HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
crytek
cryengine
HISTORICAL RECORD2018–2020
crytek / cryengine · Not publicly available

cryengine

Discover this repository through its Hacker News conversations.

10Distinct people
10Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

A public description has not been verified.

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 1:49:46 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by month10 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2018-05-31 15:03:49 UTC to 2020-06-28 01:25:35 UTC.

02462018-05-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-06-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsMay 20182018-06-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-07-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2018-07-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-08-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2018-08-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-09-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2018-09-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-10-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2018-10-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-11-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2018-11-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-12-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2018-12-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-02-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2019-02-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-03-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2019-03-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-04-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2019-04-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-05-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2019-05-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-06-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 commentsMay 20192019-06-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-07-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2019-07-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-08-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2019-08-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-09-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2019-09-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-10-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2019-10-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-11-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2019-11-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-12-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2019-12-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-02-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-02-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-03-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-03-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-04-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2020-04-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-05-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-05-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-06-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-06-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-07-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 6 mentions; 1 submissions, 5 commentsJun 2020

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
May 20182018-05-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-06-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Jun 20182018-06-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-07-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 20182018-07-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-08-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 20182018-08-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-09-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Sep 20182018-09-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-10-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Oct 20182018-10-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-11-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Nov 20182018-11-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-12-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Dec 20182018-12-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-02-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Feb 20192019-02-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-03-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Mar 20192019-03-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-04-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Apr 20192019-04-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-05-01 00:00:00 UTC000
May 20192019-05-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-06-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jun 20192019-06-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-07-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 20192019-07-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-08-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 20192019-08-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-09-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Sep 20192019-09-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-10-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Oct 20192019-10-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-11-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Nov 20192019-11-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-12-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Dec 20192019-12-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-02-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 20202020-02-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-03-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Mar 20202020-03-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-04-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Apr 20202020-04-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-05-01 00:00:00 UTC000
May 20202020-05-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-06-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jun 20202020-06-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-07-01 00:00:00 UTC615

What Hacker News says

10 sources
This is what draws my attention more: > //FIXME: There's a threading issue in CryPhysics with ARM's weak memory ordering. https://github.com/CRYTEK/CRYENGINE/blob/6c4f4df4a7a092300d6... Translation: "We have race conditions in our C++, but x86 is lenient enough and current MSVC not aggressive enough to make it crash and burn constantly on our main platform." Coincidentally, I finished Crysis 1 today. That involved the first four crashes I had with the game, three of which were in the final battle.
In Cryengine Source Code
I don't think it's the best code I've ever seen, but a lot of these are surface-level complaints. > * goto inside 3 nested for-loops. C has no pattern for breaking out of multiple for loops at the same time. Other languages like Java and JavaScript introduced "break label;" to handle this edge case. goto is perfectly acceptable to break out of multiple loops. > * new/delete, with no RAII They use RAII, but it's not applicable here. In this case, the developers only want to allocate a temporary array when it needs to be resized. Since we don't want a large stack allocation (stack sizes are super small on consoles), using a delete/free to resize an array seems fine to me. Game developers have a long-seated distrust of std::vector, and for good reasons. RAII is used for the WriteCondLock which you criticize in the next bullet point, so it's
Read the rest
not like they were unaware of it. Just not the right tool for the job. > * thread specific variables and locks (?) You seem to be upset that they have code that uses locks at all? I don't really know what this bullet-point is saying, other than "I looked for 5 minutes and didn't understand the threading structure". If I had to take an issue with this code, it's the lack of enums for e.g. iSimClass, despite it having an enum with definitions. That's the sort of stuff that's difficult to reason about and follow along with without having a mapping in my head. And it has no overhead, so why not do it? https://github.com/CRYTEK/CRYENGINE/blob/6c4f4df4a7a092300d6...
In Cryengine Source Code
> I did not say that everyone was using ICC, rather that desktop and game developers did not share the same opinion regarding ICC and Visual C++ Yes, sure. MSVC is garbage clearly isn't right. I presume (in the absence of any real data of course) that ICC doesn't result in significant performance advantages over MSVC, for games, or it would have been worth these developer's time to support it. > if you are reducing the world to just what Unreal, Source and CryEngine officially support It's a reduction sure enough, but I think that's a reasonable set of engines to consider. > I wonder how many AAA games have been released on Windows using GCC or clang with those engines I imagine it's none. According to the (quite possibly stale) official wiki, Source does not support Clang, and only supports GCC for building Linux dedicated servers. [0] I
Read the rest
t looks like Unreal Engine supports Clang for Linux builds [1], but for Windows it seems they really only support MSVC, although Clang can be made to work [2][3] CryEngine supports Clang for Linux builds [4], but not for Windows where it seems to be MSVC-only [5][6] [0] https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Compiler_Choices [1] https://wiki.unrealengine.com/Compiling_For_Linux [2] https://docs.unrealengine.com/en-US/Programming/Development/... [3] https://forums.unrealengine.com/development-discussion/engin... [4] https://docs.cryengine.com/display/SDKDOC4/CRYENGINE+on+Linu... [5] https://github.com/CRYTEK/CRYENGINE/issues/381 [6] https://docs.cryengine.com/display/CEPROG/Building+the+Engin...
In GCC 9.3
According to Crytek, it should be. Their engine license[0] is, if I am reading it correctly, similar in this respect. > By doing so, you, the Licensee, agree to all terms and conditions of this Agreement or in the accompanying documentation. You should read this Agreement carefully before the Start Date. If you do not agree with the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement you are not authorized to use the CRYENGINE. > You agree to check www.cryengine.com periodically for new information and terms that govern your use of CRYENGINE. Crytek may modify this Agreement at any time. Crytek will inform you about revisions to this Agreement by email and/or by a notice on our home page and/or during log in. Revisions to terms affecting existing CRYENGINE shall be effective thirty (30) days after posting at www.cryengine.com If you do not a
Read the rest
gree with the new terms your only remedy is to stop using CRYENGINE. ... > If your register your Game later than June 30, 2018 then this current Agreement shall apply (no matter which CRYENGINE version you use); ... [0] https://github.com/CRYTEK/CRYENGINE/blob/release/LICENSE.md
In Unity Engine ToS change makes cloud-based SpatialOS games illegal
It is not, just take a look at the third party directory of chromium, where it tracks all its third party dependencies https://github.com/chromium/chromium/tree/master/third_party the main point of their build system gn (similar to bazel) is to have explicit and distribution independent control of all dependencies (typically tied to specific versions). LLVM basically has no system dependencies as well, instead it implements a lot of platform abstractions within the repository (https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/tree/master/lib/Support), the remaining dependencies are mostly build dependencies such as python 2.7 and cmake. Same story for Cryengine (https://github.com/CRYTEK/CRYENGINE/tree/release/Code/Libs) and Unreal Engine (https://github.com/EpicGames/UnrealEngine/tree/release/Engin...). Linux distributions simply duplicate a lot of w
Read the rest
ork because they are based on a flawed and outdated distribution model, outdated because the main argument for shared libraries disappears with > 1 TB commodity hard drives. The approach taken by the projects above is also the only way to do cross platform development, simply because both Windows, macOS and Consoles don't have the concept of an operating system package manager. (If you are using homebrew for development on mac, you will run into a lot of trouble sooner or later).
In Build2, a Cargo-like dependency and build manager for C/C++

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.