage at the consumer level. Epic showed the Kite demo but as stated elsewhere I am waiting to load up a scene like that on a more realistic PC. Running multiple Titans is not something most have. I am open minded though and love the interior results Unreal brings.
Have you tried compressing and scaling down their textures?
Here are kite assets used (million trees)
Foliage is one of the issues with UE4. It runs much faster in CE. But well, UE4 is new and is improving…
I have used the Kite assets. I actually was the one on the CE forums to show the assets and what they provide. It just is not up to the same optimization yet in terms of CE. Don’t worry though because UE4 does loads better than CE out of the box. I am not biased and enjoy both apps. I do look at them accurately though in terms of my results.
Well stated Collin and Maximum. If Epic can figure that out and also add a GI solution that can run on my PC like CE does… well… that would be it I suppose
The light clipping volume!!!
I did something similar in an engine I wrote back in the day. Made lighting up interiors with dynamic lighting so much easier. Hopefully we can have something like this, and usable in blueprints, not just level editor volumes.
This would really help lighting interiors if you aren’t using any light mass baked lighting, like say, for a randomly generated level. That’s why volume editing should be doable in blueprints and not just in editor. (Some day)
You can also hack indirect lighting by making adjacent light volumes smoothly light each other up. If a door between areas opens, make the light from one area contribute a bit to the brightness of an adjacent area.
It was something I requested heavily from them. They had lightshapes before but with the deferred setup they became obsolete. It really does help in interior lighting. Having to rotate and move duplicate probes around a room was a nightmare. Best part now is no longer needing the visareas for all things. They are good for optimization but past that a nightmare.
My engine used them in the deferred shading step. It’s in forward shading that it would be a nightmare to support since you now have yet another light permutation to support.
That may be the case in your engine. They can differ as you know. I only know what was told to me by Crytek shading engineers.
HOOOo–LLLly S…T !!!
They actually delivered 
…3.8.1 is here…
http://docs.cryengine.com/display/SDKDOC1/EaaS+3.8.1
- GameZero Template: Just like UE4’s blank template. There no mummbo jumbo code. Only bare essentials. Go, learn make your own game.
- VR is out ! Go use and try it !
I can’t believe they actually did it I have both very capable engines at my disposal once again ! I am a happy panda !
Bad news for EPIC…