Crysis is Amazing

Wow I really must say that I'm impressed with Crysis. I played through the campaign yesterday and it is definitely one of the best games I've ever played (and I've played a lot). Definitely the best graphics which help make great gameplay. I don't know why Warhead wasn't a GOTY contender or why Crysis in general isn't more popular though. Anyone agree it deserves more credit?

Hell yeah man, Crysis is amazing on a nice rig. Turn up the surround sound, crank up the graphics and its simply amazing.

Check out Crysis Warhead if you liked Crysis. Its got much better online then crysis had, but the singleplayer is shorter. Also Crysis Warhead is optimzed better and works on more computers.

I really wish every gamer could try Crysis on a nice rig with a good graphics and sound card at least once. It truely is a game from the future imo.

No dude, according to GS MGS4 is more amazing than Crysis.EZs

No dude, according to GS MGS4 is more amazing than Crysis.EZs

[QUOTE="EZs"]No dude, according to GS MGS4 is more amazing than Crysis.StreetRacer91

IMO Crysis and MGS4 are two of the best games this gen.

[QUOTE="EZs"]No dude, according to GS MGS4 is more amazing than Crysis.StreetRacer91

[QUOTE="StreetRacer91"][QUOTE="EZs"]No dude, according to GS MGS4 is more amazing than Crysis.skrat_01

Wow I really must say that I'm impressed with Crysis. I played through the campaign yesterday and it is definitely one of the best games I've ever played (and I've played a lot). Definitely the best graphics which help make great gameplay. I don't know why Warhead wasn't a GOTY contender or why Crysis in general isn't more popular though. Anyone agree it deserves more credit?

StreetRacer91

Crysis is very entertaining, indeed.

Be sure to play it on Delta.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="StreetRacer91"] I still have to buy a PS3 and play it one of these days, but I really doubt that MGS is better than Crysis. I've played every MGS game except MGS4 and I've already seen all the tricks and stories and everything. When I was listening to why they gave MGS the GOTY award one guy said that it's a perfect blend between cutscenes and action and that it transitions into cutscenes easily. Crysis transitions better than any game I've ever played. Crysis is definitely one of the best games ever made. Better than all the Zeldas, COD4s, MGSs, and Gears imo.StreetRacer91

Crysis gets bashed here because it's the only high quality pc exclusive that console fanboys know how to bash. anshul89

Crysis is very entertaining, indeed.

Be sure to play it on Delta.

t3hTwinky

Crysis is very entertaining, indeed.

Be sure to play it on Delta.

Crysis is very entertaining, indeed.

Be sure to play it on Delta.

Crysis gets bashed here because it's the only high quality pc exclusive that console fanboys know how to bash. anshul89

Crysis is very entertaining, indeed.

Be sure to play it on Delta.

Crysis gets bashed here because it's the only high quality pc exclusive that console fanboys know how to bash. anshul89

Other than it's technical proficiency, Crysis is a pretty average FPS.

Crysis gets bashed here because it's the only high quality pc exclusive that console fanboys know how to bash. anshul89

It could also be because it's the only PC game that console players have the slightest interest in. I would bet far more Hermits want MGS4 than Cows want Crysis! MGS4 is worth buying a PS3 for Crysis however is not worth upgrading a PC for.

[QUOTE="anshul89"]Crysis gets bashed here because it's the only high quality pc exclusive that console fanboys know how to bash. Gaming_Guru_Guy

It could also be because it's the only PC game that console players have the slightest interest in. I would bet far more Hermits want MGS4 than Cows want Crysis! MGS4 is worth buying a PS3 for Crysis however is not worth upgrading a PC for.

Thats bs imo, i think both are worth it. I stopped pc gamign for two years, then came back just after crysis came out and i was blown away. Crysis and MGS4 are both classics imo.

[QUOTE="anshul89"]Crysis gets bashed here because it's the only high quality pc exclusive that console fanboys know how to bash. Dystopian-X

Other than it's technical proficiency, Crysis is a pretty average FPS.

[QUOTE="anshul89"]Crysis gets bashed here because it's the only high quality pc exclusive that console fanboys know how to bash. Gaming_Guru_Guy

It could also be because it's the only PC game that console players have the slightest interest in. I would bet far more Hermits want MGS4 than Cows want Crysis! MGS4 is worth buying a PS3 for Crysis however is not worth upgrading a PC for.

Other than it's technical proficiency, Crysis is a pretty average FPS.

Dystopian-X

Not in terms of gunplay. Sure, the plot and the setting are "average." But the presentation and the gunplay are top notch. Anyone who says otherwise is a fanboy.

[QUOTE="StreetRacer91"]

Wow I really must say that I'm impressed with Crysis. I played through the campaign yesterday and it is definitely one of the best games I've ever played (and I've played a lot). Definitely the best graphics which help make great gameplay. I don't know why Warhead wasn't a GOTY contender or why Crysis in general isn't more popular though. Anyone agree it deserves more credit?

jasonheyman

No it's not.

You do't need the original game to use Warhead. Tbh, anyone who says MGSIV looks better is insane.

[QUOTE="anshul89"]Crysis gets bashed here because it's the only high quality pc exclusive that console fanboys know how to bash. Gaming_Guru_Guy

It could also be because it's the only PC game that console players have the slightest interest in. I would bet far more Hermits want MGS4 than Cows want Crysis! MGS4 is worth buying a PS3 for Crysis however is not worth upgrading a PC for.

[QUOTE="Dystopian-X"]

Other than it's technical proficiency, Crysis is a pretty average FPS.

organic_machine

Not in terms of gunplay. Sure, the plot and the setting are "average." But the presentation and the gunplay are top notch. Anyone who says otherwise is a fanboy.

SPOILERS

The parts I thought were the best and I had the most fun with the gunplay where that shore in the second part, riding the vehicles and the finale on the ship where you blast the giant aliens with the rocket launcher but most of the gunplay on foot was pretty bleh.

[QUOTE="anshul89"]Crysis gets bashed here because it's the only high quality pc exclusive that console fanboys know how to bash. Dystopian-X

Other than it's technical proficiency, Crysis is a pretty average FPS.

[QUOTE="Dystopian-X"]

[QUOTE="anshul89"]Crysis gets bashed here because it's the only high quality pc exclusive that console fanboys know how to bash. skrat_01

Other than it's technical proficiency, Crysis is a pretty average FPS.

In the game you just go around and kill enemies while completing generic goals like rescue the hostage, escape alien compound etc, the game doesn't encourage you to do anything else. There's no creativity with the weapons, goals or even progression save a few but for the most part it's just the same as your normal modern war shooter which then turns into your average alien killing shooter.

I'm just getting tired of the mighty MGS4, I'm probably going to vomit if I see that name again, people need to face the reality, and the reality is , not everybody on earth is THAT interested in MGS4.

Crysis gets bashed here because it's the only high quality pc exclusive that console fanboys know how to bash. anshul89

That's true, System wars pays attention to Crysis, not because Crysis is special, but because Crysis pushes the graphics, I assume that Doom3 farcry and HL2 in 2004, Fear in 2005, GEOW in 2006 got the same kind of attention. And so will the next game that pushes the graphic (project offset?).

But if you make people bash pc games , like SOASE, people don't even know where to start.

I always wonder why people don't like crysis much, Its so god damn fun.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="Dystopian-X"] There are much much better titles on PC that should be hyped over it, many Hermits love to bring it up because it ''can't be teh done on consoles''.

Other than it's technical proficiency, Crysis is a pretty average FPS.

Dystopian-X

In the game you just go around and kill enemies while completing generic goals like rescue the hostage, escape alien compound etc, the game doesn't encourage you to do anything else. There's no creativity with the weapons, goals or even progression save a few but for the most part it's just the same as your normal modern war shooter which then turns into your average alien killing shooter.

Creativity in the weapons? Its the creativity in the USE of the weapons. They stay relatively real world, some sci fi, however they are versatile enough for you to experiment. Such as the weapon modifications. Sneaking into a house and setting C4 charges - luring NK soldiers in, then sneaking out? Attaching C4 to a barrel or crate and hurling them at a helicopter? Besides this makes the game average? In this regard Call of Duty 4 would be a horrible game. Besides you can use your surroundings as weapons e.g. death by spade, or chicken.

Its far from a 'normal modern war shooter'. That statement alone pretty much solidifies you don't know much about the games design.

The alien killing in Crysis is admittedly not as enjoyable (though in Warhead is very enjoyable), due to the change in design structure and level design, however the expansive level design, nano suit, and freedom of choice in the majority of the game, makes it something different entirely. For most of the part you have the complete freedom of switching gameplay styles on the fly, choosing how you want to play, adapting to the situation, and choice in how you wish to proceed, or complete what seems like a simple objective.

This really isn't much of an argument of how Crysis is 'average' tbh. Its more of a misunderstanding of how the games design, tainted by your own personal opinion towards it.

I think it's more proof of concept. The problem is that the sum is not greater than the parts. It's in fact less.

You get all these wonderful gameplay features: open world, refreshing gameplay, huge physics, but they all just don't work together. Some of them actually work against each other. Yes, it's funny when the A.I and world physics seem to confuse each other, but ultimately it ends up disappointing.

To further illustrate how I feel, I'll provide you with the opposite. Let's take Gears of War 2. Gears of War 2 is relatively simple. You have a mix of third person shooter combat, a bit of rail shooting and vehicles, and that's about it. It's got nothing on what Crysis offers. However, what Gears 2 does offer it offers with better execution. All the parts work in harmony, offering something that none of the individual bits (third person, vehicles, rail shooting) could offer alone. What Epic gives you is an illusion that what you can and will do is more than what you're actually doing. All you're doing is shooting people again and again and again, but it doesn't feel like that.

Crysis isn't like that. At one point you're battling against the physics. At another point you're watching as the enemy A.I mucks itself up. It actually feels like very different aspects of the game, rather than working together to provide you with something more.

That being said, Crysis is a great game, and if anyone were to read my reviews, you'd see that I do agree that it points to the future of first person shooters. It will leave the Half Life and Halo games in the dust.

The game sets you simple objectives. And lets you go about how do complete them, in any way you see fit (minus the linear levels in the last third of the game, which limit the freedom of choice, and simply aren't nearly as enjoyable as the others, despite the change of environment).

Creativity in the weapons? Its the creativity in the USE of the weapons. They stay relatively real world, some sci fi, however they are versatile enough for you to experiment. Such as the weapon modifications. Sneaking into a house and setting C4 charges - luring NK soldiers in, then sneaking out? Attaching C4 to a barrel or crate and hurling them at a helicopter? Besides this makes the game average? In this regard Call of Duty 4 would be a horrible game. Besides you can use your surroundings as weapons e.g. death by spade, or chicken.

Its far from a 'normal modern war shooter'. That statement alone pretty much solidifies you don't know much about the games design.skrat_01

Again none of this is new or all that special, other shooters have all this with a better execution and even more creative options in terms of how you go around your objectives and enemies. Crysis just showed it in technically better manner.

The alien killing in Crysis is admittedly not as enjoyable (though in Warhead is very enjoyable), due to the change in design structure and level design, however the expansive level design, nano suit, and freedom of choice in the majority of the game, makes it something different entirely. For most of the part you have the complete freedom of switching gameplay styles on the fly, choosing how you want to play, adapting to the situation, and choice in how you wish to proceed, or complete what seems like a simple objective.

skrat_01

Don't get me started on the nanosuit which was a big dissapoint ment you could barely use it without it going low on energy and some of it's features that I though could've been used for solving progression issues like stealth or super strenght were wasted in things like ''bring down aircraft carrier door'' or just ''hide from combat''. True, the game gives you a lot of freedom and options but all that freedom is boring if the options are so generic.

Not sure why you brought COD4 up since that's another good but overhyped game I don't find all that great for similar reasons.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]

The game sets you simple objectives. And lets you go about how do complete them, in any way you see fit (minus the linear levels in the last third of the game, which limit the freedom of choice, and simply aren't nearly as enjoyable as the others, despite the change of environment).

Creativity in the weapons? Its the creativity in the USE of the weapons. They stay relatively real world, some sci fi, however they are versatile enough for you to experiment. Such as the weapon modifications. Sneaking into a house and setting C4 charges - luring NK soldiers in, then sneaking out? Attaching C4 to a barrel or crate and hurling them at a helicopter? Besides this makes the game average? In this regard Call of Duty 4 would be a horrible game. Besides you can use your surroundings as weapons e.g. death by spade, or chicken.

Its far from a 'normal modern war shooter'. That statement alone pretty much solidifies you don't know much about the games design.Dystopian-X

Again none of this is new or all that special, other shooters have all this with a better execution and even more creative options in terms of how you go around your objectives and enemies. Crysis just showed it in technically better manner.

The alien killing in Crysis is admittedly not as enjoyable (though in Warhead is very enjoyable), due to the change in design structure and level design, however the expansive level design, nano suit, and freedom of choice in the majority of the game, makes it something different entirely. For most of the part you have the complete freedom of switching gameplay styles on the fly, choosing how you want to play, adapting to the situation, and choice in how you wish to proceed, or complete what seems like a simple objective.

skrat_01

Don't get me started on the nanosuit which was a big dissapoint ment you could barely use it without it going low on energy and some of it's features that I though could've been used for solving progression issues like stealth or super strenght were wasted in things like ''bring down aircraft carrier door'' or just ''hide from combat''. True, the game gives you a lot of freedom and options but all that freedom is boring if the options are so generic.

Not sure why you brought COD4 up since that's another good but overhyped game I don't find all that great for similar reasons.

It's just a game. If you enjoy it who cares if it's simple

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]

The game sets you simple objectives. And lets you go about how do complete them, in any way you see fit (minus the linear levels in the last third of the game, which limit the freedom of choice, and simply aren't nearly as enjoyable as the others, despite the change of environment).

Creativity in the weapons? Its the creativity in the USE of the weapons. They stay relatively real world, some sci fi, however they are versatile enough for you to experiment. Such as the weapon modifications. Sneaking into a house and setting C4 charges - luring NK soldiers in, then sneaking out? Attaching C4 to a barrel or crate and hurling them at a helicopter? Besides this makes the game average? In this regard Call of Duty 4 would be a horrible game. Besides you can use your surroundings as weapons e.g. death by spade, or chicken.

Its far from a 'normal modern war shooter'. That statement alone pretty much solidifies you don't know much about the games design.Dystopian-X

Again none of this is new or all that special, other shooters have all this with a better execution and even more creative options in terms of how you go around your objectives and enemies. Crysis just showed it in technically better manner.

The alien killing in Crysis is admittedly not as enjoyable (though in Warhead is very enjoyable), due to the change in design structure and level design, however the expansive level design, nano suit, and freedom of choice in the majority of the game, makes it something different entirely. For most of the part you have the complete freedom of switching gameplay styles on the fly, choosing how you want to play, adapting to the situation, and choice in how you wish to proceed, or complete what seems like a simple objective.

skrat_01

Don't get me started on the nanosuit which was a big dissapoint ment you could barely use it without it going low on energy and some of it's features that I though could've been used for solving progression issues like stealth or super strenght were wasted in things like ''bring down aircraft carrier door'' or just ''hide from combat''. True, the game gives you a lot of freedom and options but all that freedom is boring if the options are so generic.

Not sure why you brought COD4 up since that's another good but overhyped game I don't find all that great for similar reasons.

When your nano suit is about to run out of power for the cloak mode, just duck down.. and hide for a few seconds 9behind a rock, tree, building,etc.. and it will fill up again right away. Just play it stealth and you can use your powers as much as you want.

It's just a game. If you enjoy it who cares if it's simple

halo_killer345

[QUOTE="halo_killer345"]It's just a game. If you enjoy it who cares if it's simple

Dystopian-X

[QUOTE="Dystopian-X"][QUOTE="halo_killer345"]It's just a game. If you enjoy it who cares if it's simple

JangoWuzHere

Would I really need to bring a list of all the other shooters where you take control of an specialized group of the US military against another military group using machine guns, C4s and such to take them down in order to get my point across? I mean those have been all over the place all the time.

Again none of this is new or all that special, other shooters have all this with a better execution and even more creative options in terms of how you go around your objectives and enemies. Crysis just showed it in technically better manner.

Dystopian-X

Well... why did you stop yourself? What shooter offers you more freedom and creative options than Crysis as far as choice, and gameplay style goes (especially changing on the fly)?

What "other shooters"? Id love to know, as it must be one that has slipped under my radar somehow.

Care to elaborate?

Don't get me started on the nanosuit which was a big dissapoint ment you could barely use it without it going low on energy and some of it's features that I though could've been used for solving progression issues like stealth or super strenght were wasted in things like ''bring down aircraft carrier door'' or just ''hide from combat''. True, the game gives you a lot of freedom and options but all that freedom is boring if the options are so generic.

Not sure why you brought COD4 up since that's another good but overhyped game I don't find all that great for similar reasons.

Dystopian-X

I really don't know what you are talking about in those examples, however the suit gives you plenty of options, and increase the variables of how you can do things substantially -rather than having you focus on a single task. You can stealth your way through enemy lines, and if spotted, ninja your way about with speed, picking off soldiers one by one. You can use strength to get to a vantage point - enable armour and wreak havoc, before slipping away - or dashing away. etc. etc.

Its only limited by how creative you are, or how many things you can think of. Of course there are plenty of gamers who dont like that... and opt for something they are more accustomed too - and play the game that way, simply because they aremost used to this ****of game design that delivers a particular experience, rather than relying on the player to make their own.

Again, your argument is simply your own opinion of the game. There is really nothing here that suddenly proves that Crysis has 'average' gameplay, as its all your own interpretation, which of course does show clear bias.

I have crysis warhead it's a decent but...but the game is way overrated the multiplayer is very noobish, if you are a pretty far distance from someone the game will point the enemy out to you that's noobish.

i use the xbox360 controller and crysis has aim assist using the xbox360 controller there's no option to turn it off aim damn crytek noobs.

there should be none, ut3 on pc has none though.

half life 2 deatmatch reinvented the online deathmach.

I think it's more proof of concept. The problem is that the sum is not greater than the parts. It's in fact less.

You get all these wonderful gameplay features: open world, refreshing gameplay, huge physics, but they all just don't work together. Some of them actually work against each other. Yes, it's funny when the A.I and world physics seem to confuse each other, but ultimately it ends up disappointing.

To further illustrate how I feel, I'll provide you with the opposite. Let's take Gears of War 2. Gears of War 2 is relatively simple. You have a mix of third person shooter combat, a bit of rail shooting and vehicles, and that's about it. It's got nothing on what Crysis offers. However, what Gears 2 does offer it offers with better execution. All the parts work in harmony, offering something that none of the individual bits (third person, vehicles, rail shooting) could offer alone. What Epic gives you is an illusion that what you can and will do is more than what you're actually doing. All you're doing is shooting people again and again and again, but it doesn't feel like that.

Crysis isn't like that. At one point you're battling against the physics. At another point you're watching as the enemy A.I mucks itself up. It actually feels like very different aspects of the game, rather than working together to provide you with something more.

That being said, Crysis is a great game, and if anyone were to read my reviews, you'd see that I do agree that it points to the future of first person shooters. It will leave the Half Life and Halo games in the dust.

FrozenLiquid

The elements in the game can conflict at times; however due to the massive amounts of variables, its the only games out there to work so cohesively with so many. The visuals, the complex a.i., the complex physics, the memory intensive landscape architecture and geometry, the insane amount of assets, audio and animation ques. In this respect it is one of the greatest, if not the greatest technical feat for the genre having all of it working so well in conjunction this generation; and its pretty why the game is such a massive leap forwards in many regards, compared to other titles in the genre this generation.

A game like Gears delivers a particular experience to be had. It totally limits what it achieves, but its the same result for everyone else, and it can be polished to a tea; so its a great experience for each player.

However Crysis delivers an experience encourages the player to make, pushing the boundaries of its limitations, to increase the scope of what the player can do, in the game world, and how it will be presented to them. Even to this day, this design method is still very different to the vast majority of first person action games out there; mainly because the difficulty in executing it with the polish of the above (geow example), to deliver a satisfying experience.

Its not to say Crysis does not have its issues (thankfully most of which have been fixed - such as the a.i. bugs - others like the super accurate boat gunners remain), however there is no other game out there, that does so much so well. Hell not even Far Cry 2 - which is sitll a bit baffling. For a game with so much going on, and so much in it, its amazing that it is not so broken.

Once upon a time I was kind of expecting it to turn out like Jurassic Park Trespasser because of this. Thankfully it wasn't.