As far as gameplay: Crysis or cod4

Crysis!

The enemies are challenging for a change, and youre not a one-man army. Your armor and health get depleted fairly quickly, so you need to think before you attack....look for cover, sneak around, shoot from far then run back into jungle. Crysis requires actual tactics. Then there is the suit, which is freaking awesome both for singleplayer and multiplayer.

CoD4 is great, but its going to be identical to CoD2 in terms of gameplay.

I think they will both kick ***. COD4 runs flawlessly on high 1680*1050 but the crysis demo was optimizing at medium :( I have SLI 8800 GTS. COD4 shooting is better I think, but as far as the game itself.... Crysis blows it away. Comparing Demos of course..... I am sure Crysis will put COD4 to its knees when both full games are out.daniel52587

crysis...Ive been replaying the demo several times now...and every time its an entirelly different experience...nothing ever goes the same way twice...with COD4...well its great the first time...but has bassiclly no replay value at all....

but I think COD4's multiplayer will be better.

COD:4 is braindead. Crysis AI is buggy but has potential.

WOOT WOOT WOOT SOB (that's me being let down by buggy Crysis AI - I thought they could ****ing see)

Crysis, hands down. The graphics and environment are so much more involving than CoD4's, like when you pick up ammo, you physically pick up the weapon or case. It doesn't just disappear. Or when bullets are riddling plants and they twitch back and forth, and trees topple under heavy machine gun fire. CoD's scripted events just don't have the same zing to them as something you create yourself.

They've both been done before and not original, both have mediocre multiplayers aswel (not to my taste) but Crysis is a must for me just because of the CryEngine 2, the faces are soo realistic....

crysis hands down, the environment the details, the suit, the ability to jump ontop of a house and knock the roof in right onto an enemy crushing him! and it runs and looks great on my computer - P4 2.4ghz, 6800 ultra, 1.25gb ram, vista 32bit, 169.01 nvidia drivers, medium settings with physics and water quality on high.

CoD4 is the same old call of duty just set in a new timeframe

They've both been done before and not original, both have mediocre multiplayers aswel (not to my taste) but Crysis is a must for me just because of the CryEngine 2, the faces are soo realistic....

Grantelicious

I am still counting ways in which you can kill enemies in Crysis....there are just so many.....

in COD4...well....Im up to 1.

Crysis for me. Crytek had done an astounding job on pushing the FPS genre to the limits because of the many different ways to execute attacks and the awesome destruction in the enviornment.

CoD4 was a extreme dissapointment for me. It was just CoD2 with a modern theme slapped on to it and it showed no real changes to gameplay that seperates itself from the other CoD games. If you played the first CoD, then you've played them all.

Crysis is innovative and unique and obviously pushing the boundries with visual technology and its doing an amazing job at it as both the demo and beta did show us how good a job Crytek have been doing. Aswell as this the enviroment and AI are very interactive as heavy gun fire cuts small trees down or makes branches wobble while the AI seem to utilise their terrain to their advantage. I found myself getting flanked by the enemy a few times forcing me to move around and utilise my suits powers (the nanosuit is a big plus for Crysis) to help me survive. Aswell as this the fact you have a lot of customisation options for weapons in Crysis also makes it more interesting as you can change your weapons according to your situation which is a good thing.

However Crysis has a few large drawbacks which happen to be poor optimisation and very high system requirements, which while good does limit the market for the game. The problem with having such high system requirements is that fewer people will have PC's that meet them and considering the games poor optimisation it also means people who do meet these requirements are still suffering performance issues. And at this time of year when people are spending small fortunes on presents anyway i doubt they will be too keen spending more on upgrading their PC to play just the one game when they can play numerous ones also released at this time of year without the need to upgrade.

CoD4 however has great visuals that may not be as good as what Crysis has to offer but their great none the less and aren't disappointing. It does have a "Deja Vu" feeling to it for those who have played previous games in the series but thats not such a bad thing as CoD2 was a good game, and CoD4 has continued using a winning forumla. The AI in the game is pretty damn good as on a few occasions i found my grenade chucked back directly at me or that the enemy had run behind cover as i pointed an RPG at them. However enemy encounters in CoD4 seem rather linear as you fight of waves for a set time then move onto the next scripted event which means you haven't got anywhere near as much free roaming as Crysis has.

Personally i think CoD4 will be the better game as its gameplay formula has been done before and been a success not to mention the game itself runs far better than Crysis does and i have yet to find any performance issues with CoD4. While i like Crysis and i definately will be buying it i don't think i will be buying it or playing it anytime soon, not until i hear its optimised more or i've upgrade my PC.

Crysis is junk until its optimized.stupiddk

Ignorance such as this is a shame. I guess people want PC games to look like Half-Life 2 forever.

crysis, more variety to the gameplay. You can do things how you want to, and it's not as linear. Both i think will have great stories (since cod is a story now).

Multiplayer though, I think cod4 will be much better and will be compelling to play.

I have yet to play the Crysis demo but unless the MP CoD4 is amazing and the actual SP game is much much better I will not be picking it up. This demo just felt boring, the guns felt too accurate in iron sights and not accurate enough on recticle. The cool parts like nightvision turned out to be annoying, the scripted momments are not that good. It still has that feeling that you are fighting some sort of horde. The modern setting feels wasted, where as before the diffrence between a rifle, an smg and a HMG made gameplay/positioning unique with the fully automatic/accurate modern weapons they just feel bland. What the enemy soldier is holding does not matter, unless its an rpg.

The mission objectives and the set pieces are uninspired, attack this, blow up the AAA, go to this yellow marker, flank the enemy positions through the side houses. The only interesting piece of geography in the entire demo was the bus with the MG's near then end and the AI on my playthrough's made no use of it. The rest of the levels seems to be built with the philosophy of just having a bunch of random crap thrown around to be made use as cover. There is nothing as interesting as the chruch/gaveyard in the CoD demo.

It is also extremely linear, now there is nothing wrong with that but enemies, even when you are flanking seem to come only from the front that with the uber accurate guns gives it a turkey shoot feel. Oh and they also come in waves of three (on offense), which is diffrent from the past CoD games and strange as there are times with way more enemies on screen. The only thing that could have saved it was defending the Abrams, but then the tank ends up being useless. Compared to the experience and fun the original two CoD demo's gave me this blows. Even though CoD was linear I always felt that there were different ways to approach each situation that were fun to experiment with and each rewarding in its own way.

The production values that made the series great are still there but cranking up the background noise just does not make a game more intense. Hearing the no pulse beep in Half-Life 2 each time you kill a Civil Defense trooper was a better use of sound than loud yells and explositions that we have all heard before. Finally there will also be no Soviet/Russian campaing in CoD4, the British campaign in the past games always felt the leas interesting (I liked the glider conpet though) and it seems the game will still have the shooting gallery mission that I never found fun. There will also be retarded scripted stealth sequences, which is confusing since one of the fun things about stealth games is figuring out how to sneak around something, not being babysat by your officer.

For the MP I have yet to try it buy I am not sold on the concept of character modifications, I would find it annoying being killed if I have not picked the correct atribute to counter what the opponent has chosen. I also don't care for the levelling concept in an FPS that rewards play time in the way of the MMO by giving the player diffrent weapons than the stock ones.

For me cod4 blows it away .... but this is just from the experience of the demos so far. .... and i was thinking that crysis would have been better ...... what do you guys think .... I am for sure buying cod4 but i dont know about crysis it didnt impress me that muchArson06

[QUOTE="Arson06"]For me cod4 blows it away .... but this is just from the experience of the demos so far. .... and i was thinking that crysis would have been better ...... what do you guys think .... I am for sure buying cod4 but i dont know about crysis it didnt impress me that muchbeckoflight

Stop playing easy and put it on Delta and OMG the AI is smart again!

CoD4 will be around alot longer than crysis. I choose CoD4 great SP and Spectacular MP.A1B2C3CAL

Have they said how long it would be? Cause FarCry was one of the longest FPS i've ever played and i'd expect it to be the same length + i've always blasted through COD games in like 2/3 hours.

[QUOTE="A1B2C3CAL"]CoD4 will be around alot longer than crysis. I choose CoD4 great SP and Spectacular MP.Grantelicious

Have they said how long it would be? Cause FarCry was one of the longest FPS i've ever played and i'd expect it to be the same length + i've always blasted through COD games in like 2/3 hours.

Crysis won't be as long as Far Cry I've heard :( *sob*

CoD 4 will be really short though.

And to whoever said Crysis is unoptimized: lol

[QUOTE="Grantelicious"]

[QUOTE="A1B2C3CAL"]CoD4 will be around alot longer than crysis. I choose CoD4 great SP and Spectacular MP.kyrieee

Have they said how long it would be? Cause FarCry was one of the longest FPS i've ever played and i'd expect it to be the same length + i've always blasted through COD games in like 2/3 hours.

Crysis won't be as long as Far Cry I've heard :( *sob*

CoD 4 will be really short though.

And to whoever said Crysis is unoptimized: lol

I'm worried Crysis will just be like a tech demo for the engine to make people want to mod on it and buy their engine. Cause i don't like the multiplayer i can't justifying buying a really short game. It's like i bought Quake 4 and completed it in about 3 hours and never touched it again, coulda just downlaoded it for free.

COD4 vs. Crysis?

That's gotta go to Crysis easily! :)

The demo has me hooked, and I've been playing it many, many times over more than I did with the COD4 demo, although there's no question I want both games. I totally understand the concerns people have mentioned with the optimization though.

cod 4 was so formulaic, so restrictive, so dependent on making a lot of stuff happen around you to make the game interesting. Crysis doesn't rely on any of that to creat an awesome experience. They give you a large level, a few objectives and let you loose. Its amazing.

Playing the Crysis demo reminded me of Farcry with a special Bodysuit. Everything I did felt like I was playing Farcry also. There are new alien enemies later on... Sure... But Farcry did have Mutated Stuff that can be replaced with aliens. Looking at how Farcry's plot was quirky and silly... And how Crysis started its story... I don't think I'm going to expect a compelling story in here either.

The game was running on the lowest setting so I can comment on the graphics... But I'm not picking this game up unless my rig can play it on the high setting. On low the jungle just doesn't have the feel of farcry. I did try it on High... which made the game look incredible... of course it wasn't playable...

Crysis is for people with a higher spec rig. If you don't have one I think its missing the point of the game.

As for COD4. I've never played a COD game so I guess I'm in luck! The demo was fun to play through. I played the demo on all difficulty settings besides the easiest one, and I think normal is too easy, its like their trying to let casual FPSers to play the game. But on higher difficulties the game played out much better.

Somebody mentioned the bus with the mounted gun in it. YES. The A.I. does use it. I confirmed the A.I. using it twice. (Just wanted to mention it)

I was able to play the game on medium settings (around there) and the game looks great. Did take a lot of tweaking the settings however.

I'm planning on getting Hellgate: London at the moment though. All my PC game purchases this year were FPSs and I need a break from them.

CRYSIS OF COURSE!

COD 4 is dumbed down for consoles,everything is scripted,no physics,way too linear,and way too easy.I played it on hardest difficulty and it is way too easy,and in the part with nightvisionI almost lost my eyes.

I will also mention that game(COD 4)is NOT REALISTIC,i once counted enemies in COD 4 in bridge part,as soon as i would kill 4 soldiers,they would be replaced with new 4 soldiers.I stayed there for a while just to test how many soldiers will come,and there are like 200 soldiers just on one bridge and they are just coming.I got bored but if i stayed a little longer i would count up 2 500 soldiers.THATS JUST ON ONE BRIDGE!!! Same thing is with buildings etc.

I choose UT3 for MP, and COD4 for SP. Crysis is junk until its optimized.stupiddk

i like to cod 4 as crysis. but crysis language options more than cod 4 . example i living in turkey. crysis language options turkish. good news for me... cod 4 gameplay much better crysis and more action... and real world, real story.

SOMEONE DELETED MY POST OR I CANT SEE IT?

ANYWAY i will tell again.

CRYSIS is bether for sure.

COD 4 is way too:

-Linear

-Unrealistic

-Scripted

-They force u to see something,they force u to experience something

-It is dumbed down version,mybe because to make it easier for console players

-no physics or verry little

-IN PART WITH NIGHT VISION I ALMOST DAMAGED MY EYES!

-verry easy game,on hardest difficulty setting its easy

-i do not see why they put map of area when u cannot miss objective point.For example it is like going through long hallway and on the end is exit.Ok i know there is exist,i dont need map for that.I will just go straight anyway

Cryis and COD 4 (as someone before said) cannot be even in same sentence!

COD 4 is just recycling old ideas with bether graphics and different models.

Cryiss takes FPS to next level.

Even if u had 2 trees that look identical.Same number of leefs,same textures,same everything.The one that is destructable,with realistic physics and everything.That one wins.

I've played the CoD4 demo a dozen times, and I've spent about two hours with Crysis this morning.

I'll start by saying they're both shaping up to be great games.

Call of Duty 4 is a fast paced and intense experience, each firefight is simply wonderful; but will the game feel any different than CoD2? I certainly didn't get that impression from the demo - while there's supposedly more of a story to carry it forward this time, which is certainly welcome, this is Call of Duty 2-2.

And that's certainly no bad thing, CoD2 is one of the best FPS games of its time, but playing a game that feels exactly the same - i find it hard to get overly excited about playing an EA-style same-game-new-name sequel - I'm looking forward to the game, I think it's gonna be great, but it just doesn't strike me as carrying the wow factor of CoD2, or of really delivering that I'm playing something very special here experience. Cod4 may have a great online game, too, but frankly I don't care: I will still be playing TF2 this time next year.

Crysis, I've spent the last year or two saying it would be somewhat mediocre besides the visuals - after Farcry, which I outright did not like at all. But Crysis really feels like a more intelligent, more refined experience to me. It's still a linear game posing as a non-linear game, at least insofar as level design is concerned - but the variety of playstyles the nanosuit offers is really quite refreshing - and in that sense, it really does surpass FarCry's wannabe-sandbox status. I've not given the demo a serious play yet, i just dabbled on medium as a tutorial then did a quick run through on hard.

I simply think it plays great - the gunplay itself isn't as good as CoD4 - or most other of the big name shooters, for that matter... by gunplay, thouh, I mean the actual act of shooting. The combat as a whole is magnificent - I played it mostly as a stealther, occasionally playing with speed and strength to some really fun effect. Every enemy encounter was fun, whether I engaged them in combat, went for a stealth kill or just avoided them entirely; Crysis is everything I wanted Farcry to be - a game that can be played as a run n gun shooter, but also facilitates stealth properly. Crysis also has much better voice work,FarCry felt like an homage to Duke Nukem to me, and the enemy AI's voice work reminded me of evil henchmen in cartoons. Plus the game was full of homosexual double entendre, anyone ever notice that?

On the whole, I think it's a very impressive demo - I had it on pre-order before I played it and I still have it on pre-order now; I think it deserves to be owned. My only concern is that the giant metal aliens will spoil the game in the same way the mutants did Farcry, because really all I want from my cry games, is a jungle stealther.

If I had to pick one game, I'd go with Crysis - it seems to deliver a more diverse, more original and simply more satisfying experience - that's not to say I don't think CoD4 is also great... I will be buying both, but I think Crysis takes with the sheer diversity of playstyles. Plus it's worth noting that both games are really recycled versions of their predecessors, yet Crysis manages to go above and beyond Farcry in exactly the way a sequel should, while CoD4 does notappear to based on the demo in which no story elements are revealed- it merely repackages the original experience, but to what extent really remains to be seen.

Both great games, but Crysis takes it for me.

i love cod 4 and crysis, but in crysis i actually found myself tactically taking advantage of my environment, which is.... unlimited essentially, and using it. it was a great next-gen-game feeling. while cod4 is realistic in its portrayal of skirmishes and battles with enemies in a war-torn environment, it still feels so linear (go to this place THIS way, shoot these guys in THIS place because it has the only best cover in the designated "arena"... etc.). games should take example of what crytek is doing with it's gem.

btw, is anyone else getting sick of the ut3 engine being used everywhere? i am.