This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="gameguy6700"][QUOTE="Falconoffury"]It's exactly like playing COD with a nanosuit. If you've played MW, MW2, WAW, or Blops then you've played Crysis 2 multiplayer. Hell, even the single player copies MW2 pretty heavily in a few ways. No, the game is not worth a buy. If you want it just for the multiplayer then go back to playing COD and save yourself $60. If you want to play the single player then know that it's a substantial step down from Crysis and Warhead in terms of both graphics and gameplay. I wouldn't suggest anyone buy this until it hits the $20 mark. I feel the singleplayer gameplay is a step up from Crysis/warhead. Not only is it more fluid, the environments are more varied and have a lot of detail. The game is simply more fun to play than Crysis or Warhead ever were. The environments are not more varied. In Crysis you were fighting on beaches, in rice fields, dense jungles, caves, massive plains, mountain sides, villages, an alien ship, and snow covered versions of many of those same types of areas. In Crysis 2 you've got a city, more city, and even more city.The nanosuit abilities sound pretty different compared to most multiplayer shooters. That's nothing new?
Why is it not worth $60? Come on, people. Really tell us what is wrong with the multiplayer. Maybe compare it to a game that has popular multiplayer.
SF_KiLLaMaN
There is also not more detail in Crysis 2. Rather than go through a list I'll just point out the textures as a case-in-point:
Crysis 1
Crysis 2:
The only thing I'll give you is that Crysis 2's action is more fluid, but that's mostly because the game focuses a lot more on scripted action scene after scripted action scene rather than the completely free form, methodical action you had in Crysis.
I feel the singleplayer gameplay is a step up from Crysis/warhead. Not only is it more fluid, the environments are more varied and have a lot of detail. The game is simply more fun to play than Crysis or Warhead ever were. The environments are not more varied. In Crysis you were fighting on beaches, in rice fields, dense jungles, caves, massive plains, mountain sides, villages, an alien ship, and snow covered versions of many of those same types of areas. In Crysis 2 you've got a city, more city, and even more city.[QUOTE="SF_KiLLaMaN"][QUOTE="gameguy6700"] It's exactly like playing COD with a nanosuit. If you've played MW, MW2, WAW, or Blops then you've played Crysis 2 multiplayer. Hell, even the single player copies MW2 pretty heavily in a few ways. No, the game is not worth a buy. If you want it just for the multiplayer then go back to playing COD and save yourself $60. If you want to play the single player then know that it's a substantial step down from Crysis and Warhead in terms of both graphics and gameplay. I wouldn't suggest anyone buy this until it hits the $20 mark.gameguy6700
There is also not more detail in Crysis 2. Rather than go through a list I'll just point out the textures as a case-in-point:
Crysis 1
Crysis 2:
The only thing I'll give you is that Crysis 2's action is more fluid, but that's mostly because the game focuses a lot more on scripted action scene after scripted action scene rather than the completely free form, methodical action you had in Crysis.
by detail I don't mean textures. I mean things such as mail boxes, sign, and other details in the maps. This is due to the urban setting. Also, you have obviously not played Crysis 2 if you think you are only in the city streets....
Log in to comment