does any one else feel this way about crysis

i don't how many people on my firends list have pc's but if you do and have a great working one you would have crysis , know i know what your thinking crysis that amazing game that super detailed game , that **** storm awesome balls to the walls action game, WRONG , for everything that crysis is is now awesome it pretty but not pretty awesome , the missions are soo repetitive and boring , it nothing but running jumping and dismantlement and blowing up satellite blockers and throwing Asians into stuff i mean yeh it a pretty game but for some reason i cant get into it everyttimei play it i just sit and think about wow i wounder how many more satellites and aliens am i gonna have to blow up , i mean the game wasn't even suppose to be a game the crytek engine running it was suppose to be made for house designers or something bottom line tired of it

deleting it

hope warhead is better cause phyco is awsome

i 'm mean ok if you love it and you get how to use the sand box editor cool, i mean its not gonna be everyones cup of tea but crysis is just another average shooter with amzing graphics thats just me

i don't how many people on my firends list have pc's but if you do and have a great working one you would have crysis , know i know what your thinking crysis that amazing game that super detailed game , that **** storm awesome balls to the walls action game, WRONG , for everything that crysis is is now awesome it pretty but not pretty awesome , the missions are soo repetitive and boring , it nothing but running jumping and dismantlement and blowing up satellite blockers and throwing Asians into stuff i mean yeh it a pretty game but for some reason i cant get into it everyttimei play it i just sit and think about wow i wounder how many more satellites and aliens am i gonna have to blow up , i mean the game wasn't even suppose to be a game the crytek engine running it was suppose to be made for house designers or something bottom line tired of it

deleting it

hope warhead is better cause phyco is awsome

i 'm mean ok if you love it and you get how to use the sand box editor cool, i mean its not gonna be everyones cup of tea but crysis is just another average shooter with amzing graphics thats just me

ed765

To me, those who didn't enjoy Crysis simply played the game the wrong way. People who are geared towards linear experiences will resort to lame and generic tactics to get past the game, thus making the Crysis itself feel generic. But to some players, to us, who explored the full capability of Crysis' physics and excellent gunplay will find a walthy amount of gameplay fun in it. It's always a different experience each time you play it.

I personally loved it and I haven't uninstalled it since I got last November.

To me, those who didn't enjoy Crysis simply played the game the wrong way. People who are geared towards linear experiences will resort to lame and generic tactics to get past the game, thus making the Crysis itself feel generic.

shalashaska88

if this game can be played as a :linear: and :generic: FPS...it is a linear and generic game in addition to whatever glory you who play it "correctly" paint to it. another thing, ever since the alien get to the scene full blown, what's the "correct" way to go through the game other than follow instructions and play generically? exactly how many ways can you get pass the air piloting level? the campfire or die mission, and the taking order or no pass finale?

I'm sorry to hear that, i do think Crysis is an excelent shooter, the incredible graphics and huge levels are just awesome, the story isn't the best but either is the worst, i have played the game several times and never get tired of it, also there is all the mods and the sandbox2 editor that are excellent for the replay value.

And don't forget that this game is probably the reason of why we see new graphics cards released almost constantly, this game is what really shows what the PC gaming can do over the consoles and i think it does introduces that thing that every shooter should follow from now long.

All the Crysis complainers make no sense.
Here Crytek gives them a different shooter with a different way to play if you wanted to, and instead they complain about repetitiveness and stuff, when look at all the other shooters, linear repetive, games. Bu bu teh stalker! Thats only two games buddy.

All the Crysis complainers make no sense.
Here Crytek gives them a different shooter with a different way to play if you wanted to, and instead they complain about repetitiveness and stuff, when look at all the other shooters, linear repetive, games. Bu bu teh stalker! Thats only two games buddy.

lettuceman44

Their opinion doesn't make sense? Why not? Because it goes against your opinion?

Average FPS for sure, 9.5 from Gamespot? I smell payoff. FarCry was so much better, well atleast until it's insanely hard ending.claytoma

Far Cry didn't have an "insanely hard ending", and Crysis took everything that Far Cry did and made it better. Sure, Crysis has some linear levels here and there, but who cares? They're still great, and the non-linear ones are better than Far Cry's.

Crysis is a great game overall and I enjoyed it a lot. If you think this way then so is every other FPS. Just like when Doom 3 was released, I had great expectations, but it didn't turn out how I expected it to be but that doesn't mean I didn't enjoy playing it.

The point is that it looks like people expected it to revolutionize the FPS games but it will take a long time till we'll have such a game.

[QUOTE="claytoma"]Average FPS for sure, 9.5 from Gamespot? I smell payoff. FarCry was so much better, well atleast until it's insanely hard ending.ReddestSkies

Far Cry didn't have an "insanely hard ending", and Crysis took everything that Far Cry did and made it better. Sure, Crysis has some linear levels here and there, but who cares? They're still great, and the non-linear ones are better than Far Cry's.

So are you saying my opinion is wrong about the ending because I found it hard and you didn't? Opinions are purely subjective, everyone's varies based on their perspective. For this reason, no one can be right or wrong about how they perceive things. Learn this concept, and life will get much easier for you. Yes, it was hard for me, but it seems like you must have God-like hand-eye coordination; congratulations on that!

Stop bringing up 'opinion' so bloody much...

Anyways, it was the same for me. Take away the graphics and it's a dull game. The stealth was crap (press button, go invisible), and the 3 other features of the nanosuit were equally exciting. Saying it's non-linear and creative because of the nanosuit is like saying Half-Life 2 is non-linear and creative because of the gravity gun. It's still a linear shooter with a few tricks thrown in.

Nope, thats a lot of people who feel the need to put down the game and call it dull and boring and a tech demo just like you. So you don't have to feel lonely.

I'm not one of them though, so be gone from me!!!

I thought it was a pretty darn good FPS, with a solid story, and likeable characters (except Nomad, he doesnt have a personality :P ). It was really good and the graphics were superb, obviously.

[QUOTE="ReddestSkies"]

[QUOTE="claytoma"]Average FPS for sure, 9.5 from Gamespot? I smell payoff. FarCry was so much better, well atleast until it's insanely hard ending.claytoma

Far Cry didn't have an "insanely hard ending", and Crysis took everything that Far Cry did and made it better. Sure, Crysis has some linear levels here and there, but who cares? They're still great, and the non-linear ones are better than Far Cry's.

So are you saying my opinion is wrong about the ending because I found it hard and you didn't? Opinions are purely subjective, everyone's varies based on their perspective. For this reason, no one can be right or wrong about how they perceive things. Learn this concept, and life will get much easier for you. Yes, it was hard for me, but it seems like you must have God-like hand-eye coordination; congratulations on that!

My first play through was on "realistic" with checkpoints-only (I still find it disgusting that the gaming community had Crytek release a patch including quicksaves, bunch of newbs...) and while I did die a decent amount, there isn't a single part of the game that I found "insanely hard. /brag

My first play through was on "realistic" with checkpoints-only (I still find it disgusting that the gaming community had Crytek release a patch including quicksaves, bunch of newbs...) and while I did die a decent amount, there isn't a single part of the game that I found "insanely hard. /brag

ReddestSkies

Quicksave was included when the game was released, nothing wrong with including quicksave.

ok, jaw dropping graphics and destructable enviroments are pretty awsome, but thats not my reason for this reply.... MACDONALDS TASTES AWSOME!!!!!blairstheman

[QUOTE="ReddestSkies"]

My first play through was on "realistic" with checkpoints-only (I still find it disgusting that the gaming community had Crytek release a patch including quicksaves, bunch of newbs...) and while I did die a decent amount, there isn't a single part of the game that I found "insanely hard. /brag

Lonelynight

Quicksave was included when the game was released, nothing wrong with including quicksave.

Quicksaving is an incentive for both the player and the developer to get lazy. When used, it makes any game much, much easier, and when developers know that their game will include quicksaving, they might not carefully position the checkpoints/autosaves.

I guess that quicksaving was added after the demo, then. Same thing. People played a 30 minutes demo and figured that the game was somewhat challenging, so they cried for quicksaving to make it easier. Sad.

[QUOTE="Lonelynight"][QUOTE="ReddestSkies"]

My first play through was on "realistic" with checkpoints-only (I still find it disgusting that the gaming community had Crytek release a patch including quicksaves, bunch of newbs...) and while I did die a decent amount, there isn't a single part of the game that I found "insanely hard. /brag

ReddestSkies

Quicksave was included when the game was released, nothing wrong with including quicksave.

Quicksaving is an incentive for both the player and the developer to get lazy. When used, it makes any game much, much easier, and when developers know that their game will include quicksaving, they might not carefully position the checkpoints/autosaves.

I guess that quicksaving was added after the demo, then. Same thing. People played a 30 minutes demo and figured that the game was somewhat challenging, so they cried for quicksaving to make it easier. Sad.

[QUOTE="ReddestSkies"][QUOTE="Lonelynight"][QUOTE="ReddestSkies"]

My first play through was on "realistic" with checkpoints-only (I still find it disgusting that the gaming community had Crytek release a patch including quicksaves, bunch of newbs...) and while I did die a decent amount, there isn't a single part of the game that I found "insanely hard. /brag

lettuceman44

Quicksave was included when the game was released, nothing wrong with including quicksave.

Quicksaving is an incentive for both the player and the developer to get lazy. When used, it makes any game much, much easier, and when developers know that their game will include quicksaving, they might not carefully position the checkpoints/autosaves.

I guess that quicksaving was added after the demo, then. Same thing. People played a 30 minutes demo and figured that the game was somewhat challenging, so they cried for quicksaving to make it easier. Sad.

I care because it is a bunch of small details like this one that make it so that most of today's games are too easy.

i don't how many people on my firends list have pc's but if you do and have a great working one you would have crysis , know i know what your thinking crysis that amazing game that super detailed game , that **** storm awesome balls to the walls action game, WRONG , for everything that crysis is is now awesome it pretty but not pretty awesome , the missions are soo repetitive and boring , it nothing but running jumping and dismantlement and blowing up satellite blockers and throwing Asians into stuff i mean yeh it a pretty game but for some reason i cant get into it everyttimei play it i just sit and think about wow i wounder how many more satellites and aliens am i gonna have to blow up , i mean the game wasn't even suppose to be a game the crytek engine running it was suppose to be made for house designers or something bottom line tired of it

deleting it

hope warhead is better cause phyco is awsome

i 'm mean ok if you love it and you get how to use the sand box editor cool, i mean its not gonna be everyones cup of tea but crysis is just another average shooter with amzing graphics thats just me

ed765

Could we get a translation here? If you're going to rant, make sure to use proper grammer.

Aside from that, I completely disagree. Crysis had great graphics, with great gameplay included. It may have seemed repetative to you, because you took all the easy ways out. If you play around with the nansuit and try some dangerous stuff, the game's alot better

I don't feel that way at all. Crysis' action and gunplay is as exciting as they come. Hell, I could replay the opening levels forever. GodLovesDead

I agree as well, the gunplay was amazing in the game, people that say its a generic shooter with pretty graphics have their opinions, but name a fps outside of Half life 2, that pushes the gen. foward? You really can't, shooters are always going to be about shooting people with guns.

[QUOTE="Lonelynight"][QUOTE="ReddestSkies"]

My first play through was on "realistic" with checkpoints-only (I still find it disgusting that the gaming community had Crytek release a patch including quicksaves, bunch of newbs...) and while I did die a decent amount, there isn't a single part of the game that I found "insanely hard. /brag

ReddestSkies

Quicksave was included when the game was released, nothing wrong with including quicksave.

Quicksaving is an incentive for both the player and the developer to get lazy. When used, it makes any game much, much easier, and when developers know that their game will include quicksaving, they might not carefully position the checkpoints/autosaves.

I guess that quicksaving was added after the demo, then. Same thing. People played a 30 minutes demo and figured that the game was somewhat challenging, so they cried for quicksaving to make it easier. Sad.

So I wouldn't call that challenging, I would just call that an excuse for a short game.:P

Far from average gunplay.

I poured 40 hours of Crysis gameplay.

At 800x500 on the lowest details.

Graphics aren't everything, graphic whores.

[QUOTE="ReddestSkies"][QUOTE="Lonelynight"][QUOTE="ReddestSkies"]

My first play through was on "realistic" with checkpoints-only (I still find it disgusting that the gaming community had Crytek release a patch including quicksaves, bunch of newbs...) and while I did die a decent amount, there isn't a single part of the game that I found "insanely hard. /brag

gs_gear

Quicksave was included when the game was released, nothing wrong with including quicksave.

Quicksaving is an incentive for both the player and the developer to get lazy. When used, it makes any game much, much easier, and when developers know that their game will include quicksaving, they might not carefully position the checkpoints/autosaves.

I guess that quicksaving was added after the demo, then. Same thing. People played a 30 minutes demo and figured that the game was somewhat challenging, so they cried for quicksaving to make it easier. Sad.

So I wouldn't call that challenging, I would just call that an excuse for a short game.:P

"Replaying the game until the checkpoint again" is challenging in any self-respecting game. Saving after every movement makes any game much easier, as you only have to care about getting one thing right, then save again, then get one thing right, etc. With checkpoints, though, you have to go through a whole string of challenger before saving again, and can't screw it up before the next checkpoint.

[QUOTE="gs_gear"][QUOTE="ReddestSkies"][QUOTE="Lonelynight"][QUOTE="ReddestSkies"]

My first play through was on "realistic" with checkpoints-only (I still find it disgusting that the gaming community had Crytek release a patch including quicksaves, bunch of newbs...) and while I did die a decent amount, there isn't a single part of the game that I found "insanely hard. /brag

ReddestSkies

Quicksave was included when the game was released, nothing wrong with including quicksave.

Quicksaving is an incentive for both the player and the developer to get lazy. When used, it makes any game much, much easier, and when developers know that their game will include quicksaving, they might not carefully position the checkpoints/autosaves.

I guess that quicksaving was added after the demo, then. Same thing. People played a 30 minutes demo and figured that the game was somewhat challenging, so they cried for quicksaving to make it easier. Sad.

So I wouldn't call that challenging, I would just call that an excuse for a short game.:P

"Replaying the game until the checkpoint again" is challenging in any self-respecting game. Saving after every movement makes any game much easier, as you only have to care about getting one thing right, then save again, then get one thing right, etc. With checkpoints, though, you have to go through a whole string of challenger before saving again, and can't screw it up before the next checkpoint.

I also like games to be more challenging but not in this way. Make the AI better, add more enemies or make them harder to kill. Many people complained about the trigens being too strong, and yes they were (two hits from a small trigen, even with full health bar and armour, and you were dead) but I liked them, it really made the game more challenging.

And I don't get it what's with all the games recently having only checkpoints. I mean I understand that they were needed for last gen consoles games because the saves were limited by memory card but nowadays consoles also have HDDs. But as I've said, I think this is just an excuse for making shorter games. :|

Yep once you get past the graphics... its just another FPS. Nothing special.theking52_TDK

this

Those who complain that Crysis is just another shooter

are these people

1. The ones who want to play it at uber hight resolution on very high setting with x4 AA but can't(uh no one can.

2.The one who own a crappy PC.

3.Did not buy Crysis.

4.Console Fanboy

For those who own Crysis and complain its just another generic shooter.

YOU ARE NOT PLAYING IT RIGHT!!

To me, those who didn't enjoy Crysis simply played the game the wrong way. People who are geared towards linear experiences will resort to lame and generic tactics to get past the game, thus making the Crysis itself feel generic. But to some players, to us, who explored the full capability of Crysis' physics and excellent gunplay will find a walthy amount of gameplay fun in it. It's always a different experience each time you play it.

I personally loved it and I haven't uninstalled it since I got last November.

shalashaska88

this man speaks the truth

People who play through Crysis "to beat it" by running through the game taking the most obvious route everytime, will find it a boring game. When in fact it's the player's fault that they decide to take the linear and methodical path which is drummed into their heads from linear FPS games which holds their hands for them.

It's evident that the thread posteris all about getting tothe next objective in a linear manner, he talks about going from blowing up one satellite to the next, and so on. In Crysis, the game isn't about from point A to B. It is HOW and WHAT you do in between every objective which makes Crysis unique.

I don't feel that way at all. Crysis' action and gunplay is as exciting as they come. Hell, I could replay the opening levels forever. GodLovesDead

Those who complain that Crysis is just another shooter

are these people

1. The ones who want to play it at uber hight resolution on very high setting with x4 AA but can't(uh no one can.

2.The one who own a crappy PC.

3.Did not buy Crysis.

4.Console Fanboy

For those who own Crysis and complain its just another generic shooter.

YOU ARE NOT PLAYING IT RIGHT!!

gianshomai

i can play it on high

i dont have a crappy pc

i own the dvd and the 2 other dvd's that came with it

and yes i do love consols but, i love pc's just as much cause theres just more to have with tem my oc brok and i was bored out of my mind , and i have ps3 and a 360 so yeh thats saying something