Support NeoGAF

[Rapping Granny]

Just like Crysis is a space marine shooter and nothing more. Can't you see how pathetic your initial argument was.

oh ok sorry. An open world space marine shooter.

 

[I <3 Memes]

Shit. We've come around the last turn and were into the glitchy/unoptimized homestretch now. Pretty soon we will be back around to art direction.

 

[Mr. B Natural]

Played Crysis not too long ago and all I have to say is that I should have saved my money and just looked at the screen shots. The game still looks better than anything I've ever seen, too bad that doesn't matter when the game itself is ironically not fleshed out at all.

Willing to give them a second shot? Probably not considering they're still whistling the same tune with Crysis 2 - "Hey, look, it's pretty!" What about your game? Remember, you're making a game not a slide show.

 

[wolfmat]

I liked Crysis. Hooray.

 

[Salacious Crumb]

Except none of that was needed.

I hate this mentality. Sure none of it was strictly "needed" to beat the game, but that's what makes it great. It gives the player the choice to play the game how they want. If you want to play the game in a completely bland and repetitive way, well go right ahead, but for people that play games to have fun and not just to beat them, Crysis offers a huge variety of ways to complete tasks.

 

[I <3 Memes]

Played Crysis not too long ago and all I have to say is that I should have saved my money and just looked at the screen shots. The game still looks better than anything I've ever seen, too bad that doesn't matter when the game itself is ironically not fleshed out at all.

Willing to give them a second shot? Probably not considering they're still whistling the same tune with Crysis 2 - "Hey, look, it's pretty!" What about your game? Remember, you're making a game not a slide show.

How was it a slide show? That doesn't even make sense.

 

[Dennis]

Judging from this thread, the inevitable 360 vs PS3 vs PC and Crysis 2 vs UC2 vs GoW3 vs Killzone 3 threads will be the stuff of legends.

I predict Crysis 2 will be the most divisive shooter since Killzone 2. I also predict many gifs.

 

[Salacious Crumb]

oh ok sorry. An open world space marine shooter.

I can't tell if you're a troll, or if you're just unaware of your hypocrisy.

either way: 'eh'

 

[StevePharma]

Judging from this thread, the inevitable 360 vs PS3 vs PC and Crysis 2 vs UC2 vs GoW3 vs Killzone 3 threads will be the stuff of legends.

I predict Crysis 2 will be the most divisive shooter since Killzone 2. I also predict many gifs.

One can never have too many GIFS..:lol

 

[Nizz]

Well, it's nice that they're constantly bringing up the PS3 version in conversations. That's the version of the game I'll be getting. I hope for the PS3 version two particular things: that the framerate is a solid 30fps, and that they let you shoot using the R1 button instead of R2.

I can't wait to see some legit gameplay footage finally. This is one of my most anticipated titles this Fall.

 

[Mr. B Natural]

I hate this mentality. Sure none of it was strictly "needed" to beat the game, but that's what makes it great. It gives the player the choice to play the game how they want. If you want to play the game in a completely bland and repetitive way, well go right ahead, but for people that play games to have fun and not just to beat them, Crysis offers a huge variety of ways to complete tasks.

Variety is not necessarily interesting... especially when it's the same variety you get everywhere else. The "variety" you speak of in crysis was so overdone and better done by other games. The game is completely bland and repetitive no matter how you slice it. It felt that way from start to finish. The crap narrative made sure I had no investment whatsoever in the actions I was doing throughout the game.

Combat was so bad in crysis that I found it necessary to just run past everybody. That's sad. It was unrewarding (literally), it was unexciting, it was random thanks to bad, unentertaining ai

The only thing differentiating crysis from the slew of other uninspiring "sandbox" games was the suit's powers - all of which were 1 dimensional ideas that weren't fleshed out at all. Very rarely did I get excited, feel badass or just plain laugh at the randomness while playing, unlike superior (and admittedly uglier) games like Saints Row II, Crackdown or even GTA.

These guys have talent and potential for sure. No doubt. But they can learn a thing from Bungie (and others) about the fine-line AI that's good AND fun to play against and outsmart. They can learn a thing from Volition or the guys that made crackdown about making sand box straight up entertaining. And of course they can learn a thing or two from rockstar about making a compelling sandbox space and a narrative that fits within it.

 

[rollingstart]

Crysis is a shooter where the player needs to invest themselves and define their own play style. If you played it like a regular shooter, you're probably just a boring person. The same argument works for Just Cause 2. Two (interesting) people playing these games would have radically difference sessions.

But I do understand if people don't like engaging gameplay anymore. I mean, people liked Prince of Persia 2008 for the visuals and extremely low impact gameplay. Same for the Splinter Cell Conviction demo. Some people just play video games to relax.

 

[I <3 Memes]

Variety is not necessarily interesting... especially when it's the same variety you get everywhere else. The "variety" you speak of in crysis was so overdone and better done by other games. The game is completely bland and repetitive no matter how you slice it. It felt that way from start to finish. The crap narrative made sure I had no investment whatsoever in the actions I was doing throughout the game.

Combat was so bad in crysis that I found it necessary to just run past everybody. That's sad. It was unrewarding (literally), it was unexciting, it was random thanks to bad, unentertaining ai

The only thing differentiating crysis from the slew of other uninspiring "sandbox" games was the suit's powers - all of which were 1 dimensional ideas that weren't fleshed out at all. Very rarely did I get excited, feel badass or just plain laugh at the randomness while playing, unlike superior (and admittedly uglier) games like Saints Row II, Crackdown or even GTA.

These guys have talent and potential for sure. No doubt. But they can learn a thing from Bungie (and others) about the fine-line AI that's good AND fun to play against and outsmart. They can learn a thing from Volition or the guys that made crackdown about making sand box straight up entertaining. And of course they can learn a thing or two from rockstar about making a compelling sandbox space and a narrative that fits within it.

Why would you compare a game with large levels that offer multiple ways to play with sandbox games. Crysis is not a sandbox game. It's a linear fps with giant levels.

What would you have improved in the Assault and Onslaught levels?

 

[DodgyGeezerFella]

Why would you compare a game with large levels that offer multiple ways to play with sandbox games. Crysis is not a sandbox game. It's a linear fps with giant levels.

What would you have improved in the Assault and Onslaught levels?

Autoaim, milk-bottle sized bullets, a giant arrow telling you where to go, and a "radio buddy" guiding you :lol

 

[Tom Penny]

The only thing differentiating crysis from the slew of other uninspiring "sandbox" games was the suit's powers - all of which were 1 dimensional ideas that weren't fleshed out at all. Very rarely did I get excited, feel badass or just plain laugh at the randomness while playing, unlike superior (and admittedly uglier) games like Saints Row II, Crackdown or even GTA.

Nah. Your just a a boring person who didn't know how to play the game. If you played it correctly you would see the endless possibilities and the astounding innovations of the Nano suit.

 

[Salacious Crumb]

The "variety" you speak of in crysis was so overdone and better done by other games. The game is completely bland and repetitive no matter how you slice it.

This is simply where our opinions differ, so there's not much point in me taking this argument any further than I already have.

 

[GHG]

Why would you compare a game with large levels that offer multiple ways to play with sandbox games. Crysis is not a sandbox game. It's a linear fps with giant levels.

What would you have improved in the Assault and Onslaught levels?

Lets just agree to disagree and say its a Story driven FPS with sandbox elements.

Each level in itslef can be considered a mini sandbox. Linear is one thing Crysis is not.

 

[BobsRevenge]

Variety is not necessarily interesting... especially when it's the same variety you get everywhere else. The "variety" you speak of in crysis was so overdone and better done by other games. The game is completely bland and repetitive no matter how you slice it. It felt that way from start to finish. The crap narrative made sure I had no investment whatsoever in the actions I was doing throughout the game.

Combat was so bad in crysis that I found it necessary to just run past everybody. That's sad. It was unrewarding (literally), it was unexciting, it was random thanks to bad, unentertaining ai

The only thing differentiating crysis from the slew of other uninspiring "sandbox" games was the suit's powers - all of which were 1 dimensional ideas that weren't fleshed out at all. Very rarely did I get excited, feel badass or just plain laugh at the randomness while playing, unlike superior (and admittedly uglier) games like Saints Row II, Crackdown or even GTA.

These guys have talent and potential for sure. No doubt. But they can learn a thing from Bungie (and others) about the fine-line AI that's good AND fun to play against and outsmart. They can learn a thing from Volition or the guys that made crackdown about making sand box straight up entertaining. And of course they can learn a thing or two from rockstar about making a compelling sandbox space and a narrative that fits within and amongst it.

There is something deeply disturbed about this. I can't pinpoint exactly what happened in your life that led to such an opinion, but something truly troubling must've happened. I don't mean to get personal, but was your dad an abusive alcoholic? Did your mother not show you love?

As someone with a degree in psychology I find this post most interesting. Perhaps one day we can have lunch together and I can pick your brain, and maybe help you past some of your issues.

Let me know,
Bobs

 

[Lostconfused]

Judging from this thread, the inevitable 360 vs PS3 vs PC and Crysis 2 vs UC2 vs GoW3 vs Killzone 3 threads will be the stuff of legends.

I predict Crysis 2 will be the most divisive shooter since Killzone 2. I also predict many gifs.

Well yeah, but lets be honest you would probably be making those gifs anyway.

 

[BobsRevenge]

Lets just agree to disagree and say its a Story driven FPS with sandbox elements.

Each level in itslef can be considered a mini sandbox. Linear is one thing Crysis is not.

It is a linear, story-driven, sandbox FPS. It is all of those things, most of the time.

edit: Crysis has more variety to it than any other FPS I've played. You guys must not have imaginations or something.

 

[Mr. B Natural]

Crysis is a shooter where the player needs to invest themselves and define their own play style. If you played it like a regular shooter, you're probably just a boring person. The same argument works for Just Cause 2. Two (interesting) people playing these games would have radically difference sessions.

But I do understand if people don't like engaging gameplay anymore. I mean, people liked Prince of Persia 2008 for the visuals and extremely low impact gameplay. Same for the Splinter Cell Conviction demo. Some people just play video games to relax.

Engaging!? :lol Oh lord. Ok well, you guys have fun.

And to the guy above me - no, technically it's a hybrid but it tries to play like a sandbox game especially in the forms of combat. It does it so miserably that I can understand the confusion. You are tossed on a big island, you can for the most part go anywhere even if it was completely pointless, and you can kill things how and when you like...that's sandbox. However, you killed things the exact same way you kill things in all sandbox games, and that's the point i was making. There's variety, but it's stale variety with no personality or individuality.

I did find the truly no-disguises linear parts of the game much better. It was super simple and uninspiring and the power suit became more of a black sheep concept in tight corridor battles but it played like your standard fps from 2002 and that was an improvement gameplay wise from the unfinished hybrid style gameplay found elsewhere in the game. The aliens sucked, but again that's cause they didn't bother to consider gameplay into the equation.

 

[GHG]

It is a linear, story-driven, sandbox FPS. It is all of those things, most of the time.

Its awesome.

There.

 

[rollingstart]

Nah. Your just a a boring person who didn't know how to play the game. If you played it correctly you would see the endless possibilities and the astounding innovations of the Nano suit.

despite trying to use sarcasm to mask your own insecurities, that is completely true!

no offense to either of you. Like I said, some people to walk a single path and have that narrative to dictate why they're doing it. bringing up GTA4 or Saints Row 2, both are sandbox games in the sense that when you're not doing a mission you can drive around and do what you want. GTA4 especially becomes incredibly linear when you do play, even more so than previous games in the series. In earlier GTA games you could block off a road before starting a mission and it rewarded planning and built a consistent world. GTA4 ditched that in favor of extremely linear missions that only open up when you're expected to evade the police.

Engaging!? :lol Oh lord. Ok well, you guys have fun.

Oh, we do.

 

[Tom Penny]

despite trying to use sarcasm to mask your own insecurities, that is completely true!

A game like Bioshock which is incredibly linear had more insteresting ways to dispose of enemies then Crysis and wasn't even a big fan of Bioshock which make Crysis pretty much Meh in the gameplay department.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

wrong

wronger

wrongest

bad people bad posters

shameful

 

[BobsRevenge]

A game like Bioshock which is incredibly linear had more insteresting ways to dispose of enemies then Crysis and wasn't even a big fan of Bioshock which make Crysis pretty much Meh in the gameplay department.

That's true that Bioshock has more potential variety, but Crysis allowed you to access the variety with an incredible fluidity and ease. Bioshock requires too many button presses to get what you're planning done. Crysis is genius from a human factors perspective for how it let you access the variety mechanics. Switching suit powers is a matter of press-shove mouse in direction-unpress. Changing weapon stuff was a matter of pressing one button, then selecting what you wanted to change with precision (mouse pointer and click) or haste (press the number that applies to what you want to change to cycle through the options for it). And the specific options are limited enough to not ever overwhelm, but so widely applicable to any variety of situations and environments that there is more of an exponential aspect to Crysis's variety, whereas Bioshock's seemed more linear due to the more deliberate and gamey design.

Also, the environment isn't as tactically interesting as Crysis's is. Usually its not even close. Occasionally it will set you up with some awesome environment to take advantage of, but generally it feels more forced and deliberate.

I had a lot more fun with Crysis's gameplay than Bioshock's. It required less preparation and was more satisfying in general.

 

[godhandiscen]

Crysis Wars and BF:BC2 run at similar framerates on my computer with 4xAA. BF:BC2 is a fucking beast with everything turned on.

For some reason Crysis Wars wasn't doing motion blur for me last night. Not sure what is up with that, but its not like BF:BC2 does it.

Both run at around 30fps most of the time.

He is right though. BFBC2 MP looks much much better than Crysis Wars (the MP component) and I can max BFBC2 MP @ 60fps whereas Crysis Wars takes huges dives below 30fps.

It also has to do with the fact that AA is wonky in Crysis and BFBC2 employs CSAAx8 which costs the same as MSAA x4 but it looks much better. I use CSAAx8 AFx18 and everything maxed.

 

[Firewire]

When I think about Crysis, I can't help but think about Adam Sessler's review of it. You can hype the graphics but the rest of the game not so much.

Forward to about 1:45 to see the broken AI, physics and some weird glitches.

http://g4tv.com/videos/19156/crysis-review/

 

[zoukka]

Yeah the combat in Crysis was pretty soulless. I prefer a more Japanese approach to shooters.

 

[Combichristoffersen]

Judging from this thread, the inevitable 360 vs PS3 vs PC and Crysis 2 vs UC2 vs GoW3 vs Killzone 3 threads will be the stuff of legends.

I predict Crysis 2 will be the most divisive shooter since Killzone 2. I also predict many gifs.

The gif warz following Crysis 2 might very well be more entertaining than the game itself.

 

[BobsRevenge]

Yeah the combat in Crysis was pretty soulless. I prefer a more Japanese approach to shooters.

I don't even understand. Crysis has the juiciest combat. You can do so much with it. The game really opens itself up to your creativity in such an accessible way. I think its approach to player creativity in the gameplay is unmatched in the genre. That's why it's my favorite FPS. I always have fun with it when I play it, and it's the only game that I can say I've beaten multiple (like, 8 or some shit by now) times and still say that I could load it up right now, start from where I left off, and immediately start having a fucking blast.

That's because of the variety that you guys seemed to have missed. Not sure how so many of you missed it, but it is unfortunate that you guys haven't known the fun I have. Maybe someday you will. I hope so.

 

[iamaustrian]

I wish I would get 100 euros for everytime a dev says that.
I would be millionare by now

 

[Cornbread78]

I'll just have to wait until I get all the details of the game, I neer had a PC powerful enough to play the original, but I heard nothing but raves about it.
The following three things are all that matters to me:

- The game is on PS3 so I can play it
- The game looks great
- The game plays great

What more can we ask for.

 

[Tworak]

it's always entertaining when someone who has clearly not played a/the game try to explain why it's bad/worse than something else other

 

[JaseC]

I wish I would get 100 euros for everytime a dev says that.
I would be millionare by now

 

[DodgyGeezerFella]

I don't even understand. Crysis has the juiciest combat. You can do so much with it. The game really opens itself up to your creativity in such an accessible way. I think its approach to player creativity in the gameplay is unmatched in the genre. That's why it's my favorite FPS. I always have fun with it when I play it, and it's the only game that I can say I've beaten multiple (like, 8 or some shit by now) times and still say that I could load it up right now, start from where I left off, and immediately start having a fucking blast.

That's because of the variety that you guys seemed to have missed. Not sure how so many of you missed it, but it is unfortunate that you guys haven't known the fun I have. Maybe someday you will. I hope so.

I honestly think me and you play it the same way. Ive completed both Crysis and Warhead about 5 times each by now, and each time ive found new routes and new methods to kill the enemy, i absolutely love the combat !

Maybe Crytek didnt do a good enough job of showing the player what can be done :/

 

[daxter01]

Yeah the combat in Crysis was pretty soulless. I prefer a more Japanese approach to shooters.

your joking right?

 

[Rubezh]

I thought the combat in Crysis was fantastic, at least against the Koreans (not so much the aliens). On higher difficulty settings it was mostly unstealthing, shooting a guy, stealthing again, then watching them walk around confused. However, a lot of fun was had on the lower levels too, like grabbing them with strength mode or knocking them over in speed mode.

 

[BobsRevenge]

He is right though. BFBC2 MP looks much much better than Crysis Wars (the MP component) and I can max BFBC2 MP @ 60fps whereas Crysis Wars takes huges dives below 30fps.

It also has to do with the fact that AA is wonky in Crysis and BFBC2 employs CSAAx8 which costs the same as MSAA x4 but it looks much better. I use CSAAx8 AFx18 and everything maxed.

Maybe my cpu is bottlenecking me for BC2, but I get a pretty consistent 30fps at 4xAA when v-syncing it. Crysis Wars runs similarly for me, but with occasional minor dips. Generally, BC2 is more pleasing to look at, though Wars beats it in some ways as well.

Keep in mind I'm guessing. I don't have a FRAPS counter or anything going on.

 

[Salz01]

I was hyped for Crysis 2. Then lost interest when they said it was to take place in New York. Farcry/ Crysis was good out in the Islands, and can totally tell the sandbox gameplay there. But in a New York setting with a bunch of streets that go up and down in a city, it just seems boring to me.

Every shot of a blown up city street just seems boring to me because I know I wont have too much interaction with the environment. And I love my action shooters.

If you put me in a city and had physics like Red Faction were bldgs crumble and blow up form rocket launchers, than it would be more interesting.

 

[DogWelder]

When I think about Crysis, I can't help but think about Adam Sessler's review of it. You can hype the graphics but the rest of the game not so much.

Forward to about 1:45 to see the broken AI, physics and some weird glitches.

http://g4tv.com/videos/19156/crysis-review/

$10 says you haven't played the game.

Edit: I shoulda wagered more. Anyone who defers to a review to make an opinion about a game is full of shit.

 

[wolfmat]

Yeah the combat in Crysis was pretty soulless. I prefer a more Japanese approach to shooters.

The japanese approach is "do the same shit over and over with unnecessarily bad controls and out-of-place cutscenes". In my opinion, Crysis is better than that.

 

[Violater]

Needs some screens released, the bitching over stuff we haven't seen is getting unbearable.

 

[LosDaddie]

I anticipate Crysis2 if for nothing more than all the comparison GIFs.

$10 says you haven't played the game.

Edit: I shoulda wagered more. Anyone who defers to a review to make an opinion about a game is full of shit.

:lol :lol

 

[ghst]

id: "doom snes will hit graphical ceiling".

 

[REMEMBER CITADEL]

I was hyped for Crysis 2. Then lost interest when they said it was to take place in New York. Farcry/ Crysis was good out in the Islands, and can totally tell the sandbox gameplay there. But in a New York setting with a bunch of streets that go up and down in a city, it just seems boring to me.

Every shot of a blown up city street just seems boring to me because I know I wont have too much interaction with the environment.

Central Park.

 

[Firewire]

$10 says you haven't played the game.

Edit: I shoulda wagered more. Anyone who defers to a review to make an opinion about a game is full of shit.

I never said I played it.

Anyone who can't see the complaints stated by Adam Sessler in that video I linked to, with their own two eyes is full of shit.

Enemy AI that doesn't realize where its being shot from and doesn't take appropriate cover is apparently great! Oh, and he shoots the lockers! Lockers are so deadly. And dude a tank that can move its turret when upside down is such an advancement in gaming, and shit the turret can go through walls and even fire at you while upside down!

All I'm saying is that you can hype Crysis for its graphics, that perfectly reasonable. But in allot of ways it suffers from allot of things that plagues allot of other games out there today. No need to get all defensive about it.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

I never said I played it.

Anyone who can't see the complaints stated by Adam Sessler in that video I linked to, with their own two eyes is full of shit.

Enemy AI that doesn't realize where its being shot from and doesn't take appropriate cover is apparently great! Oh, and he shoots the lockers! Lockers are so deadly. And dude a tank that can move its turret when upside down is such an advancement in gaming, and shit the turret can go through walls and even fire at you while upside down!

All I'm saying is that you can hype Crysis for its graphics, that perfectly reasonable. But in allot of ways it suffers from allot of things that plagues allot of other games out there today. No need to get all defensive about it.

Fortunately, Crysis makes up for all those things in spades with its amazing gameplay.


I'm actually wondering why the real defensiveness comes from a certain group that somehow feels threatened by a multiplatform developer making the (easily believable considering who) claim that their game could have the best graphics on the platform.

 

[dark10x]

Played Crysis not too long ago and all I have to say is that I should have saved my money and just looked at the screen shots. The game still looks better than anything I've ever seen, too bad that doesn't matter when the game itself is ironically not fleshed out at all.

Willing to give them a second shot? Probably not considering they're still whistling the same tune with Crysis 2 - "Hey, look, it's pretty!" What about your game? Remember, you're making a game not a slide show.

Different strokes, I guess.

I thought Crysis was one of the best first person shooters of the decade. It goes FAR beyond its impressive visuals.

 

[Tom Penny]

Yeah the combat in Crysis was pretty soulless. I prefer a more Japanese approach to shooters.

Totally agree. Quantum Theory by Tecmo brings such fresh and new ideas to the shooter genre. Hopefully Crytek can compete with Crysis 2.