Crysis is overrated because...

Crysis is overrated because

Most people that play PC games can't play it on max settings..

A huge chunk of PC gamers wont even be able to play the game on medium settings..

so basically.. for most people.. this game looks no better than a great looking Xbox 360 game..

most people that play console games...dont play them on HDTV's either.....cobrax25

True.. but I'm just saying man..Plus as the costs for HD TVs go down..

Playing on a high end PC will always stay at a high price cause the technology gets newer.

So standard 720p HD TVs don't cost that much anymore since the technology as new..You can get a 20 Inch HD TV for around 200-300 bucks now(same size as a PC monitor)

so doing the math..

Xbox 360 + 20 inch HD TV= around 600 dollars

Running Crysis at full settings= double or even triple..

Crysis is overrated because

Most people that play PC games can't play it on max settings..

A huge chunk of PC gamers wont even be able to play the game on medium settings..

so basically.. for most people.. this game looks no better than a great looking Xbox 360 game..

FantasySports00

i have to disagree. i have e6600,8800gts and i can only run it at medium and i think it looks like crap and doesnt even compare graphicly to any ps3,360 game at medium.

[QUOTE="cobrax25"]most people that play console games...dont play them on HDTV's either.....FantasySports00

True.. but I'm just saying man..Plus as the costs for HD TVs go down..

Playing on a high end PC will always stay at a high price cause the technology gets newer.

So standard 720p HD TVs don't cost that much anymore since the technology as new..You can get a 20 Inch HD TV for around 200-300 bucks now(same size as a PC monitor)

Yeah, but the price of the hardware it takes to run Crysis will drop in price *much* faster than that of HDTV's, so what's your point with that post? That the same technology drops in price overtime as newer things come along? I didn't need you to tell me that.

Regardless, yeah, Crysis is getting a bit more praise on this forum that it deserves, but this is System Wars people. EVERYTHING here gets overrated. Personally I think yeah, Crysis is a bit derivative of Far Cry (which I thought was inferior to HL2 and FEAR), doesn't mean it won't be fun. Is it the second coming? very unlikely; but I'm sure it'll be at least an enjoyable game.

Because it's Far Cry with better graphics. Wasn't exactly leaps and bounds ahead of anything in the gameplay department.FrozenLiquid

Heck no. The destructible enviroments alone provide a much better game play experience than far cry. Have you driven a jeep into a building then threw a grenade into the building with NK in it? it is amazing, so many things you can do that you couldn't in Far Cry. It is defintely not FC with better graphics.

[QUOTE="cobrax25"]most people that play console games...dont play them on HDTV's either.....FantasySports00

True.. but I'm just saying man..Plus as the costs for HD TVs go down..

Playing on a high end PC will always stay at a high price cause the technology gets newer.

So standard 720p HD TVs don't cost that much anymore since the technology as new..You can get a 20 Inch HD TV for around 200-300 bucks now(same size as a PC monitor)

PC can play at higher res then HD.

Because it's Far Cry with better graphics. Wasn't exactly leaps and bounds ahead of anything in the gameplay department.FrozenLiquid

Halo 3 is essentially Halo 2 and CE.

UT3 is essentially an improved UT04

Bioshock is the barstard child of System Shock 2

ArmA is OFP with better visulas, and a larger scale

heck I could go on.

[QUOTE="FantasySports00"]

[QUOTE="cobrax25"]most people that play console games...dont play them on HDTV's either.....Olidsc

True.. but I'm just saying man..Plus as the costs for HD TVs go down..

Playing on a high end PC will always stay at a high price cause the technology gets newer.

So standard 720p HD TVs don't cost that much anymore since the technology as new..You can get a 20 Inch HD TV for around 200-300 bucks now(same size as a PC monitor)

Yeah, but the price of the hardware it takes to run Crysis will drop in price *much* faster than that of HDTV's, so what's your point with that post? That the same technology drops in price overtime as newer things come along? I didn't need you to tell me that.

No but that fails because HD TV costs are already at a plasauble prise.. To run crysis at max it's going to take a while for it to come down in price.

most people that play console games...dont play them on HDTV's either.....cobrax25

very good, /thread

[QUOTE="Olidsc"][QUOTE="FantasySports00"]

[QUOTE="cobrax25"]most people that play console games...dont play them on HDTV's either.....FantasySports00

True.. but I'm just saying man..Plus as the costs for HD TVs go down..

Playing on a high end PC will always stay at a high price cause the technology gets newer.

So standard 720p HD TVs don't cost that much anymore since the technology as new..You can get a 20 Inch HD TV for around 200-300 bucks now(same size as a PC monitor)

Yeah, but the price of the hardware it takes to run Crysis will drop in price *much* faster than that of HDTV's, so what's your point with that post? That the same technology drops in price overtime as newer things come along? I didn't need you to tell me that.

New cards are arriving at really low price aka 8800GT@250 doing better then 8800GTS.

No but that fails because HD TV costs are already at a plasauble prise.. To run crysis at max it's going to take a while for it to come down in price.

Because it's Far Cry with better graphics. Wasn't exactly leaps and bounds ahead of anything in the gameplay department.FrozenLiquid

difference b/w far cry and crysis is much more than almost any other FPS in recent times likehalo 3, bioshock, ut3, COD 4 etc

"No but that fails because HD TV costs are already at a plasauble prise.. To run crysis at max it's going to take a while for it to come down in price."

Ok...but why do you absolutely need to run it at max? Do you want the graphics to be so good that your eyes orgasm everytime you look at the screen or something?

Isn't it actually a good thing that you have the option to have the game's visuals improve over time as hardware advances? This was pretty much what Crytek was shooting for: an impressive game engine that's visual features will remain relevant to those at the bleeding edge of technology (note, you don't need to be at the bleeding edge to enjoy the game).

Also, if I were you, I wouldn't be so sure in your claim that hardware required to run Crysis at max will take a "while" for it to come down in price. Given how quickly PC tech advances, I'd be willing to claim that even in just a year from now, a sub $800 PC will be able to max it. Where as now, I don't think there's even a way to spend enough money to max the game out.

[QUOTE="FrozenLiquid"]Because it's Far Cry with better graphics. Wasn't exactly leaps and bounds ahead of anything in the gameplay department.naval

difference b/w far cry and crysis is much more than almost any other FPS in recent times likehalo 3, bioshock, ut3, COD 4 etc

Well if it was different, I didn't feel it.

I don't think many other people did feel it either, since the reactions aren't unanimous.

[QUOTE="FrozenLiquid"]Because it's Far Cry with better graphics. Wasn't exactly leaps and bounds ahead of anything in the gameplay department.skrat_01

Halo 3 is essentially Halo 2 and CE.

UT3 is essentially an improved UT04

Bioshock is the barstard child of System Shock 2

ArmA is OFP with better visulas, and a larger scale

heck I could go on.

Yeah, you definitely could skrat.

You always, always miss out Half Life.

But neither of those games went out of the way of calling themselves an absolute revolution, or six years ahead of any FPS or whatever that crazy thing was.

It's not the be all/end all of FPSs hermits are thinking.

[QUOTE="naval"]

[QUOTE="FrozenLiquid"]Because it's Far Cry with better graphics. Wasn't exactly leaps and bounds ahead of anything in the gameplay department.FrozenLiquid

difference b/w far cry and crysis is much more than almost any other FPS in recent times likehalo 3, bioshock, ut3, COD 4 etc

Well if it was different, I didn't feel it.

I don't think many other people did feel it either, since the reactions aren't unanimous.

If you play FC then play Crysis I think you would notice a huge difference. Nano suit also makes a huge difference in game play. You can use it however you want to, I personally tend to go for a more stealthier approach but if you want you could go crazy and str jump onto roofs punching them in and just go punching everybody to death. Cant do that kind of stuff in FC.

If you play FC then play Crysis I think you would notice a huge difference. Nano suit also makes a huge difference in game play. You can use it however you want to, I personally tend to go for a more stealthier approach but if you want you could go crazy and str jump onto roofs punching them in and just go punching everybody to death. Cant do that kind of stuff in FC.

bignice12

Yup and you can't throw equipment in Halo 2.

Yet I don't think anyone's going to go screaming that Halo 3 is leaps and bounds different than Halo 2.

[QUOTE="naval"]

[QUOTE="FrozenLiquid"]Because it's Far Cry with better graphics. Wasn't exactly leaps and bounds ahead of anything in the gameplay department.FrozenLiquid

difference b/w far cry and crysis is much more than almost any other FPS in recent times likehalo 3, bioshock, ut3, COD 4 etc

Well if it was different, I didn't feel it.

I don't think many other people did feel it either, since the reactions aren't unanimous.

maybe all you wanted to do was to run and gun, its always upto to you how you want to play. if you play it exactly like far cry, it would be exactly like far cry (especially at the first level)

[QUOTE="naval"]

[QUOTE="FrozenLiquid"]Because it's Far Cry with better graphics. Wasn't exactly leaps and bounds ahead of anything in the gameplay department.FrozenLiquid

difference b/w far cry and crysis is much more than almost any other FPS in recent times likehalo 3, bioshock, ut3, COD 4 etc

Well if it was different, I didn't feel it.

I don't think many other people did feel it either, since the reactions aren't unanimous.

maybe all you wanted to do was to run and gun, its always upto to you how you want to play. if you play it exactly like far cry, it would be exactly like far cry (especially at the first level)

Actually...on medium settings it looks better than any game I have ever played.The_Ish

Including Half Life 2 turned to max?

maybe all you wanted to do was to run and gun, its always upto to you how you want to play. if you play it exactly like far cry, it would be exactly like far cry (especially at the first level)

naval

I really just don't find that argument convincing at all.

On a smaller scale, the same could be said for Half Life 2. You can choose how you want to fight the Combine, because the different weapons at any given time somewhat change how you will play the game. Yet essentially, it's all very much the same.

When I heard about the "blow up the jammer any way you want to", I thought that idea was marvellous, but I dunno -- I'm just not feeling it in practice even though there are quite a few ways.

Eh all games are pretty underwhelming nowdays. I guess it's time to step up to the challenge and go make a mod that addresses these needs. The Source Engine -- I'm a little unimpressed by what the CryEngine 2 has done.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]

[QUOTE="FrozenLiquid"]Because it's Far Cry with better graphics. Wasn't exactly leaps and bounds ahead of anything in the gameplay department.FrozenLiquid

Halo 3 is essentially Halo 2 and CE.

UT3 is essentially an improved UT04

Bioshock is the barstard child of System Shock 2

ArmA is OFP with better visulas, and a larger scale

heck I could go on.

Yeah, you definitely could skrat.

You always, always miss out Half Life.

But neither of those games went out of the way of calling themselves an absolute revolution, or six years ahead of any FPS or whatever that crazy thing was.

It's not the be all/end all of FPSs hermits are thinking.

just didnt come to mind as typing.

However I can say now that Half Life was an absolute revolution

As was Operation Flashpoint

-

No oner pitched Crysis as the ultimate revolutionary FPS, just like no one did so with Halo 3 (exept for the fanboys who thought video replays and forge were revolutionary).

Crysis's fundementals are the same as Far Crys, though it is quite different in many regards - though yes that is just the same as the other titles.

I will say that certain games do change more than others. Like Halo 3 is almost identical to Halo 2, in comparison to Crysis and Far Cry, which has changed moreso - but both are fundementally the same.

I'm a little unimpressed by what the CryEngine 2 has done.

FrozenLiquid

:o , really? Have you messed around with the sandbox editor 2 yet? it is amazing, Cryengine 2 is an amazing engine indeed.

[QUOTE="bignice12"]

If you play FC then play Crysis I think you would notice a huge difference. Nano suit also makes a huge difference in game play. You can use it however you want to, I personally tend to go for a more stealthier approach but if you want you could go crazy and str jump onto roofs punching them in and just go punching everybody to death. Cant do that kind of stuff in FC.

FrozenLiquid

Yup and you can't throw equipment in Halo 2.

Yet I don't think anyone's going to go screaming that Halo 3 is leaps and bounds different than Halo 2.

If Halo 3 had full environmental destructability and something like the nanosuit, they would be. These things directly impact and enhance gameplay. You even leave footprints in the sand, and the Koreans will track them. The game's only comparable to Far Cry in the mission objective structure, and the fact that it takes place on an island.

so doing the math..

Xbox 360 + 20 inch HD TV= around 600 dollars

Running Crysis at full settings= double or even triple..

FantasySports00

[QUOTE="FantasySports00"]

so doing the math..

Xbox 360 + 20 inch HD TV= around 600 dollars

Running Crysis at full settings= double or even triple..

SuperVegeta518

[QUOTE="naval"]

[QUOTE="FrozenLiquid"]Because it's Far Cry with better graphics. Wasn't exactly leaps and bounds ahead of anything in the gameplay department.FrozenLiquid

difference b/w far cry and crysis is much more than almost any other FPS in recent times likehalo 3, bioshock, ut3, COD 4 etc

Well if it was different, I didn't feel it.

I don't think many other people did feel it either, since the reactions aren't unanimous.

Take advantage of the phycis, Nano Suit, AI

It will only feel like Far Cry with better graphics if you play like it.

indeed I should list Half life, as HL2 is fundementally the same.

just didnt come to mind as typing.

However I can say now that Half Life was an absolute revolution

As was Operation Flashpoint

-

No oner pitched Crysis as the ultimate revolutionary FPS, just like no one did so with Halo 3 (exept for the fanboys who thought video replays and forge were revolutionary).

Crysis's fundementals are the same as Far Crys, though it is quite different in many regards - though yes that is just the same as the other titles.

I will say that certain games do change more than others. Like Halo 3 is almost identical to Halo 2, in comparison to Crysis and Far Cry, which has changed moreso - but both are fundementally the same.

skrat_01

You're kidding.

In the beginning, Crysis was put on the pedestal as the next best thing since the original Half Life. Also, funnily enough, Far Cry started getting some praise.

As more info started coming out, like Power Struggle and how it actually works and stuff, the "Best FPS ever" tag dropped because there were some comparable efforts that most people could come to conclusions about.

And if you can't see it right now, then I can't help you -- but once the demo hit the public, the general concensus about the game has been dropped quite a bit. Perhaps people are putting up a brave front here, but talking to some people via MSN, what they've heard from their friends is the same one reactions I've been getting. It's not the graphics they've been underwhelmed by, it's the gameplay.

The game is fun and all, but I'd rather be playing the Orange Box than spend the 12 gigs on my harddrive on Crysis from my impressions.

And OMG FakeFactory has started on the Episode 2 conversion!!!!!!

Wahoo!!!!!!

[QUOTE="naval"]

maybe all you wanted to do was to run and gun, its always upto to you how you want to play. if you play it exactly like far cry, it would be exactly like far cry (especially at the first level)

FrozenLiquid

I really just don't find that argument convincing at all.

On a smaller scale, the same could be said for Half Life 2. You can choose how you want to fight the Combine, because the different weapons at any given time somewhat change how you will play the game. Yet essentially, it's all very much the same.

When I heard about the "blow up the jammer any way you want to", I thought that idea was marvellous, but I dunno -- I'm just not feeling it in practice even though there are quite a few ways.

Eh all games are pretty underwhelming nowdays. I guess it's time to step up to the challenge and go make a mod that addresses these needs. The Source Engine -- I'm a little unimpressed by what the CryEngine 2 has done.

HL 2 gunplay was even a little bit worse than HL 1, but the sequences in HL 2 made the game fun and different.

Nanosuit can change the way you play game significantly. for ex:- GS previews says thatat higher levels one may need to change the nanosuit options quickly to survive. same goes for destructible envoirments. I am sure the Zero G level would also be quite enjoyable.

You're kidding.

In the beginning, Crysis was put on the pedestal as the next best thing since the original Half Life. Also, funnily enough, Far Cry started getting some praise.

As more info started coming out, like Power Struggle and how it actually works and stuff, the "Best FPS ever" tag dropped because there were some comparable efforts that most people could come to conclusions about.

And if you can't see it right now, then I can't help you -- but once the demo hit the public, the general concensus about the game has been dropped quite a bit. Perhaps people are putting up a brave front here, but talking to some people via MSN, what they've heard from their friends is the same one reactions I've been getting. It's not the graphics they've been underwhelmed by, it's the gameplay.

The game is fun and all, but I'd rather be playing the Orange Box than spend the 12 gigs on my harddrive on Crysis from my impressions.

And OMG FakeFactory has started on the Episode 2 conversion!!!!!!

Wahoo!!!!!!

FrozenLiquid

If mean by the public as in the Crysis forums on GS, they are all a bunch of whinners, but the public opinion doesn't matter here, only GS and Jason seems really exited about the game when he previewed it :P

I really hope you are not saying that people who like far cry like it because of crysis

If Halo 3 had full environmental destructability and something like the nanosuit, they would be. These things directly impact and enhance gameplay. You even leave footprints in the sand, and the Koreans will track them. The game's only comparable to Far Cry in the mission objective structure, and the fact that it takes place on an island.

Zeliard9

But they can't think for themselves when they're on a turret and you're just looking at them point blank, right?

Take advantage of the phycis, Nano Suit, AI

It will only feel like Far Cry with better graphics if you play like it.

Lonelynight

Seems like the new catchphrase right now.

Sorry man but I'm not buying that excuse. My opinion though.

This whole thing is kinda reminding me of the whole Doom 3 fiasco, when people got to try it for themselves the first time. The denial from some was pretty funny.

So stylish how Valve just came in so humbly and trumped all FPSs that year.

And he be looking better than ever!!!!!

And if you can't see it right now, then I can't help you -- but once the demo hit the public, the general concensus about the game has been dropped quite a bit. Perhaps people are putting up a brave front here, but talking to some people via MSN, what they've heard from their friends is the same one reactions I've been getting. It's not the graphics they've been underwhelmed by, it's the gameplay.

FrozenLiquid

Oh please. You talked to a couple people on MSN and from that you can gather that the general consensus on the game has dropped? Go visit forums like nvnews, the overall reaction to the demo is very positive.

[QUOTE="FantasySports00"]

Crysis is overrated because

Most people that play PC games can't play it on max settings..

A huge chunk of PC gamers wont even be able to play the game on medium settings..

so basically.. for most people.. this game looks no better than a great looking Xbox 360 game..

white45e

i have to disagree. i have e6600,8800gts and i can only run it at medium and i think it looks like crap and doesnt even compare graphicly to any ps3,360 game at medium.

This is optemization problems.. I have a E4300 with a 8800gts 320mb, and 2gb ddr 2 and I can run it on high settings with 1280 x 1040

[QUOTE="Zeliard9"]

If Halo 3 had full environmental destructability and something like the nanosuit, they would be. These things directly impact and enhance gameplay. You even leave footprints in the sand, and the Koreans will track them. The game's only comparable to Far Cry in the mission objective structure, and the fact that it takes place on an island.

FrozenLiquid

But they can't think for themselves when they're on a turret and you're just looking at them point blank, right?

No, they tend to leave the vehicles on higher difficulties when you get too close.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]

indeed I should list Half life, as HL2 is fundementally the same.

just didnt come to mind as typing.

However I can say now that Half Life was an absolute revolution

As was Operation Flashpoint

-

No oner pitched Crysis as the ultimate revolutionary FPS, just like no one did so with Halo 3 (exept for the fanboys who thought video replays and forge were revolutionary).

Crysis's fundementals are the same as Far Crys, though it is quite different in many regards - though yes that is just the same as the other titles.

I will say that certain games do change more than others. Like Halo 3 is almost identical to Halo 2, in comparison to Crysis and Far Cry, which has changed moreso - but both are fundementally the same.

FrozenLiquid

You're kidding.

In the beginning, Crysis was put on the pedestal as the next best thing since the original Half Life. Also, funnily enough, Far Cry started getting some praise.

As more info started coming out, like Power Struggle and how it actually works and stuff, the "Best FPS ever" tag dropped because there were some comparable efforts that most people could come to conclusions about.

And if you can't see it right now, then I can't help you -- but once the demo hit the public, the general concensus about the game has been dropped quite a bit. Perhaps people are putting up a brave front here, but talking to some people via MSN, what they've heard from their friends is the same one reactions I've been getting. It's not the graphics they've been underwhelmed by, it's the gameplay.

The game is fun and all, but I'd rather be playing the Orange Box than spend the 12 gigs on my harddrive on Crysis from my impressions.

And OMG FakeFactory has started on the Episode 2 conversion!!!!!!

Wahoo!!!!!!

have you condsidered that manybe its because all the people that like it...are playing it?

there will always be people that dislike demo's and cause huge uproar because of it.....

when the COD4 and UT3 demo's came out....a lot of people were very dissopointed....PC gamer even ran a podcast about how much they were dissopointed in both demo's of the game....

for me..crysis was a lot more time..the second time around...when I already knew the general layout of the level, and could just mess around with it.

Seems like the new catchphrase right now.

Sorry man but I'm not buying that excuse. My opinion though.

FrozenLiquid

I find it to be true in most cases when people complain about game play. If you are not taking advantage of the nano suit( imo, it has different play styles depending on the way you use it) and destructible enviroments then you are pretty much playing your "FC w/ better graphics".

[QUOTE="FrozenLiquid"]

And if you can't see it right now, then I can't help you -- but once the demo hit the public, the general concensus about the game has been dropped quite a bit. Perhaps people are putting up a brave front here, but talking to some people via MSN, what they've heard from their friends is the same one reactions I've been getting. It's not the graphics they've been underwhelmed by, it's the gameplay.

Zeliard9

Oh please. You talked to a couple people on MSN and from that you can gather that the general consensus on the game has dropped? Go visit forums like nvnews, the overall reaction to the demo is very positive.

I too believe that the majority of people that played it loved it. Of course on forums there are those few people that want to trash it and create different threads and those turn into lengthy topics making it appear like the majority.