Crysis has better graphics, just compare the system requirements and no1 can discuss. Animations were solid on crysis,although not too realistic. Who didn't hate the demo for not being able to mess with the bodies? and that silly crap double pistol?
Like someone said above, we do forget how amazing the game is and keep insisting on it's low points. I didn't see anything like the natural environment on crysis; and I didn't see either anything like how natural the characters on hl2 looks.
For those who claim crysis to be a better fps than hl2, I think we should consider, first, the FPS stile. HL2 stands for a linear FPS: it's not like crysis, where you can have numerous approaches; but still , that's NOT a bad quality of HL2, it's a different stile.
Crysis can have those approaches, but , in the demo, I felt like doing the same thing around the level. You sneak near the enemy, show up and blast him off , cloak again, get behind the second enemy, blast him off, cloak, and that goes on.
I've tried too the Rambo way: rush to the enemy, punch him on the face, blast his friend, cloak, jump on the house, destroy it, cloak, explode everything. It's like:get to the enemy, use your cool suit to munch them.
Although repetitive, it's really addicting, for some time. I trully hope the action to continue intense, but to be different through the game.
That feeling never ever came to me in HL2. Although the premise is simple(one army men to destroy the bad guys), it has got it's own credit for how variating the action can be in the game. Sometimes you're running from the cops, other times killing them, blasting zombies etc. The game manipulates you, and, if you let it, it's great to see how the game does it.
First, we need to analyse the gaming **** and then, compare. It's like comparing WIC and C&C RA2.
Log in to comment