Crysis 2 'Be The Weapon' Trailer: AMAZING

[QUOTE="NotTarts"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] Come on really? I didnt post anything that wasnt fact. Nor did I used my imagination, I think your the one that isnt seeing the obvious effects that are affecting Crysis 2 by the console intergration.

blues35301

I still think Crytek was going in that direction either way, so it seems a bit brash to state that consoles were the sole cause of it. Crysis Warhead is a prime example of it, and when comparing Crysis to Far Cry you can see the differences.

:roll: I have replayed crysis a few times, what is this freedom everyone thinks is so great? The end result is the same, what you can go guns blazing or stealth? Pc gamers on this forum are giving crysis1 way to much credit, actually it has been bashed alot for its gameplay, but now it seems more convenient to praise it as the 2nd coming so it is easier to bash crysis2 because it is also on consoles. For me pc gamers on this forum have lost the little cred they had left.

[QUOTE="NotTarts"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] Come on really? I didnt post anything that wasnt fact. Nor did I used my imagination, I think your the one that isnt seeing the obvious effects that are affecting Crysis 2 by the console intergration.

blues35301

I still think Crytek was going in that direction either way, so it seems a bit brash to state that consoles were the sole cause of it. Crysis Warhead is a prime example of it, and when comparing Crysis to Far Cry you can see the differences.

[QUOTE="blues35301"][QUOTE="NotTarts"]

I still think Crytek was going in that direction either way, so it seems a bit brash to state that consoles were the sole cause of it. Crysis Warhead is a prime example of it, and when comparing Crysis to Far Cry you can see the differences.

AAllxxjjnn

:roll: I have replayed crysis a few times, what is this freedom everyone thinks is so great? The end result is the same, what you can go guns blazing or stealth? Pc gamers on this forum are giving crysis1 way to much credit, actually it has been bashed alot for its gameplay, but now it seems more convenient to praise it as the 2nd coming so it is easier to bash crysis2 because it is also on consoles. For me pc gamers on this forum have lost the little cred they had left.Advid-Gamer

[QUOTE="blues35301"][QUOTE="NotTarts"]

I still think Crytek was going in that direction either way, so it seems a bit brash to state that consoles were the sole cause of it. Crysis Warhead is a prime example of it, and when comparing Crysis to Far Cry you can see the differences.

Advid-Gamer

:roll: I have replayed crysis a few times, what is this freedom everyone thinks is so great? The end result is the same, what you can go guns blazing or stealth? Pc gamers on this forum are giving crysis1 way to much credit, actually it has been bashed alot for its gameplay, but now it seems more convenient to praise it as the 2nd coming so it is easier to bash crysis2 because it is also on consoles. For me pc gamers on this forum have lost the little cred they had left.

[QUOTE="Advid-Gamer"]:roll: I have replayed crysis a few times, what is this freedom everyone thinks is so great? The end result is the same, what you can go guns blazing or stealth? Pc gamers on this forum are giving crysis1 way to much credit, actually it has been bashed alot for its gameplay, but now it seems more convenient to praise it as the 2nd coming so it is easier to bash crysis2 because it is also on consoles. For me pc gamers on this forum have lost the little cred they had left.AAllxxjjnn

[QUOTE="Advid-Gamer"]:roll: I have replayed crysis a few times, what is this freedom everyone thinks is so great? The end result is the same, what you can go guns blazing or stealth? Pc gamers on this forum are giving crysis1 way to much credit, actually it has been bashed alot for its gameplay, but now it seems more convenient to praise it as the 2nd coming so it is easier to bash crysis2 because it is also on consoles. For me pc gamers on this forum have lost the little cred they had left.AAllxxjjnn

OMG.. this one is awesome!

[QUOTE="Silenthps"]But as for Crytek, if you've read any of their interviews you'd know that they switched to a city because they were tired of jungle after jungle after jungle that they've been doing since Farcry and wished to switch it up and do an "urban jungle" which add's more verticality to it as well. Consoles had very little to do with that decision as shown by the fact that they already had an island and a forest scene working on consoles in the CE3 tech demos. AnnoyedDragon

You believe it to be true because they said so, do you really think they would tell two thirds of their audience that they held the game back? Crytek are trying to penetrate the console market, not annoy them. They are already saying the graphics were held back by consoles, don't want to add game design to that list. Plus if you had played the first game, you would note that the dawn scene replicated in CryEngine 3 was completely massacred. The other was a forest scene from a discontinued game.

OMG.. this one is awesome!

kozzy1234

:roll: I have replayed crysis a few times, what is this freedom everyone thinks is so great? The end result is the same, what you can go guns blazing or stealth? Pc gamers on this forum are giving crysis1 way to much credit, actually it has been bashed alot for its gameplay, but now it seems more convenient to praise it as the 2nd coming so it is easier to bash crysis2 because it is also on consoles. For me pc gamers on this forum have lost the little cred they had left.

Advid-Gamer

Best Shooter

"It was this open-ended, emergent gameplay--the ability to let us tackle out challenges in whatever way we wished while requiring us to think on our feet that helped the game squeak pass impressive shooters such as the highly addictive Call of Duty 4, the extremely polished Halo 3, the creepy and distinctive Bioshock, and the jam-packed game known as The Orange Box--all of which are genuinely exceptional games in their own right that are absolutely, positively worth your while. But for being able to make us feel like an incredibly lethal and intelligent predator in a way that perhaps no other game has done, Crysis takes this award"

OMG.. this one is awesome!

kozzy1234

Well what do we know?

We know for a fact that the games design is being held back by consoles, because Crytek themselves have come out and said this.

We know for a fact that the scale from the previous game has been taken away, an accommodation for consoles memory limitations; forcing the game to be converted to streaming. Something the head of Crytek himself has said would change the fundamental intended experience of Crysis.

AnnoyedDragon

And yes, consoles would have held back... CRYSIS 1, but this isn't Crysis 1. And if you're going to make the proposition that Crytek is making Crysis 2 more linear SOLELY because of consoles, then you're gonna have to explain why they made Crysis: Warhead so linear, especially during a time when PC's were stronger than they were at the release of Crysis.

We know for a fact that the nano suit has been streamlined. The main fun of Crysis was switching suit powers on the fly in order to achieve interesting results, were as now they have combined the number of powers to force the player to choose between two modes effectively.AnnoyedDragon

The streamlining makes Crysis 2 better, not worse. The way it was in Crysis made it unnecessarily difficult to change suit modes, and doing a speed mode > strength mode jump didn't make you go further in anyway which just made the jump look clumsy and awkward. The only way you could get long distance jumps is by the circle strafing glitch.

Also, think about it logically, does it at all make sense that in speed mode it makes your legs strong enough to run fast, but it doesn't make them strong enough to jump high? The combined speed/strength mode makes much more sense. So no, consoles are not the sole cause of the streamlining of the modes, it just makes more sense. And BTW its actually three modes (strength/speed, armor, cloak) + the multiple nanosuit upgrades.

And for whatever particular reason, they have only shown the 360 version of the game, despite PC gamers being the original Crysis fans.

So there is a lot to not be happy about. It doesn't particularly help that console gamers who most likely never played the first game are telling us to shut up, because they personally find Crysis impressive in this held back state; and anything the original fans think is irrelevant to them.

AnnoyedDragon

What's more annoying than console gamers are pessimistic pc elitist who find technology more impressive than the actual practical and beneficial use of technology. Crysis 1 is dead, if you want open world sandbox gameplay then play Crysis or play the many other open world fps that are on the PC. Crytek is trying to do something different by combining the fun of sandbox with the excitement of linear games (choreographed sandbox) which is something that no other game is doing. Yes it may be less technologically advanced than a pure sandbox and quite frankly, I don't care. I'd much rather have a new experience.

Yes, obviously consoles have limited the creative freedom of Crysis 2. However, in that interview where he said it, he didn't say how much. And if you read earlier interviews he says that the amount of change due to consoles were very little. Course you'll probably through in your little conspiracy theory and say that they were lying.

And yes, consoles would have held back... CRYSIS 1, but this isn't Crysis 1. And if you're going to make the proposition that Crytek is making Crysis 2 more linear SOLELY because of consoles, then you're gonna have to explain why they made Crysis: Warhead so linear, especially during a time when PC's were stronger than they were at the release of Crysis.

Silenthps

As I have said in the past, Crysis Warhead was a offshoot from the main game. Did you know the launch price was cheaper than Crysis 1? Because it was shorter, they spent less time on it, it wasn't meant to be as big as the original; it was just a stand alone expansion.

You call it a conspiracy theory to say Crytek chose the city because of consoles, but look at the facts. At the end of Crysis 1 they were heading back to the Island, showing that the next game was based there. You call it a rehash, I say the expanded sphere could have done a lot to the island. Now also take into account that the head of Crytek himself explained that consoles wouldn't be able to achieve Crysis's intended experience because of memory limitations, he said they would have to use streaming. Now consider that Crysis 2 has been converted to streaming, and that city environments are the perfect locations for streaming.

I don't see how following the logical rout makes me a conspiracy theorist.

The streamlining makes Crysis 2 better, not worse. The way it was in Crysis made it unnecessarily difficult to change suit modes, and doing a speed mode > strength mode jump didn't make you go further in anyway which just made the jump look clumsy and awkward. The only way you could get long distance jumps is by the circle strafing glitch.

Also, think about it logically, does it at all make sense that in speed mode it makes your legs strong enough to run fast, but it doesn't make them strong enough to jump high? The combined speed/strength mode makes much more sense. So no, consoles are not the sole cause of the streamlining of the modes, it just makes more sense. And BTW its actually three modes (strength/speed, armor, cloak) + the multiple nanosuit upgrades.

Silenthps

You know you can jump further with speed mode by doing a run and jump? I never encountered any problems with the mode switching, it was very fast, you could do it in mid air while performing an action. What you are making an argument for is convenience, combining the modes so that you don't have to switch between them. Well I have a word for that, overpowered. It is clear why they combined the modes though, they expect you to run and leap between buildings.

I just hope previews I have read in the past are wrong, which is why I said two modes. I recall reading in the past that you can combined modes.

They have said time and time again what that particular reason is. You may not agree with that reason, but your opinion doesn't take away from the legitimacy of that reason.

What's more annoying than console gamers are pessimistic pc elitist who find technology more impressive than the actual practical and beneficial use of technology. Crysis 1 is dead, if you want open world sandbox gameplay then play Crysis or play the many other open world fps that are on the PC. Crytek is trying to do something different by combining the fun of sandbox with the excitement of linear games (choreographed sandbox) which is something that no other game is doing. Yes it may be less technologically advanced than a pure sandbox and quite frankly, I don't care. I'd much rather have a new experience.

Silenthps

You don't care what I think, so why should I care what you think?

Why does it matter that it is being made more linear? More restricted? More scripted? Because we are supposed to be seeing progress, and I'm seeing progress go backwards; which is hardly a good thing. Gaming is interactive entertainment, emphasis on interactive. Crap like Call of Duty is trying to turn gaming into a movie; and developers want to be like Call of Duty because it sells. Consoles will one day be able to support the sort of levels Crysis 1 did, and when that happens; maybe they will finally get what it's about.

looks better than future real life

The streamlining makes Crysis 2 better, not worse. The way it was in Crysis made it unnecessarily difficult to change suit modes, and doing a speed mode > strength mode jump didn't make you go further in anyway which just made the jump look clumsy and awkward. The only way you could get long distance jumps is by the circle strafing glitch.

Also, think about it logically, does it at all make sense that in speed mode it makes your legs strong enough to run fast, but it doesn't make them strong enough to jump high? The combined speed/strength mode makes much more sense. So no, consoles are not the sole cause of the streamlining of the modes, it just makes more sense. And BTW its actually three modes (strength/speed, armor, cloak) + the multiple nanosuit upgrades.

Silenthps

You can swich between suit modes in Crysis in 3 ways: using the radial menu, using direct hotkeys and using multiple hits in a swich key. Wasm't hard at all.

The game looks much slower now, and some powers (stealth) seems useless in multiplayer due the scale reduction and the focus in deathmacth game modes -stealth was useless in Team Instant Action but usefull in the large Power Struggle maps to camp protecting bunkers and some of the facilities-.

[QUOTE="Silenthps"]

As I have said in the past, Crysis Warhead was a offshoot from the main game. Did you know the launch price was cheaper than Crysis 1? Because it was shorter, they spent less time on it, it wasn't meant to be as big as the original; it was just a stand alone expansion.

You call it a conspiracy theory to say Crytek chose the city because of consoles, but look at the facts. At the end of Crysis 1 they were heading back to the Island, showing that the next game was based there. You call it a rehash, I say the expanded sphere could have done a lot to the island. Now also take into account that the head of Crytek himself explained that consoles wouldn't be able to achieve Crysis's intended experience because of memory limitations, he said they would have to use streaming. Now consider that Crysis 2 has been converted to streaming, and that city environments are the perfect locations for streaming.

I don't see how following the logical rout makes me a conspiracy theorist.

[QUOTE="Silenthps"]

The streamlining makes Crysis 2 better, not worse. The way it was in Crysis made it unnecessarily difficult to change suit modes, and doing a speed mode > strength mode jump didn't make you go further in anyway which just made the jump look clumsy and awkward. The only way you could get long distance jumps is by the circle strafing glitch.

Also, think about it logically, does it at all make sense that in speed mode it makes your legs strong enough to run fast, but it doesn't make them strong enough to jump high? The combined speed/strength mode makes much more sense. So no, consoles are not the sole cause of the streamlining of the modes, it just makes more sense. And BTW its actually three modes (strength/speed, armor, cloak) + the multiple nanosuit upgrades.

AnnoyedDragon

You know you can jump further with speed mode by doing a run and jump? I never encountered any problems with the mode switching, it was very fast, you could do it in mid air while performing an action. What you are making an argument for is convenience, combining the modes so that you don't have to switch between them. Well I have a word for that, overpowered. It is clear why they combined the modes though, they expect you to run and leap between buildings.

I just hope previews I have read in the past are wrong, which is why I said two modes. I recall reading in the past that you can combined modes.

They have said time and time again what that particular reason is. You may not agree with that reason, but your opinion doesn't take away from the legitimacy of that reason.

What's more annoying than console gamers are pessimistic pc elitist who find technology more impressive than the actual practical and beneficial use of technology. Crysis 1 is dead, if you want open world sandbox gameplay then play Crysis or play the many other open world fps that are on the PC. Crytek is trying to do something different by combining the fun of sandbox with the excitement of linear games (choreographed sandbox) which is something that no other game is doing. Yes it may be less technologically advanced than a pure sandbox and quite frankly, I don't care. I'd much rather have a new experience.

Silenthps

You don't care what I think, so why should I care what you think?

Why does it matter that it is being made more linear? More restricted? More scripted? Because we are supposed to be seeing progress, and I'm seeing progress go backwards; which is hardly a good thing. Gaming is interactive entertainment, emphasis on interactive. Crap like Call of Duty is trying to turn gaming into a movie; and developers want to be like Call of Duty because it sells. Consoles will one day be able to support the sort of levels Crysis 1 did, and when that happens; maybe they will finally get what it's about.

Like what I said before Crysis 2 is taking one step forward and two steps backwards,

The problem most people dont see or ignore is that when you create a multiplaform game the base engine is the same on all platforms and you design the levels, restrictions and features around the lowest common denominator. Then you go from there, both consoles have only 512mb of memory and its for both system use and video use which means alot of restrictions have to made for the level design with size, amount of objects, AI, etc. City type of environment is a clever way to cover up the issues that consoles would have in a jungle environment from the 1st Crysis since city environments tend to be the perfect place for consoles to stream load sections of areas, cut down draw distances and limit what happens on screen at any given time.

Could the game be fun and add more to the story.. It sure can , but to blindly ignore what console limits doto every multiplatform game, and just shrug off the downgrading that has been done to make it work for the consoles. It's not wrong to expect the same level of quality on a technical level.

As I have said in the past, Crysis Warhead was a offshoot from the main game. Did you know the launch price was cheaper than Crysis 1? Because it was shorter, they spent less time on it, it wasn't meant to be as big as the original; it was just a stand alone expansion.

You call it a conspiracy theory to say Crytek chose the city because of consoles, but look at the facts. At the end of Crysis 1 they were heading back to the Island, showing that the next game was based there. You call it a rehash, I say the expanded sphere could have done a lot to the island. Now also take into account that the head of Crytek himself explained that consoles wouldn't be able to achieve Crysis's intended experience because of memory limitations, he said they would have to use streaming. Now consider that Crysis 2 has been converted to streaming, and that city environments are the perfect locations for streaming.

I don't see how following the logical rout makes me a conspiracy theorist.

AnnoyedDragon

Yes, but you still haven't explained why they made the choice to make the game linear instead of open world.

And yes, thats exactly what conspiracy theorist do. They take a bunch of facts and try to piece them together as logically as they see fit, and call the official story a lie. The only problem is that they're bad at logic. You haven't displayed how consoles have caused it. Yeah having Crysis 2 in a city just happened to be perfect for consoles, but correlation does NOT equal causation. And the fact that there are many other reasons for them to have Crysis 2 in the city and that they have explained why they decided to have it in the city, trumps your little conspiracy.

And the only thing the expanded sphere would have done was made the island more cold. The story in Crysis was horrible and they knew it. It seems much more logical that they wanted to just start over. And not only does it seem more logical, its factual since they kinda said it... logic + facts > your little conspiracy.

You know you can jump further with speed mode by doing a run and jump? I never encountered any problems with the mode switching, it was very fast, you could do it in mid air while performing an action. What you are making an argument for is convenience, combining the modes so that you don't have to switch between them. Well I have a word for that, overpowered. It is clear why they combined the modes though, they expect you to run and leap between buildings.

I just hope previews I have read in the past are wrong, which is why I said two modes. I recall reading in the past that you can combined modes.

AnnoyedDragon

Yes but Im talking about when you go from speed mode to a strength mode jump, you get an awkward loss of momentum so you don't get the benefits of the speed mode + the benefits of the extra height from strength mode. And if you're going to call making it more convenient "overpowered" then you're going to have a problem with the hotkeys in Crysis 1. And yes it is clear why they combined the modes, and the answer is not your little conspiracy. They themselves said that they changed it because they saw how people who played Crysis 1 would play the game so the crafted it to enhance their experience. There are other benefits such as building jumping plus the fact that it seems more logical to have speed and strength combined but the cause is because of how they saw Crysis 1 gamers playing.

You don't care what I think, so why should I care what you think?

Why does it matter that it is being made more linear? More restricted? More scripted? Because we are supposed to be seeing progress, and I'm seeing progress go backwards; which is hardly a good thing. Gaming is interactive entertainment, emphasis on interactive. Crap like Call of Duty is trying to turn gaming into a movie; and developers want to be like Call of Duty because it sells. Consoles will one day be able to support the sort of levels Crysis 1 did, and when that happens; maybe they will finally get what it's about.

AnnoyedDragon

Gaming is interactive entertainment but NO, you are not to force an emphasis on anything. Ultimate interactivity is basically real life, and at the other end of the scale is watching a movie. The key is to strike a perfect balance between the two and thats what they're doing. They're having large sandbox levels mixed with Call of Duty like scripted events. Which to me is much more progressive then forcing ultra large environments for the sake of saying DURRHURR WE'Z MAXIN YO GFX CARD. I've played open world games and I've played linear games. And I'm excited to see how Crytek will balance the good qualities of both games. But if you like rehashes then just go on sandbox 2 and make your own sequel to Crysis 2.

[QUOTE="Silenthps"]

The streamlining makes Crysis 2 better, not worse. The way it was in Crysis made it unnecessarily difficult to change suit modes, and doing a speed mode > strength mode jump didn't make you go further in anyway which just made the jump look clumsy and awkward. The only way you could get long distance jumps is by the circle strafing glitch.

Also, think about it logically, does it at all make sense that in speed mode it makes your legs strong enough to run fast, but it doesn't make them strong enough to jump high? The combined speed/strength mode makes much more sense. So no, consoles are not the sole cause of the streamlining of the modes, it just makes more sense. And BTW its actually three modes (strength/speed, armor, cloak) + the multiple nanosuit upgrades.

Ondoval

You can swich between suit modes in Crysis in 3 ways: using the radial menu, using direct hotkeys and using multiple hits in a swich key. Wasm't hard at all.

The game looks much slower now, and some powers (stealth) seems useless in multiplayer due the scale reduction and the focus in deathmacth game modes -stealth was useless in Team Instant Action but usefull in the large Power Struggle maps to camp protecting bunkers and some of the facilities-.

Like what I said before Crysis 2 is taking one step forward and two steps backwards,

The problem most people dont see or ignore is that when you create a multiplaform game the base engine is the same on all platforms and you design the levels, restrictions and features around the lowest common denominator. Then you go from there, both consoles have only 512mb of memory and its for both system use and video use which means alot of restrictions have to made for the level design with size, amount of objects, AI, etc. City type of environment is a clever way to cover up the issues that consoles would have in a jungle environment from the 1st Crysis since city environments tend to be the perfect place for consoles to stream load sections of areas, cut down draw distances and limit what happens on screen at any given time.

Could the game be fun and add more to the story.. It sure can , but to blindly ignore what console limits doto every multiplatform game, and just shrug off the downgrading that has been done to make it work for the consoles. It's not wrong to expect the same level of quality on a technical level.

04dcarraher

Yes, but you still haven't explained why they made the choice to make the game linear instead of open world.

And yes, thats exactly what conspiracy theorist do. They take a bunch of facts and try to piece them together as logically as they see fit, and call the official story a lie. The only problem is that they're bad at logic. You haven't displayed how consoles have caused it. Yeah having Crysis 2 in a city just happened to be perfect for consoles, but correlation does NOT equal causation. And the fact that there are many other reasons for them to have Crysis 2 in the city and that they have explained why they decided to have it in the city, trumps your little conspiracy.

And the only thing the expanded sphere would have done was made the island more cold. The story in Crysis was horrible and they knew it. It seems much more logical that they wanted to just start over. And not only does it seem more logical, its factual since they kinda said it... logic + facts > your little conspiracy.

Silenthps

It has been explained, multiple times, people just aren't listening. Hell I posted a video of the head of Crytek explaining how consoles force streaming to be used; and people "still" aren't listening.

What do I have to do, put a diagram together to try to explain this?

And Crysis isn't open world; it is open environment, there is a difference. One lets you walk long distances without a single loading screen because of streaming, the other loads the entire environment; so that loaded cells don't restrict interactivity.

Yes but Im talking about when you go from speed mode to a strength mode jump, you get an awkward loss of momentum so you don't get the benefits of the speed mode + the benefits of the extra height from strength mode. And if you're going to call making it more convenient "overpowered" then you're going to have a problem with the hotkeys in Crysis 1. And yes it is clear why they combined the modes, and the answer is not your little conspiracy. They themselves said that they changed it because they saw how people who played Crysis 1 would play the game so the crafted it to enhance their experience. There are other benefits such as building jumping plus the fact that it seems more logical to have speed and strength combined but the cause is because of how they saw Crysis 1 gamers playing.

Silenthps

There has to be limitations to make it fun, if you're superman; there isn't going to be much challenge in the game. Jump high or jump far, I don't see a problem with that, why must you be able to do them at the same time? I know what people are like, they would have all the powers activated at once if they were allowed to.

Crytek shouldn't have intervened by locking down the suit modes into common play styles, being able to combine the powers in your own way is what made the game fun. Now we are being told we have to choose a pre-configured style based on Crytek's observations?

The problem is your view of progress is faulty. A game being linear, more scripted etc is not going forward or backward it's just a preference.

Gaming is interactive entertainment but NO, you are not to force an emphasis on anything. Ultimate interactivity is basically real life, and at the other end of the scale is watching a movie. The key is to strike a perfect balance between the two and thats what they're doing. They're having large sandbox levels mixed with Call of Duty like scripted events. Which to me is much more progressive then forcing ultra large environments for the sake of saying DURRHURR WE'Z MAXIN YO GFX CARD. I've played open world games and I've played linear games. And I'm excited to see how Crytek will balance the good qualities of both games. But if you like rehashes then just go on sandbox 2 and make your own sequel to Crysis 2.

Silenthps

My view on progress is fine, yours is stagnant. You can spin it how you like, Crysis did things that consoles couldn't achieve no matter how much you scaled the graphics; and now it is using the same techniques that every console game in existence are using. Streaming with 256mb maximum memory being accounted for.

Console gamers get offended by the idea that their 5 year old system may not be able to do everything a PC can, so I get people like you trying to spin it as being something other than what it obviously is. Consoles cannot support open environments. Far Cry Instincts proved that; and now Crysis 2 is proving that. Don't try to tell me cutting something console's hardware prevents them from doing is not holding back progress, don't try to call technological progress a gimmick like the other guy either.

When consoles can do this in the future, it will magically matter again. Because that's what it is about at the end of the day, console gamers don't like admitting their systems are holding back PC; so they try to spin it.

Do not quote this message unless you delete the images

The trailer itself was awesome, redeeming C2, but graphically, that could easily be console footage, since TBH, it doesnt look that good, but I think the footage is from PC at console spec(Since some aspects look great)

For reference:

I would also post U3 shots, but the shots from the recent gameplayvideo are low-quality, so I cant

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

Like what I said before Crysis 2 is taking one step forward and two steps backwards,

The problem most people dont see or ignore is that when you create a multiplaform game the base engine is the same on all platforms and you design the levels, restrictions and features around the lowest common denominator. Then you go from there, both consoles have only 512mb of memory and its for both system use and video use which means alot of restrictions have to made for the level design with size, amount of objects, AI, etc. City type of environment is a clever way to cover up the issues that consoles would have in a jungle environment from the 1st Crysis since city environments tend to be the perfect place for consoles to stream load sections of areas, cut down draw distances and limit what happens on screen at any given time.

Could the game be fun and add more to the story.. It sure can , but to blindly ignore what console limits doto every multiplatform game, and just shrug off the downgrading that has been done to make it work for the consoles. It's not wrong to expect the same level of quality on a technical level.

[QUOTE="Silenthps"]

It has been explained, multiple times, people just aren't listening. Hell I posted a video of the head of Crytek explaining how consoles force streaming to be used; and people "still" aren't listening.

What do I have to do, put a diagram together to try to explain this?

AnnoyedDragon

There has to be limitations to make it fun, if you're superman; there isn't going to be much challenge in the game. Jump high or jump far, I don't see a problem with that, why must you be able to do them at the same time? I know what people are like, they would have all the powers activated at once if they were allowed to.

Crytek shouldn't have intervened by locking down the suit modes into common play styles, being able to combine the powers in your own way is what made the game fun. Now we are being told we have to choose a pre-configured style based on Crytek's observations?AnnoyedDragon

"There has to be limitations to make it fun" :lol: the utter hypocrisy in this statement is so hilarious. Combining the momentum of speed with the power of strength jump doesn't overpower you or turn you into superman, all it does is make the game make sense. If it does overpower you they can simply make it so it drains more suit power.

If you disagree with their intervening then thats on you, I'm just simply saying that consoles aren't the sole cause for the change.

My view on progress is fine, yours is stagnant. You can spin it how you like, Crysis did things that consoles couldn't achieve no matter how much you scaled the graphics; and now it is using the same techniques that every console game in existence are using. Streaming with 256mb maximum memory being accounted for.

Console gamers get offended by the idea that their 5 year old system may not be able to do everything a PC can, so I get people like you trying to spin it as being something other than what it obviously is. Consoles cannot support open environments. Far Cry Instincts proved that; and now Crysis 2 is proving that. Don't try to tell me cutting something console's hardware prevents them from doing is not holding back progress, don't try to call technological progress a gimmick like the other guy either.

When consoles can do this in the future, it will magically matter again. Because that's what it is about at the end of the day, console gamers don't like admitting their systems are holding back PC; so they try to spin it.

AnnoyedDragon

Progress means you're progressing towards something, aka a goal. Because gaming is interactive entertainment, the goal would be to increase interactivity and to increase entertainment. Technology is one of the means, in which to achieve this goal but technology itself isn't the goal. Another means to achieve this goal is threw innovation and just better design which is what they seem to be doing with their choreographed sandbox idea.

Your view of progress seems to put technology as the goal instead of better gaming as the goal. In your view, no game should ever be in a city because cities always = confined spaces and confined spaces always = not maxing out the technology. So all you're really doing is limiting the creative freedom of devs who wish to do more than rehashing jungles and forest.

Anastasia,you do realize you posted promotional bullshots from ps3 exclusives and print screen captures from Crysis 2? :roll:

And this not only may very well be,this is console footage. And what i dont get is why would you like to prove that Crysis 2 wont be top dog in graphics department on consoles?Cus its on ps3 as well you know...

Plus,you posted absolutely the worst once from Crysis 2...way to prove your argument.

Can you still pick up and throw random objects and debris?

Can you still pick up and throw random objects and debris?

psn8214

Can you still pick up and throw random objects and debris?

psn8214

I was talking about Warhead there.

Silenthps

You made no reference to Warhead in that post.

What you did do was claim the changes made to the game had nothing to do with consoles, that it was a conspiracy theory to think it was. To spell it out to you, you are calling it a conspiracy theory that consoles have 256mb of available ram, because that is why they had to convert to cell streaming. It was not a design decision completely independent from consoles like you claim, it was a required decision to make the game even work on them; and it is the primary reason Crysis 1 was never ported to consoles.

It is impossible to sqeeze 1GB worth of information into 256mb of ram, you have to cut it up into chunks console memory can handle; and that impacts the interactive range. You cannot interact with areas that don't exist in memory.

Far Cry 1 used the exact same technique, then when Far Cry Instincts came out on consoles; it was converted to cell streaming. Both Far Cry and Crysis used this memory managed method, both games were converted to cell streaming when they hit consoles. Explain again how it is a conspiracy theory to suggest consoles are the cause of these changes, when streaming is their primary memory management model? Explain how this is Crytek's intended design for Crysis 2, when all their previous games used the open enviornment method?

This is simply technical knowledge, not a conspiracy theory, or "elitism" as some console gamers like to call "knowing things".

"There has to be limitations to make it fun" the utter hypocrisy in this statement is so hilarious. Combining the momentum of speed with the power of strength jump doesn't overpower you or turn you into superman, all it does is make the game make sense. If it does overpower you they can simply make it so it drains more suit power.

If you disagree with their intervening then thats on you, I'm just simply saying that consoles aren't the sole cause for the change.

Silenthps

I'd like for you to explain how prefering that Crysis 2 maintains the scale of its predecessor makes me a hypocrite, when I said limitations to the players capabilities help make a game fun? How are these two things possibility related? You are suggesting that the reduction in scale was a decision to aid fun, quite frankly that is a highly subjective statement to make; if it's the intended meaning.

Maybe if you're the sort of gamer that has to be hand led through the fun, a restricted environment would aid in being directed towards the fun. But thankfully such people are not everyone; and there are people who enjoy large scale environments.

As for the controls. Given that combining those modes only makes sense if your intended function is building leaping, and the city was a console oriented decision, I'd argue that it was a console impacted change. You may even go as far as saying the limited buttons of a game pad are what led to functions being merged, but I'd have to see the controller layout to know that for sure.

You keep arguing that the city wasn't a console driven decision. Regardless of whether you think going back to the island would have led to a rehash or not isn't the point, that is how Crysis 1 ended; and that is the direction they chose to go. They have totally scrapped that and jumped years forward so that they may start from scratch, a decision that only makes sense under the context that they have to account for a new factor, that factor being consoles. Cities repetition and simplicity makes them the perfect streaming environment, that is a fact that has been known for some time, regardless of your attempts to suggest otherwise.

Yeah cause I'm totally a console gamer that totally doesn't spend atleast 2hours a day on Sandbox 2. The only thing that offends me is bad logic.

Progress means you're progressing towards something, aka a goal. Because gaming is interactive entertainment, the goal would be to increase interactivity and to increase entertainment. Technology is one of the means, in which to achieve this goal but technology itself isn't the goal. Another means to achieve this goal is threw innovation and just better design which is what they seem to be doing with their choreographed sandbox idea.

Your view of progress seems to put technology as the goal instead of better gaming as the goal. In your view, no game should ever be in a city because cities always = confined spaces and confined spaces always = not maxing out the technology. So all you're really doing is limiting the creative freedom of devs who wish to do more than rehashing jungles and forest.

Silenthps

What platforms you own and play on are irrelevant, me having part ownership of a PS3 doesn't make me a PS3 gamer. What matters to me is how you behave, and right now you sound like a console apologist, so that is how I'm treating you. If we are going to talk about bad logic, how about your refusal to blame consoles for game changing decisions that only make sense on consoles? You call it a conspiracy theory, I call it knowing what you are talking about.

I'd also appreciate it if you didn't exaggerate my position into absurdity. Let me make this clear, my arguments are based on the expectations that Crysis has placed on anything carrying the name, not gaming as a whole. You have taken my position on Crysis and applied it to everything, making me look like a loon that hates cities and thinks every game has to push technology.

Don't take my arguments out of context in an effort to demonize my position...

In the context of Crysis, my views on progress is that it maintains the achievements of the previous game and builds on them. Instead they changed the game solely because of technical limitations that previously did not exist. That is moving backwards, not forwards. I have no doubt that if consoles could support the sort of levels Crysis 1 had, Crysis 2 would be a very different game from what we are seeing now.

As I Pc gamer, this game just dosent look good to me. They ruined the open world and options by downsizing the levels because of consoles. I could tell all of this from the 20 sec trailer, as a pc gamer and they just dont seem to be able to make games to my standerds anymore.

[QUOTE="psn8214"]

Can you still pick up and throw random objects and debris?

windsquid9000

Yay! Hopefully there are chickens to throw somewhere in NYC.

parts of that looked only pc compatible if you catch my drift :P

i liked the tidal wave at the end.

[QUOTE="windsquid9000"][QUOTE="psn8214"]

Can you still pick up and throw random objects and debris?

psn8214

Yay! Hopefully there are chickens to throw somewhere in NYC.

As I Pc gamer, this game just dosent look good to me. They ruined the open world and options by downsizing the levels because of consoles. I could tell all of this from the 20 sec trailer, as a pc gamer and they just dont seem to be able to make games to my standerds anymore.

Advid-Gamer

I'm glad it's in a city. Good to change things up from the past 3 games.

Couldn't they have done a jungle-type game if they wanted anyway? Oblivion, Fallout 3, and Just Cause 2 are all open-world. Maybe they wanted to do an urban game because they feel like jungles are played out now.

[QUOTE="heretrix"]

[QUOTE="PurpleHaze89"]

That just looks amazing. Gameplay Wise and Graphic Wise. I wonder if that is PC Footage?

Wasdie

There is no way that is PS3 footage. If it is, it just blew away every single PS3 game and most PC games to date. The draw distance is much farther than we've seen, it's much more fluid than what we have see, the lighting and effects are far better than what we have seen. Unless there is a major difference between the 360 version and the PS3 version (highly doubtful), that has to be from the PC engine.

Im 100% sure that is console footage and NOT even played on PC and applied some sort of AA at console settings.Console footage with their own AA method.

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="heretrix"]The clip says PS3.

Bus-A-Bus

There is no way that is PS3 footage. If it is, it just blew away every single PS3 game and most PC games to date. The draw distance is much farther than we've seen, it's much more fluid than what we have see, the lighting and effects are far better than what we have seen. Unless there is a major difference between the 360 version and the PS3 version (highly doubtful), that has to be from the PC engine.

Im 100% sure that is console footage and NOT even played on PC and applied some sort of AA at console settings.Console footage with their own AA method.

How are you 100%?

[QUOTE="Bus-A-Bus"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

There is no way that is PS3 footage. If it is, it just blew away every single PS3 game and most PC games to date. The draw distance is much farther than we've seen, it's much more fluid than what we have see, the lighting and effects are far better than what we have seen. Unless there is a major difference between the 360 version and the PS3 version (highly doubtful), that has to be from the PC engine.

haberman13

Im 100% sure that is console footage and NOT even played on PC and applied some sort of AA at console settings.Console footage with their own AA method.

How are you 100%?

Because I am...100% sure,definitely console version.You will see...and Im NOT guessing it.

You made no reference to Warhead in that post.

AnnoyedDragon

It was the first line in my post, responding to the first line of your post... shoulda been obvious. GJ finding a way to dodge the question though.

What you did do was claim the changes made to the game had nothing to do with consoles, that it was a conspiracy theory to think it was. To spell it out to you, you are calling it a conspiracy theory that consoles have 256mb of available ram, because that is why they had to convert to cell streaming. It was not a design decision completely independent from consoles like you claim, it was a required decision to make the game even work on them; and it is the primary reason Crysis 1 was never ported to consoles.

It is impossible to sqeeze 1GB worth of information into 256mb of ram, you have to cut it up into chunks console memory can handle; and that impacts the interactive range. You cannot interact with areas that don't exist in memory.

Far Cry 1 used the exact same technique, then when Far Cry Instincts came out on consoles; it was converted to cell streaming. Both Far Cry and Crysis used this memory managed method, both games were converted to cell streaming when they hit consoles. Explain again how it is a conspiracy theory to suggest consoles are the cause of these changes, when streaming is their primary memory management model? Explain how this is Crytek's intended design for Crysis 2, when all their previous games used the open enviornment method?

This is simply technical knowledge, not a conspiracy theory, or "elitism" as some console gamers like to call "knowing things".AnnoyedDragon

Nope, thats conspiracy theory to the T. You're taking your technical knowledge, rejecting the official story and basically calling Crytek liars, and trying to create a new theory as to why they really chose a city. I'm not saying your theory doesn't seem reasonable or somewhat logical, but it is making a logical error of assuming that correlation is the same thing as causation. And it is not more logical than the official story that they were getting tired of jungles and wanted to try something new.

I'd like for you to explain how prefering that Crysis 2 maintains the scale of its predecessor makes me a hypocrite, when I said limitations to the players capabilities help make a game fun? How are these two things possibility related? You are suggesting that the reduction in scale was a decision to aid fun, quite frankly that is a highly subjective statement to make; if it's the intended meaning.

As for the controls. Given that combining those modes only makes sense if your intended function is building leaping, and the city was a console oriented decision, I'd argue that it was a console impacted change. You may even go as far as saying the limited buttons of a game pad are what led to functions being merged, but I'd have to see the controller layout to know that for sure. AnnoyedDragon

No, you're a hypocrite because in one place you see limitations as a bad thing and in another you see it as a good thing.

And here you go again with the conspiracies. Crytek has already told us why they made the control decisions. Yes they said part of the reason is building leaping but they also said it was due to what they've seen from PC gamers. But since you like theorizing I'll do the same and say theystreamlined the controls so they can attract all the casual mainstream PC gamers.

You keep arguing that the city wasn't a console driven decision. Regardless of whether you think going back to the island would have led to a rehash or not isn't the point, that is how Crysis 1 ended; and that is the direction they chose to go. They have totally scrapped that and jumped years forward so that they may start from scratch, a decision that only makes sense under the context that they have to account for a new factor, that factor being consoles. Cities repetition and simplicity makes them the perfect streaming environment, that is a fact that has been known for some time, regardless of your attempts to suggest otherwise.AnnoyedDragon

What platforms you own and play on are irrelevant, me having part ownership of a PS3 doesn't make me a PS3 gamer. What matters to me is how you behave, and right now you sound like a console apologist, so that is how I'm treating you. If we are going to talk about bad logic, how about your refusal to blame consoles for game changing decisions that only make sense on consoles? You call it a conspiracy theory, I call it knowing what you are talking about.

I'd also appreciate it if you didn't exaggerate my position into absurdity. Let me make this clear, my arguments are based on the expectations that Crysis has placed on anything carrying the name, not gaming as a whole. You have taken my position on Crysis and applied it to everything, making me look like a loon that hates cities and thinks every game has to push technology.

Don't take my arguments out of context in an effort to demonize my position...

In the context of Crysis, my views on progress is that it maintains the achievements of the previous game and builds on them. Instead they changed the game solely because of technical limitations that previously did not exist. That is moving backwards, not forwards. I have no doubt that if consoles could support the sort of levels Crysis 1 had, Crysis 2 would be a very different game from what we are seeing now.

AnnoyedDragon

The only problem is that the ONLY system I game on is PC and the only console bias I have is towards the Wii. I'm not a console apologist I'm just being non-bias. If anything, I'm a Crytek apologist thats mad that you're basically calling one of my favorite developers a liar.

You, on the other hand, are incredibly blinded by your PC elitist bias. Every fact you ever hear about Crysis 2 is filtered through anti-console glasses that forces you to see things that are not the actual story. You're jealous of console gamers getting your precious PC exclusive so you hate on everything you see about the game.

I'd also appreciate it if you didn't exaggerate my position into absurdity. Let me make this clear, my arguments are based on the expectations that Crysis has placed on anything carrying the name, not gaming as a whole. You have taken my position on Crysis and applied it to everything, making me look like a loon that hates cities and thinks every game has to push technology.

Don't take my arguments out of context in an effort to demonize my position...

In the context of Crysis, my views on progress is that it maintains the achievements of the previous game and builds on them. Instead they changed the game solely because of technical limitations that previously did not exist. That is moving backwards, not forwards. I have no doubt that if consoles could support the sort of levels Crysis 1 had, Crysis 2 would be a very different game from what we are seeing now.AnnoyedDragon

I'm exaggerating your position into absurdity to show that your position is absurd. Thats exactly what a reductio ad absurdum is.

Your position on Crysis MUST be applied to everything in order for it to make sense. When you say that your views on progress is that it maintains the achievements of the previous game, you are presupposing that Crysis made achievements to something. Therefore, progress must be judged on the context of that something. That something could be things like level design, graphics, gameplay, technology or gaming as a whole. For me it's gaming as a whole but for you it seems to be technology. And if it is technology then my reductio ad adsurdum stands.

[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

You made no reference to Warhead in that post.

Silenthps

It was the first line in my post, responding to the first line of your post... shoulda been obvious. GJ finding a way to dodge the question though.

What you did do was claim the changes made to the game had nothing to do with consoles, that it was a conspiracy theory to think it was. To spell it out to you, you are calling it a conspiracy theory that consoles have 256mb of available ram, because that is why they had to convert to cell streaming. It was not a design decision completely independent from consoles like you claim, it was a required decision to make the game even work on them; and it is the primary reason Crysis 1 was never ported to consoles.

It is impossible to sqeeze 1GB worth of information into 256mb of ram, you have to cut it up into chunks console memory can handle; and that impacts the interactive range. You cannot interact with areas that don't exist in memory.

Far Cry 1 used the exact same technique, then when Far Cry Instincts came out on consoles; it was converted to cell streaming. Both Far Cry and Crysis used this memory managed method, both games were converted to cell streaming when they hit consoles. Explain again how it is a conspiracy theory to suggest consoles are the cause of these changes, when streaming is their primary memory management model? Explain how this is Crytek's intended design for Crysis 2, when all their previous games used the open enviornment method?

This is simply technical knowledge, not a conspiracy theory, or "elitism" as some console gamers like to call "knowing things".AnnoyedDragon

Nope, thats conspiracy theory to the T. You're taking your technical knowledge, rejecting the official story and basically calling Crytek liars, and trying to create a new theory as to why they really chose a city. I'm not saying your theory doesn't seem reasonable or somewhat logical, but it is making a logical error of assuming that correlation is the same thing as causation. And it is not more logical than the official story that they were getting tired of jungles and wanted to try something new.

All Compamies lie to a degree to make money... And yes Crytek has lied before in the past. Also Theres nothing wrong in changing a location, but they had to skip the ending on the first game because of the console's & consolers. Because they cant run the jungle scenes on the console with the same quality, and had tofill in the backstory and put the game in a location where consoles were able to run descently.

I'd like for you to explain how prefering that Crysis 2 maintains the scale of its predecessor makes me a hypocrite, when I said limitations to the players capabilities help make a game fun? How are these two things possibility related? You are suggesting that the reduction in scale was a decision to aid fun, quite frankly that is a highly subjective statement to make; if it's the intended meaning.

As for the controls. Given that combining those modes only makes sense if your intended function is building leaping, and the city was a console oriented decision, I'd argue that it was a console impacted change. You may even go as far as saying the limited buttons of a game pad are what led to functions being merged, but I'd have to see the controller layout to know that for sure. AnnoyedDragon

No, you're a hypocrite because in one place you see limitations as a bad thing and in another you see it as a good thing.

And here you go again with the conspiracies. Crytek has already told us why they made the control decisions. Yes they said part of the reason is building leaping but they also said it was due to what they've seen from PC gamers. But since you like theorizing I'll do the same and say theystreamlined the controls so they can attract all the casual mainstream PC gamers.

What? like limitations are a good thing? I think the your the one who needs to rethink about who's wrong, he never gave a any praise on limitations. Of course you beleive in what ever they say... They wont tell youtruereasons in why they combined suit powers, and it isnt because they wanted too its because of the limits in controlllers.

You keep arguing thy wont tell at the city wasn't a console driven decision. Regardless of whether you think going back to the island would have led to a rehash or not isn't the point, that is how Crysis 1 ended; and that is the direction they chose to go. They have totally scrapped that and jumped years forward so that they may start from scratch, a decision that only makes sense under the context that they have to account for a new factor, that factor being consoles. Cities repetition and simplicity makes them the perfect streaming environment, that is a fact that has been known for some time, regardless of your attempts to suggest otherwise.AnnoyedDragon

No that was not the direction they wanted to go. They wanted to start over because the story of Crysis 1 sucked, which is why they hired Richard Morgan. Yes, the fact that it's on consoles was yet another reason. But it was just fuel to an already burning fire, consoles aren't the sole reason.

Crysis's story didnt suck..... omg how can you praise Crysis 2 then? since the story from the 1st game is the basis of the 2nd.

What platforms you own and play on are irrelevant, me having part ownership of a PS3 doesn't make me a PS3 gamer. What matters to me is how you behave, and right now you sound like a console apologist, so that is how I'm treating you. If we are going to talk about bad logic, how about your refusal to blame consoles for game changing decisions that only make sense on consoles? You call it a conspiracy theory, I call it knowing what you are talking about.

I'd also appreciate it if you didn't exaggerate my position into absurdity. Let me make this clear, my arguments are based on the expectations that Crysis has placed on anything carrying the name, not gaming as a whole. You have taken my position on Crysis and applied it to everything, making me look like a loon that hates cities and thinks every game has to push technology.

Don't take my arguments out of context in an effort to demonize my position...

In the context of Crysis, my views on progress is that it maintains the achievements of the previous game and builds on them. Instead they changed the game solely because of technical limitations that previously did not exist. That is moving backwards, not forwards. I have no doubt that if consoles could support the sort of levels Crysis 1 had, Crysis 2 would be a very different game from what we are seeing now.

AnnoyedDragon

The only problem is that the ONLY system I game on is PC and the only console bias I have is towards the Wii. I'm not a console apologist I'm just being non-bias. If anything, I'm a Crytek apologist thats mad that you're basically calling one of my favorite developers a liar.

You, on the other hand, are incredibly blinded by your PC elitist bias. Every fact you ever hear about Crysis 2 is filtered through anti-console glasses that forces you to see things that are not the actual story. You're jealous of console gamers getting your precious PC exclusive so you hate on everything you see about the game.

How can they keep the same level of quality when the average limitations of the consoles limits them in almost everyway? and them having to cater toward consolers's appeal too?

I think he's one of the few that see's what they are doing and Crytek is fooling most younger groups with flashy new over the top action scenes. There are a bunch of gamers that are seeing the downgrading of Crysis because of the multiplatforming of the game. Every Pc to console game ever made has be edited for consoles and lose what made the game great on Pc. I doubt that Crysis 2 willbe spared...

I've never played the first Crysis but this one looks so awesome I'm definitely gonna get it for PS3, I just hope it has a lengthy single player campaign. An explanation of the first game to fill in the story would also be appreciated by newcomers like myself.

Wow, you guys are acting like Crysis 2 is the ONLY sequel to ever be placed years after the ending of the previous game :| Yes companies do lie but you have no evidence that they're lying now. Crytek has no problem admitting, and has already admitted that consoles have held them back. If they changed the story and the setting for consoles, they would have admitted it. Also, you haven't played the beginning of Crysis 2 so you have no clue how they've filled in the backstory...

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

What? like limitations are a good thing? I think the your the one who needs to rethink about who's wrong, he never gave a any praise on limitations. Of course you beleive in what ever they say... They wont tell youtruereasons in why they combined suit powers, and it isnt because they wanted too its because of the limits in controlllers.

04dcarraher

Crysis's story didnt suck..... omg how can you praise Crysis 2 then? since the story from the 1st game is the basis of the 2nd.

04dcarraher

...I can praise Crysis 2 since it has a different story than Crysis' and its written by Richard Morgan, who himself admitted that Crysis' story wasn't that well developed.

How can they keep the same level of quality when the average limitations of the consoles limits them in almost everyway? and them having to cater toward consolers's appeal too?

I think he's one of the few that see's what they are doing and Crytek is fooling most younger groups with flashy new over the top action scenes. There are a bunch of gamers that are seeing the downgrading of Crysis because of the multiplatforming of the game. Every Pc to console game ever made has be edited for consoles and lose what made the game great on Pc. I doubt that Crysis 2 willbe spared...

04dcarraher

They can't keep the same level of quality nor did I ever say they will. The quality will be better. The levels will still be very open, the larger levels are just as large as Crysis' and the smaller ones still give you lots of freedom thanks to verticallity. But even they're not as big, the levels could still have better level design. And no matter what you think, it will NOT be another call of duty in terms of how linear it is. It'll have better gameplay, better a.i., better story, better graphics (pc), better multiplayer, etc... You don't need 50gigs of ram to make a better quality game, you need talent.

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

Wow, you guys are acting like Crysis 2 is the ONLY sequel to ever be placed years after the ending of the previous game :| Yes companies do lie but you have no evidence that they're lying now. Crytek has no problem admitting, and has already admitted that consoles have held them back. If they changed the story and the setting for consoles, they would have admitted it. Also, you haven't played the beginning of Crysis 2 so you have no clue how they've filled in the backstory...

No the problem is that they left the 1st game on a cliffhanger, and would made the 2nd game continue from that point. Crytek has lied in the past which means that most likely lying about something now. Crytek wouldnt admitt that the game suffers from consoles because they are focusing all their time showing and convicing consolers to get the game. I know that they wont allow you to play the cliffhanger from 1st because the consoles wont allow it.

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] I never said he did give praise on the limitations. I believe what they say because there is no reason to believe otherwise. And controls aren't just streamlined to fit controllers, they're also streamlined for all the casual PC gamers. I guess by your logic, Mass Effect 2's controls were streamlined for controllers too, despite the fact that Mass Effect started off as a 360 exclusive.

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

Crysis's story didnt suck..... omg how can you praise Crysis 2 then? since the story from the 1st game is the basis of the 2nd.

Silenthps

...I can praise Crysis 2 since it has a different story than Crysis' and its written by Richard Morgan, who himself admitted that Crysis' story wasn't that well developed.

How can they keep the same level of quality when the average limitations of the consoles limits them in almost everyway? and them having to cater toward consolers's appeal too?

I think he's one of the few that see's what they are doing and Crytek is fooling most younger groups with flashy new over the top action scenes. There are a bunch of gamers that are seeing the downgrading of Crysis because of the multiplatforming of the game. Every Pc to console game ever made has be edited for consoles and lose what made the game great on Pc. I doubt that Crysis 2 willbe spared...

04dcarraher

They can't keep the same level of quality nor did I ever say they will. The quality will be better. The levels will still be very open, the larger levels are just as large as Crysis' and the smaller ones still give you lots of freedom thanks to verticallity. But even they're not as big, the levels could still have better level design. And no matter what you think, it will NOT be another call of duty in terms of how linear it is. It'll have better gameplay, better a.i., better story, better graphics (pc), better multiplayer, etc... You don't need 50gigs of ram to make a better quality game, you need talent.

You cant bypass the limits of the hardware to make it better. Now I ask you how can they make something better when everything will be linear and scripted? Consoles dont have the memory to make anything better. Crysis 2 will have consolized gameplay, better story? it will be based off the 1st so they will be equal to a degree, better graphics on Pc's sure but it will be limited because of the engine's limits from the consoles in the level design to limit draw distances and amount of things happening on screen at any given time. Come on 50gb of ram to make a game better...... Crytek talent can only be as good as the hardware will let them be. which is why Crysis 2 will suffer in many areas compared to Crysis.