Crysis Warhead is SO much better than plain Crysis!

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for polarwrath11
polarwrath11

1676

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 polarwrath11
Member since 2006 • 1676 Posts

Just installed Crysis Warhead. Never finished original Crysis as I found the framerate unbearable, so the gameplay was totally victimised. Therefore, I hated crysis. It's only after playing Warhead at a good framerate that I realise the gameplay is awsome. Rushing people and shotgunning totally didn't work at 20fps, but totally does work at 30+fps lol. Warhead FTW.

Avatar image for Frenzyd109
Frenzyd109

2276

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 20

User Lists: 0

#2 Frenzyd109
Member since 2007 • 2276 Posts
So you're saying warhead is better because your computer cant handle the original?
Avatar image for rzepak
rzepak

5758

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 rzepak
Member since 2005 • 5758 Posts

I found Warhead more fun becouse it was like Crysis but condensed into an action oriented package. It was a faster paced game and the hero had more personality than the bore from Crysis.

Avatar image for RedDanDoc
RedDanDoc

3720

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 RedDanDoc
Member since 2005 • 3720 Posts
I like the cut scene where Psycho drowns that Korean soldier. I enjoyed it, it was much better optimised but it was more linear and too short but then it was only an expansion.
Avatar image for Gammit10
Gammit10

2397

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 119

User Lists: 2

#5 Gammit10
Member since 2004 • 2397 Posts

I found Warhead more fun becouse it was like Crysis but condensed into an action oriented package. It was a faster paced game and the hero had more personality than the bore from Crysis.

rzepak
My sentiments exactly.
Avatar image for DanielDust
DanielDust

15402

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 DanielDust
Member since 2007 • 15402 Posts
So you're saying warhead is better because your computer cant handle the original?Frenzyd109
Yep, typical "Now my PC can handle the game so it's awesome but it sucked" post. Anyway, Warhead is short extreme awesome and now because of mods it's longer, but Crysis is long and steady awesome with lots of mods that where made before Warhead that made it way longer. So, overall, I like Crysis more, but Warhead has some "wow" moments.
Avatar image for polarwrath11
polarwrath11

1676

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 polarwrath11
Member since 2006 • 1676 Posts
So you're saying warhead is better because your computer cant handle the original?Frenzyd109
yep. I can really see myself completing warhead in a week. Thats quick by my standards. Optimisation had so much impact. Also I OC my graphics card between the original and warhead so enjoying a nicer framerate.
Avatar image for Daytona_178
Daytona_178

14962

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#8 Daytona_178
Member since 2005 • 14962 Posts

IMO:

Crysis Original: Better gameplay (slower and more tactical)

Crysis Warhead: Better graphics and better framerate.

Avatar image for deactivated-64ba3ebd35404
deactivated-64ba3ebd35404

7590

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#9 deactivated-64ba3ebd35404
Member since 2004 • 7590 Posts

IMO:

Crysis Original: Better gameplay (slower and more tactical)

Crysis Warhead: Better graphics and better framerate.

Daytona_178
I am Kieranb2000, and I fully endorse this post, giving it my official Seal of Approval, arrp arrp. But yeah, I agree with you xD The original Crysis's gameplay was better, and personally I found its overall pacing much better. That said, Warhead was a fantastic expansion pack, and it surprised me at the time just how good it was.
Avatar image for chandu83
chandu83

4864

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#10 chandu83
Member since 2005 • 4864 Posts

When I am done reviewing this game, I am giving it a 10/10

Gameplay video

Avatar image for Ondoval
Ondoval

3103

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#11 Ondoval
Member since 2005 • 3103 Posts

Bot are great. IMO Crysis is better because has better production values: more levels (11 vs 7), more variety in the environments and better cut scenes, with a more slow placed gameplay -that is not better or worse, but more on my tastes-. This can be maybe because Crysis was made from Crytek Frankfurt, and Warhead by Crytek Budapest.

Still, the good news about Warhead are that the gameplay is more intense: more enemies x scenary, TONS of weapons and ammunition, new ones to use (micro smgs, gl, deployable claymores and AT mines in the campaign- and the alien I.A. is now a lot more aggressive. Recently I started again the campaing and I'm really enjoying the game a lot, uploading vids from all the levels up to the 5th:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLzW1rr9jIg

But the best thing about Wrhead is the multiplayer, Crysis Wars. They increased the number of official maps from 9 to 23, added the TIA (Team Death Match mode) and added a autodownloader to install on fly any new map you try in the online, so the mp experience is now much more complete -but still low populated-.

Avatar image for Born_Lucky
Born_Lucky

1730

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 Born_Lucky
Member since 2003 • 1730 Posts

Two years after the game was released, and 99% of the computers out there still can't play it.

This is the kind of stupidity from devs that has console gaming kicking the crap out of PC gaming.

My 9800 GT will play it, but there isn't a PC out there that can max it with 8x AA - even now.

Avatar image for Filthybastrd
Filthybastrd

7124

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 Filthybastrd
Member since 2009 • 7124 Posts

Crysis with CCC level 5 looked better and had better framerate than Warhead for me.

I like Crysis better but they're both great.

Oh yeah, Warhead has some really annoying pop in.

Avatar image for Daytona_178
Daytona_178

14962

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#14 Daytona_178
Member since 2005 • 14962 Posts

Crysis with CCC level 5 looked better and had better framerate than Warhead for me.

I like Crysis better but they're both great.

Oh yeah, Warhead has some really annoying pop in.

Filthybastrd
Must have been something wrong with your install because Warhead does have slightly better graphics and smoother FPS.
Avatar image for Filthybastrd
Filthybastrd

7124

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15 Filthybastrd
Member since 2009 • 7124 Posts

[QUOTE="Filthybastrd"]

Crysis with CCC level 5 looked better and had better framerate than Warhead for me.

I like Crysis better but they're both great.

Oh yeah, Warhead has some really annoying pop in.

Daytona_178

Must have been something wrong with your install because Warhead does have slightly better graphics and smoother FPS.

Nope, it's the mod.

Avatar image for Too_tight_shoes
Too_tight_shoes

2486

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 Too_tight_shoes
Member since 2009 • 2486 Posts
[QUOTE="Born_Lucky"]

Two years after the game was released, and 99% of the computers out there still can't play it.

This is the kind of stupidity from devs that has console gaming kicking the crap out of PC gaming.

My 9800 GT will play it, but there isn't a PC out there that can max it with 8x AA - even now.

:|... A 1.5 year old "extreme" setup at work did exactly at 1680x1050 @ 30-40fps with the following setup: - Core 2 Quad QX6800 - 2x2GB OCZ Reaper 1150Mhz - 2x XFX 8800 Ultra It was our prime site display PC.
Avatar image for johnny27
johnny27

4400

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#17 johnny27
Member since 2006 • 4400 Posts
warhead is a great game no doubt and the graphics are better then crysis but crysis was more fun overall the game was less linear and gave you more freedom to play around and tackle each mission how you wanted.
Avatar image for johnny27
johnny27

4400

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#18 johnny27
Member since 2006 • 4400 Posts
[QUOTE="Too_tight_shoes"][QUOTE="Born_Lucky"]

Two years after the game was released, and 99% of the computers out there still can't play it.

This is the kind of stupidity from devs that has console gaming kicking the crap out of PC gaming.

My 9800 GT will play it, but there isn't a PC out there that can max it with 8x AA - even now.

:|... A 1.5 year old "extreme" setup at work did exactly at 1680x1050 @ 30-40fps with the following setup: - Core 2 Quad QX6800 - 2x2GB OCZ Reaper 1150Mhz - 2x XFX 8800 Ultra It was our prime site display PC.

so dx10 maxed out all very high 8xaa 1680x1050 on a 8800gtx at 30-40fps i find that hard to believe.
Avatar image for Too_tight_shoes
Too_tight_shoes

2486

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19 Too_tight_shoes
Member since 2009 • 2486 Posts
[QUOTE="johnny27"][QUOTE="Too_tight_shoes"][QUOTE="Born_Lucky"]

Two years after the game was released, and 99% of the computers out there still can't play it.

This is the kind of stupidity from devs that has console gaming kicking the crap out of PC gaming.

My 9800 GT will play it, but there isn't a PC out there that can max it with 8x AA - even now.

:|... A 1.5 year old "extreme" setup at work did exactly at 1680x1050 @ 30-40fps with the following setup: - Core 2 Quad QX6800 - 2x2GB OCZ Reaper 1150Mhz - 2x XFX 8800 Ultra It was our prime site display PC.

so dx10 maxed out all very high 8xaa 1680x1050 on a 8800gtx at 30-40fps i find that hard to believe.

So do I to be honest, but I said "2x XFX 8800 Ultra"... :|
Avatar image for Ondoval
Ondoval

3103

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#20 Ondoval
Member since 2005 • 3103 Posts

Two years after the game was released, and 99% of the computers out there still can't play it.

This is the kind of stupidity from devs that has console gaming kicking the crap out of PC gaming.

My 9800 GT will play it, but there isn't a PC out there that can max it with 8x AA - even now.

Born_Lucky

99% of the computers can't run Quake 3 maxed. And 2 years after is still the best looking game out there; you can't shield criticism behind system requirements since the hardware is way cheaper and way powerful today than in fall 2007.. My GTX 275 runs it fine at Enthusiast/Very high 1680 x 1050 with average 40 fps. A friend of mine with a GTX 280 SLI rus the game at 60 fps with X4 Edge AA.

Avatar image for DanielDust
DanielDust

15402

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21 DanielDust
Member since 2007 • 15402 Posts

Two years after the game was released, and 99% of the computers out there still can't play it.

This is the kind of stupidity from devs that has console gaming kicking the crap out of PC gaming.

My 9800 GT will play it, but there isn't a PC out there that can max it with 8x AA - even now.

Born_Lucky
Link? 99%? no matter how ignorant you are you can't tell me that 99% of the "gaming PCs" out there can't play Crysis. And what does the part with consoles have to do with anything except your insecurities? Please find a better place to post all your "trash" like the console forums. You haven't posted a single intelligent, logical, reply in the last week on the PC forums.
Avatar image for bowlingotter
bowlingotter

6464

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 34

User Lists: 0

#22 bowlingotter
Member since 2005 • 6464 Posts

Crysis is one of the best FPSs I've ever played. Additionally, Warhead is one of the best expansions to an FPS (probably second to HL2 Episode 2). A lot of developers would've packed it as a sequel and sold it for full price. That gives me a great handle of the standard they're setting for the game, which is a solid reason to look forward to Crysis 2.

That said, yeah the system optimization for Crysis Warhead was much better than it was for the original Crysis. But it's a great expansion to a great game, not "SO much better than 'plain' Crysis!"

Avatar image for Farkeman
Farkeman

1199

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#23 Farkeman
Member since 2009 • 1199 Posts

warhead has better gameplay and story !

Avatar image for Daytona_178
Daytona_178

14962

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#24 Daytona_178
Member since 2005 • 14962 Posts

warhead has better gameplay and story !

Farkeman
LOL, its the same story! Slightly different.
Avatar image for Macutchi
Macutchi

11215

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#25 Macutchi
Member since 2007 • 11215 Posts

Two years after the game was released, and 99% of the computers out there still can't play it.

This is the kind of stupidity from devs that has console gaming kicking the crap out of PC gaming.

My 9800 GT will play it, but there isn't a PC out there that can max it with 8x AA - even now.

Born_Lucky

:D

talk about dangling the bait..

loved both but crysis is my favourite, that first play through was just :shock:

loved it

Avatar image for Gravitational24
Gravitational24

30

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#26 Gravitational24
Member since 2009 • 30 Posts

My 9800 GT will play it, but there isn't a PC out there that can max it with 8x AA - even now.

Born_Lucky

I beg to differ...I bet this PC could. http://kingpincooling.com/forum/showthread.php?t=199

A core i9 @ 6ghzand 4x5870...............