Want to learn CRYENGINE from the experts at a live event? We’ve partnered with SAE Institute to arrange two workshops in Leipzig and Hannover, Germany, hosted by Crytek Senior Cinematic Artist Joe Garth, where he’ll show you how to get amazing results from CRYENGINE.
Attendees at the seminars will be introduced to various world building projects, an exploration of the latest workflows, including how to integrate photogrammetry into scenes, and find out how to set up realistic PBR (Physically Based Rendering) materials and lighting. He’ll also be sharing his knowledge on how to optimize assets, scenes, and lighting. The seminar gives attendees the chance to ask questions as they find out how to elevate their own games to the highest levels of performance and visual quality in the industry. And Joe’s throwing in an exciting look at what the future holds for CRYENGINE, plus an exclusive opportunity for students to be the first to register for a two day CRYENGINE V game building workshop at SAE in January 2018.
The first two events are open to the public. Soeverybody can register for the event in Leipzig on December 9 here and the workshop at Hannover on December 16 here.

If you can’t make either events, stay tuned. We plan on rolling out more live events in future. Joe is, of course, one of our Master Class hosts. Crytek regularly holds live webinars with experts from the studio and CRYENGINE Insider members are able to access this content first and ask questions in real time. You can find out how you can join these webinars, and contribute directly to the evolution of the engine, by checking out our CRYENGINE membership options. Recent Master Class tutorials which have been subsequently released to the community include Joe’s introduction to cinematic storytelling, an environment art pipeline video, an in-depth introduction to UI, and our introduction to audio tutorial.

You can check out all of these tutorials on the CRYENGINE YouTube channel, where you will also find more videos which will help you up your development game. As ever, we’re looking forward to your feedback and requests on the usual channels – the forums, Facebook, and Twitter.

- Your CRYENGINE Team

If you can’t make either events, stay tuned. We plan on rolling out more live events in future.

Munich please . That would be great!

There's absolutely no point in talking about Physically Based Rendering in Cryengine! In the engine is the most miserable Material Editor you can imagine. What can I talk about? how to insert 4 textures in the required slots and twirl a couple of sliders, because more than this Material Editor does not know how. Give us a new Material Editor, which at least a little can compete with the Material Editor in the UE4, then the engine is interested in a lot of people. I do not understand why the development of this branch of the engine is completely ignored, the Material Editor does not change since the times of Cryengine 2. Now added support to the Substance, well! but this is still very small.

There's absolutely no point in talking about Physically Based Rendering in Cryengine! In the engine is the most miserable Material Editor you can imagine. What can I talk about? how to insert 4 textures in the required slots and twirl a couple of sliders, because more than this Material Editor does not know how. Give us a new Material Editor, which at least a little can compete with the Material Editor in the UE4, then the engine is interested in a lot of people. I do not understand why the development of this branch of the engine is completely ignored, the Material Editor does not change since the times of Cryengine 2. Now added support to the Substance, well! but this is still very small.

There has already been talk of a redesign of the Material Editor. It was on the roadmap some time ago but was since removed. We just don't know when it's coming. Plan is for all editors under Sandbox to use Qt and have an overhaul. Obviously tools like the Material Editor, Lens Flare Editor and Mannequin etc.. are still missing this.

Material Editor is still good less things can go wrong with it compared with ue4. an easy way to tweak too
Though its soon going to be part of the list obsolete now that theres sub interaction

I like that you can see changes in real time in CE's material editor. You can't do this in unreal, you always have to compile even if you just move a node.I agree however that it needs an overhaul. Support for metallic maps is greatly needed too (UE has both specular maps and Metallic maps).

I like that you can see changes in real time in CE's material editor. You can't do this in unreal, you always have to compile even if you just move a node.I agree however that it needs an overhaul. Support for metallic maps is greatly needed too (UE has both specular maps and Metallic maps).

Why would you need metallic maps in a specular/smoothness workflow? It doesn't give you any benefits. You can just simply mask your metallic and dielectric materials in the specular map by using the correct pbr values. Thats why the specular/smoothness workflow exists to begin with. It's at minimum equal to the metallic/roughness workflow.

Why would you need metallic maps in a specular/smoothness workflow? It doesn't give you any benefits. You can just simply mask your metallic and dielectric materials in the specular map by using the correct pbr values. Thats why the specular/smoothness workflow exists to begin with. It's at minimum equal to the metallic/roughness workflow.

Maybe the metallic workflow is more convenient regarding the source files. That would be one benefit.
It is strange that other engines allow switch between workflow if it was without benefits.

Why would you need metallic maps in a specular/smoothness workflow? It doesn't give you any benefits. You can just simply mask your metallic and dielectric materials in the specular map by using the correct pbr values. Thats why the specular/smoothness workflow exists to begin with. It's at minimum equal to the metallic/roughness workflow.

Maybe the metallic workflow is more convenient regarding the source files. That would be one benefit.
It is strange that other engines allow switch between workflow if it was without benefits.

Other engines don't allow to switch between both workflows. The specular input in a metallic workflow is just there to adjust the the reflection of dielectric materials in the 2-5% range. And when mask as metallic the specular information derives from the albedo map.

And still urgently need to improve the quality of SSR. When you work with matte materials everything looks good, but as soon as you want to do basic for example (glossy floor in the room), the ugly SSR kills all realistic PBR, which Crytek is so proud of. It would be desirable simply to disconnect SSR, and simply to leave reflections cubemap, it sometimes looks even more realistically.