Crysis 2 Shown At E3 2010

I have real trouble caring. I remember when Far Cry came out. I was amazing be the graphics and wanted it badly. I then found out that despite my computer being pretty good, it couldn't handle the good graphics. So I kinda set it aside. Played it later and found it started off as a good, semi-sneaky shooter right up until it became a bad monster game.

So then here comes Crysis. Looks great, my roommate gets it. However despite having a top of the line system, he can't run it at "screen shot" detail. Looks good, but not all that good given how hard it hits the system. Seems like a fairly good, semi-sneaky shooter right up until it became a bad monster game.

Wait a sec... Seen that before.

So I really am not that interested. I'm more interested in games that look good while still running great, and games that are a lot of fun. Crytek seems to just make games that look amazing by requiring hardware that doesn't exist when they release it, and releasing the same kind of game over and over.
 
The graphic is a huge NONO, and motion blur gone completely?

and what is that gay running style, the old one is way much better.

overall, the video is horrible compare to original Crysis.

probably because the limitation of 360 hardware, hopefully the will bring back at least what Crysis have, not some shitty console style..
 
Need to see computer version to be fully sure. Still hopeful as I really enjoyed Crysis. Stupid consoles taking the game out of the jungle.
 
It's not the graphics that makes the gameplay, it's the content of the game that matters more. Anyone here remember the Zork adventure games? No graphics, but the content made it what it was. Just saying.
 
crysis was a game that could have been so much more, if they just had more of an imagination.

armor was useless, strength was only there when i had to jump over ledges, speed was just to run past areas i cleared, cloak was way overpowered (what you can't see that obvious distortion infront of you?)

they totally missed what they could have done with the suit. the suit should have been made so that you can have a power up at all times. if they didn't like people cloaked 90% of the game, then just make it so that cloak doesnt hide so well. the game would have been way more fun if it made more use of the powers. would have been awesome to be able to speed dashing into a camp, strength throw a guy, then dash to the next one and next one and next one.
 
It really looks like a completely different game, however I'll probably end up buying it.
 
" Crysis 2 delivers a new kind of sandbox ex..." *Tab closed*

Fuck you crytek I'm done.
 
I enjoyed Farcry Pc it is my favorite game tied with hl2. I enjoyed crysis and warhead and I am looking forward to playing this on my 360. Hopefully DICE has given them some pointers in the MP department
 
The new Crysis 2 looks worse then Crysis 1. What's this sandboxing crap? Isn't that another way of saying linear game? Aren't linear FPS games for machines with limiting ram, AKA XBox 360 and PS3?
 
linear is call of duty, sandbox is basically what farcry 2 was, crysis is in between with being able to "roam" off the beaten path so to speak. Since Farcry was as close to sandbox as FPS were at the time in 2004 Crytek has held on to that tagline and they over use it if you ask me..
 
I have my reservations about this game. Crysis was an amazing tech demo with mediocre gameplay. It allowed a couple neat gameplay advantages when fighting the north koreans, but when the aliens came the game became fucking idiotic and the alien AI was worse than 10 year old games.

The main thing I am most concerned about is if they will bring back the ridiculous install limit DRM that they had with Crysis:Warhead. If they pull that shit, it won't matter if this is the best damn game ever created, Crytek will have fucked themselves again and might as well exit the PC game market altogether.
 
Crysis was great on the highest difficulty, you actually had to use tactics or you WOULD die. Make a distraction, go stealth, they go looking for you where you last were... LITTLE DO THEY KNOW YOU SNUCK UP BEHIND THEM WITH A FUCKING DRILL PRESS. You could get away with just walking through 5 million bullets on the earlier difficulty but that's not fun. If you didn't play on delta difficulty you played it wrong.


Graphics / framerate are cleaning up with each demo they show. NY will be a nice change I think. They are doing a good job with making it seem like something is going on in the city. Explosions, shit crashing, people calling for help.

The suits problems from the first game are getting rectified.

I dont know why people like to ride Crytek's nuts so much.
 
I just hope the PC looks better, way better.

The 360 version looks like simmering ass.:eek:

Need new weapons, you got a cadillac suit and yugo weapons.
 
Is it possible to die in that game? The guy playing was being hit nonstop and never died lol
 
Sycraft said:
I have real trouble caring. I remember when Far Cry came out. I was amazing be the graphics and wanted it badly. I then found out that despite my computer being pretty good, it couldn't handle the good graphics. So I kinda set it aside. Played it later and found it started off as a good, semi-sneaky shooter right up until it became a bad monster game.

So then here comes Crysis. Looks great, my roommate gets it. However despite having a top of the line system, he can't run it at "screen shot" detail. Looks good, but not all that good given how hard it hits the system. Seems like a fairly good, semi-sneaky shooter right up until it became a bad monster game.

Wait a sec... Seen that before.

So I really am not that interested. I'm more interested in games that look good while still running great, and games that are a lot of fun. Crytek seems to just make games that look amazing by requiring hardware that doesn't exist when they release it, and releasing the same kind of game over and over.
Click to expand...

eth3ton said:
Post #4 completely sums it up....
Click to expand...

piscian18 said:
" Crysis 2 delivers a new kind of sandbox ex..." *Tab closed*

Fuck you crytek I'm done.
Click to expand...

Now if everyone who said things like this means it, we'll have far, far less crybabies on the forums.
 
Sycraft said:
I have real trouble caring. I remember when Far Cry came out. I was amazing be the graphics and wanted it badly. I then found out that despite my computer being pretty good, it couldn't handle the good graphics. So I kinda set it aside. Played it later and found it started off as a good, semi-sneaky shooter right up until it became a bad monster game.

So then here comes Crysis. Looks great, my roommate gets it. However despite having a top of the line system, he can't run it at "screen shot" detail. Looks good, but not all that good given how hard it hits the system. Seems like a fairly good, semi-sneaky shooter right up until it became a bad monster game.

Wait a sec... Seen that before.

So I really am not that interested. I'm more interested in games that look good while still running great, and games that are a lot of fun. Crytek seems to just make games that look amazing by requiring hardware that doesn't exist when they release it, and releasing the same kind of game over and over.
Click to expand...

When Crysis was release, even at High setting it was way better than every other title that was in the market out there. And you can't have such image quality out of nothing, they comes with a huge amount of graphics processing requirement to render all the effects. The graphics quality it offers simply exceed what the hardware at that time can offer.

Why do people always feel all games must be able to run at maximum settings on their so called high end system. :confused: Just because the system at that time is unable to provide the required processing capabilities, it doesn't mean all game developers must limit their engine capabilities when it can do more

Sure, Crytek can simply limit its quality at High, and call it Ultra High and less people would bitch about it. But whats the point when CryEngine 2 was capable of so much more. Don't know about you but there's nothing to be glad about running Bioshock 2 on max setting when its quality is crap.
 
lol seriously? this is what we have been waiting for? that was a horrible demo and i'm not sure why crytek showed it because it looked like every other game we've seen before and i don't give 2 shits about this game.
 
I dont know, I think it looks pretty cool. A few shader effects looked a bit cheesy (glass shattering, flames) but it looked pretty damn good for a console title IMO.

I am glad they're bringing it out of the jungle too, after Crysis and Warhead, the scenery got a little old.

hl3395, you hit the nail on the head about the suit. It never actually occurred to me what I didn't like the suit in the first game (it always felt 'off'), but you're right. Half of the functions I never used (except when ya had to) and the stupid power meter prevented you from really playing the game the way that you wanted to. I hope they revamp it for this game.

niconx said:
God mode on a console? You can do that?
Click to expand...

:confused: why wouldn't you be able to? They're, more than likely, playing it on a developers console
 
Looks pretty good... I'll hold my judgement until I can feel the controls, myself.

3D on all three platforms? That's awesome and innovative.
 
i guess im the only one who thinks it looks like a new bad ass version of gears of war......i like it....
 
Why do people always feel all games must be able to run at maximum settings on their so called high end system. Just because the system at that time is unable to provide the required processing capabilities, it doesn't mean all game developers must limit their engine capabilities when it can do more
Click to expand...

You seem to forget the game couldn't do steady 60fps with 8800 ultras in 3 way and a 4ghz core 2 quad at 1920x1200. Its bullshit to not blame them for that, you didn't get any more high end at that time.

I didn't cry about it and just turned it down because I didn't have gear like that, but I would have been unhappy had I.

Oh and I agree with the game being a lot of fun until the alien suckfest began. I would have been very happy to fight Koreans the whole time. I guess they just ran out of ideas.
 
i love how the intro guy sits there talking about it being the greatest game on PC and the friggin demo is done on a 360.. waste of the 3 minutes i sat there waiting to see the demo thinking it was going to be the pc version..
 
shoot the robot.
shoot the alien.

wow. not very exciting. esp after watching all the other E3 demos.

here's a good example of how gameplay needs to complement the graphics.

crytek is good at making shit pretty.
But based on the videos, it seems they cheapened out during the planning phase-

it almost seems like they hired 4th graders to write the story...... in the span of 24 hours:
[little kid]: *raises hand* oo! oo! I know, I know ! ..... let's put aliens in NYC, and making big explosions.

[crytek ceo]: right on! how come I didn't think of that. great idea, kid. here's a gold star sticker.


i hope more exciting videos come out.
 
Oh great, now we'll hear "will it play Crysis 2?" when new computers and hardware are announced. :-P
 
My Give-a-Shit-o-Meter didn't even flicker..
pretty pictures with dull repetitive game play and story is just so damned predictable from these guys now. They should just focus on engine development and farm out the actual game production to somebody else.
 
I'll never understand why anybody would ever play an fps on a console. That guy's aim and attempt at fluid control was hideous.

No opinion on the game yet, hoping it turns out well. I'll probably buy it.
 
Marlfox said:
I'll never understand why anybody would ever play an fps on a console. That guy's aim and attempt at fluid control was hideous..
Click to expand...

Ugh, it pained me to watch it. I kept saying JUST SHOOT THE F'N THING! And trying to use what looked like a shotgun (even if it is futuristic) at range just had me shaking my head.
 
no edit button = multiple consecutive posts

bacon said:
You seem to forget the game couldn't do steady 60fps with 8800 ultras in 3 way and a 4ghz core 2 quad at 1920x1200. Its bullshit to not blame them for that, you didn't get any more high end at that time.

I didn't cry about it and just turned it down because I didn't have gear like that, but I would have been unhappy had I.

Oh and I agree with the game being a lot of fun until the alien suckfest began. I would have been very happy to fight Koreans the whole time. I guess they just ran out of ideas.
Click to expand...

Crysis on MEDIUM looked just as good as any game when it came out. Theres your standard. Crysis on HIGH still better than almost any game at the time. Like said earlier, dont blame them for making a game that scaled far into the future. Played on a the highest settings your computer can handle netted you better graphics than other games set on their highest levels your computer could handle.

Although I'd agree it doesnt make sense for them to do this. Not many people are going BACK to buy Crysis now that hardware has finally come around to supporting it on its highest setting.
 
I like most FPS games so I already bought this one. Was only $30 shipped from EA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top