Crysis gets too much attention.

To anyone who heavily played Stalker, I bought both Stalker and Clearsky, I got some mods on each that made it pretty much photorealistic, but I'll have to still try this one at some point, my problem was, pretty much every firefight took me like 1000 quicksave/loads, I would bleed and end up dying pretty fast, I play quite cautiosly, I don't run and gun, but I always felt like my bullets never quite went where I was aiming, was it just me sucking, does this mod improve this? :o110million

[QUOTE="SexySasquatch11"]

[QUOTE="GTR2addict"]STALKER makes every single console game ever made like an NES game, forget crysisGTR2addict

1st you boost that those pics are photorealistic then you spout this crap. And I thought I was the one that needed glasses... its people like you that really gives fanboys a bad name.

EDIT: Oh and were on GS so we follow what GS says. That the rules I didn't make them, but graphic wish MGS4 > Crysis Warhead == Crysis. So everyone that says Crysis is the best looking game ever and no console game beats it. GS said MGS4 > Crysis so all the hermit can shut up now because SW == what ever GS says. GS is law here and everything else is just your opinion.

Then why did MGS4 beat out your all mighty Crysis for best techinocal graphics last year? GS is law in SW so MGS4 > Crysis, and MGS4 and all the games you listed are less than pretty. Very very bad art direction imo.

Then why did MGS4 beat out your all mighty Crysis for best techinocal graphics last year? GS is law in SW so MGS4 > Crysis, and MGS4 and all the games you listed are less than pretty. Very very bad art direction imo.

SexySasquatch11

You actually think MGS4 looks better than Crysis?

[QUOTE="SexySasquatch11"]

Then why did MGS4 beat out your all mighty Crysis for best techinocal graphics last year? GS is law in SW so MGS4 > Crysis, and MGS4 and all the games you listed are less than pretty. Very very bad art direction imo.

psn8214

You actually think MGS4 looks better than Crysis?

I think both are ugly games. If I wanted to do something realistic I'd go out and do it in real life. I like good art styles when I play my games. Eternal Sonata and Tales of Vesperia are my beautiful games. I find games like Crysis and MGS4 very bland and uninspired, that said GS thinks MGS4 > Crysis: Warhead last year, so until they say other wise we can't say Crysis looks better until GS says otherwise. I don't agree with it but what GS says is SW law.

Personally I would have given both games like a 6-7 not a 9-10 but thats just me.

EDIT: Uncharted to me is the perfect blend of techinocal and a unique artsytle. Games like KZ2, GeoW, GOW, Forza 3 or GT5 don't impress me in the slightest.

The last thing STALEKR needs is photo-realism. *shudders*

[QUOTE="psn8214"]

[QUOTE="SexySasquatch11"]

Then why did MGS4 beat out your all mighty Crysis for best techinocal graphics last year? GS is law in SW so MGS4 > Crysis, and MGS4 and all the games you listed are less than pretty. Very very bad art direction imo.

SexySasquatch11

You actually think MGS4 looks better than Crysis?

I think both are ugly games. If I wanted to do something realistic I'd go out and do it in real life. I like good art styles when I play my games. Eternal Sonata and Tales of Vesperia are my beautiful games. I find games like Crysis and MGS4 very bland and uninspired, that said GS thinks MGS4 > Crysis: Warhead last year, so until they say other wise we can't say Crysis looks better until GS says otherwise. I don't agree with it but what GS says is SW law.

Personally I would have given both games like a 6-7 not a 9-10 but thats just me.

EDIT: Uncharted to me is the perfect blend of techinocal and a unique artsytle. Games like KZ2, GeoW, GOW, Forza 3 or GT5 don't impress me in the slightest.

Ok. I disagree, but I respect your opinion.

Then why did MGS4 beat out your all mighty Crysis for best techinocal graphics last year? GS is law in SW so MGS4 > Crysis, and MGS4 and all the games you listed are less than pretty. Very very bad art direction imo.

SexySasquatch11

technical achievment =/= best technically

MGS4 has some of the weakest techncial graphics in a while. anyone with working eyes and some knoweldge of graphics would tell you that. how it was a technical achievment especially when uncharted wasa better choice is beyond me.

Ok. I disagree, but I respect your opinion.

psn8214

Everything to do with gaming is completely subjective. It varies from person to person. I can see why people say all the games are beautiful. Just doesn't work for me. That why we use what GS says here. If we didn't it's just be non stop arguing because everyone would be right. Because I think SSBB is one of the worst gaming experiences I've ever had, but GS and a lot of other sites said it was a great game and I accept that. Just because I hated every min of it doesn't make it less enjoyable for anyone else.

Everything to do with gaming is completely subjective.

SexySasquatch11

[QUOTE="SexySasquatch11"]

Then why did MGS4 beat out your all mighty Crysis for best techinocal graphics last year? GS is law in SW so MGS4 > Crysis, and MGS4 and all the games you listed are less than pretty. Very very bad art direction imo.

washd123

technical achievment =/= best technically

MGS4 has some of the weakest techncial graphics in a while. anyone with working eyes and some knoweldge of graphics would tell you that. how it was a technical achievment especially when uncharted wasa better choice is beyond me.

It was for that year. Uncharted was't released last year so it wasn't included(I don't think). But like I said before it's subjective. One man's pretty game is another garbage. It varies from person to person. GS thought MGS4 was better than Crysis last year so thats what we have to go with.

It looks great, I thought even the vanilla was one of the best looking games the year it came out, the setting, gritty artstyle and lighting go really well together to create the amazing atmosphere. That being said I do think Crysis is still better in both graphics and gameplay even though I prefer Stalker's gameworld and artstyle.

It doesn't get much attention anymore. Despite Crysis Warhead being the best looking game to date, at least from a technical aspect, it's still not mentioned as much. It's primarily brought up by PS3 fanboys trying to cite Uncharted 2 or Heavy Rain as the graphics kings...

It was for that year. Uncharted was't released last year so it wasn't included(I don't think). But like I said before it's subjective. One man's pretty game is another garbage. It varies from person to person. GS thought MGS4 was better than Crysis last year so thats what we have to go with.

SexySasquatch11

technical things arent subjective though. it has nothing to do with looks. i forgot uncharted was 2007. and like i said MGS4 is a technical mess honestly theres nothing technically outstanding about it. nothing at all. not even the character models. theyre not a technical acheivement. so i have no idea what GS was smoking.

[QUOTE="SexySasquatch11"]

Everything to do with gaming is completely subjective.

foxhound_fox

Each engine is built for a particular game. Saying ones better than another is subjective. Not one engine does everything perfectly. The Cryteck engine probbaly can push more polys and have better lighting than the Unreal engine, but the unreal engine could handle textures better. I don't know. I don't the capibilities of either engine, but I get better framerate with the source engine games than I do with Crytecks games. Does that make the source engine better?

[QUOTE="SexySasquatch11"]

It was for that year. Uncharted was't released last year so it wasn't included(I don't think). But like I said before it's subjective. One man's pretty game is another garbage. It varies from person to person. GS thought MGS4 was better than Crysis last year so thats what we have to go with.

washd123

technical things arent subjective though. it has nothing to do with looks. i forgot uncharted was 2007. and like i said MGS4 is a technical mess honestly theres nothing technically outstanding about it. nothing at all. not even the character models. theyre not a technical acheivement. so i have no idea what GS was smoking.

Pipes stuff full of Sony dollars?

[QUOTE="washd123"]

[QUOTE="SexySasquatch11"]

Then why did MGS4 beat out your all mighty Crysis for best techinocal graphics last year? GS is law in SW so MGS4 > Crysis, and MGS4 and all the games you listed are less than pretty. Very very bad art direction imo.

SexySasquatch11

technical achievment =/= best technically

MGS4 has some of the weakest techncial graphics in a while. anyone with working eyes and some knoweldge of graphics would tell you that. how it was a technical achievment especially when uncharted wasa better choice is beyond me.

It was for that year. Uncharted was't released last year so it wasn't included(I don't think). But like I said before it's subjective. One man's pretty game is another garbage. It varies from person to person. GS thought MGS4 was better than Crysis last year so thats what we have to go with.

What if Gamespot said that the Earth was flat? I guess we'd have to change our science books then.

Each engine is built for a particular game. Saying ones better than another is subjective. Not one engine does everything perfectly. The Cryteck engine probbaly can push more polys and have better lighting than the Unreal engine, but the unreal engine could handle textures better. I don't know. I don't the capibilities of either engine, but I get better framerate with the source engine games than I do with Crytecks games. Does that make the source engine better?

SexySasquatch11

pushing more tech and realitively optimized = better

source may run better but its pushing significantly less than the CE2.

its only slightly subjective at the lowest level. like how much does scale compensate for or how far does optimization go.

other than that its not at all.

[QUOTE="SexySasquatch11"]

It was for that year. Uncharted was't released last year so it wasn't included(I don't think). But like I said before it's subjective. One man's pretty game is another garbage. It varies from person to person. GS thought MGS4 was better than Crysis last year so thats what we have to go with.

washd123

technical things arent subjective though. it has nothing to do with looks. i forgot uncharted was 2007. and like i said MGS4 is a technical mess honestly theres nothing technically outstanding about it. nothing at all. not even the character models. theyre not a technical acheivement. so i have no idea what GS was smoking.

MGS4 character models and enviorments have more polys than Uncharted(pretty sure). So that makes it a better it a better achievement than Uncharted but MGS4's bad art direction doesn't help it at all. Hell Lair had a some rocks in the game that had a 10000 polys each(before the update that fixed it). There's not doubt in my mind Crysis can push polys. I've had over 1 mil on the screen at one time before, but polys don't make a game.

[QUOTE="SexySasquatch11"]

Each engine is built for a particular game. Saying ones better than another is subjective. Not one engine does everything perfectly. The Cryteck engine probbaly can push more polys and have better lighting than the Unreal engine, but the unreal engine could handle textures better. I don't know. I don't the capibilities of either engine, but I get better framerate with the source engine games than I do with Crytecks games. Does that make the source engine better?

washd123

pushing more tech and realitively optimized = better

source may run better but its pushing significantly less than the CE2.

its only slightly subjective at the lowest level. like how much does scale compensate for or how far does optimization go.

other than that its not at all.

Honestly there is no point arguing with someone that thinks MGS4 is the best technical achievement.

What if Gamespot said that the Earth was flat? I guess we'd have to change our science books then.

Hanass

I'd accept it on SW. But in RL GS has nothing to do with anything, just when I'm on SW. But I think that would make a very interesting day to say the least.

MGS4 character models and enviorments have more polys than Uncharted(pretty sure). So that makes it a better it a better achievement than Uncharted but MGS4's bad art direction doesn't help it at all. Hell Lair had a some rocks in the game that had a 10000 polys each(before the update that fixed it). There's not doubt in my mind Crysis can push polys. I've had over 1 mil on the screen at one time before, but polys don't make a game.

SexySasquatch11

never said it was the sole aspect.

graphics is a collective measure. you can push more polys than another engine but do it while rendering a rock. or have pisspoor lighting. theres no one sole aspect that determines better graphics. its more a overall thing.

[QUOTE="Hanass"]

What if Gamespot said that the Earth was flat? I guess we'd have to change our science books then.

SexySasquatch11

I'd accept it on SW. But in RL GS has nothing to do with anything, just when I'm on SW. But I think that would make a very interesting day to say the least.

Somebody puts way too much faith in Gamespot...

Regardless of where you are, you should have enough sense to think for yourself.

[QUOTE="washd123"]

[QUOTE="SexySasquatch11"]

Each engine is built for a particular game. Saying ones better than another is subjective. Not one engine does everything perfectly. The Cryteck engine probbaly can push more polys and have better lighting than the Unreal engine, but the unreal engine could handle textures better. I don't know. I don't the capibilities of either engine, but I get better framerate with the source engine games than I do with Crytecks games. Does that make the source engine better?

1080pOnly

pushing more tech and realitively optimized = better

source may run better but its pushing significantly less than the CE2.

its only slightly subjective at the lowest level. like how much does scale compensate for or how far does optimization go.

other than that its not at all.

Honestly there is no point arguing with someone that thinks MGS4 is the best technical achievement.

Where did I say I think MGS4 was the best. I said GAMESPOT said so, and that on system wars what they say is law. And I really wouldn't say we were arguing, just having a discussion. But time to play FFXI.

[QUOTE="GTR2addict"][QUOTE="SexySasquatch11"]

1st you boost that those pics are photorealistic then you spout this crap. And I thought I was the one that needed glasses... its people like you that really gives fanboys a bad name.

EDIT: Oh and were on GS so we follow what GS says. That the rules I didn't make them, but graphic wish MGS4 > Crysis Warhead == Crysis. So everyone that says Crysis is the best looking game ever and no console game beats it. GS said MGS4 > Crysis so all the hermit can shut up now because SW == what ever GS says. GS is law here and everything else is just your opinion.

SexySasquatch11

Then why did MGS4 beat out your all mighty Crysis for best techinocal graphics last year? GS is law in SW so MGS4 > Crysis, and MGS4 and all the games you listed are less than pretty. Very very bad art direction imo.

[QUOTE="SexySasquatch11"]

[QUOTE="GTR2addict"] :lol: it's all opinion here. but the problem is, it's a FACT that STALKER Clear Sky, Shadow Of Chernobyl and Crysis make every console game look 2 generations oldEggimannd

Then why did MGS4 beat out your all mighty Crysis for best techinocal graphics last year? GS is law in SW so MGS4 > Crysis, and MGS4 and all the games you listed are less than pretty. Very very bad art direction imo.

Each engine is built for a particular game. Saying ones better than another is subjective. Not one engine does everything perfectly. The Cryteck engine probbaly can push more polys and have better lighting than the Unreal engine, but the unreal engine could handle textures better. I don't know. I don't the capibilities of either engine, but I get better framerate with the source engine games than I do with Crytecks games. Does that make the source engine better?

SexySasquatch11

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"] They're talking about Crysis Warhead.Eggimannd

because it was best techncial acheivement (which warhead still should have won) not best technical graphics.

either way though i have no idea how MGS4 wont its far from having good graphics let alone being a technical acheivement. MGS1 was a tehcnical masterpeice as is MGS3 MGS4? no. were the other entries from the consoles really that weak?

[QUOTE="Eggimannd"][QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"] They're talking about Crysis Warhead.washd123

because it was best techncial acheivement (which warhead still should have won) not best technical graphics.

either way though i have no idea how MGS4 wont its far from having good graphics let alone being a technical acheivement. MGS1 was a tehcnical masterpeice as is MGS3 MGS4? no. were the other entries from the consoles really that weak?

Personally, I'm more impressed by the first one. That's just my opinion, though.

That depends on which achievement impresses you more: wringing good graphics out of a limited platform, or putting together great graphics (with the possibility for even more, if you want to modify it) and saying "just throw every year's new hardware at this until it runs fast enough for you".

Personally, I'm more impressed by the first one. That's just my opinion, though.

lowe0

i would be too if MGS4 was actually good technically. but its not its a mess. theres nothing good about it.

but honestly its just as impressive doing good work with limited hardware and doing somehting amazing period. crysis is a technical achievement in its own right no game for 2 years now has been able to even touch it.

so if MGS4 was technically impressive id say yeah it deserved it but its not.

[QUOTE="SexySasquatch11"]

[QUOTE="Hanass"]

What if Gamespot said that the Earth was flat? I guess we'd have to change our science books then.

Puckhog04

I'd accept it on SW. But in RL GS has nothing to do with anything, just when I'm on SW. But I think that would make a very interesting day to say the least.

Somebody puts way too much faith in Gamespot...

Regardless of where you are, you should have enough sense to think for yourself.

Me? Faith in GS? LOL. I hate GS. I only come here for the forums. I don't care what they think. After the Metroid Prime 3 review, I never cared what they said. But I try and play by the rules when I'm here. So in SW we go with what GS says.