Crysis? just does not seem like all its cracked up to be...

You haven't really played Crysis until you've played Crysis Wars. Period.

Someone is actually arguing that Farcry 2 is better than Crysis?

*violent facepalm*

MrWednesday14

[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:

kozzy1234

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.

i was talking about the ones with the nanosuits and i like crysis i gave it an 8 and i gave cod 4 8.5 and far cry 2 a 9.

[QUOTE="dakan45"][QUOTE="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.

mrbojangles25

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.

[QUOTE="dakan45"][QUOTE="skrat_01"]No 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.

skrat_01

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.

All these are wrong. have you even played crysis? The weapons are innacurate and the ai is complex enough to bug up. hows that good ai? Far cry 2 has clearly better ai.

... I am not sure what you are on about, but the weapons are realistic to the extent of other games like Coutner Striker.. You can't spray the entire time.. You do short round bursts.. To me it sounds like you want some arcade shooter that sprays weapon that is accurate at 200 yards.sSubZerOo

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]

[QUOTE="dakan45"] 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.dakan45

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.

All these are wrong. have you even played crysis? The weapons are innacurate and the ai is complex enough to bug up. hows that good ai? Far cry 2 has clearly better ai.

Far Cry 2's a.i. was better?

Jeesh, post a reasonable response, that offers a degree of insight and then I'll start taking you seriously.

My last reply was more than enough.

You haven't really played Crysis until you've played Crysis Wars. Period.

mhofever

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]

[QUOTE="dakan45"]

All these are wrong. have you even played crysis? The weapons are innacurate and the ai is complex enough to bug up. hows that good ai? Far cry 2 has clearly better ai.

dakan45

[QUOTE="dakan45"]

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]

[QUOTE="dakan45"]

All these are wrong. have you even played crysis? The weapons are innacurate and the ai is complex enough to bug up. hows that good ai? Far cry 2 has clearly better ai.

IMaBIOHAZARD

Nice reply... "far cry 2 ai was better jeez" yeah it was better, if you make noise somewhere they investagate, they stop to aim and shoot, they flank you, if you get up a tower they will try to get up the tower when you dont expect it, but if you keep your sights on them they will stay under the tower and wait for you to lose your attention and then they will attack... it actually happen to me.... another thing is that they can drive and chase you, they also can call for backup and if you injure them a lot, they fall down and crawl inside a house when they bleed out scared to death and holding a pistol waiting for you. If you use you sniper rilfe they try to find you, unlike crysis that they instantly know where you are..hows this better? Also they never bug up. So..most reallistic ai :Far cry 2 Most agressive ai: Far cry 2 Less buggy ai :Far cry 2 What else do you need to beconvinced? In logical terms far cry 2 has better ai, you just don't want to accept it.dakan45

The most impressive thing they do is hop into cars, chase you relentlessly, or yes the odd one that crawls.
The first being terribly flawed by trigger points - such as:

There is also the issue of Far Cry 2 completely lacking global a.i. resulting in a dull environment populated with people hell bent on killing you, regardless of faction.

They are simply not not as good as Crysis's dynamic a.i. which does a far better job reacting believably to the player.

There is no 'convincing me', I know both games well enough to make an educated judgement between the two and stand by it, let alone say -you are wrong.

..... i give up i had enough with lies.dakan45

OHHHH i get it... you guys are not going to gree no matter what and the 4 users here who had the same opinion as me, even the TC dropped the subject because they realize that thanks to your "crysis is a god" idea you cant accept not even a single diffirent opinion, so ill do the same and ignore all these and stop posting....i didnt know that if i liked far cry 2 (9.0 for me) more than crysis (8.0) for me, i am crazy and deserve to burn in hell....excuse me people but the reason those people posted here was because they had diffirent opinions and they expected to hear some positive comments but you guys were like..."no you dont even know what you are talking about"...... i guess you hate me too now because i dont love crysis and i think its average, and i hapen to like far cry 2 and stalker more so i guess i have to die. There you go, i insulated myself so you wont have to do it, can we all get along now? Or should i go and talk with those users who agree with me...OUTSIDE of this forum?dakan45

Look, I personally didn't enjoy Crysis overly but I am far from blind to see that all of the points that people are making are pretty accurate. The only person in this thread that has yet to contribute anything towards their post is currently you. And no, I didn't like the game because of any of the reasons you have stated. I just couldn't get into it for some reason. Maybe it's my taste in games? Perhaps but that's why we all have likes and dislikes. By the way, do you always say "No, you're always wrong" when someone doesn't agree with your OPINION?

PS: I also own a copy of Far Cry 2 for the PC and I ended up shelving that as well. There were more blatant issues with the game I found such as the instantly respawning guard posts and the missions in which neither faction would help you. I mean come on, you can't select a side or something?

Crysis is garbage. Bioshock is a MUCH better first person shooter.

Let me correct what you actually meant.

I didn't enjoy the gameplay or mechanics in Crysis. Bioshock is a MUCH more enjoyable first person shooter to me.

Timberwolf5578

Crysis is garbage. Bioshock is a MUCH better first person shooter.

Timberwolf5578

Funny thing is that i have the exact same score for both games... 8.0

But with all that hate against me, you guys make me wanna change my ratings and give 9.0 to bioshock and 7.0 to crysis, just because people dont hate you when you say "bioshock is average"

Let me correct what you actually meant.

[QUOTE="Timberwolf5578"]

I didn't enjoy the gameplay or mechanics in Crysis. Bioshock is a MUCH more enjoyable first person shooter to me.

Cdscottie

[QUOTE="Cdscottie"]

Let me correct what you actually meant.

[QUOTE="Timberwolf5578"]

I didn't enjoy the gameplay or mechanics in Crysis. Bioshock is a MUCH more enjoyable first person shooter to me.

DanielDust

[QUOTE="DanielDust"][QUOTE="Cdscottie"] See, now it's an opinion instead of a blatant attempt to stir up a hornet's nest.

dakan45

When it's about Timberwolf it isn't about just stating ones opinion or hating a game, it's all about mindless talk and he's a troll too, he never even contributes to the threads, he just makes them and waits for responses, he'd bash Crysis even in a Barbie thread :/.

To all of the people that are bashing anyone who says that they like this game. What games do you like? Gears of War? Call of Duty? Far Cry 2? Halo?

artiedeadat40

[QUOTE="dakan45"][QUOTE="DanielDust"] Don't bother, this one really is an idiot, all his threads and most of his posts are about how bad crysis looks and what garbage it is compared to various games. Being this idiotic should be illegal. DanielDust

When it's about Timberwolf it isn't about just stating ones opinion or hating a game, it's all about mindless talk and he's a troll too, he never even contributes to the threads, he just makes them and waits for responses, he'd bash Crysis even in a Barbie thread :/.

Get ready for a war with the users in this forum... Anyways i feel the same way as you about the game it feels extremely repetitive to me I didn't like it at all. In fact i would give it a 6.5/10.fighter91

damn i didnt read that, it should be a rule here in order to avoid conflicts, someone has to turn this into a stickie.

i knew there was gonna be someone who mentions todays standards...its a shooter, after going 3d and adding realistic physics there is little more that you can do...except have great gameplay and that doesn't really age (some of the games i still play for gameplay are from the 90's or early 00's, and i have yet to notice something showing its age (except the obvious-graphics, the only thing i admired in far cry, now crysis and so on...)

[QUOTE="fighter91"]Get ready for a war with the users in this forum... Anyways i feel the same way as you about the game it feels extremely repetitive to me I didn't like it at all. In fact i would give it a 6.5/10.dakan45

damn i didnt read that, it should be a rule here in order to avoid conflicts, someone has to turn this into a stickie.

Ok, Far Cry 2 was innovative and fun while Crysis was repetitive and boring. Right :roll:

How much more trolling are you going to do in this thread? We get it you don't like Crysis, well I hated Far Cry 2. You don't need to bash everyone who says that they enjoyed Crysis. I couldn't read your posts after about the 50th one here. Are you going to follow this up with another triple post? There is an edit button, learn how to use it.

men! Crysis dis threads never disppoint! it's specutaculr to see fanboys all work up and once in a while the greatness of Crysis need to be told all over again.

anyway, other games have been pulled into this mess...Crysis is at least worth a thorough play through, but Far Cry 2 is not.

and Crysis's graphic quality (especially water) is still no contest to this day, but its art direction is left too much to be desired.

men! Crysis dis threads never disppoint! it's specutaculr to see fanboys all work up and once in a while the greatness of Crysis need to be told all over again.

anyway, other games have been pulled into this mess...Crysis is at least worth a thorough play through, but Far Cry 2 is not.

and Crysis's graphic quality (especially water) is still no contest to this day, but its art direction is left too much to be desired.

teardropmina