Crysis 2 details in EDGE

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"][QUOTE="yonnex"]

I guess more people should have paid for the game when it was on PC and then it would have stayed PC exclusive shame about the amount of PC pirates

These people need to be paid and consoles is the solution for this.

yonnex

considering the PC install base 3 million thats rather poor. Honestly this is why PC gaming is def in decline compared to mid 90's to around the time xbox360 PS3 released.

Rather sad really... How much will it sell now that its going to be PC, 360, PS3 $$$ money talks

Well, Crysis 1 did take place on an island compared to New York. Having a whole big city like that open while having amazing graphics and physics would be kinda hard to do on even the most powerful of gaming PC's.clubsammich91

I'm not impressed by cities, lots of games do cities, the PS2 had open world city games. All that changes is the graphics, a city environment itself is doable on low end hardware.

Cities are repetitive, navigation is controlled and view distance can be close. Consoles love cities because they fit right in with what they are good at, streaming. Believe it or not some of us PC gamers actually care about the impact this is going to have on the game play, console exclusive gamers think graphics is Crysis's only noteworthy trait, who would have known reviews talking about the game play actually meant something.

It doesn't help that many of these people cannot tell the difference between open world and open environment, therefore don't see the big deal about Crysis being restricted because they think the first game was linear. I understand why console gamers would become confused regarding this, they don't have any games that actually do it on consoles because of memory constraints.

[quote="Joystiq"]We already know the game will take place in New York, but according to the developer, it'll be "a New York City like none in games or cinema." Crytek is more interested in having the city environment act as a focus on the action rather than a big open sandbox, so while you'll see lots of the city above, you'll only be able to travel in "constrained freedom," or only about "three storeys up and down."
anshul89

Shouldn't PC gamers just be happy there getting games? Considering that there market is a small and dwindling one

[QUOTE="yonnex"]

I guess more people should have paid for the game when it was on PC and then it would have stayed PC exclusive shame about the amount of PC pirates

These people need to be paid and consoles is the solution for this.

AAllxxjjnn

last I heard it had only sold around one million in sales.

did anyone actually read the whole article? they explained some of those design decisions. i mean before people start jumping to conclusions.

[QUOTE="yonnex"]

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"] It sold 3 million.AAllxxjjnn

considering the PC install base 3 million thats rather poor. Honestly this is why PC gaming is def in decline compared to mid 90's to around the time xbox360 PS3 released.

Rather sad really... How much will it sell now that its going to be PC, 360, PS3 $$$ money talks

Compared to Half Life sales? which was a new IP at the time aswell.

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"][QUOTE="yonnex"]

I guess more people should have paid for the game when it was on PC and then it would have stayed PC exclusive shame about the amount of PC pirates

These people need to be paid and consoles is the solution for this.

opex07

last I heard it had only sold around one million in sales.

And the last time I checked it was 1.5 million, either way any million seller is good so the hateboys need to lay off.

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"][QUOTE="yonnex"]

I guess more people should have paid for the game when it was on PC and then it would have stayed PC exclusive shame about the amount of PC pirates

These people need to be paid and consoles is the solution for this.

opex07

last I heard it had only sold around one million in sales.

[QUOTE="anshul89"]

[quote="Joystiq"]We already know the game will take place in New York, but according to the developer, it'll be "a New York City like none in games or cinema." Crytek is more interested in having the city environment act as a focus on the action rather than a big open sandbox, so while you'll see lots of the city above, you'll only be able to travel in "constrained freedom," or only about "three storeys up and down."
smartcriminal

Shouldn't PC gamers just be happy there getting games? Considering that there market is a small and dwindling one

Unfortunatly i have to agree with this......

People act as though every major PC game that has gone to consoles hasn't been dumbed down in some way...Crysis 2 will look and control like a console shooter. They're going to spend more time catering to the console audience because that is where the money is.

In July 2008 article of PC Gamer UK, Crytek claims it sold 3 million through retail only.AAllxxjjnn

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"][QUOTE="yonnex"]

I guess more people should have paid for the game when it was on PC and then it would have stayed PC exclusive shame about the amount of PC pirates

These people need to be paid and consoles is the solution for this.

yonnex

considering the PC install base 3 million thats rather poor. Honestly this is why PC gaming is def in decline compared to mid 90's to around the time xbox360 PS3 released.

Rather sad really... How much will it sell now that its going to be PC, 360, PS3 $$$ money talks

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"] In July 2008 article of PC Gamer UK, Crytek claims it sold 3 million through retail only.opex07

[QUOTE="smartcriminal"]

Shouldn't PC gamers just be happy there getting games? Considering that there market is a small and dwindling one

yonnex

Unfortunatly i have to agree with this......

Will the hateboys quit it? They don't care enough about PC gaming to even check if the market is "dwindling", they just love to assume PC is failing and their platform of choice is winning.

what is with all the developer distrust here lately? its not like its Peter Molynuex we,re talking about here. lol

[QUOTE="clubsammich91"]Well, Crysis 1 did take place on an island compared to New York. Having a whole big city like that open while having amazing graphics and physics would be kinda hard to do on even the most powerful of gaming PC's.AnnoyedDragon

I'm not impressed by cities, lots of games do cities, the PS2 had open world city games. All that changes is the graphics, a city environment itself is doable on low end hardware.

Cities are repetitive, navigation is controlled and view distance can be close. Consoles love cities because they fit right in with what they are good at, streaming. Believe it or not some of us PC gamers actually care about the impact this is going to have on the game play, console exclusive gamers think graphics is Crysis's only noteworthy trait, who would have known reviews talking about the game play actually meant something.

It doesn't help that many of these people cannot tell the difference between open world and open environment, therefore don't see the big deal about Crysis being restricted because they think the first game was linear. I understand why console gamers would become confused regarding this, they don't have any games that actually do it on consoles because of memory constraints.

[QUOTE="opex07"]

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"] It sold 3 million.AnnoyedDragon

last I heard it had only sold around one million in sales.

And the last time I checked it was 1.5 million, either way any million seller is good so the hateboys need to lay off.

1.5mil! i mean thats not bad but you cant blame them for jumping on the console bandwagon either.... they need to get paid and your praise isnt paying there bills sorry PC gamers

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"][QUOTE="yonnex"]

considering the PC install base 3 million thats rather poor. Honestly this is why PC gaming is def in decline compared to mid 90's to around the time xbox360 PS3 released.

Rather sad really... How much will it sell now that its going to be PC, 360, PS3 $$$ money talks

yonnex

Compared to Half Life sales? which was a new IP at the time aswell.

Consoles dumbing down games again I see!

Espada12

[QUOTE="opex07"]

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"] [QUOTE="opex07"]

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"][QUOTE="yonnex"]

I guess more people should have paid for the game when it was on PC and then it would have stayed PC exclusive shame about the amount of PC pirates

These people need to be paid and consoles is the solution for this.

AnnoyedDragon

last I heard it had only sold around one million in sales.

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"] No, because it's in a MAGAZINE.opex07

i agree google searching the issue and i am only finding figures around the 1.5mil mark i would say the 3mil is incorrect.

Considering each building in Crysis 2 is enter-able, and many have multiple stories, I say that you should be impressed. Shame on you for comparing it to a city such as GTA III, for example, where most buildings are tall boxes that are there for looks. :oSparkyProtocol

1.5mil! i mean thats not bad but you cant blame them for jumping on the console bandwagon either.... they need to get paid and your praise isnt paying there bills sorry PC gamers

yonnex

hopefully it's not as bad as it sounds. If you could enter any building upto 3 stories that would be awesome though.

by the end of 2008 it sold around 3 million and that's before it went over to steam.

Silenthps

Do you have a link to something credible saying that?

[QUOTE="Silenthps"]by the end of 2008 it sold around 3 million and that's before it went over to steam.

opex07

Do you have a link to something credible saying that?

[QUOTE="Yandere"]

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

Consoles dumbing down games again I see!

Espada12

Because linearity is a crime.

It is when you start as an open world game. Imagine making GTA linear so wii owners could play it as well :lol:

Crysis was never as open ended as GTA4 or AC not even close.

I'm not sure how much it sold ,but the developers made it quite clear in 2008 that they had no interest in being PC developers anymore.

http://pc.ign.com/articles/870/870416p1.html

** Mind you at this point the game had sold over a million**

[QUOTE="yonnex"]

[QUOTE="smartcriminal"]

Shouldn't PC gamers just be happy there getting games? Considering that there market is a small and dwindling one

AnnoyedDragon

Unfortunatly i have to agree with this......

Will the hateboys quit it? They don't care enough about PC gaming to even check if the market is "dwindling", they just love to assume PC is failing and their platform of choice is winning.

Here you got the first MGS

Looks alright for a PS1 game. But on the PC at that same time there was Half-Life.

Looks light years better right? Now lets compare a 2010 game like ME2.

So ME2 on the PC looks alot sharper than on the 360, but other than that they look and play almost identical.

What I'm saying is, the line between consoles and the PC is getting really blurry to the point where devs like Crytech don't mind bringing a game to the consoles without having so sacrifice too much if it would have been just a PC exclusive.

^

Mass Effect 2 didn't even have AA for PC...I had to force it outside of the game.

[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

[QUOTE="clubsammich91"]Well, Crysis 1 did take place on an island compared to New York. Having a whole big city like that open while having amazing graphics and physics would be kinda hard to do on even the most powerful of gaming PC's.SparkyProtocol

I'm not impressed by cities, lots of games do cities, the PS2 had open world city games. All that changes is the graphics, a city environment itself is doable on low end hardware.

Cities are repetitive, navigation is controlled and view distance can be close. Consoles love cities because they fit right in with what they are good at, streaming. Believe it or not some of us PC gamers actually care about the impact this is going to have on the game play, console exclusive gamers think graphics is Crysis's only noteworthy trait, who would have known reviews talking about the game play actually meant something.

It doesn't help that many of these people cannot tell the difference between open world and open environment, therefore don't see the big deal about Crysis being restricted because they think the first game was linear. I understand why console gamers would become confused regarding this, they don't have any games that actually do it on consoles because of memory constraints.

Well, there are definitely less PC gamers now than back in the Quake era. Back then PC had huge advantages over consoles, but it seems like every year that advantage shrinks a little. For example lets compare games in 1998.

Here you got the first MGS

Looks alright for a PS1 game. But on the PC at that same time there was Half-Life.

Looks light years better right? Now lets compare a 2010 game like ME2.

So ME2 on the PC looks alot sharper than on the 360, but other than that they look and play almost identical.

What I'm saying is, the line between consoles and the PC is getting really blurry to the point where devs like Crytech don't mind bringing a game to the consoles without having so sacrifice too much if it would have been just a PC exclusive.

clubsammich91

You're using a cross platform game as evidence that consoles can keep up with PC capability? Think on that a moment, if you are not biased you will see the problem.

The explanation for your criticisms (the valid ones) would in itself take up an entire thread, look at my longer blogs for some in depth explanations, specifically "The meaning of exclusives" and "Colliding into the cost walls of game development".

A simple response would be people are focusing on PC too much to note the condition of console gaming, many of your criticisms of PC gaming will likely be replicated on the console side. If you look at the GS list you will note that PC has a far greater exclusivity (orange names) to cross platform ratio than consoles, something people should think on before accusing PC of losing support.

Fanboys aren't interested in looking beyond the surface, to the point that they will often make a fool of themselves by saying something silly like "PC developers fleeing to consoles". Never mind there are more consoles games going cross platform than PC, as shown by the number of cross platform games on consoles compared to PC. Also never mind the exclusive games consoles do get tend to be 1st and 2nd party, in other words paid for exclusives.

Consoles are a cross platform dumping ground that have to pay for most of their exclusives, therefore anti PC criticisms from the console end have little significance when you can see PC is doing fine. Of course most of them will outright ignore everything I am saying, they are too used to the idea PC is dieing to change the way they think.

-edit

It's late my end, logging for the night, will check replys tomorrow.

[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

[QUOTE="yonnex"]

Unfortunatly i have to agree with this......

clubsammich91

Will the hateboys quit it? They don't care enough about PC gaming to even check if the market is "dwindling", they just love to assume PC is failing and their platform of choice is winning.

Here you got the first MGS

Looks alright for a PS1 game. But on the PC at that same time there was Half-Life.

Looks light years better right? Now lets compare a 2010 game like ME2.

So ME2 on the PC looks alot sharper than on the 360, but other than that they look and play almost identical.

What I'm saying is, the line between consoles and the PC is getting really blurry to the point where devs like Crytech don't mind bringing a game to the consoles without having so sacrifice too much if it would have been just a PC exclusive.

Thats a pretty bad comparison

is not that big of a gap

is a huge gap

You're using a cross platform game as evidence that consoles can keep up with PC capability? Think on that a moment, if you are not biased you will see the problem.

The explanation for your criticisms (the valid ones) would in itself take up an entire thread, look at my longer blogs for some in depth explanations, specifically "The meaning of exclusives" and "Colliding into the cost walls of game development".

A simple response would be people are focusing on PC too much to note the condition of console gaming, many of your criticisms of PC gaming will likely be replicated on the console side. If you look at the GS list you will note that PC has a far greater exclusivity (orange names) to cross platform ratio than consoles, something people should think on before accusing PC of losing support.

Fanboys aren't interested in looking beyond the surface, to the point that they will often make a fool of themselves by saying something silly like "PC developers fleeing to consoles". Never mind there are more consoles games going cross platform than PC, as shown by the number of cross platform games on consoles compared to PC. Also never mind the exclusive games consoles do get tend to be 1st and 2nd party, in other words paid for exclusives.

Consoles are a cross platform dumping ground that have to pay for most of their exclusives, therefore anti PC criticisms from the console end have little significance when you can see PC is doing fine. Of course most of them will outright ignore everything I am saying, they are too used to the idea PC is dieing to change the way they think.

-edit

It's late my end, logging for the night, will check replys tomorrow.

AnnoyedDragon

^

Much better comparison, more or less the point I was trying to make by saying I had force AA on the PC version of Mass Effect 2. They look the same because Mass Effect 2 is a console centric game. No special attention was given to the PC version of the game.

I'm not saying the PC is loosing exclusivity, I'm just saying that console gaming has caught up considerably to PC gaming to the point where the 2 are becoming similar enough in terms of tech that making a PC game into a console game and keeping most of the content isn't a real challenge for devs.

clubsammich91

[QUOTE="clubsammich91"]

I'm not saying the PC is loosing exclusivity, I'm just saying that console gaming has caught up considerably to PC gaming to the point where the 2 are becoming similar enough in terms of tech that making a PC game into a console game and keeping most of the content isn't a real challenge for devs.

anshul89

[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

[QUOTE="yonnex"]

Unfortunatly i have to agree with this......

clubsammich91

Will the hateboys quit it? They don't care enough about PC gaming to even check if the market is "dwindling", they just love to assume PC is failing and their platform of choice is winning.

Here you got the first MGS

Looks alright for a PS1 game. But on the PC at that same time there was Half-Life.

Looks light years better right? Now lets compare a 2010 game like ME2.

So ME2 on the PC looks alot sharper than on the 360, but other than that they look and play almost identical.

What I'm saying is, the line between consoles and the PC is getting really blurry to the point where devs like Crytech don't mind bringing a game to the consoles without having so sacrifice too much if it would have been just a PC exclusive.

[quote="Joystiq"]We already know the game will take place in New York, but according to the developer, it'll be "a New York City like none in games or cinema." Crytek is more interested in having the city environment act as a focus on the action rather than a big open sandbox, so while you'll see lots of the city above, you'll only be able to travel in "constrained freedom," or only about "three storeys up and down."
anshul89

[QUOTE="clubsammich91"]

[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

Will the hateboys quit it? They don't care enough about PC gaming to even check if the market is "dwindling", they just love to assume PC is failing and their platform of choice is winning.

windsquid9000

Here you got the first MGS

Looks alright for a PS1 game. But on the PC at that same time there was Half-Life.

Looks light years better right? Now lets compare a 2010 game like ME2.

So ME2 on the PC looks alot sharper than on the 360, but other than that they look and play almost identical.

What I'm saying is, the line between consoles and the PC is getting really blurry to the point where devs like Crytech don't mind bringing a game to the consoles without having so sacrifice too much if it would have been just a PC exclusive.

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

[QUOTE="Yandere"]

Because linearity is a crime.

Silenthps

It is when you start as an open world game. Imagine making GTA linear so wii owners could play it as well :lol:

Because GTA was clearly pushing PC tech at the time :|

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

Consoles dumbing down games again I see!

Wasdie

Better than what we are going to get, another corridor shooter with a couple paths. Sounds like gears of war.

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

[QUOTE="Yandere"]

Because linearity is a crime.

GulliversTravel

It is when you start as an open world game. Imagine making GTA linear so wii owners could play it as well :lol:

Crysis was only really linear at the end...

[QUOTE="Silenthps"][QUOTE="Espada12"]

It is when you start as an open world game. Imagine making GTA linear so wii owners could play it as well :lol:

Espada12

Because GTA was clearly pushing PC tech at the time :|

[QUOTE="Wasdie"][QUOTE="Espada12"]

Consoles dumbing down games again I see!

Espada12

Better than what we are going to get, another corridor shooter with a couple paths. Sounds like gears of war.

[QUOTE="Wasdie"][QUOTE="Espada12"]

Consoles dumbing down games again I see!

Espada12

Better than what we are going to get, another corridor shooter with a couple paths. Sounds like gears of war.

Yes, blame the consoles and not the devs. That is just silly. Maybe you should start a petition, I hear they work really well. Just look at MW2, its all the way down to #6 on the top Steam sales.

Yes, a corridor shooter with two paths. Oh you and your infinite knowledge. You must be on the inside. :roll: I'll trust the preview that was linked here a week or so ago over that said it was open over your "analysis" I have faith that Crytek wont **** over their fans

SparkyProtocol

I'm sorry, I've heard the promise story with games going to consoles. Originally it was said the console version would not affect the PC version, now i'm hearing that I'm basically going to be more limited than the first game for the purpose of story telling. Explain to me how making the game more linear helps story telling.... as long as you complete an objective the story will progress, now if he is just referring to artificial barriers in a huge world I won't mind, but it doesn't sound like that. BTW this is the head of crytek talking here, I guess he is more credible than journalist giving previews.

I for one don't see this as really all that bad of a thing, especially if it makes Crysis more fun to play. I think it comes down to drawing a line between "open-ended" as in different ways to reach a goal, and simply huge open environments that don't really add that much to the actual fun of the game. Far Cry 2 offered a lot freedom and that freedom did NOTHING for the game's fun factor.

If crysis is less "open" in terms of the amount of level existing at once, but is more fun b/c of it. Fine by me.

As amazing as it was to look at, I didn't find Crysis to be all that fun to actually play. It was a good game of course, but I don't think it would have gained nearly as much attention if it wasn't for the "pretty stuff".

I just want to know if they are ever going to make a decent multiplayer? They should be working on that more than anything.