crysis games are the best games I have ever played on any system, I hope more games follow in crysis foot steps.
Crysis? just does not seem like all its cracked up to be...
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="Mr_Ditters"]Indeed, technically its amazing. But its one of the most loveless games ive every played, I dont even own a PS3 .. and im pro PC to hell and back, hell i even hyped Crysis up into oblivion. But Killzone 2/Uncharted 2/Bioshock and many other "shooters" have so much more love in them than this game... and look better because of it. (artistically.)Yes I was disappointed with crysis. Not much of a story. The gameplay was just ok.
Birdy09
Killzone2 and Uncharted have much more LOVE in them? Riiiight :roll:
Crysis is an amazing game. The gameplay in it is fun and its always different cause of that great suit. One of the bestFPS's I have ever played, and I have been playing first-person shooters since Doom.
Ugh enough with this already, Whoa you took a slightly different root or killed the same enemies from another position or the really limited weapons/abilities congrats to you. .. "completely different way"... nothing more than an illusion.[QUOTE="Birdy09"][QUOTE="dos4gw82"] Please explain how you find the gameplay average and repetitive. As in you see something, you shoot it, repeat? I've played through the game at least four or five times, and I have never once approached any situation in the same way. What is so average and repetitive about a game where every one situation plays out differently each time?
As for the story, lack of a complex and compelling plot isn't exactly a game breaker. Just ask Duke Nukem or your friend Mario.
dos4gw82
Ok, apparently you can't think creatively enough to imagine what I'm talking about yourself, so let's work through a scenario in Crysis.
On the "recovery" chapter, you must infiltrate a KPA base and rescue a hostage. Here's a list of some ways I've approuched this situation in the past:
- Came in from the high ground, sniped the gas pumps at the gas station, blowing it up and creating a diversion that drew all of the enemies in the base the that point. I then retraced my steps, snuck down the shoreline at the other end of the base, and made my way to the hostage with very little opposition.
- Sniped a few enemies, which drew a large number of enemies over to investigate the bodies, then I blew up the nearby gas pump, causing death and chaos. Ran into the base, guns blazing, taking advantage of the confusion.
-Snuck all of the way to the hostage without killing a soul, running from bush to bush, wall to wall.
-Drove full speed in an enemy jeep towards the front gate of the base, jumped out of the jeep as it was moving, dived into some bushes. When the jeep reached the gate, I blew it up with a remote bomb I had attached to it. Death, chaos. I remained in the bushes, sniping the confused KPA until I could enter the base with relatively little opposition.
Those are just a few examples. I've done that mission in many other different ways, and I have no doubt that I'll find another way to do it the next time I play it. Point is, if you think that the only option you have is to take a different route or attack an enemy from a different position, you will undoubtedly find this game very average and repetitive. Action games can be more than just walking mindlessly towards a blip on your minimap and headshoting anything that gets in your way.
apparently thats not enough variation for some people :roll:
What shooters are you comparing it too? Because I can't think of a single one that even compares to it for multiplayer reasons.. The gun mechanics are good, the game is unforgiving, its vast giving you multiple strategies and the like.. It has a varying environment, it has some of the best set pieces I have ever seen such as when the Americans invade or the tank battle.the gameplay is avergae to todays standard and i found that the gameplay was repetitive. what else is more to say?
Kaisos
Indeed, technically its amazing. But its one of the most loveless games ive every played, I dont even own a PS3 .. and im pro PC to hell and back, hell i even hyped Crysis up into oblivion. But Killzone 2/Uncharted 2/Bioshock and many other "shooters" have so much more love in them than this game... and look better because of it. (artistically.)[QUOTE="Birdy09"][QUOTE="Mr_Ditters"]
Yes I was disappointed with crysis. Not much of a story. The gameplay was just ok.
The_PC_Gamer
Ok what? You dont own a PS3 yet you think all those games are better? How the heck can you make the assumption they have "much more love in them"? And from those, only KZ2 has been released.
And since I actually own a PS3 and am playing KZ2 right now actually, I can safely tell you Crysis blows it away in every possible category, gameplay and story included.
I dont own a PS3, but im in a flat with 5 other guys and we have all 3 consoles, I meant in the sense that im a PC "fanboy" if anything to be labeled as. the "love" part comes from the artistic design, the animations.. While technically inferior they made so much better use of what they had, especially in the animations despartment, the texture *DESIGN* department, hell Uncharted 2 is another amazing example of this.Theyre so much more interesting to look at, not to mention a whole lot of other games... Crysis looks like something I could do in Maya and slap some bloody Stock photo realsitic texures on them and be done with it.
Gameplay? Questionable, while it has good free-roaming it has some of the most tacky/random gunplay out there... nowhere near as bad as Far Cry 2's mind you. Animations - Many games beat crysis in this department... too bad all the effort when into pretty high rez textures right?
Multiplayer - Im bored of the MoHAA esque style MP which is why i think KZ2 ect have nothing special in that department, HOWEVER Crysis + Warheads multiplayers are garbage... nice ON PAPER, but the lack of players and how crummy it feels to play furthers my point.
Story - I dont even need to touch this. Variety - A limited sandbox with repititve enemies/vehicles. while spaced out, its still incredible limited.
So what on earth does it have besides amazing graphics? I would git it 8.0 AA.... one of the most underwhelming hyped games ive ever played, hell im going to go as far as saying I enjoyed Halo 3 a TON more... and im NOT a Halo person...
[QUOTE="Mr_Ditters"]Indeed, technically its amazing. But its one of the most loveless games ive every played, I dont even own a PS3 .. and im pro PC to hell and back, hell i even hyped Crysis up into oblivion. But Killzone 2/Uncharted 2/Bioshock and many other "shooters" have so much more love in them than this game... and look better because of it. (artistically.)Yes I was disappointed with crysis. Not much of a story. The gameplay was just ok.
Birdy09
exactly all those games got more "juice" in them they got more polish. more love in design better levels i dare to say....
I can't believe your comparing it with something like Killzone 2.. A game that is extremely limited with narrow hallways and the like for singleplayer and has just about the same useless story line.. Graphics are you seriously saying that animation is better? Crysis has some of the best facial expressions, their bodies actually react realistically to the terrain.. Instead of running unrealistically up a steep hill.. I find this ironic too when Killzone 2 had no real gameplay changes.. The onlythign I will agree with you is the multiplayer, but than again I don't think Crysis even needs a multiplayer to be great. Repitive enemies? I can say the exact same thing to places like Killzone 2, or many others... Uncharted had the exact same "problems" if you call it that.sSubZerOoNo... Crysis animations are incredible average, facial being some of the better ones no doubt... but the combat animations, are average, especially the soldiers themselves, the vehicles arnt much better. And once again, brag about the open-world all you like, its incredible average, if you want "choices" in a shooter then its the wrong game, as far as it feels like it mayaswell be CoD with no fences :lol:. Proper "choice" games include Deus Ex for example... while somewhat "corridor" thats indeed a much more prevelant and rewarding "open feeling" not scouring a mountain that is as generic as Oblivion's world just to kill a korean soldier that I could kill on the damn road outside and still get the identical result.
There really are two vastly different opionions here. The game isn't bad like some people are making it out to be, now Far Cry 2 is a bad game. It's better than alot of if not most fps games that have come out in the past couple of years but it's not exactly revolutonary gameplaywise like alot of people are making it out to be but from a technical standpoint it is without a doubt revolutionary.
artiedeadat40
[QUOTE="Kaisos"]
I recently purchased crysis I can run everything on high it looks good but... the gameplay is average, find it to be very repetitive, the story is lackluster... I really don't understand all the hype about this game. It seems to be a fair game maybe like a 7.0 /10 but does not deserve a 9.5 / 10 or game of the year. I have not played multiplayer or Warhead but nothing is making me want to. Does anyone else share the same opinions of the game as I do or is it just me?
ktseymour
Totally agree. Not even as good as Far Cry 1.
I've tried to play this game but can't play It for more than a couple of hours before I fall asleep...................
i agree with both.... damn warhead is so borring for me...why?Ugh enough with this already, Whoa you took a slightly different root or killed the same enemies from another position or the really limited weapons/abilities congrats to you. .. "completely different way"... nothing more than an illusion.[QUOTE="Birdy09"][QUOTE="dos4gw82"] Please explain how you find the gameplay average and repetitive. As in you see something, you shoot it, repeat? I've played through the game at least four or five times, and I have never once approached any situation in the same way. What is so average and repetitive about a game where every one situation plays out differently each time?
As for the story, lack of a complex and compelling plot isn't exactly a game breaker. Just ask Duke Nukem or your friend Mario.
dos4gw82
Ok, apparently you can't think creatively enough to imagine what I'm talking about yourself, so let's work through a scenario in Crysis.
On the "recovery" chapter, you must infiltrate a KPA base and rescue a hostage. Here's a list of some ways I've approuched this situation in the past:
- Came in from the high ground, sniped the gas pumps at the gas station, blowing it up and creating a diversion that drew all of the enemies in the base the that point. I then retraced my steps, snuck down the shoreline at the other end of the base, and made my way to the hostage with very little opposition.
- Sniped a few enemies, which drew a large number of enemies over to investigate the bodies, then I blew up the nearby gas pump, causing death and chaos. Ran into the base, guns blazing, taking advantage of the confusion.
-Snuck all of the way to the hostage without killing a soul, running from bush to bush, wall to wall.
-Drove full speed in an enemy jeep towards the front gate of the base, jumped out of the jeep as it was moving, dived into some bushes. When the jeep reached the gate, I blew it up with a remote bomb I had attached to it. Death, chaos. I remained in the bushes, sniping the confused KPA until I could enter the base with relatively little opposition.
Those are just a few examples. I've done that mission in many other different ways, and I have no doubt that I'll find another way to do it the next time I play it. Point is, if you think that the only option you have is to take a different route or attack an enemy from a different position, you will undoubtedly find this game very average and repetitive. Action games can be more than just walking mindlessly towards a blip on your minimap and headshoting anything that gets in your way.
those examples are crap...no offence..... compared with what you can do in far cry 2I can't believe your comparing it with something like Killzone 2.. A game that is extremely limited with narrow hallways and the like for singleplayer and has just about the same useless story line.. Graphics are you seriously saying that animation is better? Crysis has some of the best facial expressions, their bodies actually react realistically to the terrain.. Instead of running unrealistically up a steep hill.. I find this ironic too when Killzone 2 had no real gameplay changes.. The onlythign I will agree with you is the multiplayer, but than again I don't think Crysis even needs a multiplayer to be great. Repitive enemies? I can say the exact same thing to places like Killzone 2, or many others... Uncharted had the exact same "problems" if you call it that.sSubZerOoso what? enemies die, the gunplay is better, its a better fps...end of story.
[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]I can't believe your comparing it with something like Killzone 2.. A game that is extremely limited with narrow hallways and the like for singleplayer and has just about the same useless story line.. Graphics are you seriously saying that animation is better? Crysis has some of the best facial expressions, their bodies actually react realistically to the terrain.. Instead of running unrealistically up a steep hill.. I find this ironic too when Killzone 2 had no real gameplay changes.. The onlythign I will agree with you is the multiplayer, but than again I don't think Crysis even needs a multiplayer to be great. Repitive enemies? I can say the exact same thing to places like Killzone 2, or many others... Uncharted had the exact same "problems" if you call it that.Birdy09No... Crysis animations are incredible average, facial being some of the better ones no doubt... but the combat animations, are average, especially the soldiers themselves, the vehicles arnt much better. And once again, brag about the open-world all you like, its incredible average, if you want "choices" in a shooter then its the wrong game, as far as it feels like it mayaswell be CoD with no fences :lol:. Proper "choice" games include Deus Ex for example... while somewhat "corridor" thats indeed a much more prevelant and rewarding "open feeling" not scouring a mountain that is as generic as Oblivion's world just to kill a korean soldier that I could kill on the damn road outside and still get the identical result. yeah i get the feeling that the designers forget to add soem animations, unlike cod4 that the enemies feel like they are alive
Crysis's gameplay is beyond the current crop of shooters on the market. It gives the freedom of choice in playstyle and approach (complimented by level design, enhanced by the nanosuit, items, a.i. and technical interactivity), and gives the player the ability to change their playstyle on the fly. For most of the part the game accommodates a variety of playstyles and player choice; the major flaw being the final sections of the game.Gameplay? Questionable, while it has good free-roaming it has some of the most tacky/random gunplay out there... nowhere near as bad as Far Cry 2's mind you. Animations - Many games beat crysis in this department... too bad all the effort when into pretty high rez textures right?
Multiplayer - Im bored of the MoHAA esque style MP which is why i think KZ2 ect have nothing special in that department, HOWEVER Crysis + Warheads multiplayers are garbage... nice ON PAPER, but the lack of players and how crummy it feels to play furthers my point.
Story - I dont even need to touch this. Variety - A limited sandbox with repititve enemies/vehicles. while spaced out, its still incredible limited.
So what on earth does it have besides amazing graphics? I would git it 8.0 AA.... one of the most underwhelming hyped games ive ever played, hell im going to go as far as saying I enjoyed Halo 3 a TON more... and im NOT a Halo person...
Birdy09
Crysis's technical visuals are still some of the most advanced for a game. Good luck doing a high poly maya model and putting into the vast majority of game engines; what the CryEngine 2 achieves is remarkable in detail, scale and splendor.
Crysis's multiplayer is standard. It offers a good enough design, marred by imbalances, and lack of polish. Most of all its not as strong as many shooters this generation. Its a flaw of the game, which is counterpointed by pros such as the Sandbox 2 Editor.
The games story is fine. Its doesn't try to be complex - rather it gives context to the action, and carries the games progression. It does so perfectly - it doesn't try to be anything other than B-movie, and its production values associated are simply great. It serves its purpose well.
Variety; Crysis offers more variety in its shooter design than any other shooter this generation. I have already outlined this in the gameplay paragraph. Its far from incredibly limited - its both expansive and well tested to accommodate re playability and players choice, in a far more meaningful manner than other shooters like Bioshock.
It has far more than amazing graphics, sorry you couldn't see it.
If you dont like the game, fair enough, however Crysis is a landmark shooter this generation, for more than production values.
Crysis's gameplay is beyond the current crop of shooters on the market. It gives the freedom of choice in playstyle and approach (complimented by level design, enhanced by the nanosuit, items, a.i. and technical interactivity), and gives the player the ability to change their playstyle on the fly. For most of the part the game accommodates a variety of playstyles and player choice; the major flaw being the final sections of the game.[QUOTE="Birdy09"]
Gameplay? Questionable, while it has good free-roaming it has some of the most tacky/random gunplay out there... nowhere near as bad as Far Cry 2's mind you. Animations - Many games beat crysis in this department... too bad all the effort when into pretty high rez textures right?
Multiplayer - Im bored of the MoHAA esque style MP which is why i think KZ2 ect have nothing special in that department, HOWEVER Crysis + Warheads multiplayers are garbage... nice ON PAPER, but the lack of players and how crummy it feels to play furthers my point.
Story - I dont even need to touch this. Variety - A limited sandbox with repititve enemies/vehicles. while spaced out, its still incredible limited.
So what on earth does it have besides amazing graphics? I would git it 8.0 AA.... one of the most underwhelming hyped games ive ever played, hell im going to go as far as saying I enjoyed Halo 3 a TON more... and im NOT a Halo person...
skrat_01
Crysis's technical visuals are still some of the most advanced for a game. Good luck doing a high poly maya model and putting into the vast majority of game engines; what the CryEngine 2 achieves is remarkable in detail, scale and splendor.
Crysis's multiplayer is standard. It offers a good enough design, marred by imbalances, and lack of polish. Most of all its not as strong as many shooters this generation. Its a flaw of the game, which is counterpointed by pros such as the Sandbox 2 Editor.
The games story is fine. Its doesn't try to be complex - rather it gives context to the action, and carries the games progression. It does so perfectly - it doesn't try to be anything other than B-movie, and its production values associated are simply great. It serves its purpose well.
Variety; Crysis offers more variety in its shooter design than any other shooter this generation. I have already outlined this in the gameplay paragraph. Its far from incredibly limited - its both expansive and well tested to accommodate re playability and players choice, in a far more meaningful manner than other shooters like Bioshock.
It has far more than amazing graphics, sorry you couldn't see it.
If you dont like the game, fair enough, however Crysis is a landmark shooter this generation, for more than production values.
VARIETY? All the levels are borring jungles i wanted to kill myself in warhead from boredom... in ant case i think i spent too much time at this thread, crysis fanboys see something that i dont see maybe its in a diffirent demension but i wont bother anymore i got tired of pointing out how they are wrong and stick with the same world "freedom"...freedom is something you take by yourself and not given by a game.Crysis's gameplay is beyond the current crop of shooters on the market. It gives the freedom of choice in playstyle and approach (complimented by level design, enhanced by the nanosuit, items, a.i. and technical interactivity), and gives the player the ability to change their playstyle on the fly. For most of the part the game accommodates a variety of playstyles and player choice; the major flaw being the final sections of the game.[QUOTE="Birdy09"]
Gameplay? Questionable, while it has good free-roaming it has some of the most tacky/random gunplay out there... nowhere near as bad as Far Cry 2's mind you. Animations - Many games beat crysis in this department... too bad all the effort when into pretty high rez textures right?
Multiplayer - Im bored of the MoHAA esque style MP which is why i think KZ2 ect have nothing special in that department, HOWEVER Crysis + Warheads multiplayers are garbage... nice ON PAPER, but the lack of players and how crummy it feels to play furthers my point.
Story - I dont even need to touch this. Variety - A limited sandbox with repititve enemies/vehicles. while spaced out, its still incredible limited.
So what on earth does it have besides amazing graphics? I would git it 8.0 AA.... one of the most underwhelming hyped games ive ever played, hell im going to go as far as saying I enjoyed Halo 3 a TON more... and im NOT a Halo person...
skrat_01
Crysis's technical visuals are still some of the most advanced for a game. Good luck doing a high poly maya model and putting into the vast majority of game engines; what the CryEngine 2 achieves is remarkable in detail, scale and splendor.
Crysis's multiplayer is standard. It offers a good enough design, marred by imbalances, and lack of polish. Most of all its not as strong as many shooters this generation. Its a flaw of the game, which is counterpointed by pros such as the Sandbox 2 Editor.
The games story is fine. Its doesn't try to be complex - rather it gives context to the action, and carries the games progression. It does so perfectly - it doesn't try to be anything other than B-movie, and its production values associated are simply great. It serves its purpose well.
Variety; Crysis offers more variety in its shooter design than any other shooter this generation. I have already outlined this in the gameplay paragraph. Its far from incredibly limited - its both expansive and well tested to accommodate re playability and players choice, in a far more meaningful manner than other shooters like Bioshock.
It has far more than amazing graphics, sorry you couldn't see it.
If you dont like the game, fair enough, however Crysis is a landmark shooter this generation, for more than production values.
Crysis Engine - I wouldnt disagree for a second Skrat ;), the ENGINE is amazing, the artistic detail designers/love however in Crysis absolutely downright average, I cant wait to see games that actual make great use of it... Crysis DID NOT.
Crysis Multiplayer - Its below standard, it was a broken mix of too many games, ontop of that NO a sandbox editor does in NO WAY make up for this... only if your the kind that likes it, for those of us that want epic competitive or hell even fun multiplayer if failed to provide that completely, no "editor" makes up for this fail isnce its not in the same category.
Variety - I want this explained skrat, and dont for a second think im not a creative person, but my idea of variety in a game isnt Crysis ... everyone uses all the powers and guns, you all go to the same waypoints to do the same thing (kill or destroy or rescue) which just envolves blowing up an object/enemy... walking up a different landscape changes nothing.
Thats the point you seem to be missing entirely, the technical graphics and what it can render is by far the best this gen, its design choices however are very boring, I am no doubt in the majority aswell on this (its a big market afterall) but the general pace of other games and thier art designs make it so much better to look at than Crysis ... I think "Whoa pretty water and landscape... now waht else is there?" and to no suprize theres barely anything "amazing" beyond that.
It does NOT have great production values... that is ridiculous to say by the least, they took a slightly new approach, made a risky powerful engine and produced a slightly different shooter... thats it...
VARIETY? All the levels are borring jungles i wanted to kill myself in warhead from boredom... in ant case i think i spent too much time at this thread, crysis fanboys see something that i dont see maybe its in a diffirent demension but i wont bother anymore i got tired of pointing out how they are wrong and stick with the same world "freedom"...freedom is something you take by yourself and not given by a game.dakan45Yes there was plenty of situational variety to scenarios, and the game is more expansive than any dedicated shooter in gamepaly variety.
The tropical island setting is fitting for the above.
And no I am talking freedom in a game design sense, and I have the game as its own evidence.
There is no "fanboy" bias, its how Crysis is, you just dont happen to like it. Which is fine.
Doesn't stop the game from achieving what I have stated.
Yes there was plenty of situational variety to scenarios, and the game is more expansive than any dedicated shooter in gamepaly variety.[QUOTE="dakan45"VARIETY? All the levels are borring jungles i wanted to kill myself in warhead from boredom... in ant case i think i spent too much time at this thread, crysis fanboys see something that i dont see maybe its in a diffirent demension but i wont bother anymore i got tired of pointing out how they are wrong and stick with the same world "freedom"...freedom is something you take by yourself and not given by a game.skrat_01
The tropical island setting is fitting for the above.
And no I am talking freedom in a game design sense, and I have the game as its own evidence.
There is no "fanboy" bias, its how Crysis is, you just dont happen to like it. Which is fine.
Doesn't stop the game from achieving what I have stated.
no its not like that, and far cry 2 achieves all those much better but people hated..so i guess there is no logic and now that you just prove me that i wont bother anymore in this thread...... where did i say i dont like crysis? i just dont see all that "freedom" you are talking about....How didn't Crysis do just that? Large environments, high amounts of detail and interactivity at a high visual fidelity. Crysis is the best technical demo a game can offer in terms of showcasing an engines capabilities.Crysis Engine - I wouldnt disagree for a second Skrat ;), the ENGINE is amazing, the artistic detail designers/love however in Crysis absolutely downright average, I cant wait to see games that actual make great use of it... Crysis DID NOT.
Crysis Multiplayer - Its below standard, it was a broken mix of too many games, ontop of that NO a sandbox editor does in NO WAY make up for this... only if your the kind that likes it, for those of us that want epic competitive or hell even fun multiplayer if failed to provide that completely, no "editor" makes up for this fail isnce its not in the same category.
Variety - I want this explained skrat, and dont for a second think im not a creative person, but my idea of variety in a game isnt Crysis ... everyone uses all the powers and guns, you all go to the same waypoints to do the same thing (kill or destroy or rescue) which just envolves blowing up an object/enemy... walking up a different landscape changes nothing.
Thats the point you seem to be missing entirely, the technical graphics and what it can render is by far the best this gen, its design choices however are very boring, I am no doubt in the majority aswell on this (its a big market afterall) but the general pace of other games and thier art designs make it so much better to look at than Crysis ... I think "Whoa pretty water and landscape... now waht else is there?" and to no suprize theres barely anything "amazing" beyond that.
It does NOT have great production values... that is ridiculous to say by the least, they took a slightly new approach, made a risky powerful engine and produced a slightly different shooter... thats it...
Birdy09
Well I wont disagree with you on the multiplayer, its not strong. Warhead has improvements - its not sub standard, such as streamlining game modes, combat modifiers etc. however, again its not as strong as it could have been.
Otherwise the SandBox2 Editor is a good enough feature to be recognised alongside the rest of the content. Hell imagine taking a game like Operation Flashpoint or ArmA 1/II into account without their editors. Sandbox 2 is an added feature to the game, that contributes to its quality. "Only if your the kind that likes it" logic does not work at all. What about the type of gamer who doesn't care for multiplayer, and wants to be creative? Again, the sandbox 2 editor is a great enough feature to contribute to the games overall quality.
Yes this is your idea of variety. Your interpretation.
Crysis's design does allow variety, as I have explained. Yes an objective is fundamentally go to X way-point, but its the way the player can do so, that makes Crysis stand out from the vast majority of shooters this generation. Objective design is fundamentally similar - however its the complexities involved that give the player so much variety. Your gameplay ****is never pre defined, the player can choose, and change on the fly - and the game will accommodate it.
Its one of the most intelligently and thoughtfully designed shooters this generation, and sandbox games.
Problem is the ice levels completely break the strong design trend.
Its design choices are boring? What? Its far from boring; it being a sandbox game means the player experience is never pre defined like the vast majority of shooters. Again I have covered the why twice.
You are the majority? What? Making silly statements undermines your own argument. When you start making assumptions that 'my opinion defines the greater market' insinuates evidence of complete misunderstanding.
Art design? Crysis's artistic design is nothing short of good- the alien levels are evidence of that. However art is fundamentally subjective, so again, such an argument is flawed - Crysis has the strongest technicals of a shooter to date, and some of the most a game can offer. Technical visuals are not artistic in comparisons, there is defining separations and comparisons. And saying that what again, games like Call of Duty and Gears of War, and the technical bounds of titles are evidence that gamers want realistic looking games, and developers push technical limitations of systems to create them.
What? Crysis's production values are great.... The visuals are superb, as are the sound effects and music, even the voice acting is of a high standard, as is the games overall presentation. Crysis does have high production values, evidence points directly towrds it.
no its not like that, and far cry 2 achieves all those much better but people hated..so i guess there is no logic and now that you just prove me that i wont bother anymore in this thread...... where did i say i dont like crysis? i just dont see all that "freedom" you are talking about....dakan45No Far Cry 2 doesn't - like Crysis.
Far Cry 2's mission design is not structured, spaced and paced like Crysis - it is open world. As a result mission objectives in the open world do become repedative, as they are much more common in the games structure, and lack a unique level design each time to accomidate the mission scenario.
Another issue is the players creative-ness is marred in Far Cry 2. Missions usually funnell the player into a few areas in terms of angle of approach - restricting them, and things such as the stealth mechanics are both flawed and non existant, meaning the player is usually confined to confrontational combat - apart from long distance combat (again depending on the missions design).
Furthermore Far Cry 2's open world doesn't grant the player much freedom, as the world itself, while free to explore, offers nothing in the way of giving the player choice in how the play through the game in its almost deceptive 'rpg like design'. The most unique thing about Far Cry 2 is its procedurally generated narrative with the buddy system - and emergent gameplay in that regard.... even this is marred by flaws.
Crysis in terms of 'freedom' gives the player a small sandbox - in each level, and a set of objectives with a simplistic premises - e.g. go from A to B, Destroy X etc. However the game gives the player a variety of ways to progress and complete these - enhanced by the nanosuit, items and the games own tech. If you want to play stealthily, you can, if you want to race through a stage in a car, you can, run and gun, you can, take enemies out from afar, you can, hit and run, you can - of course with the other gamepaly elements (and technical) this becomes very complex. The beauty of it is the game accommodates all of these 'freedoms' of design - and things like the a.i. are complex enough to dynamically adapt to the player behaviour, and change to accommodate their play style - as are the levels, which have been designed to accommodate these play styles.
Now in this regard, Crysis is far from the only game to do this - Deus Ex is a great example (or Far Cry 2 - mind you it does it much better than Far Cry 2 (as does Deus Ex) - for reasons I stated). *However* what Crysis does, is give the player the freedom to switch between their play style at will - you can go from stealth to run and gun in an instant, for instance - and the game will accommodate this, and does not punish you to do so - and you can switch back, do something else, vice versa.
The big problem is, Crysis is fundamentally a sandbox game, with no predefined gameplay style, so allot rests in the player, so every ones experience is never pre defined.
Now not everyone is going to like Crysis, and without a doubt not everyone is going to like its design - its radically different to the majority of shooters out there. However Crysis is a fantastic example of 'freedom' in shooters, in design and execution.
Hope that clears things up.
[QUOTE="skrat_01"]Yes there was plenty of situational variety to scenarios, and the game is more expansive than any dedicated shooter in gamepaly variety.[QUOTE="dakan45"VARIETY? All the levels are borring jungles i wanted to kill myself in warhead from boredom... in ant case i think i spent too much time at this thread, crysis fanboys see something that i dont see maybe its in a diffirent demension but i wont bother anymore i got tired of pointing out how they are wrong and stick with the same world "freedom"...freedom is something you take by yourself and not given by a game.dakan45
The tropical island setting is fitting for the above.
And no I am talking freedom in a game design sense, and I have the game as its own evidence.
There is no "fanboy" bias, its how Crysis is, you just dont happen to like it. Which is fine.
Doesn't stop the game from achieving what I have stated.
no its not like that, and far cry 2 achieves all those much better but people hated..so i guess there is no logic and now that you just prove me that i wont bother anymore in this thread...... where did i say i dont like crysis? i just dont see all that "freedom" you are talking about....You call people who enjoy Crysis fanboys, but yet every thread you are in you cant stop talking abotu hwo amazing Farcry2 is and how its the best FPS ever.
The gameplay is simply amazing.
First, there is the semi-sandbox nature of the game. You are given a huuuuuge level to play with, the developers say "Get from here to there" and you can essentially go about it however you like. Take the main road with a truck and gun down everything; sneak through the forest, using stealth and speed; take a less traveled route for minimal resistance; the list goes on.
Second, there is the nanosuit. Far from making a character overpowered as was anticipated, the suit is more of a tool than a superweapon. Your character can still die if he is careless, and if overwhelmed it is game over. But the suit makes things a lot more interesting: you can run and gun in armor mode; sneak around in stealth; run up to people with speed mode, grab them, and then switch on strength and chuck them like 50 yards. The nanosuit, in addition to the sandbox nature of the levels, adds near-infinite replayability to Crysis.
The AI is also outstanding. Enemy soldiers will take cover, flush you out with grenades, and use commands. If alone and ambushed, they will run back and gather reinforcements if theyre nearby. If you neglect an officer, he will shoot a flare into the sky and call up trucks, helicopters, or more soldiers.
Allow me to give you a literal example of the diversity available in Crysis.
Scenario: You start out the level on a road that runs along about 30 feet above a beautiful beach. To the right is a forest with cliffs and some good vantage points; to the center is the road, stretching on for a few kilometers, and to the left the beach. A few kilometers up the road is a fortified Korean base with a hostage you must rescue. Now, allow me to explain just one of the many ways you could execute this level:
1. Using stealth and speed, I take the high route through the forests. I use my binoculars to scout ahead and tag any enemies. There is not a lot of action, but the intensity is high because I dont want to get caught. Occasionally I encounter a korean sniper of scout.
As I work my way north, the road to the left splits into a dirt road bisecting my path. There is a six-man patrol walking around about halfway up the hill. Enjoying my predatorial style of gameplay, I turn on speed mode, zoom up to the lagging korean soldier, grab him by the throat, and then zoom back into the jungle. I then knock him on the head and toss him away. The remainder of the patrol splits up and enters the forest, my domain...perfect. I then pick off the remainign soldiers, pummeling them while in strength mode or sneaking up on them and choking them with stealth mode.
After getting rid of the patrol, I make my way up to the top of the small hill and see a radar site. There are about six or seven koreans guarding it. I spot a Korean strolling over to me and he proceeds to take a leek; I stealth myself, grab him, and chuck him off the cliff to his death. Spotting the radar truck, I take out my rifle, attach the silencer, and shoot the gas tank, causing the radar vehicle to explode. Not subtle, but they still dont know where I am. I take out the remaining koreans not killed by the explosion with silent, precise shots. I got into the demolished shack and find a scope; excellent.
From the top of the radar hill I can see the heavily fortified base. Bunkers, landmines, but look!...a gas station in the center. I take out my missile launcher and shoot it right at the gas tanks, resulting in a monstrous, beautiful fireball...alarms go off, soldiers run around like crazy...mass confusion. Turning on speed mode, I zoom over to the forest to my right and infilitrate the base via a small creek. Using a variety of tactics, I take out the frantic soldiers running and patrolling around. I then sneak into the building with the hostage and dispatch the soldiers with hand to hand combat. I rescue the hostage but then find out a tank has been sent my way.
Going down stairs, I find a room with a missile launcher in it. Cloaking myself, I run out and spot the tank. I hide behind a thick wall and shoot three missiles straight into the air...I wait about five seconds, pop from outside cover, and put the laser on the tank. Nothing happens for a few seconds, then BOOM BOOM BOOM! the three missiles I sent skyward plumet from the heavens and make three direct hits on the weak turret of the tank...enemy dispatched!
OK, example over. Sounds fun, dont it? Well, its even better than it sounds. And that is just ONE example of how I did that part (yes, part...while that part took me about an hour, it was only 1/2 of that level); Ive done that part of the level about ten different ways, all approaches different enough to be rewarding and not repetative or familiar.
The story and high requirements are the only flaws with Crysis, and it is hard to criticize Crysis' story because A.) its a shooter, and B.) stories in shooters are hardly ever good. Furthermore, 90% of the time people complain about the story, saying "Crysis is ok and the story really sucked, so i dont like it"...are you sure? Seems like youre grasping for straws there.
The reason people bought Crysis is because of the mind-blowing graphics. The reason people love Crysis is due to the awesome gameplay, and good value (its a lengthy game with tons of replayability).
As Ive said countless times in defense of Crysis, the visuals of the game are merely icing on top of an amazing gameplay cake.
The problem I have with the critics is they neglect the tools Crytek has given us in the game. This is not a linear, point a to point b game. Its not an "asembled" product. Crysis gives us all these amazing ingredients and says "Have fun!" and it is up to the player to make the most of it. So, in short, the game is as fun as you want it to be. IF you walk around in armor mode and just shoot stuff...thats not gonna be so much fun. But if you explore, use your suit, and try different styles of gameplay you will be rewarded with an amzing game.
[QUOTE="Macutchi"][QUOTE="dakan45"] those examples are crap...no offence..... compared with what you can do in far cry 2dakan45
such as...
you can climb on boats :) OMG no wai, really?:O That is so awesome man I never even knew that you can climb on boats, now that makes Far Cry 2 a lot better than Crysis since you can do that in Crysis too. You should be playing FC 2 since it's so awesome, you shouldn't waste time hear making up mindless arguments. And yeah, I know you'll have a nice intelligent post after this with good arguments ;) (nah not really).No Far Cry 2 doesn't - like Crysis.[QUOTE="dakan45"]no its not like that, and far cry 2 achieves all those much better but people hated..so i guess there is no logic and now that you just prove me that i wont bother anymore in this thread...... where did i say i dont like crysis? i just dont see all that "freedom" you are talking about....skrat_01
Far Cry 2's mission design is not structured, spaced and paced like Crysis - it is open world. As a result mission objectives in the open world do become repedative, as they are much more common in the games structure, and lack a unique level design each time to accomidate the mission scenario.
Another issue is the players creative-ness is marred in Far Cry 2. Missions usually funnell the player into a few areas in terms of angle of approach - restricting them, and things such as the stealth mechanics are both flawed and non existant, meaning the player is usually confined to confrontational combat - apart from long distance combat (again depending on the missions design).
Furthermore Far Cry 2's open world doesn't grant the player much freedom, as the world itself, while free to explore, offers nothing in the way of giving the player choice in how the play through the game in its almost deceptive 'rpg like design'. The most unique thing about Far Cry 2 is its procedurally generated narrative with the buddy system - and emergent gameplay in that regard.... even this is marred by flaws.
Crysis in terms of 'freedom' gives the player a small sandbox - in each level, and a set of objectives with a simplistic premises - e.g. go from A to B, Destroy X etc. However the game gives the player a variety of ways to progress and complete these - enhanced by the nanosuit, items and the games own tech. If you want to play stealthily, you can, if you want to race through a stage in a car, you can, run and gun, you can, take enemies out from afar, you can, hit and run, you can - of course with the other gamepaly elements (and technical) this becomes very complex. The beauty of it is the game accommodates all of these 'freedoms' of design - and things like the a.i. are complex enough to dynamically adapt to the player behaviour, and change to accommodate their play style - as are the levels, which have been designed to accommodate these play styles.
Now in this regard, Crysis is far from the only game to do this - Deus Ex is a great example (or Far Cry 2 - mind you it does it much better than Far Cry 2 (as does Deus Ex) - for reasons I stated). *However* what Crysis does, is give the player the freedom to switch between their play style at will - you can go from stealth to run and gun in an instant, for instance - and the game will accommodate this, and does not punish you to do so - and you can switch back, do something else, vice versa.
The big problem is, Crysis is fundamentally a sandbox game, with no predefined gameplay style, so allot rests in the player, so every ones experience is never pre defined.
Now not everyone is going to like Crysis, and without a doubt not everyone is going to like its design - its radically different to the majority of shooters out there. However Crysis is a fantastic example of 'freedom' in shooters, in design and execution.
Hope that clears things up.
1) so in crysis you disable a jammer and then do it again, the tc said it.... crysis feels repetive no unique level and mission design, far cry however had those back in 2004 or was it 2005? 2) not really i cant blow something up to divert their attention or storm in with the vehicle or use a snipper rilfe and see them trying to find me.. or blow them up with the mortar, the stealth works fine, if you play with the camo suit and stick to the shadows in night.... funny thing is in crysis the only way to play stealthy is the cloak mode so stealth is unexisted without it. 3 )what you mean it doesnt grand more freedom? i can do much more stuff than cryis like attacking from diffirent sides or use the mortar or divert their attention or call for reinformants or even burn the vegetation and make them run.... 4) wrong, some enemy bases have a linear approach and no way to go around, also the stealth is flawed, thanks to innacurate weapons that often make you miss and cloak mode that runs down fast and you light up like a christmas tree if you shoot, make the stealth apporach pretty...partial, more or less you will get spotted especially sicne you cant carry bodies and you cant hide in the shadows or vegetation like far cry 2 and splinter cell, and the ai sucks... i shot someone with the sniper rilfe and his body hit me right away....now how the hell he spotted me and reacted so fast with so high accuracy? Ohh and 2 more things the innacuracy of the weapons is riddiculus and the ai moves too much when they shoot, atleast in far cry 2 they stand still when they aim, and another thing... i wanna play as a sniper.. why the sniper is so stupid, why i cant have a silencer and a scope from the first time i find it, why there isnt much ammo lying around... another thing that far cry 2 pawns crysis. 5) sandbox game or not, the levels have very linear geological contrustion... eg when you get to Aztec, take a look to the left and to the right.... rocky hills and linear paths that lead to the enemy's base and the next X objective.... unlikely crysis warhead had better and bigger areas. The thing is that crysis levels dont really feel like an island and they aind pretty took look at.... unlikely far cry and crysis warhead felt that way.... crysis doesnt feel like an island, far cry did.no its not like that, and far cry 2 achieves all those much better but people hated..so i guess there is no logic and now that you just prove me that i wont bother anymore in this thread...... where did i say i dont like crysis? i just dont see all that "freedom" you are talking about....[QUOTE="dakan45"][QUOTE="skrat_01"]Yes there was plenty of situational variety to scenarios, and the game is more expansive than any dedicated shooter in gamepaly variety.
The tropical island setting is fitting for the above.
And no I am talking freedom in a game design sense, and I have the game as its own evidence.
There is no "fanboy" bias, its how Crysis is, you just dont happen to like it. Which is fine.
Doesn't stop the game from achieving what I have stated.
kozzy1234
You call people who enjoy Crysis fanboys, but yet every thread you are in you cant stop talking abotu hwo amazing Farcry2 is and how its the best FPS ever.
my point was that it does things better but yeah many people hated... so you said it yourself... "there is no logic just opinions"[QUOTE="dakan45"][QUOTE="Macutchi"]you can climb on boats :) OMG no wai, really?:O That is so awesome man I never even knew that you can climb on boats, now that makes Far Cry 2 a lot better than Crysis since you can do that in Crysis too. You should be playing FC 2 since it's so awesome, you shouldn't waste time hear making up mindless arguments. And yeah, I know you'll have a nice intelligent post after this with good arguments ;) (nah not really).such as...
DanielDust
it was a joke... but i put it this way cod 4 combat feels better than crysis, doesnt it? therefore its a better game, if not then why you rated cod 4 with 9.5 and crysis with an 8.0? I thought crysis was so great because you can do ALLLLLL these stuff when they are simple stuff like, climbing up a boat that you cant' do!!!!!
OMG no wai, really?:O That is so awesome man I never even knew that you can climb on boats, now that makes Far Cry 2 a lot better than Crysis since you can do that in Crysis too. You should be playing FC 2 since it's so awesome, you shouldn't waste time hear making up mindless arguments. And yeah, I know you'll have a nice intelligent post after this with good arguments ;) (nah not really).[QUOTE="DanielDust"][QUOTE="dakan45"] you can climb on boats :)dakan45
it was a joke... but i put it this way cod 4 combat feels better than crysis, doesnt it? therefore its a better game, if not then why you rated cod 4 with 9.5 and crysis with an 8.0? I thought crysis was so great because you can do ALLLLLL these stuff when they are simple stuff like, climbing up a boat that you cant' do!!!!!
Because that was when I first played Crysis and I hated it, but after the 2nd playthrough I'd rate Crysis 9.5 too, also I didn't rate CoD 4 like that because it feels better, but because it's lots of fun and has intense action (the sp campaign) and the multiplayer is awesome as always.get from here there... when the level desing doesnt remind me an open ended island at all its more like paths that you must follow... the nanosuit is weak as hell, the koreans on the other hand got the enchanced model the ai bugs up all the time and the "flush you out and suround you" works much better in far cry 2...they will also fire flares and then you will quickload and you see them fire flares again...known bug that shows that the ai has a few cheap scripts in their code...arma 2 has much better and belivalbe ai the story is blockbuster propably even better than hollywood movies... what else people want? and yeag crysis is mostly a benchmark tool... they focus into an amazing polish on graphics and far less on polishing the actual gameplay and balance it.The gameplay is simply amazing.
First, there is the semi-sandbox nature of the game. You are given a huuuuuge level to play with, the developers say "Get from here to there" and you can essentially go about it however you like. Take the main road with a truck and gun down everything; sneak through the forest, using stealth and speed; take a less traveled route for minimal resistance; the list goes on.
Second, there is the nanosuit. Far from making a character overpowered as was anticipated, the suit is more of a tool than a superweapon. Your character can still die if he is careless, and if overwhelmed it is game over. But the suit makes things a lot more interesting: you can run and gun in armor mode; sneak around in stealth; run up to people with speed mode, grab them, and then switch on strength and chuck them like 50 yards. The nanosuit, in addition to the sandbox nature of the levels, adds near-infinite replayability to Crysis.
The AI is also outstanding. Enemy soldiers will take cover, flush you out with grenades, and use commands. If alone and ambushed, they will run back and gather reinforcements if theyre nearby. If you neglect an officer, he will shoot a flare into the sky and call up trucks, helicopters, or more soldiers.
The story and high requirements are the only flaws with Crysis, and it is hard to criticize Crysis' story because A.) its a shooter, and B.) stories in shooters are hardly ever good. Furthermore, 90% of the time people complain about the story, saying "Crysis is ok and the story really sucked, so i dont like it"...are you sure? Seems like youre grasping for straws there.
The reason people bought Crysis is because of the mind-blowing graphics. The reason people love Crysis is due to the awesome gameplay, and good value (its a lengthy game with tons of replayability).
As Ive said countless times in defense of Crysis, the visuals of the game are merely icing on top of an amazing gameplay cake.
mrbojangles25
[QUOTE="dakan45"][QUOTE="DanielDust"] OMG no wai, really?:O That is so awesome man I never even knew that you can climb on boats, now that makes Far Cry 2 a lot better than Crysis since you can do that in Crysis too. You should be playing FC 2 since it's so awesome, you shouldn't waste time hear making up mindless arguments. And yeah, I know you'll have a nice intelligent post after this with good arguments ;) (nah not really).DanielDust
it was a joke... but i put it this way cod 4 combat feels better than crysis, doesnt it? therefore its a better game, if not then why you rated cod 4 with 9.5 and crysis with an 8.0? I thought crysis was so great because you can do ALLLLLL these stuff when they are simple stuff like, climbing up a boat that you cant' do!!!!!
Because that was when I first played Crysis and I hated it, but after the 2nd playthrough I'd rate Crysis 9.5 too, also I didn't rate CoD 4 like that because it feels better, but because it's lots of fun and has intense action (the sp campaign) and the multiplayer is awesome as always. same here i hated it the first time but in the 3rd playthrough i gave it an 8.0 and cod 4 an 8.5, now i love cod 4 and i eagery wait to see more good action scenes many weapons and cool combat from modern warfare 2.. but i gave it 8.5 so people dont go crazy with "ohhh its linear " dont rate it that high... the main reason why i prefer either far cry 2 or cod 4 over crysis is that simply the combat feels better and they are more weapons.. i see no poing playing most of the game with a korean ak74 knock offf and screaming die you............ ..........i have the same suit as yours why you take so many hits? Firing rockets.... DIE already... simply cod 4 and far cry 2 feel better in terms of first person shooter.....as for sandbox gameplay? well id bother but the levels ain't as tropical as far cry and not even the simpliest thing dont work properly like climbing up a boat... plus with so crappy weapons and very not human- like ai, i dont think i am gonna to make a map... but give me a map editor in cod 4 and stalker and i mod like crazy.... another thing is that crysis is unpolished thats why i prefer even bioshock..Sorry, but killing someone with super punch does exactly the same thing as normal punch only with some *hilarity*, the guns are typical, and throwing objects at people ... what other boundaries are there? In the end its all waypoints, im not saying there is more variety in others, but the illusion of "choice" is absolutely ridiculous. to anwser your question despite its genre being on the fence of 2 ... Dues Ex felt like more a choice by a complete and utter landslide ... Crysis has the most boring "choice" mechanic ever... waste my time being bored walking AROUND a complex or shoot it up... ram into the objective in a car or nade spam it... Cmon... its quite frankly nothing special.Sorry, but I meant think a little harder, I meant think harder than just punching, please try. So all you could say was Deus Ex, which was like 9 years ago, thanks for proving my point :lol: . And yeah, Crysis is nothing special you can approach a complex in different directions or kil by ramming a car or throwing a grenade, but linear shooter where you do ntohign more than just kill and move are better :roll:Birdy09
[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]get from here there... when the level desing doesnt remind me an open ended island at all its more like paths that you must follow... the nanosuit is weak as hell, the koreans on the other hand got the enchanced model the ai bugs up all the time and the "flush you out and suround you" works much better in far cry 2...they will also fire flares and then you will quickload and you see them fire flares again...known bug that shows that the ai has a few cheap scripts in their code...arma 2 has much better and belivalbe ai the story is blockbuster propably even better than hollywood movies... what else people want? and yeag crysis is mostly a benchmark tool... they focus into an amazing polish on graphics and far less on polishing the actual gameplay and balance it.The gameplay is simply amazing.
First, there is the semi-sandbox nature of the game. You are given a huuuuuge level to play with, the developers say "Get from here to there" and you can essentially go about it however you like. Take the main road with a truck and gun down everything; sneak through the forest, using stealth and speed; take a less traveled route for minimal resistance; the list goes on.
Second, there is the nanosuit. Far from making a character overpowered as was anticipated, the suit is more of a tool than a superweapon. Your character can still die if he is careless, and if overwhelmed it is game over. But the suit makes things a lot more interesting: you can run and gun in armor mode; sneak around in stealth; run up to people with speed mode, grab them, and then switch on strength and chuck them like 50 yards. The nanosuit, in addition to the sandbox nature of the levels, adds near-infinite replayability to Crysis.
The AI is also outstanding. Enemy soldiers will take cover, flush you out with grenades, and use commands. If alone and ambushed, they will run back and gather reinforcements if theyre nearby. If you neglect an officer, he will shoot a flare into the sky and call up trucks, helicopters, or more soldiers.
The story and high requirements are the only flaws with Crysis, and it is hard to criticize Crysis' story because A.) its a shooter, and B.) stories in shooters are hardly ever good. Furthermore, 90% of the time people complain about the story, saying "Crysis is ok and the story really sucked, so i dont like it"...are you sure? Seems like youre grasping for straws there.
The reason people bought Crysis is because of the mind-blowing graphics. The reason people love Crysis is due to the awesome gameplay, and good value (its a lengthy game with tons of replayability).
As Ive said countless times in defense of Crysis, the visuals of the game are merely icing on top of an amazing gameplay cake.
dakan45
that is why I said semi-sandbox...the game is, like most, linear. Every level will begin and end the same, with you starting at one point and ending at another. This is how all shooters are, and Crysis should not be criticized for this.
Now, there are far more than paths. A path to me means you take it and follow it until it ends. Crysis does more than this; the paths intersect, you can jump from one path to another with ease. In the edited example of my original post, you can go from the forest to the beach and back again as you please.
As for comparing it to ArmA...thats a bit rediculous. ArmA is a simulator going for realism...Crysis is a shooter going for blockbuster action.
Sorry, but I meant think a little harder, I meant think harder than just punching, please try. So all you could say was Deus Ex, which was like 9 years ago, thanks for proving my point :lol: . And yeah, Crysis is nothing special you can approach a complex in different directions or kil by ramming a car or throwing a grenade, but linear shooter where you do ntohign more than just kill and move are better :roll: well those simple shooters you are reffering dont frustrate you so much with very high innacuracy, weird ai and way too much damage to the player, and elite enemies that just dont die after 3 rockets and 4 sniper headshots...[QUOTE="Birdy09"] Sorry, but killing someone with super punch does exactly the same thing as normal punch only with some *hilarity*, the guns are typical, and throwing objects at people ... what other boundaries are there? In the end its all waypoints, im not saying there is more variety in others, but the illusion of "choice" is absolutely ridiculous. to anwser your question despite its genre being on the fence of 2 ... Dues Ex felt like more a choice by a complete and utter landslide ... Crysis has the most boring "choice" mechanic ever... waste my time being bored walking AROUND a complex or shoot it up... ram into the objective in a car or nade spam it... Cmon... its quite frankly nothing special.
naval
get from here there... when the level desing doesnt remind me an open ended island at all its more like paths that you must follow... the nanosuit is weak as hell, the koreans on the other hand got the enchanced model the ai bugs up all the time and the "flush you out and suround you" works much better in far cry 2...they will also fire flares and then you will quickload and you see them fire flares again...known bug that shows that the ai has a few cheap scripts in their code...arma 2 has much better and belivalbe ai the story is blockbuster propably even better than hollywood movies... what else people want? and yeag crysis is mostly a benchmark tool... they focus into an amazing polish on graphics and far less on polishing the actual gameplay and balance it.[QUOTE="dakan45"][QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]
The gameplay is simply amazing.
First, there is the semi-sandbox nature of the game. You are given a huuuuuge level to play with, the developers say "Get from here to there" and you can essentially go about it however you like. Take the main road with a truck and gun down everything; sneak through the forest, using stealth and speed; take a less traveled route for minimal resistance; the list goes on.
Second, there is the nanosuit. Far from making a character overpowered as was anticipated, the suit is more of a tool than a superweapon. Your character can still die if he is careless, and if overwhelmed it is game over. But the suit makes things a lot more interesting: you can run and gun in armor mode; sneak around in stealth; run up to people with speed mode, grab them, and then switch on strength and chuck them like 50 yards. The nanosuit, in addition to the sandbox nature of the levels, adds near-infinite replayability to Crysis.
The AI is also outstanding. Enemy soldiers will take cover, flush you out with grenades, and use commands. If alone and ambushed, they will run back and gather reinforcements if theyre nearby. If you neglect an officer, he will shoot a flare into the sky and call up trucks, helicopters, or more soldiers.
The story and high requirements are the only flaws with Crysis, and it is hard to criticize Crysis' story because A.) its a shooter, and B.) stories in shooters are hardly ever good. Furthermore, 90% of the time people complain about the story, saying "Crysis is ok and the story really sucked, so i dont like it"...are you sure? Seems like youre grasping for straws there.
The reason people bought Crysis is because of the mind-blowing graphics. The reason people love Crysis is due to the awesome gameplay, and good value (its a lengthy game with tons of replayability).
As Ive said countless times in defense of Crysis, the visuals of the game are merely icing on top of an amazing gameplay cake.
mrbojangles25
that is why I said semi-sandbox...the game is, like most, linear. Every level will begin and end the same, with you starting at one point and ending at another. This is how all shooters are, and Crysis should not be criticized for this.
Now, there are far more than paths. A path to me means you take it and follow it until it ends. Crysis does more than this; the paths intersect, you can jump from one path to another with ease. In the edited example of my original post, you can go from the forest to the beach and back again as you please.
As for comparing it to ArmA...thats a bit rediculous. ArmA is a simulator going for realism...Crysis is a shooter going for blockbuster action.
i wouldnt call it riddiculs... the way the character shakes his weapon in arma when you move is riddiculus, if you cant hold a rilfe steady while moving slowly you dont belong in field ops, but the most ironic thing of all is that crysis might not aiming for realism but when you aiming the innacuracy is higher than arma 2 and the mechanics it uses to be reallisticly innacurate are more reallistic than the ones in arma 2 :shock:... unlesss you find the innacuracy and the fact that weapon aim shakes in crysis, more reallistic than the funny way the weapons shake like crazy when you move in arma 2.... seriously if you stand still and aim in arma 2 ,you are far more accurate than crysis...what the?[QUOTE="naval"]Sorry, but I meant think a little harder, I meant think harder than just punching, please try. So all you could say was Deus Ex, which was like 9 years ago, thanks for proving my point :lol: . And yeah, Crysis is nothing special you can approach a complex in different directions or kil by ramming a car or throwing a grenade, but linear shooter where you do ntohign more than just kill and move are better :roll: well those simple shooters you are reffering dont frustrate you so much with very high innacuracy, weird ai and way too much damage to the player, and elite enemies that just dont die after 3 rockets and 4 sniper headshots...[QUOTE="Birdy09"] Sorry, but killing someone with super punch does exactly the same thing as normal punch only with some *hilarity*, the guns are typical, and throwing objects at people ... what other boundaries are there? In the end its all waypoints, im not saying there is more variety in others, but the illusion of "choice" is absolutely ridiculous. to anwser your question despite its genre being on the fence of 2 ... Dues Ex felt like more a choice by a complete and utter landslide ... Crysis has the most boring "choice" mechanic ever... waste my time being bored walking AROUND a complex or shoot it up... ram into the objective in a car or nade spam it... Cmon... its quite frankly nothing special.
dakan45
no, actually they (linear shooters) use the cheap way of respwaning AI or pitting you against wave and wave of dumb enemies :lol:
No accuracy ? were you playing with a controller, it controlled pretty nicley. "way too much damage to the player, and elite enemies that just dont die after 3 rockets and 4 sniper headshots", wtf .... if anything, Crysis was a bit easy, I personally hoped that it should have frustrated me like it frustrated you
well those simple shooters you are reffering dont frustrate you so much with very high innacuracy, weird ai and way too much damage to the player, and elite enemies that just dont die after 3 rockets and 4 sniper headshots...[QUOTE="dakan45"][QUOTE="naval"] Sorry, but I meant think a little harder, I meant think harder than just punching, please try. So all you could say was Deus Ex, which was like 9 years ago, thanks for proving my point :lol: . And yeah, Crysis is nothing special you can approach a complex in different directions or kil by ramming a car or throwing a grenade, but linear shooter where you do ntohign more than just kill and move are better :roll:
naval
no, actually they (linear shooters) use the cheap way of respwaning AI or pitting you against wave and wave of dumb enemies :lol:
No accuracy ? were you playing with a controller, it controlled pretty nicley. "way too much damage to the player, and elite enemies that just dont die after 3 rockets and 4 sniper headshots", wtf .... if anything, Crysis was a bit easy, I personally hoped that it should have frustrated me like it frustrated you
yeah they did that in cod games but if you look at the past like quake 2 and unreal..... honestly even in arma 2 the weapons are more accurate if i stand still and the nanosuit soldiers dont die by explosives.... but what he meant is that crysis aint as amazing as cod WAW that you shoot with the BAR in full auto and all the bullets hit the at the exact same point :lol:[QUOTE="naval"]Sorry, but I meant think a little harder, I meant think harder than just punching, please try. So all you could say was Deus Ex, which was like 9 years ago, thanks for proving my point :lol: . And yeah, Crysis is nothing special you can approach a complex in different directions or kil by ramming a car or throwing a grenade, but linear shooter where you do ntohign more than just kill and move are better :roll: well those simple shooters you are reffering dont frustrate you so much with very high innacuracy, weird ai and way too much damage to the player, and elite enemies that just dont die after 3 rockets and 4 sniper headshots...[QUOTE="Birdy09"] Sorry, but killing someone with super punch does exactly the same thing as normal punch only with some *hilarity*, the guns are typical, and throwing objects at people ... what other boundaries are there? In the end its all waypoints, im not saying there is more variety in others, but the illusion of "choice" is absolutely ridiculous. to anwser your question despite its genre being on the fence of 2 ... Dues Ex felt like more a choice by a complete and utter landslide ... Crysis has the most boring "choice" mechanic ever... waste my time being bored walking AROUND a complex or shoot it up... ram into the objective in a car or nade spam it... Cmon... its quite frankly nothing special.
dakan45
Its more your fault then the games fault if it takes 4 sniper shots to kill someone in Crysis. I can take the Kroeans down with one sniper shot.
Its not the games fault because you cant aim properly.
We understand that you hate crysis and love Farcry2 and have made numerous accounts to get your point across.
[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"][QUOTE="dakan45"] get from here there... when the level desing doesnt remind me an open ended island at all its more like paths that you must follow... the nanosuit is weak as hell, the koreans on the other hand got the enchanced model the ai bugs up all the time and the "flush you out and suround you" works much better in far cry 2...they will also fire flares and then you will quickload and you see them fire flares again...known bug that shows that the ai has a few cheap scripts in their code...arma 2 has much better and belivalbe ai the story is blockbuster propably even better than hollywood movies... what else people want? and yeag crysis is mostly a benchmark tool... they focus into an amazing polish on graphics and far less on polishing the actual gameplay and balance it.dakan45
that is why I said semi-sandbox...the game is, like most, linear. Every level will begin and end the same, with you starting at one point and ending at another. This is how all shooters are, and Crysis should not be criticized for this.
Now, there are far more than paths. A path to me means you take it and follow it until it ends. Crysis does more than this; the paths intersect, you can jump from one path to another with ease. In the edited example of my original post, you can go from the forest to the beach and back again as you please.
As for comparing it to ArmA...thats a bit rediculous. ArmA is a simulator going for realism...Crysis is a shooter going for blockbuster action.
i wouldnt call it riddiculs... the way the character shakes his weapon in arma when you move is riddiculus, if you cant hold a rilfe steady while moving slowly you dont belong in field ops, but the most ironic thing of all is that crysis might not aiming for realism but when you aiming the innacuracy is higher than arma 2 and the mechanics it uses to be reallisticly innacurate are more reallistic than the ones in arma 2 :shock:... unlesss you find the innacuracy and the fact that weapon aim shakes in crysis, more reallistic than the funnt way the weapons shake like crazy when you move in arma 2.... seriously if you stand still and aim in arma 2 you are far more accurate than crysis...what the?i totally see where you are coming from and I can understand.
I think people see Crysis as "just another shooter" and it is to an extent...its got aliens, crap that blows up, and all kidns of typical shooter stuff in it.
but at the same time it plays differently.
In Quake 4 you can run around and shoot your gun and every single bullet or plasma round or rocket will hit in the exact same spot with zero spread. This is what we are used to in shooters
In Crysis you cant do this. In Crysis you need to aim. End of story.
The hypocrisy, however, is that the aiming mechanics of the Call of Duty series are exactly the same as Crysis yet you dont hear any complaints from the CoD players about it. You can run wild and spray and pray in CoD, and you cant in Crysis.
You are not alone. I also found the gameplay to be average and I have not played the game in over a year because it got boring and repetitive. The AI isn't that challenging either. The online multiplayer is also terrible.I recently purchased crysis I can run everything on high it looks good but... the gameplay is average, find it to be very repetitive, the story is lackluster... I really don't understand all the hype about this game. It seems to be a fair game maybe like a 7.0 /10 but does not deserve a 9.5 / 10 or game of the year. I have not played multiplayer or Warhead but nothing is making me want to. Does anyone else share the same opinions of the game as I do or is it just me?
Kaisos
[QUOTE="blade55555"][QUOTE="dos4gw82"] Please explain how you find the gameplay average and repetitive. As in you see something, you shoot it, repeat? I've played through the game at least four or five times, and I have never once approached any situation in the same way. What is so average and repetitive about a game where every one situation plays out differently each time?He's trolling. He' s just a loser trying to get everyone to respond harshly to him. Its his goal don't let him win. Don't let the fighter91 win either its the reaction they want. Do you have proof of this? Next thing you'll be telling me is that when I played Crysis in May of this year that I loved it and thought it was the best looking game I had ever seen. Am I allowed to form my own opinion about a game - or do I have to ask you how I feel about it?As for the story, lack of a complex and compelling plot isn't exactly a game breaker. Just ask Duke Nukem or your friend Mario.
Charles_Dickens
You don't get it. Not liking the game is one thing, but when someone makes such ridiculous claims as "it's repetitive" without giving a single reason, it comes off as trolling, especially when this is a game that can be played 10 times and each time be completely different.
No reasons = people think you're trolling.
.[QUOTE="skrat_01"]No Far Cry 2 doesn't - like Crysis.[QUOTE="dakan45"]no its not like that, and far cry 2 achieves all those much better but people hated..so i guess there is no logic and now that you just prove me that i wont bother anymore in this thread...... where did i say i dont like crysis? i just dont see all that "freedom" you are talking about....dakan45
Far Cry 2's mission design is not structured, spaced and paced like Crysis - it is open world. As a result mission objectives in the open world do become repedative, as they are much more common in the games structure, and lack a unique level design each time to accomidate the mission scenario.
Another issue is the players creative-ness is marred in Far Cry 2. Missions usually funnell the player into a few areas in terms of angle of approach - restricting them, and things such as the stealth mechanics are both flawed and non existant, meaning the player is usually confined to confrontational combat - apart from long distance combat (again depending on the missions design).
Furthermore Far Cry 2's open world doesn't grant the player much freedom, as the world itself, while free to explore, offers nothing in the way of giving the player choice in how the play through the game in its almost deceptive 'rpg like design'. The most unique thing about Far Cry 2 is its procedurally generated narrative with the buddy system - and emergent gameplay in that regard.... even this is marred by flaws.
Crysis in terms of 'freedom' gives the player a small sandbox - in each level, and a set of objectives with a simplistic premises - e.g. go from A to B, Destroy X etc. However the game gives the player a variety of ways to progress and complete these - enhanced by the nanosuit, items and the games own tech. If you want to play stealthily, you can, if you want to race through a stage in a car, you can, run and gun, you can, take enemies out from afar, you can, hit and run, you can - of course with the other gamepaly elements (and technical) this becomes very complex. The beauty of it is the game accommodates all of these 'freedoms' of design - and things like the a.i. are complex enough to dynamically adapt to the player behaviour, and change to accommodate their play style - as are the levels, which have been designed to accommodate these play styles.
Now in this regard, Crysis is far from the only game to do this - Deus Ex is a great example (or Far Cry 2 - mind you it does it much better than Far Cry 2 (as does Deus Ex) - for reasons I stated). *However* what Crysis does, is give the player the freedom to switch between their play style at will - you can go from stealth to run and gun in an instant, for instance - and the game will accommodate this, and does not punish you to do so - and you can switch back, do something else, vice versa.
The big problem is, Crysis is fundamentally a sandbox game, with no predefined gameplay style, so allot rests in the player, so every ones experience is never pre defined.
Now not everyone is going to like Crysis, and without a doubt not everyone is going to like its design - its radically different to the majority of shooters out there. However Crysis is a fantastic example of 'freedom' in shooters, in design and execution.
Hope that clears things up.
1) so in crysis you disable a jammer and then do it again, the tc said it.... crysis feels repetive no unique level and mission design, far cry however had those back in 2004 or was it 2005? 2) not really i cant blow something up to divert their attention or storm in with the vehicle or use a snipper rilfe and see them trying to find me.. or blow them up with the mortar, the stealth works fine, if you play with the camo suit and stick to the shadows in night.... funny thing is in crysis the only way to play stealthy is the cloak mode so stealth is unexisted without it. 3 )what you mean it doesnt grand more freedom? i can do much more stuff than cryis like attacking from diffirent sides or use the mortar or divert their attention or call for reinformants or even burn the vegetation and make them run.... 4) wrong, some enemy bases have a linear approach and no way to go around, also the stealth is flawed, thanks to innacurate weapons that often make you miss and cloak mode that runs down fast and you light up like a christmas tree if you shoot, make the stealth apporach pretty...partial, more or less you will get spotted especially sicne you cant carry bodies and you cant hide in the shadows or vegetation like far cry 2 and splinter cell, and the ai sucks... i shot someone with the sniper rilfe and his body hit me right away....now how the hell he spotted me and reacted so fast with so high accuracy? Ohh and 2 more things the innacuracy of the weapons is riddiculus and the ai moves too much when they shoot, atleast in far cry 2 they stand still when they aim, and another thing... i wanna play as a sniper.. why the sniper is so stupid, why i cant have a silencer and a scope from the first time i find it, why there isnt much ammo lying around... another thing that far cry 2 pawns crysis. 5) sandbox game or not, the levels have very linear geological contrustion... eg when you get to Aztec, take a look to the left and to the right.... rocky hills and linear paths that lead to the enemy's base and the next X objective.... unlikely crysis warhead had better and bigger areas. The thing is that crysis levels dont really feel like an island and they aind pretty took look at.... unlikely far cry and crysis warhead felt that way.... crysis doesnt feel like an island, far cry did.1) Did you read what I said? At all?
"Crysis in terms of 'freedom' gives the player a small sandbox - in each level, and a set of objectives with a simplistic premises - e.g. go from A to B, Destroy X etc. However the game gives the player a variety of ways to progress and complete these - enhanced by the nanosuit, items and the games own tech. If you want to play stealthily, you can, if you want to race through a stage in a car, you can, run and gun, you can, take enemies out from afar, you can, hit and run, you can - of course with the other gamepaly elements (and technical) this becomes very complex. The beauty of it is the game accommodates all of these 'freedoms' of design - and things like the a.i. are complex enough to dynamically adapt to the player behaviour, and change to accommodate their play style - as are the levels, which have been designed to accommodate these play styles."
The mission design is varied and unique - compare a Missions such as Relic to Onslaught. Completely different scenarios, change of situational gameplay dynamics, even though both have fundamentally similar structure.
By your own logic every game is 'repedative' as it follows a simple pre determined structure. As I have outlined game design is much more complex than that.
2) What? This is in regard to Far Cry 2? No stealth is botched in Far Cry 2; I found that out the hard way, I always tend to play stealthily. Far Cry 2 has no indication of how hidden you are - leaving the player assuming, the a.i. has no alert system or counter stealth functionality that is fleshed out, and mission structure generally forces you into direct combat anyway.
Crysis's stealth mechanics are far better. You can track enemy movements, the a.i. has an alert system (and reinforcements system), you can stealth without the nanosuit - go prone and crawl through the grass (ala Far Cry 1) - you have a meter to track how hidden you are. All the nanosuit does is enhance the stealth mechanics, giving the player much more freedom and mobility and options when using stealth (instead of crawling prone for an entire level).
Again Crysis has better sandbox design, this is evidence of it.
3) Again Far Cry 2's scope in player given 'freedoms' is limited. Creating fire fronts is probably the most outstanding thing, otherwise choice is within its own constraints, and not nearly as fleshed out as Crysis's/
I stated this before, please re-read:
"Another issue is the players creative-ness is marred in Far Cry 2. Missions usually funnel the player into a few areas in terms of angle of approach - restricting them, and things such as the stealth mechanics are both flawed and non existent, meaning the player is usually confined to confrontational combat - apart from long distance combat (again depending on the missions design).
Furthermore Far Cry 2's open world doesn't grant the player much freedom, as the world itself, while free to explore, offers nothing in the way of giving the player choice in how the play through the game in its almost deceptive 'rpg like design'. "
4) What? Crysis right?
Bases have a limited approach? No, no they dont, and the extra mobility given the player allows them to make better use of the environment. Compared to other titles its expansive - much more akin to Deus Ex if anything else.
No weapons are not inaccurate, and you have plenty of weapon customisation options to make your gun silent and more accurate. Crouch, use irons, and you are fine - depending on the distance to target (keeping in mind silencers do reduce range and bullet velocity).
Stealth is fine. It drains appropriately, and forces you to move from cover to cover - be intelligent, and think ahead of how you proceed. It does so with out become an an overpowered cloaked predator.
Yes you can hide in the vegetation, lying down in plain sight of soldiers will get you killed however... Saying that its much better done than Far Cry 2's in this regard, I have already gone over this.
The a.i. moving is bad? Wow, just wow. Yes lets punish the a.i. for being too intelligent. Its trying to outmaneuver you. When you have a freaking nanosuit you would think that they would fight against you differently.
You can put a scope on it, the first time you 'find it'. A silencer was left out for design purposes, to not undermine the stealth mechanics. If you want one that badly look on CryMod.
There is tons of ammo, the level design caters to munitions just fine - be resourceful.
5) The game is fundementally linear in progression, as are the levels. So how else do you have the player progress to X point? Level design geometry; Even far Cry 2 does it, the only games that don't to such a degree are tactical shooters like Ghost Recon and OFP/ArmA.
Difference is Crysis's levels again are mini sandboxes with plenty of options of approach and execution, within the level contraints.
Crysis Warhead did not have bigger areas, its level design was very different to Crysis's - Crytek even stated the level design had been changed to 'action bubbles' than large consistent environments. It shows, but is still very good nonetheless, although different.
Crysis's setting design is fine, even from a geographic standpoint its more consistent than Far Cry's. Not that this matters much, its the level design that counts. A pretty petty criticism.
-
Now please read the GameSpot review of Crysis, at least to stop me pointing out the obvious again and again.
Someone is actually arguing that Farcry 2 is better than Crysis?
*violent facepalm*
i liked the demo but im not going to buy the game
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment