I'm sure he'll clarify, but it's definitely more objective than those that say Half Life 2 looks better...which you didn't comment on
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
Official Crysis 2 Thread
- Thread starter Drawmonster
- Start date
I'm sure he'll clarify, but it's definitely more objective than those that say Half Life 2 looks better...which you didn't comment on
There's narrow hallway fights in Crysis 2 and fire fights in large expanses with a million things to climb onon and ways to go. It varies
I have to comment on anything anyone says now?I'm sure he'll clarify, but it's definitely more objective than those that say Half Life 2 looks better...which you didn't comment on
That may take some time.
Yeah...I don't know how anyone can say Crysis 2 looks 'objectively' better. Graphics are a pretty subjective thing. I much prefer Half-Life 2's visuals to Gears of War, even though the latter is certainly more technically impressive. Hell, I think STALKER Complete is one of the best looking games around, simply thanks to its tasteful use of lighting.
I think Crysis 2 is not as technically impressive as the first, and not as photorealistic, but in application, it ends up looking better thanks to a better overal IQ, better performance, and less low-points (no massively low-res rock textures, or deforming terrain). This is my subjective opinion. At first, I was put off by the edge AA blur, which I considered to ruin the IQ. But going back to the original, I think the trade off is worth it when it comes to foliage. Foliage really does look quite bad in the original, even with the edge AA (which looks far worse than the edge AA in Crysis 2).
I think Crysis 2 is not as technically impressive as the first, and not as photorealistic, but in application, it ends up looking better thanks to a better overal IQ, better performance, and less low-points (no massively low-res rock textures, or deforming terrain). This is my subjective opinion. At first, I was put off by the edge AA blur, which I considered to ruin the IQ. But going back to the original, I think the trade off is worth it when it comes to foliage. Foliage really does look quite bad in the original, even with the edge AA (which looks far worse than the edge AA in Crysis 2).
defiant007
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2006
- Messages
- 3,497
It is you who should read it again, graphics are but a single voiced complaint with many users decrying all other more significant shortcomings.
The fact that it is now a strictly linear game with little flexibility in terms of strategy renders it very generic, with the only distinguishing feature being a suit with limited capabilities. The "amazing" setting doesn't save it from being just like the other bajillion shooters...move to next area via corridor route, kills all baddies....rinse and repeat.
And what about MP being like CoD ? Did you ever look at the attendance of CoD MP maps ? There are thousands playing those. Did you see thousands playing Crysis 1 MP ? No, you didn't and I didn't either, since I was one of the few playing it, until I gave up. So Crytek had to change something and they changed it to something known to have been a success.
Don't like it, go back to Crysis 1, that was quite different, yet almost no one played it. I'm sure you'll have fun playing with yourself (no pun intended, but it suits the context
You seem to think that you're entitled to something in this regard, but you're not. Crysis 2 wasn't made for you. It was made to please more than just one person and the facts stand that what you don't like, seems to please many (I'm specifically talking about the MP portion).
Nice straw man argument which ignores the reality that CoD is a freak of nature which defies all logic. Simply because it emulates CoD MP, and does a poor job of it, does not mean that it will attract the same player base. Why would that demographic of players bother with a poor imitation when they can keep playing CoD huh? The PC version is even more atrocious with its severe player caps and god awful lobbies. Take my word, the servers will be just as empty as crysis 1 in 4 to 6 weeks time.
Come on phide, don't be like that
You know I was messing with you, given our constant discussion related with the Source Engine!
I won't go into the "no you" argument, so I'll leave it at that.
defiant007 said:
If that's the case (I disagree on it being that generic, but ok), why is Crysis 2 the only game here being hammered with that point ? If there are "bajillion" games like that, I don't see "bajillion" threads criticizing them...
defiant007 said:
How is it straw man ? You think developers know what people really want ? No they don't. They either risk something totally new, that can be successful or fail completely, or follow something that others have done in risk and actually succeeded.
As for CoD, I was fed up with it since MW and even MW was nothing special to me. It was more of the same, but in a modern setting. My favorite CoD game is still CoD 2.
But CoD is far from a freak of nature. It's actually a well played sequence of games, banking on the success of its predecessors. Crysis 2 MP experience is certainly quite subjective too, since I never played MW2 MP nor Black Ops MP. I only played MW MP and didn't really thought it was fun. Crysis 2 MP is better than MW MP by far IMO,
As for the servers, we'll see. Nothing is written in stone and I can't possibly predict the outcome of something that depends on thousands of people. You somehow can it seems...
defiant007
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2006
- Messages
- 3,497
The answer should be self evident and has already been poignantly observed several times in this thread. Those raft of other generic shooters are usually panned, but the reason crysis 2 is being savagely lambasted is because of its pedigree and the fact that it has so markedly deviated from aspects and innovations which distinguished it from other games. You have a fan base which have gravitated around the prequels because of their uniqueness and you are surprised that they are upset when greeted with what is another generic and soulless experience?
Because ignoring the inadequacies of what they have delivered and simply excusing it on the basis that the formula worked well for CoD is not suggestive of success in this instance, particularly given the poor implementation and the fact that in many respects it falls well below the mark of what is expected with any modern PC MP.
Gawd this game is getting shredded in forums. Hardocp eviscerated it. What the hell? I think it's a pretty good game. When did gamers become so intellectual and forget about just playing games? It's a friggin game man! When I read what Hardocp said, it just gave me the impression that with all their triple 580s and gazillion screen gaming, they have lost touch with the Joe Gamer along the way. Seems like they are forgetting just how to have fun. Personally I'm having fun playing this game. I don't spend any time trying to compare the Crysis games. Different games, different times. Dunno what much to say about the makers of Crysis. They evidently have thought out their path and want to make a few bucks like anyone else. Hell, I'm going back to playing the game. I'll leave the complaining to others.
Compare Far Cry for consoles to the PC version. Now imagine if the PC version was just like the console version. Can you say wasted potential?
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
This is a fair point and I think that question is why? PC gamers have been pitching about the demise of PC games for years blaming consoles and greedy game developers. Game developers have been citing low sales and piracy.
I just want to play fun games on my PC and Crysis 2 is that. Is it consolized? Obviously. Did Crytek sell out? Sure. But I can't say that I wouldn't either if I thought I could make more money. This idea of some pure and great form of PC gaming doesn't mean a rats ass if it can generate some impressive amounts of cash. That's just the way the world works.
With 3D Surround I can get a great Crysis 2 experience on my PC that I love and can't be had on consoles. So even with the consoliztion of the game I'm getting what I think is a trans-console experience which in a way the consolization has helped. Crysis 2 runs very well on Extreme in 3D Surround and looks great and it certainly takes more than a $100 video card to get there.
PC gamers looking for 15 hour + campaigns with content that bring multi-thousand dollar PCs to their knees are just going to have a rough time of it. Developers just aren't interested in that right now and it's probably going to get worse before it's gets better until the next generation of consoles comes out.
I'd love to find and support a developer willing to do super-duper PC exclusives again. I don't think lambasting Crysis 2 like it has been is particularly helpful in this regard. If all PC gamers can do is be vulgar and hyper-critical and can't find something to actually SUPPORT then its just not going to go well for PC gamers.
I really hate how this playing out as I HATE consoles on every level. I don't like gaming on a comfy couch. I don't like slow and stuttering gaming. I don't like low-res graphics. I don't like controllers except where they work well like driving games. I hate the experience from top to bottom inside and out in every imaginable way. I would much rather have SOME decent content consolized and it my be that can at least take advantage of PC hardware and performance like 3D Surround. I'd like more but cusing out developers isn't going to give any of us more.
We simply have to find more constructive ways to get what we want or it's just only going to get worse. I don't think that PC gaming is anywhere near dying but yes those high-end GPU killing experiences are going to be few and far between until we can be supportive of SOMETHING with our mouths and our money instead of this constant vitriol. Hell I personally bought 10 copies of Crysis and Warhead combined over the years to be supportive of Crytek and combine the sales were not all that really. Maybe Crytek won't do well in the console market but I won't be a hypocrite about it. They want more cash and I sure as hell know I would too.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
I totally agree with what you're saying. But make no mistake about it, Crysis 2 can very much take advantage of triple 580s. But it takes 3 monitors and in my case 3D to do it but the visuals and performance are overall very impressive. Yeah, its cool to have benchmarks to bring high-end hardware to its knees but it's even better to actually have that high-end hardware provide a great gaming experience.
After editing the settings with an autoexec.cfg file (I don't really know if it actually works) I enjoy the game a lot more. I set shaders and postprocessing at "Very High" and now the bloom or brownish colors seem to be a lot less. I just had a short game and I really enjoyed it more than yesterday.
Hopefully this game will grow on me, I'm definitely looking forward to play more now and that's a good sign. And if there would be a way to actually enable higher AA and supersampling I would really be happy.
Hopefully this game will grow on me, I'm definitely looking forward to play more now and that's a good sign. And if there would be a way to actually enable higher AA and supersampling I would really be happy.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
Overall this game is getting pretty good reviews and I think the SP is great fun. It's just a simple and basic shooter overall, my kind of game.
What it boils down to is:
yes, it wasn't the enormous graphical leap forward envisioned.
yes, the menus suck chode and there was stupid shit that should have been fixed from the start
yes, it blows that the editor wasn't in the release
but...
it's a pretty decent game overall. i went in with shit for expectations and hey, it's pretty fun actually. also imagine that, it looks pretty good... even better that it's probably like 60+ fps most of the time.
sorry your 3 video cards that cost over double what my entire computer did eat it and every game in the universe alive and sorry that the only possible enjoyment you can get from a video game is if it is absolutely system crushing, has an option to run a benchmark loop.
except that's nothing what the game is like in single player. i don't give a fuck about the multiplayer.
yes, it wasn't the enormous graphical leap forward envisioned.
yes, the menus suck chode and there was stupid shit that should have been fixed from the start
yes, it blows that the editor wasn't in the release
but...
it's a pretty decent game overall. i went in with shit for expectations and hey, it's pretty fun actually. also imagine that, it looks pretty good... even better that it's probably like 60+ fps most of the time.
sorry your 3 video cards that cost over double what my entire computer did eat it and every game in the universe alive and sorry that the only possible enjoyment you can get from a video game is if it is absolutely system crushing, has an option to run a benchmark loop.
except that's nothing what the game is like in single player. i don't give a fuck about the multiplayer.
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2005
- Messages
- 4,658
Actually it kind of is IMO. MP is a bonus for me as well.\
Like you said:"It's a decent game."
As in: Not great.
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2005
- Messages
- 4,658
I'm not really a single player FPS kinda guy these days but I'm really enjoying Crysis 2.
What MP game isn't inspired by CoD these days? They've got the iron fist on the MP front and everyone wants some of their pie. It could be a generic shit fest like Homefront but it's not. It's sort of like CoD given that you get upgrades and perks but it's also got the nanosuit and it's own style. It's an original take on CoD's perk system and it's pretty cool to see Crytek doing something different. It actually makes the upgrades believable because of the suit, and not just "hey I've got this cool perk, now I can knife somebody who's 6 feet away". Crysis and FarCry were very similar so why not rip on Crysis and call it "FarCry:Nano Suit Edition"
Crysis 2 looks good, sorry but it's the truth. You're jaded if you think otherwise. Just because it didnt meet these huge expecations some of you built up doesn't mean it's garbage. It CERTAINLY looks better than pretty much anything released in the past two years, and I don't think there's a game out there that looks as good as C2 that runs as fluidly and smooth as it does.
To those saying HL2 looks better, that is not the case, and it's not an opinion. You may appreciate the art style of HL2 more which can give that impression but on a raw graphical fidelity standpoint Crysis and Crysis 2 blow it out of the water.
It's not without it's fair share of issues mainly with the gui, how it's layed out and what the options are but they seem to be listening and I'm sure we'll get some more freedom. At least they left the console in.
To those of you who are playing, how many have experienced crashing, lock-ups or game breaking bugs? I'd say not many...and to those bitching about Melee not working yeah it's a bug but in the time it takes to post and bitch about it, some you multiple times, you could of googled and realized that all you have to do is kick an object to restore the function and not restart the game but I know it's easier to berate the title and Crytek.
The only games that come close to looking as good as Crysis 2 are the original Crysis modded, the stalker series modded and Metro 2033 and NONE of them run as well as C2.
I'm just patiently awaiting the DX11 patch when bitch fest #2 starts up and everyone calls the patch shitty or unoptimized because it actually stresses your rigs. Damned if you do, damned if you dont. Some of you would make pretty good women.
What MP game isn't inspired by CoD these days? They've got the iron fist on the MP front and everyone wants some of their pie. It could be a generic shit fest like Homefront but it's not. It's sort of like CoD given that you get upgrades and perks but it's also got the nanosuit and it's own style. It's an original take on CoD's perk system and it's pretty cool to see Crytek doing something different. It actually makes the upgrades believable because of the suit, and not just "hey I've got this cool perk, now I can knife somebody who's 6 feet away". Crysis and FarCry were very similar so why not rip on Crysis and call it "FarCry:Nano Suit Edition"
Crysis 2 looks good, sorry but it's the truth. You're jaded if you think otherwise. Just because it didnt meet these huge expecations some of you built up doesn't mean it's garbage. It CERTAINLY looks better than pretty much anything released in the past two years, and I don't think there's a game out there that looks as good as C2 that runs as fluidly and smooth as it does.
To those saying HL2 looks better, that is not the case, and it's not an opinion. You may appreciate the art style of HL2 more which can give that impression but on a raw graphical fidelity standpoint Crysis and Crysis 2 blow it out of the water.
It's not without it's fair share of issues mainly with the gui, how it's layed out and what the options are but they seem to be listening and I'm sure we'll get some more freedom. At least they left the console in.
To those of you who are playing, how many have experienced crashing, lock-ups or game breaking bugs? I'd say not many...and to those bitching about Melee not working yeah it's a bug but in the time it takes to post and bitch about it, some you multiple times, you could of googled and realized that all you have to do is kick an object to restore the function and not restart the game but I know it's easier to berate the title and Crytek.
The only games that come close to looking as good as Crysis 2 are the original Crysis modded, the stalker series modded and Metro 2033 and NONE of them run as well as C2.
I'm just patiently awaiting the DX11 patch when bitch fest #2 starts up and everyone calls the patch shitty or unoptimized because it actually stresses your rigs. Damned if you do, damned if you dont. Some of you would make pretty good women.
The original Far Cry was great... though I'm one of the few folks who enjoyed the Trigen levels.
I agree with a lot of your points, but to this I'd say I hope you are VERY patient. They have no incentive to release this patch unless nVidia has bribed them as some articles claim. It will not generate more PC sales and certainly does nothing for the primary development platforms.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
A number of folks here have said that would buy this game when it supports DX11.
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2009
- Messages
- 11,556
Yep. Many people are saying they'll rather have great gameplay and a smooth running game.
The gameplay is a console experience that was scaled back to run on all three platforms.
Texture/object pop-in, closed doors and barricades everywhere(linear), lifeless characters, flaky AI, lack of destructible environments, glitches, energy draining Nanosuit, poor draw distance, multiplayer login/server errors, no quicksave/checkpoints and the list goes on.
Both sides of the argument, graphics and gameplay, are lacking. Some parts of the game was down right laughable. DX11 and the SDK won't save this game.
That's what they said to support their trashing attitude of "Crysis 2 sucks" because it doesn't have DX11 support, but they won't buy it if it does have support for DX11 down the road...
Most of them are here...to whine and follow the flow that others started. Not buying a game because it's "DX9 only" or "doesn't have Dx10/Dx11" is retarded, even more so, when visually speaking neither DX10 or DX11 bring anything meaningful to the table. it's more about efficiency and less API overhead in draw calls, than anything else. Tessellation is there in DX11 of course, but it wouldn't make Crysis 2 look much betteore than it does Metro 2033 look better for example.
It's just a reason to whine. If it had Dx11 and extreme tessellation usage, then it would be "LOL Crysis 2 still runs like shit. Crytek still doesn't know how to optimize their engines"...or even "Crysis 2 DX11 doesn't look any better than Crysis 2 DX9...Crytek FAIL!"
It's pointless really.
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2005
- Messages
- 4,658
I'd say by the end of April we'll have it but you never know. It already exists, it's not like they weren't working on it at all it just probably wasn't ready to launch.
I have a firm belief that should they release the Sandbox as promised we'll see the DX11 executable and the DX11 SDK released at the same time. Crytek loves the modding community.
It probably will generate more sales, I'd say one of the reasons Crysis sold 3 Million copies or whatever it did was simply because people bought it to benchmark. How many review sites, or strict benchers had copies, probably multiples on hand of Crysis for Benchmarking use.
The point this time was to ship a game, not a sorta-game/sdk/benchmark. A game that looks great and runs well on current hardware and does not suffer from memory leaks, crashing and game breaking bugs. That task was completed.
Any piece of software has bugs (especially games - I still can't forget that horrible piece of crap that Dark Messiah of Might Magic was, that crashed loading the main menu...). Crysis 2 is no different. The problem is that with Crysis 2 hate going around, any bug will be a reason to hate even more.
It doesn't have DX11 (as if it mattered): HATE
It doesn't have DX10: HATE
It supports the 360 controller: HATE
I could flood this thread with literally dozens of other games that are out there, some recently launched, that don't have DX11 and do support the 360 controller, yet have no such "love".
The only unfortunate outcome in terms of clear console partiality, is the fact that the PC version doesn't have a menu to select individual graphical settings. Fortunately we can achieve that by changing the cfg settings, but a simple menu isn't asking much and Crytek did fail there. Claiming that they are pro PC more than consoles, is a lie, when they don't even include a simple menu to change individual graphical settings. Apart from that, Crytek is getting way too much flak...
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
I COMPLETELY agree, I was just pointing out that I saw this sentiment expressed a lot around here. But the attitude of most of those folks was so negative about not only the game but Crytek that who in their right mind would believe them.
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2005
- Messages
- 4,658
I totally agree with you, and bugs happen but my point was that there was nothing major in this release. C1 and many other games (looking at you Bethesda) have game breaking bugs. I had to restart my campaign in Crysis 1 because of a mission breaking bug that was eventually patched out. I just feel everyone's version of the past is all green, they seem to forget about some of the atrocious launches. Just like when MW2 came out, everyone fucking bitched, alot of it more deserved than what Cryteks getting but they also forgot that CoD4's snipers didn't work till the 3rd patch and there were a bunch of other little issues as well.
It's like these people think games came out with no problems, and that there wasn't any bitching at the time of release and there always is. That's what patching is for and EVERY piece of software on the Planet has had post release patches.
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2005
- Messages
- 4,658
QFT. I dont know about you but I play games for fun and I certainly don't let things like what rendering API is used effect my opinion of a game out of the gate. I could fire up UT99 in software mode and have more fun then I do in a lot of recent games.
I hope you're right, but I have doubts about the new Crytek. If it's a choice between getting DX11 and the SDK ready, or pumping out some $$$ DLC, I think I can guess where the priority will lie.
People said much the same about Crysis 1. Float32 was going to swoop in and save the day because [random coder] had more technical win than Crytek. (Funny how the Stalker games never get dinged for needing it.)
Now, instead of claims like Online deer hunting game looks like Crysis (and Far Cry looks like Crysis, and CoD4 looks better, and Far Cry 2 is a Crysis killer) we get comparisons to Half Life 2.
In contrast, Valve is constantly praised for creating games that run well on a broad range of systems. Crytek is held to a higher standard and perhaps rightly so, especially given: 1) Crysis 1, and 2) verbal diarrhea spewed out by Yeril et al.
Forum FUD for any Crysis game approaches that of Windows Vista, but that's not to say there aren't legitimate criticisms of the game. Criticisms I'd call illegitimate are the ones from people wanting benchmark games--did you seriously expect a multiplatform game that can run on 5-year old consoles would stress your high end PC?
I guess we'll see how this one plays out. Crytek better damn well deliver on their DX11/SDK promises.
From what I've been able to glean about the game, my next upgrade is going the 3D route.
This horse has been so beaten to death, I can't even tell it's a horse anymore. /shrug
That said, this games fun. Ya it's fun and it looks good and it runs great and feels smooth while doing it. I would have liked it to be more open world sand box ish like everyone else but it's definetly fun as it is. It's not the maassive graphical leap we would have hoped for but that's life. Again it still looks dam good nothing bad to say really. What else out or coming out anytime soon looks better? Please tell me. Ya metro looks ok, good looking game I guess if you like russian developed games (I believe the developer is russian) in the dark and in corridors sure. The mp is very much cod/halo no doubt but that's not necessarily a bad thing. They tried to mix up the cod/battlefield thing for mp twice now and failed at it. Sorry all 81 people that still play crysis wars don't count, nope. So they went with a more sure fire way to get people hooked with their own twist and you know what? It works pretty well. I've been having fun with it. Yup having fun. Not crying and pissing/moaning about the shortcomings. Ya it has it's shortcommings what game doesnt? Why don't you guys complaining about what a fail this game is go and get some investors and make your own fuckin game. I'll support you and so will alot of us here. What's that, too hard? Ya it is hard and requires alot of risk and time and effort. Very true. So until then cut crytek some slack and either enjoy what they've made or don't buy it and move along.....this horse is deader than a door nail....Nothing left to see here.
That said, this games fun. Ya it's fun and it looks good and it runs great and feels smooth while doing it. I would have liked it to be more open world sand box ish like everyone else but it's definetly fun as it is. It's not the maassive graphical leap we would have hoped for but that's life. Again it still looks dam good nothing bad to say really. What else out or coming out anytime soon looks better? Please tell me. Ya metro looks ok, good looking game I guess if you like russian developed games (I believe the developer is russian) in the dark and in corridors sure. The mp is very much cod/halo no doubt but that's not necessarily a bad thing. They tried to mix up the cod/battlefield thing for mp twice now and failed at it. Sorry all 81 people that still play crysis wars don't count, nope. So they went with a more sure fire way to get people hooked with their own twist and you know what? It works pretty well. I've been having fun with it. Yup having fun. Not crying and pissing/moaning about the shortcomings. Ya it has it's shortcommings what game doesnt? Why don't you guys complaining about what a fail this game is go and get some investors and make your own fuckin game. I'll support you and so will alot of us here. What's that, too hard? Ya it is hard and requires alot of risk and time and effort. Very true. So until then cut crytek some slack and either enjoy what they've made or don't buy it and move along.....this horse is deader than a door nail....Nothing left to see here.
Last edited:
Crysis 2 Xbox 360 vs PC comparison...
http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/2011/03/25/crysis-2-xbox-360-vs-pc-comparison/1
night and day difference...at least PC gamers definitely got the best version of the game
http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/2011/03/25/crysis-2-xbox-360-vs-pc-comparison/1
night and day difference...at least PC gamers definitely got the best version of the game
The HL2 comparisons are indeed ridiculous. Though I'd say Portal 2 looks to pull off some pretty sweet graphics with that aging Source engine.Now, instead of claims like Online deer hunting game looks like Crysis (and Far Cry looks like Crysis, and CoD4 looks better, and Far Cry 2 is a Crysis killer) we get comparisons to Half Life 2.
In contrast, Valve is constantly praised for creating games that run well on a broad range of systems. Crytek is held to a higher standard and perhaps rightly so, especially given: 1) Crysis 1, and 2) verbal diarrhea spewed out by Yeril et al.
But anyway, the reason Valve doesn't get crap over graphics is twofold. They never try and sell their games on graphics. You'll never hear Gabe Newell boasting about Source engine being the nicest looking kid on the block. Secondly, they put so much attention into the storytelling (whether you like the actual story or not), and characters that it's easy to ignore the graphics not being cutting edge. Valve plays a different game than Crytek.
Now bitching about delays on the other hand, Valve gets and deserves plenty of that. What the hell is going on with Episode 3!
This game is pretty mediocre.
It doesn't have dx11, but they did a good job with dx9. The artwork, level design, play mechanics are pretty good.
Where it falls flat is in feel. There is no suspense or intrigue to the game - the plot develops in a predictable and repetitive manner.. The music is pathetic and adds nothing to the mood or ambience. The aliens are introduced far too matter-of-factly and are just ordinary bad guys, albeit jumping around and whatnot. While Crysis 1 took forever to get started, it happened gradually enough that everything could develop the way it ought to for suspense and dramatic unfolding of the plot. And the novelty of basing it in a recognizable city wore off with other games already having done it.
This is the kind of game I'd be willing to pay $9 for on the bargain shelf at Gamestop, not $60. More importantly, it is far, FAR below expectation as a sequel to Crysis.
It doesn't have dx11, but they did a good job with dx9. The artwork, level design, play mechanics are pretty good.
Where it falls flat is in feel. There is no suspense or intrigue to the game - the plot develops in a predictable and repetitive manner.. The music is pathetic and adds nothing to the mood or ambience. The aliens are introduced far too matter-of-factly and are just ordinary bad guys, albeit jumping around and whatnot. While Crysis 1 took forever to get started, it happened gradually enough that everything could develop the way it ought to for suspense and dramatic unfolding of the plot. And the novelty of basing it in a recognizable city wore off with other games already having done it.
This is the kind of game I'd be willing to pay $9 for on the bargain shelf at Gamestop, not $60. More importantly, it is far, FAR below expectation as a sequel to Crysis.
Now this is the type of review that I needed. Decent shooter worth a $10 Steam purchase, just don't expect anything stellar. Thank you! (I'm being sincere.)
The HL2 comparisons are indeed ridiculous. Though I'd say Portal 2 looks to pull off some pretty sweet graphics with that aging Source engine.
But anyway, the reason Valve doesn't get crap over graphics is twofold. They never try and sell their games on graphics. You'll never hear Gabe Newell boasting about Source engine being the nicest looking kid on the block. Secondly, they put so much attention into the storytelling (whether you like the actual story or not), and characters that it's easy to ignore the graphics not being cutting edge. Valve plays a different game than Crytek.
Now bitching about delays on the other hand, Valve gets and deserves plenty of that. What the hell is going on with Episode 3!
I agree. Crytek implementing some basic form of PR filtering would do wonders for their rep.
Not that Valve hasn't been called on some shenanigans either, specifically the 24-bit ATI optimization for Half Life 2--That wasn't entirely Valve's fault and nVidia scrambled to release a new set of drivers (which still didn't perform up to ATI's offering at the time. If memory serves, it wasn't long after than when nVidia pounded ATI with 6xxx hard releases.)