Crysis almost not AAA on gamerankings anymore...

[QUOTE="3ggman"][QUOTE="FrozenLiquid"][QUOTE="tenaka2"]

[QUOTE="mtradr43"]Did gamespot overrate crysis? I mean, its at 90.6% right now overall, and dropping every couple of days. Within two weeks, it will end up being below 90, far below what hermits have cracked it up to be. Of course, on gamespot, its AAA, but it seems they decided to make up for a couple flops by adding too much here.FrozenLiquid

I lot of reviewers marked the game down because they didn't have the rigs to run it. Or they were bitter that the rigs they have at home couldn't run it well either.

Personally I have no problem with the hardware requirements for Crysis, yes they are high but its good to see PC gaming pushed forward.

Crysis crushesthe current consoles in all technical areas, its a benchmark game. not just for graphics but for physics, AI, sound, gameplayand presentation.

While I do agree that not all Reviewers are gonna hate on Crysis because they have a problems with the specs, I have read a lot of reviews putting it as a negative points and talking a lot about it. I'm pretty sure that brought down the score a notch on some websites.

They didn't do it extreme though, my old PC (new PC parts on the way) can actually run Crysis on medium thats a computer with a x2 4400 1GB ram and x1800xt, if that can do medium I think the game is more then reasonable in it's requirements considering thats a 2 year old pc.

Ahhh its still AAA.

5 sites out of 21 gave Crysis AA.

Why are we listening to the 5 sites and not the other 16?

Danm_999

Should we look towards Game Critics review of Halo 3 - 7/10 - as the correct one overall.

No.

When will people realize the Crysis is probably one of the worst games playable? It's not even worthy of a play through and the multiplayer is TERRIBLE compared to Halo which isn't even a MP game. Crysis is very gimmicky with stuff added in that doesn't really change anything other than how you feel like killing 50 Koreans. Halo is not a great FPS, but it's not gimmicky at least.usmcjdk6

And the multiplayer kicks ass. Best fun ive had since BF2.

It's not AAA if you look past the graphiXwok7

As opposed to halo3 which is AAA because of it's.......it's.....

....help me out here. Why is halo3 so highly rated again?

It's not AAA if you look past the graphiXwok7

[QUOTE="wok7"]It's not AAA if you look past the graphiXTeamR

As opposed to halo3 which is AAA because of it's.......it's.....

....help me out here. Why is halo3 so highly rated again?

Gameplay. Something PC shooter's won't match unless something innovative happens, as opposed to just needing more hardware per game : /

[QUOTE="TeamR"]

[QUOTE="wok7"]It's not AAA if you look past the graphiXwok7

As opposed to halo3 which is AAA because of it's.......it's.....

....help me out here. Why is halo3 so highly rated again?

Gameplay. Something PC shooter's won't match unless something innovative happens, as opposed to just needing more hardware per game : /

Cause it was PC Quality FPS on a very cheap console, and it worked, it was even better than Goldeneye to an extent.

Come on hermits, start using your head.

Cause it was PC Quality FPS on a very cheap console, and it worked, it was even better than Goldeneye to an extent.

Come on hermits, start using your head.

wok7

wow

just....wow..

Cause it was PC Quality FPS on a very cheap console, and it worked, it was even better than Goldeneye to an extent.

Come on hermits, start using your head.

wok7

At least us hermits have things inside our head to use. Do you even know the meaning of "innovative"?

[QUOTE="TeamR"]

[QUOTE="wok7"]It's not AAA if you look past the graphiXwok7

As opposed to halo3 which is AAA because of it's.......it's.....

....help me out here. Why is halo3 so highly rated again?

Gameplay. Something PC shooter's won't match unless something innovative happens, as opposed to just needing more hardware per game : /

Cause it was PC Quality FPS on a very cheap console, and it worked, it was even better than Goldeneye to an extent.

Come on hermits, start using your head.

wok7

[QUOTE="wok7"]

Cause it was PC Quality FPS on a very cheap console, and it worked, it was even better than Goldeneye to an extent.

Come on hermits, start using your head.

skrat_01

Cause it was PC Quality FPS on a very cheap console, and it worked, it was even better than Goldeneye to an extent.

Come on hermits, start using your head.

wok7

[QUOTE="wok7"]

Cause it was PC Quality FPS on a very cheap console, and it worked, it was even better than Goldeneye to an extent.

Come on hermits, start using your head.

Vandalvideo

:lol:

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="wok7"]

Cause it was PC Quality FPS on a very cheap console, and it worked, it was even better than Goldeneye to an extent.

Come on hermits, start using your head.

muscleserge

this^

[QUOTE="muscleserge"][QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="wok7"]

Cause it was PC Quality FPS on a very cheap console, and it worked, it was even better than Goldeneye to an extent.

Come on hermits, start using your head.

Wartzay

this^

Sorry, but I haven't been around SW for very long. Can anyone post a link?

Cause it was PC Quality FPS on a very cheap console, and it worked, it was even better than Goldeneye to an extent.

Come on hermits, start using your head.

wok7

You jsut said PC FPS lack gameplay, yet you said Halo 3 *Achiveives* PC like gameplay/level ... oh dear...

[QUOTE="bezaire2005"]

no other console game in the history of video games has offered the same set of features that Halo 3 has. People LOVE to critisize Halo 3 for not having something completly new, but every time I ask them what more Bungie should have done with the game I never get a solid answer.....weird.

NECR0CHILD313

A single player mode that doesn't suck would be a good start. Consider that was a huge strength of Halo CE, it was quite dissapointing to see Halo 2 and on half-assed and thrown together, the equivalent of a rickety bridge over a giant plothole.

I meant completly new in terms of gameplay...which most people say is too similar to the previous installments but canNEVER come up with something major that Bungie should have done. The campaign and what you got from the story is purely your opinion, as there are MANY people who loved the campaign.

lol @ all the damage control hermits use against Halo 3. Stop living in denial and admit that it pwns you.wok7

Hey wok7 I gotta tell you something. Everything you ever say is wrong. Completely wrong. You should should start using sign language so that you can fool people cause as soon as you say something people instantly know not to take you seriously. Take this as the best advice you have ever received. You can thank me later.

lol @ all the damage control hermits use against Halo 3. Stop living in denial and admit that it pwns you.wok7

"Crysis is visually stunning, packed with intelligent, thrilling gameplay, and easily one of the greatest shooters ever made."

(whenever someone starts talking about how crysis suck as a fps..this is all I have to post)

[QUOTE="elbow2k"][QUOTE="PS3_3DO"]

I think it's a little bit overrated. Now the hermits know how Halo fans feel when people say Halo is overrated all the time. ;)

PS3_3DO

If Crysis is a bit overrated, Halo 3 is hugely overrated.

The Halo games bought new ideas to Console FPS games.

Cause it was PC Quality FPS on a very cheap console, and it worked, it was even better than Goldeneye to an extent.

Come on hermits, start using your head.

wok7

wok7 :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Now it's at 9.0, pretty much guaranteed at this point to go AA (whereas Mass Effect remains solid 2 points above it.)

>.> 5 dollars says if it doesnt drop below 90%..they will say "Only Gamespot matters."killab2oo5

... or... we can equate it to the fact that GR sucks for PC games. Specifically when you consider that HALF of the PC reviewers never give about an 8.0 except for a AAA quality, must own game. GFW Magazine's new review system which has 5.0 be the average score and 8.0 be a must own game is the standard over in Europe... Can't say the same for all the console magazines that throw out 10's like candy.

So what?

Since when did we go by Gamerankings? Ever?

[QUOTE="killab2oo5"]>.> 5 dollars says if it doesnt drop below 90%..they will say "Only Gamespot matters."horrowhip

... or... we can equate it to the fact that GR sucks for PC games. Specifically when you consider that HALF of the PC reviewers never give about an 8.0 except for a AAA quality, must own game. GFW Magazine's new review system which has 5.0 be the average score and 8.0 be a must own game is the standard over in Europe... Can't say the same for all the console magazines that throw out 10's like candy.

PC game magazines are increadably critical, unlike the 'offical' console magazines - which I dont see that anyone should take seriously when their entire purpose is to promote and sell games, hardware and prephrials of its platform.
(*coug* OXM AU - Halo 2 - 11/10)

[QUOTE="NECR0CHILD313"][QUOTE="bezaire2005"]

no other console game in the history of video games has offered the same set of features that Halo 3 has. People LOVE to critisize Halo 3 for not having something completly new, but every time I ask them what more Bungie should have done with the game I never get a solid answer.....weird.

bezaire2005

A single player mode that doesn't suck would be a good start. Consider that was a huge strength of Halo CE, it was quite dissapointing to see Halo 2 and on half-assed and thrown together, the equivalent of a rickety bridge over a giant plothole.

I meant completly new in terms of gameplay...which most people say is too similar to the previous installments but canNEVER come up with something major that Bungie should have done. The campaign and what you got from the story is purely your opinion, as there are MANY people who loved the campaign.

Maybe follow the trend of GeOW and Uncharted and have a cover system, that would be pretty innovative.

Back to the topic, Crysis is pure eye candy, everytime I play it's amazing, but past it I find it... lacking.

Of course, I don't own the game, but have played on my cousin's. My poor PC would explode should I tried it.

That fairly true.

PC game magazines are increadably critical, unlike the 'offical' console magazines - which I dont see that anyone should take seriously when their entire purpose is to promote and sell games, hardware and prephrials of its platform.
(*coug* OXM AU - Halo 2 - 11/10)

skrat_01

thats 100% true... Look at ANY German PC Magazine. None of them score games above a 90% unless they are almost perfect games. Then, GFW Magazine's new scoring scale means that only the cream of the crop will get above an 80%. 6 of the 26 reviewers gave it 9.0 or above. The ones that scores lower were, GFW Magazine (1UP PC), TotalVideoGames(which took off 2 points because the final boss was not as good as they hoped and the requirements are high... no other reason. They still call it one of the best FPS's ever.), Computer Games RO(which only complained about the rare bugs, and only two MP modes. Again, they still said it was easily one of the best FPS's games ever. Right now it is frontrunner for their GotY), NZGamer (AGAIN, one of the greatest shooters ever created according to them. Ending made them lower the score though... They also were annoyed by only two MP modes...), and Games Master UK (AGAIN, one of the best FPS's ever created.... seem like a common theme? It does doesn't it.)

Then there is the 70% from some random site.... thing is... their actual score given was an 80%... Seems whoever turned it in typed in the wrong score... Time to go point that out...

That fairly true.

PC game magazines are increadably critical, unlike the 'offical' console magazines - which I dont see that anyone should take seriously when their entire purpose is to promote and sell games, hardware and prephrials of its platform.
(*coug* OXM AU - Halo 2 - 11/10)

skrat_01

thats 100% true... Look at ANY German PC Magazine. None of them score games above a 90% unless they are almost perfect games. Then, GFW Magazine's new scoring scale means that only the cream of the crop will get above an 80%. 6 of the 26 reviewers gave it below a 9.0. The ones that scores lower were, GFW Magazine (1UP PC), TotalVideoGames(which took off 2 points because the final boss was not as good as they hoped and the requirements are high... no other reason. They still call it one of the best FPS's ever.), Computer Games RO(which only complained about the rare bugs, and only two MP modes. Again, they still said it was easily one of the best FPS's games ever. Right now it is frontrunner for their GotY), NZGamer (AGAIN, one of the greatest shooters ever created according to them. Ending made them lower the score though... They also were annoyed by only two MP modes...), and Games Master UK (AGAIN, one of the best FPS's ever created.... seem like a common theme? It does doesn't it.)

Then there is the 70% from some random site.... thing is... their actual score given was an 80%... Seems whoever turned it in typed in the wrong score... Time to go point that out...

Oh, that's right, I keep forgetting that we use GameRankings now.:roll:

[QUOTE="horrowhip"]

[QUOTE="killab2oo5"]>.> 5 dollars says if it doesnt drop below 90%..they will say "Only Gamespot matters."skrat_01

... or... we can equate it to the fact that GR sucks for PC games. Specifically when you consider that HALF of the PC reviewers never give about an 8.0 except for a AAA quality, must own game. GFW Magazine's new review system which has 5.0 be the average score and 8.0 be a must own game is the standard over in Europe... Can't say the same for all the console magazines that throw out 10's like candy.

PC game magazines are increadably critical, unlike the 'offical' console magazines - which I dont see that anyone should take seriously when their entire purpose is to promote and sell games, hardware and prephrials of its platform.
(*coug* OXM AU - Halo 2 - 11/10)

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="horrowhip"]

[QUOTE="killab2oo5"]>.> 5 dollars says if it doesnt drop below 90%..they will say "Only Gamespot matters."FrozenLiquid

... or... we can equate it to the fact that GR sucks for PC games. Specifically when you consider that HALF of the PC reviewers never give about an 8.0 except for a AAA quality, must own game. GFW Magazine's new review system which has 5.0 be the average score and 8.0 be a must own game is the standard over in Europe... Can't say the same for all the console magazines that throw out 10's like candy.

PC game magazines are increadably critical, unlike the 'offical' console magazines - which I dont see that anyone should take seriously when their entire purpose is to promote and sell games, hardware and prephrials of its platform.
(*coug* OXM AU - Halo 2 - 11/10)

that may be true...but PC gamer isnt the one that gave 6 360 games perfect scores this year (PC gamer has never given a perfect score)...I also doubt its any coincidence that 4 of those are either 360 exclusive, or PC/360.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]That fairly true.

PC game magazines are increadably critical, unlike the 'offical' console magazines - which I dont see that anyone should take seriously when their entire purpose is to promote and sell games, hardware and prephrials of its platform.
(*coug* OXM AU - Halo 2 - 11/10)

horrowhip

thats 100% true... Look at ANY German PC Magazine. None of them score games above a 90% unless they are almost perfect games. Then, GFW Magazine's new scoring scale means that only the cream of the crop will get above an 80%. 6 of the 26 reviewers gave it below a 9.0. The ones that scores lower were, GFW Magazine (1UP PC), TotalVideoGames(which took off 2 points because the final boss was not as good as they hoped and the requirements are high... no other reason. They still call it one of the best FPS's ever.), Computer Games RO(which only complained about the rare bugs, and only two MP modes. Again, they still said it was easily one of the best FPS's games ever. Right now it is frontrunner for their GotY), NZGamer (AGAIN, one of the greatest shooters ever created according to them. Ending made them lower the score though... They also were annoyed by only two MP modes...), and Games Master UK (AGAIN, one of the best FPS's ever created.... seem like a common theme? It does doesn't it.)

Then there is the 70% from some random site.... thing is... their actual score given was an 80%... Seems whoever turned it in typed in the wrong score... Time to go point that out...

Read this post. Case closed.

Man, these debates are so amusing.

Post #1: Halo is overrated!

Post #2: Crysis is overrated!

*10 pages of arguing ensues*