Crysis looks overrated.

Crysis generic................Black and Killzone redefining?? Is this a joke, TC are you serious?lettuceman44

Watch out, one liners are discounted by the TC, even if they are logical and succinct.

[QUOTE="lettuceman44"]Crysis generic................Black and Killzone redefining?? Is this a joke, TC are you serious?Danm_999

Watch out, one liners are discounted by the TC, even if they are logical and succinct.

The "no better than console game" thread was closed, so I'll just say it here.

Crysis looks like a generic FPS with insane graphics. That's it.

Yes, I have read the specs, I know you have the ability to pick up just about anything that isn't a tree and use it as cover or just throw it at a target. I realize the environments are cumulatively destructable. I know you can jack up your physical traits using the specialized equipment assigned to your character. I know the aliens are super-scary and blah blah blah blah.

The point is that none of these qualities seem to overtly change the presentation mechanically aside from moving faster at times and having extraneous projectiles. Even if you can do these things, it's still just another one man vs. everyone Doom spin-off.

The reason I'm looking forward to FPSs like Black 2, Killzone, Brothers in Arms, and Jericho is because of battle simulations that involve a larger scale conflict that involves teams; three caveats being The Darkness, Condemned, and Assault on Dark Athena who's combat goes beyond your generic FPS games.

After that, the story has to be insanely good for me to go for an FPS. Haze, for example, sounds like it has a crappy story, so I could care less about that particular FPS even though it's getting this weird cult hype, which I'm still struggling to understand.

Would I go out of my way to play Crysis? Sure, but I find hardly any reason to be so excited about it as this new magical creation that's going to be 'unlike any other gaming experience ever blah blah blah.' I'll just go back to enjoying Resistance (good story).

Pariah_001

Yet another console fanboi, upset because he can't afford a good pc.

*Skips ahead and doesn't bother reading half the fanboy vs. fanboy arguing*

A game does not need to change the universe to be good. Were people hyping Half-Life 2 for no reason? Oh, wait, it doesn't even have customizable weapons and that's just about as linear as it gets.

Don't judge a book by its cover. Same rules apply here.

Anyone who has a PC that can run it (or near it) is excited for this game...nuff' said.

In other words, the FPS's the TC stated in relation to Crysis don't even hold a candle to Crysis.

A re-occuring theme in this thread seems to be unwarranted defensiveness.

For example: I say "generic" and "overrated" and everyone goes into an uproar trying to tell me that the game "doesn't suck." What the bulk of you one-line wonders and cheap-shot spectators fail to realize is that "generic" and "overrated" do not equal "game's gonna suck." I'm sure the game will be good; just not genre defining as so many are hyping it up to be.

After this, there's people saying that I'm comparing the game to the ones that I would prefer getting (see also: Black, Killzone 2, BIA:Road to Hill 30) to Crysis--Which is a view ground in ignorance. I said why I would want to play the other games rather than Crysis, not that they were better games than Crysis. I, furthermore, was not saying that the games I preferred to buy were re-defining. I just think their formats haven't been milked like archetype for Crysis has.

Finally, I have posters who decide that I lack "credibility" because of preferences that are not in allignment with Crysis. Again, I have not compared the quality of the games once and yet they still shout to high heavens that I'm a bias Sony consumer. While that maybe true, that does not mean Crysis is genre-defining, nor does it prove that I've compared it to another game.

So at first you had this...

[Quote="Pariah_001"]
Other than that, I'm not trying to highlight games that "re-define" others that are related to its particular genre. I'm just trying to say that I prefer ones that don't refer to the usual formula.
raynimrod

The presentation was good though....Not unlike Crysis; beautiful visuals, but it will fall short of being "re-defining."
Pariah_001

I fail to the see the contradiction.

My point from the very beginning is that nothing described within the annals of the Crysis itinerary would imply a FPS that re-defines genre, as so many have been saying. This, coupled with the fact that it's hype/emphasis has been based solely on graphical presentation, led me to the conclusion that it's a generic FPS.

So, please tell me: Where have I tried to say a particular game "re-defines" another? The latter statement you emboldened has nothing to do with any other games I may have mentioned within this thread.

I'm sorry but your argument has been totally misguided and opinion based rather than something factual. This is your opinion based on the clearly limited and personally interpreted information that you have. You have nothing to support your theory on this game being generic.

*squeak squeak squeak*

You're starting to sound like the tourists who're quoting large bodies of text and then using a single sentence with a snappy one-liner as a response.

Everything I say is my opinion, but I have not described Crysis inaccurately.

you are somehow convinced games like Black 2 and Killzone 2 will revolutionize the genre (not even that, the way we play videos games) in some unspeakable manner by being team based. Danm_999

I've said nothing of the sort. If you've been operating under this pretext, then this whole conversation has been for naught. Pariah_001

The reason I'm looking forward to FPSs like Black 2, Killzone, Brothers in Arms, and Jericho is because of battle simulations that involve a larger scale conflict that involves teams; three caveats being The Darkness, Condemned, and Assault on Dark Athena who's combat goes beyond your generic FPS games.

Pariah_001

Now, only you understand the true meaning of your words, but it dang sure looks to me like what you've said is your looking forward to these games because they provide elements that are not generic to the FPS genre. Perhaps revolutionize is a strong word, but from the context of this you certainly seem to think they'll be doing something different.

Yet when I say it, you tell me you've said nothing of the sort.

The whole way we play video games, is directed at your criticisms Crysis is in a 1st person POV, and is about a protagonist against enemies, to the point of which I become so perplexed I interpret you wanting something different from video games altogether.

The reason I imagine most people attacked you in this thread, was because you brought neither a strong understanding of Crysis, nor a coherent argument to the table.

love these predicutions its going to be rubbish when no1 has even touched the thing. If i had to judge a game on what it looked like i would have said Halo 2 and operation flashpoint would be rubbish, and wrong could i have been.

I agree none of the movies have really shown anything spectacular and new, however its something i can imagine having an absolute blast playing, and in the end thats all i care about.

I agree with Danm on many points. This entire thread was started with over-generalizations of Crysis's fan base and nay-saying because of the game being a standard fare FPS.

There is much self-contradiction with the TC also. I do not want to take a hostile stance in the matter, since I am not a die-hard Crysis fan by any means. However, you say the game is overhyped and the genre is milked dry. What are you basing this on? Crysis sounds like a fun game with a few interesting elements that will spice it up. If Crysis is so dramatically overhyped, why was I not swept onto the bandwagon upon reading the previews?

There will be people that hype what they like around every corner. That's how our community is. Maybe you don't belong to a certain one of these groups. What makes you frown at anticipation? Let people hype it all they want. If it sucks, that's their problem. If it rocks, their celebration will be even more sweet.

Now, only you understand the true meaning of your words, but it dang sure looks to me like what you've said is your looking forward to these games because they provide elements that are not generic to the FPS genre. Perhaps revolutionize is a strong word, but from the context of this you certainly seem to think they'll be doing something different.

Yet when I say it, you tell me you've said nothing of the sort.Danm_999

You're right..."Revolutionize" is a strong word.

You were trying to tell me that I felt these other games that I mentioned would re-make the genre--When I don't. I've been criticizing the Crysis element on two fronts: Originality and Hype.

When I bring up the former, that'swhen I'm talking about being more excited over those particular games. I think they're more original and do more with the first person view than most--That does not mean I predict they'll re-define FPS. But yes, I do believe they will have quantifiable differences (I do admit however, that I'm probably wrong about Black 2, but here's to hoping).

When I bring up the latter, that's when I'm talking about the fame revolving around the game consisting entirely of fan partisanship rather than the game's true amount of merited warrant. More pointedly: Fans have a way of extrapolating the graphics and making them into a revolutionary facet; that's just silly. Perfecting in-game renders is a continuous process for all games and has nothing to do with the gameplay mechanics except to give the players pretext. There are other facets beyond the game's visuals, but...Let's face it: The only reason the game is hyped in its entirety is due to the presentation (in that rite, TimeSplitters was a more impressive game since it didn't need graphical exhibition to absorb a cult-like noteriety for its innovative gaming-style). But still, after that, the most it has going for it is environment interaction, which is still just another evolving feature for every game out there.

The whole way we play video games, is directed at your criticisms Crysis is in a 1st person POV, and is about a protagonist against enemies, to the point of which I become so perplexed I interpret you wanting something different from video games altogether.

If I really felt that way, I'd be attacking the whole FPS concept. I enjoy FPS just as much as any other hot-blooded Western gamer. At times however, I want it to do more for me. Crysis doesn't sound like it would do enough differently if differently at all. That's all I'm saying. If I played it, I'm sure I'd have fun, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be generic.

The reason I imagine most people attacked you in this thread, was because you brought neither a strong understanding of Crysis, nor a coherent argument to the table.

And I feel those attacks are unwarranted because they've consistently misinterpreted and re-shaped my terms (as has already been expressed).

It doesn't matter what my understanding of Crysis is to them. All they know is that I used a term in reference to Crysis that they don't like, so they jump on me and put meanings in my mouth using vague interpretations of my past quotes. Furthermore, they see that I like particular games that are on their ****-list, so they ridicule my opinion.

I hope you'll understand if I don't put too much stock into what qualifies as a "strong" and "coherent" understanding of Crysis or FPS in general when it comes to the present hive-mind's standards.

Since when were the FPS games you listed, not generic....?

Crysis is a much more ambitious, innovative and impressive game than any you have listed.

This whole thing sounds like "evenything I like dosent suck, and I DONT like Crysis - thus it sucks".

I mean Killzone 2 and Black 2................ WTF. BiA HH.....? Not generic?

Black 2, - Generic

Killzone - Generic

Brothers in Arms - Generic

Jericho is because - Looks quite good actually. Still I could make a silly assumption and say its a squad based Doom 3.

And for the record I own KillZone, Black, every BiA. Yes they are generic, and there okay games. Nothing AMAZING.

[QUOTE="Danm_999"]Now, only you understand the true meaning of your words, but it dang sure looks to me like what you've said is your looking forward to these games because they provide elements that are not generic to the FPS genre. Perhaps revolutionize is a strong word, but from the context of this you certainly seem to think they'll be doing something different.

Yet when I say it, you tell me you've said nothing of the sort.Pariah_001

You're right..."Revolutionize" is a strong word.

You were trying to tell me that I felt these other games that I mentioned would re-make the genre--When I don't. I've been criticizing the Crysis element on two fronts: Originality and Hype.

When I bring up the former, that'swhen I'm talking about being more excited over those particular games. I think they're more original and do more with the first person view than most--That does not mean I predict they'll re-define FPS. But yes, I do believe they will have quantifiable differences (I do admit however, that I'm probably wrong about Black 2, but here's to hoping).

When I bring up the latter, that's when I'm talking about the fame revolving around the game consisting entirely of fan partisanship rather than the game's true amount of merited warrant. More pointedly: Fans have a way of extrapolating the graphics and making them into a revolutionary facet; that's just silly. Perfecting in-game renders is a continuous process for all games and has nothing to do with the gameplay mechanics except to give the players pretext. There are other facets beyond the game's visuals, but...Let's face it: The only reason the game is hyped in its entirety is due to the presentation (in that rite, TimeSplitters was a more impressive game since it didn't need graphical exhibition to absorb a cult-like noteriety for its innovative gaming-style). But still, after that, the most it has going for it is environment interaction, which is still just another evolving feature for every game out there.

The whole way we play video games, is directed at your criticisms Crysis is in a 1st person POV, and is about a protagonist against enemies, to the point of which I become so perplexed I interpret you wanting something different from video games altogether.

If I really felt that way, I'd be attacking the whole FPS concept. I enjoy FPS just as much as any other hot-blooded Western gamer. At times however, I want it to do more for me. Crysis doesn't sound like it would do enough differently if differently at all. That's all I'm saying. If I played it, I'm sure I'd have fun, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be generic.

The reason I imagine most people attacked you in this thread, was because you brought neither a strong understanding of Crysis, nor a coherent argument to the table.

And I feel those attacks are unwarranted because they've consistently misinterpreted and re-shaped my terms (as has already been expressed).

It doesn't matter what my understanding of Crysis is to them. All they know is that I used a term in reference to Crysis that they don't like, so they jump on me and put meanings in my mouth using vague interpretations of my past quotes. Furthermore, they see that I like particular games that are on their ****-list, so they ridicule my opinion.

I hope you'll understand if I don't put too much stock into what qualifies as a "strong" and "coherent" understanding of Crysis or FPS in general when it comes to the present hive-mind's standards.

I can see your trying to write something... all I can make out though is:

'... waa I wish I could afford a good gaming rig...sniff....'

If you actually a gamer as opposed to an obvious console fanboi you would be looking forward to Crysis. Just because you won't be able to play it does not make it a flawed game.

When I bring up the former, that'swhen I'm talking about being more excited over those particular games. I think they're more original and do more with the first person view than most--That does not mean I predict they'll re-define FPS. But yes, I do believe they will have quantifiable differences (I do admit however, that I'm probably wrong about Black 2, but here's to hoping).Pariah_001

My problem with this, is that we know virtually nothing about Killzone 2 or Black 2's gameplay, we've been treated to extremely little compared to Crysis, which you in term seem to display very little knowledge of throughout the thread (you only mentioning fully destructible environments and being able to throw things).

Therefore I've got to assume other things are colouring your perceptions.

When I bring up the latter, that's when I'm talking about the fame revolving around the game consisting entirely of fan partisanship rather than the game's true amount of merited warrant. More pointedly: Fans have a way of extrapolating the graphics and making them into a revolutionary facet; that's just silly. Pariah_001

Actually, the quest to have Crysis' gameplay recognised on the same level as it's visuals is somewhat of an uphill battle, and completely contrary to what you describe as the "hive mind's standards". Without throwing too much anecdotal evidence at you, the most common form of retort to promotion of Crysis is "no gameplay". Clearly, you conform to this school of thought, as you have yet to legitimately argue why so many of Crysis gameplay features, it's non-linear, open ended and dynamic gameplay style are generic in the current FPS context. You even tried to juggle the issue by claiming that something was generic if it's been tried before.

Perfecting in-game renders is a continuous process for all games and has nothing to do with the gameplay mechanics except to give the players pretext. There are other facets beyond the game's visuals, but...Let's face it: The only reason the game is hyped in its entirety is due to the presentation (in that rite, TimeSplitters was a more impressive game since it didn't need graphical exhibition to absorb a cult-like noteriety for its innovative gaming-style). But still, after that, the most it has going for it is environment interaction, which is still just another evolving feature for every game out there.Pariah_001

This is, of course all your perception. Just because you only see worth in it's visuals, I guess your assuming this is the only worth present. This is of course an incorrect view to many who are legitimately excited (as I and many others in this thread) about the dynamic nature of it's gameplay, as an indirect sequel to Far Cry and it's multiplayer.

If I really felt that way, I'd be attacking the whole FPS concept. I enjoy FPS just as much as any other hot-blooded Western gamer. At times however, I want it to do more for me. Crysis doesn't sound like it would do enough differently if differently at all. That's all I'm saying. If I played it, I'm sure I'd have fun, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be generic.Pariah_001

As I thought, if you wanted to attack the entire FPS genre, there's less I can say, because although it works to shift those boundaries, it's still going to be an FPS.

And I feel those attacks are unwarranted because they've consistently misinterpreted and re-shaped my terms (as has already been expressed).

It doesn't matter what my understanding of Crysis is to them. All they know is that I used a term in reference to Crysis that they don't like, so they jump on me and put meanings in my mouth using vague interpretations of my past quotes. Furthermore, they see that I like particular games that are on their ****-list, so they ridicule my opinion.

I hope you'll understand if I don't put too much stock into what qualifies as a "strong" and "coherent" understanding of Crysis or FPS in general when it comes to the present hive-mind's standards.

Pariah_001

And as I said, I don't feel this qualifies you as the victim.

If your argument is constantly being misinterpreted, it's probably a confusing argument.

If people are constantly attacking your evidence, it's probably unconvinving and innaccurate.

How can something "look" overrated? Do you even know what that word means? It has to be rated first before you can use that word. And you say you are looking forward to Killzone 2, the sequel to a poor generic FPS, despite having no information on the game whatsoever, then you bash Crysis for being "generic" (which it's anything but).ithilgore2006

Besides if Crysis was PS3 exclusive, i`d bet someone would be on the bandwagon :roll:

[QUOTE="trix5817"]So you think Black and Killzone 2 are redefing game elements? Is this a joke or what? Pariah_001

So the most you can do is shout out one-liners?

Gotcha.

Its from the developers of Farcry, whom have a much larger bugdet, team, and don't need to rush Crysis like they did Farcry (they didn't want to compete with Doom 3 and HL2... and I can't say I blame them). This game will own.

Why didnt he just blog it or somthing.

I mean he has to make a thread on he feels Crysis is an 'overrated' game, even though its not rated or released. Then going to to speak of Black 2 and KillZone 2.... Ok.

Is this thread a big joke TC? coz your avatar tells us that you are joking, how can you say that crysis is generic and killzone, black, jericho "goes beyong your generic FPS"!?!?!?!

And Crysis is not overrated since its not rated yet since its not been release yet, ifa lot of people saying it will be a AAA game then it isjust overly hyped not overrated.

[QUOTE="trix5817"]So you think Black and Killzone 2 are redefing game elements? Is this a joke or what? Pariah_001

So the most you can do is shout out one-liners?

Gotcha.

Again, you got a nice arguement there. Next time, try to address what I stated, instead of insults, ok?

[QUOTE="Danm_999"]You've still not given a reason why you think it's so generic. You sort of buzz around the issue. It's certainly not generic in visuals, and it's certainly not generic in terms of gameplay in the FPS genre.Pariah_001

But it is. Like all the dozens upon dozens of FPSs that came before it-it does have the same visuals and gameplay with better than average interaction. You still have the same visual point of view and the same primary means of attack with a juggernaught physique that allows you to withstand a barrage of bullets and heal within a matter of minutes or if you find the next medical salve.

If, when you say "visuals," you're speaking of graphics rather than the POV, I already explained upscaling graphics is not the same as being innovative or original since graphical evolution is a reality for all games.

Basically, what you're stating is all FPS's are generic, because they are shown in a first person viewpoint? Withstand a barrage of bullets? All the gameplay videos shown have had god mode on. You really need to watch all the gameplay videos of Crysis and read up more on it. You're seriously lacking knowledge on this game, yet judge it and say it's "generic". What was the point of this thread? Crysis is doing more for FPS's than any game coming out this year is.

[QUOTE="Pariah_001"]

[QUOTE="Danm_999"]You've still not given a reason why you think it's so generic. You sort of buzz around the issue. It's certainly not generic in visuals, and it's certainly not generic in terms of gameplay in the FPS genre.trix5817

But it is. Like all the dozens upon dozens of FPSs that came before it-it does have the same visuals and gameplay with better than average interaction. You still have the same visual point of view and the same primary means of attack with a juggernaught physique that allows you to withstand a barrage of bullets and heal within a matter of minutes or if you find the next medical salve.

If, when you say "visuals," you're speaking of graphics rather than the POV, I already explained upscaling graphics is not the same as being innovative or original since graphical evolution is a reality for all games.

Basically, what you're stating is all FPS's are generic, because they are shown in a first person viewpoint? Withstand a barrage of bullets? All the gameplay videos shown have had god mode on. You really need to watch all the gameplay videos of Crysis and read up more on it. You're seriously lacking knowledge on this game, yet judge it and say it's "generic". What was the point of this thread? Crysis is doing more for FPS's than any game coming out this year is.

Where is TC?

Helllloooooooooo!

Cmon Vandal just showed up!

Aww it was about to get interesting :(

So I just read your post. You raelize that Black 2, Jericho, and Brothers in arms are ALSO generic shooters right? They're generic "tactical" shooters. They're no better than Crysis. Crysis is actually attempting to reform the mold here. Those aren't. Jericho, imho, is going to freaking rock though.Vandalvideo

I wish you were here earlier. The TC has lost his mind. He also shoots down logic. Also when he doesnt know how to answer a question he just says " So all you can say are one liner?" Pathetic. Tra la la.

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"]So I just read your post. You raelize that Black 2, Jericho, and Brothers in arms are ALSO generic shooters right? They're generic "tactical" shooters. They're no better than Crysis. Crysis is actually attempting to reform the mold here. Those aren't. Jericho, imho, is going to freaking rock though.Killfox

I wish you were here earlier. The TC has lost his mind. He also shoots down logic. Also when he doesnt know how to answer a question he just says " So all you can say are one liner?" Pathetic. Tra la la.

Clearly the best part was where he argued something was generic if it had ever been done before.

[QUOTE="Killfox"]

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"]So I just read your post. You raelize that Black 2, Jericho, and Brothers in arms are ALSO generic shooters right? They're generic "tactical" shooters. They're no better than Crysis. Crysis is actually attempting to reform the mold here. Those aren't. Jericho, imho, is going to freaking rock though.Danm_999

I wish you were here earlier. The TC has lost his mind. He also shoots down logic. Also when he doesnt know how to answer a question he just says " So all you can say are one liner?" Pathetic. Tra la la.

Clearly the best part was where he argued something was generic if it had ever been done before.

I think this wasa pathetic attempt to raise is level here at gamespot. He obviously doesnt know very much about crysis at all. Yet he can say its generic. I hate when people dont do research before they spew BS all over my face and in my eyes so i cant see.

A re-occuring theme in this thread seems to be unwarranted defensiveness.

For example: I say "generic" and "overrated" and everyone goes into an uproar trying to tell me that the game "doesn't suck." What the bulk of you one-line wonders and cheap-shot spectators fail to realize is that "generic" and "overrated" do not equal "game's gonna suck." I'm sure the game will be good; just not genre defining as so many are hyping it up to be.

After this, there's people saying that I'm comparing the game to the ones that I would prefer getting (see also: Black, Killzone 2, BIA:Road to Hill 30) to Crysis--Which is a view ground in ignorance. I said why I would want to play the other games rather than Crysis, not that they were better games than Crysis. I, furthermore, was not saying that the games I preferred to buy were re-defining. I just think their formats haven't been milked like archetype for Crysis has.

Finally, I have posters who decide that I lack "credibility" because of preferences that are not in allignment with Crysis. Again, I have not compared the quality of the games once and yet they still shout to high heavens that I'm a bias Sony consumer. While that maybe true, that does not mean Crysis is genre-defining, nor does it prove that I've compared it to another game.

[QUOTE="raynimrod"]So at first you had this...

[Quote="Pariah_001"]
Other than that, I'm not trying to highlight games that "re-define" others that are related to its particular genre. I'm just trying to say that I prefer ones that don't refer to the usual formula.
Pariah_001

The presentation was good though....Not unlike Crysis; beautiful visuals, but it will fall short of being "re-defining."
Pariah_001

I fail to the see the contradiction.

My point from the very beginning is that nothing described within the annals of the Crysis itinerary would imply a FPS that re-defines genre, as so many have been saying. This, coupled with the fact that it's hype/emphasis has been based solely on graphical presentation, led me to the conclusion that it's a generic FPS.

So, please tell me: Where have I tried to say a particular game "re-defines" another? The latter statement you emboldened has nothing to do with any other games I may have mentioned within this thread.

I'm sorry but your argument has been totally misguided and opinion based rather than something factual. This is your opinion based on the clearly limited and personally interpreted information that you have. You have nothing to support your theory on this game being generic.

*squeak squeak squeak*

You're starting to sound like the tourists who're quoting large bodies of text and then using a single sentence with a snappy one-liner as a response.

Everything I say is my opinion, but I have not described Crysis inaccurately.

Crysis is just hyped for it's visuals? Partly, yes. But no, it's not hyped just for that. It's a game being made by the creators of FarCry, which got a 9.2 here on GS in which they stated was "the best single player FPS experiance since Half Life". The game was a sleeper hit, and was well recieved by critics eveywhere. FarCry was devloped with only a 20 man team, a very small budget, and was rushed in order to be released before HL2 and Doom 3. Crysis on the other hand is being made by over 120 developers, they have a $30 million budget, and have as much time as they want. It's the Cevat brothers dream game, as they have stated many times. I encourage you to watch all the gameplay videos (go to incrysis.com or crysis-online.com) and read a lot of previews and articles on it (you seem to be lacking on any knowledge of what Crysis has going for it). Maybe the game doesn't appeal to you and you don't think it looks fun to play, but many, many others believe just the opposite. You're misguided and unknowledgable opinion means nothing.

It's story may be "generic", but that doesn't mean it's gameplay will be "generic". Using you're logic, I could call every team-based game "generic" also. Genre re-defining to me means that the game will set a new standard for FPS's, which it certainly seems that it will do just that.

How can something "look" overrated? Do you even know what that word means? It has to be rated first before you can use that word. And you say you are looking forward to Killzone 2, the sequel to a poor generic FPS, despite having no information on the game whatsoever, then you bash Crysis for being "generic" (which it's anything but).ithilgore2006

Yeah, it's quite ironic actually.

Crysis looks to be a generic game that is a showcase for an amazing new gaming engine that will push gaming to a new level... that being said, how will the actually generic gameplay hold up to something like bioshock?

Crysis looks to be a generic game that is a showcase for an amazing new gaming engine that will push gaming to a new level... that being said, how will the actually generic gameplay hold up to something like bioshock?

Bdking57

I don't know how the non-linear, dynamic, free-roaming gameplay with an emphasis on weapon and character customisation of Crysis will hold up to Bioshock. Oh, that and Crysis has MP.

Their actually aiming for very similar things in terms of gameplay.

I think it's overated by alot of hermits. Well that being there only worthwhile game this year they have to be happy about something.cyprus646

But We get the most AAA every year, and so far were in the lead this year:?

IDK, I wish their was a way to inform the misinformed:(

Crysis looks to be a generic game that is a showcase for an amazing new gaming engine that will push gaming to a new level... that being said, how will the actually generic gameplay hold up to something like bioshock?

Bdking57

[QUOTE="cyprus646"]I think it's overated by alot of hermits. Well that being there only worthwhile game this year they have to be happy about something.projectpat2007

But We get the most AAA every year, and so far were in the lead this year:?

IDK, I wish their was a way to inform the misinformed:(

Let them think what they want. They just don't listen and only hear what they want to hear. When they get an AAA game they go "TEH OMGZ AAA IN YOUZ FACEZ LOLZ MY SYSTEM IS TEH BETTAH LAWL". Yet when we get an AAA they say "OMG DAT GAME SUCKS ITS OVAHRATED AND IT DOESNT COUNT LOLZ". Ahhh yes, the logic of PC haters.

Crysis does seem to be overrated, at least on this board. My reason is that you see so many posts talking about how innovative and original the game is, then they only mention the graphics and the physics or the AI. Well those same areas are always the parts redefined in every FPS that raises the bar. Every FPS shooter has tried to make the game look better, have more destructive environments, and AI that would be more likely to surprise you. Its not innovative, its what everyone goes for. In those respects you can only think this is just going to be another shooter. It is just another rung in the ladder.

Now I will admit almost all that I've learned about Crysis is from this board alone, it could very well be that there are many innovative features that I do not know about. These are certainly not the things hyped here.

Also from the movies I have seen I have not found anything to appreciate the AI, they just get killed. And for that matter it seems like they made the protagonist too powerful, he can just run circles around them. Maybe it is just the movies I have watched but the game seems like it will be real easy.

Which made me think back to when I played Far Cry, supposedly it had a whole slew of options of taking out the enemies. Though when I played I just rode around on the boat and killed everything I could get the gun on with it. I guess I just did not find that to be very impressive.

The sole purpose of the Crysis game is to force pc gamers to upgrade.

Crysis does seem to be overrated, at least on this board. My reason is that you see so many posts talking about how innovative and original the game is, then they only mention the graphics and the physics or the AI. Well those same areas are always the parts redefined in every FPS that raises the bar. Every FPS shooter has tried to make the game look better, have more destructive environments, and AI that would be more likely to surprise you. Its not innovative, its what everyone goes for. In those respects you can only think this is just going to be another shooter. It is just another rung in the ladder.

Now I will admit almost all that I've learned about Crysis is from this board alone, it could very well be that there are many innovative features that I do not know about. These are certainly not the things hyped here.

Also from the movies I have seen I have not found anything to appreciate the AI, they just get killed. And for that matter it seems like they made the protagonist too powerful, he can just run circles around them. Maybe it is just the movies I have watched but the game seems like it will be real easy.

Which made me think back to when I played Far Cry, supposedly it had a whole slew of options of taking out the enemies. Though when I played I just rode around on the boat and killed everything I could get the gun on with it. I guess I just did not find that to be very impressive.

Vylence

In the gameplay demonstrations, god mode is turned on, that's why the game seems so easy. You won't be able to go through a level that easily in the real game. The AI isn't nearly finished yet. It's one of the last things devs do, especially with a dynamic game like Crysis wher enviroments change constantly. For instance, a dev was playing and they picked up a fallen tree. The AI thought you were just a treem and you basically became invisible. They have to go in and change that AI code so that the AI will respond differently.

Which FarCry did you play? The only version Crytek made was the PC version, the consoles versions they had nothing to do with. The PC version was different than the console versions, and much more open-ended. Also, Crysis is being made by more than 120 devs (FarCry was only made with 20), a $30 million budget (FarCry's was MUCH smaller), and Crytek has all the time they want to finish it (FarCry was rushed in order to come out before HL2 and Doom3).

The sole purpose of the Crysis game is to force pc gamers to upgrade.

joe_g_patton

Yeah, because that's the only game that you can play when you upgrade. If you buy a new PC, it won't run any other games but Crysis...............:roll:

[QUOTE="santeri_15"]You seems to brush off things like customizability and interactivity like they are meaningless additions, when they actually provide the possibility for a lot of gameplay variations.Pariah_001

Again, mechanically speaking, the additional variations would be minimal. Physically interacting the environment by being able to pick things up doesn't take things far enough. Customizing weapons doesn't really do much either. In the end, you're just shooting a gun--You would have done that anyway.

Could you elaborate on this thought more? If you're simply talking about team based gameplay, then there will be some of that in Crysis as well. Saying that the lack of it makes the game generic is ridiculous though.

There's was a more specific phrase I used: One man against everyone.

That's been the same old story for close to two decades. The bulk of this game seems to be exactly that.

It's not entirely team-work that I'm looking for, it's a particular atmosphere. These devs are trying to grasp realism through highly detailed textures and yet they incorporate a story about a futuristic Rambo; a person infiltrating enemy territory who's basically an army unto himself. When you have a huge 'Call of Duty' atmosphere with a full blown skirmish, it's ridiculous to expect one man to be capable of handling the situation and still give the feeling of a real battle. I've just gotten tired of this kind of genre--I still play these games, but I don't hold them in the highest regard; Crysis will be no exception.

The other games actually have more character elements and culpability to provide such an atmosphere and gamer perception.

People have different tastes in games. What makes a game appealing to you may not make it as appealing to another person.

I never said otherwise.

The previews so far show that most people who have gotten the chance to play Crysis have enjoyed it greatly.It would be best to wait until the game is released before you judge it and say it is "generic", especially since that is an opinion, and most people seem to disagree with you.

Oh I see.

I should of known you were leading up to a "majority is god" denouement.

"Only shooting a ggun, 1 man against all".

1) Just shooting a gun? Ok , platformers are just about jumping and grabbing tokens at the end of the day, RPG's are just watching animations take numbers away, Fighting games are just watching animations hit a a rag doll....

Are you seeing a pattern? theres tnoghin generic about CRYSIS, the only game even close to it's variation of an FPS is FAR CRY, no other FPS has much in common except shooting people .... DUH thats the genre.

2) 1 man ... no your a squad of 4, yea ok sometimes your alone, but there are other NPC's US soldiers thru-out the story mode, your 3 teamates (Which can die though) and the Koreans developed nano-suits to help out in the Ice Sphere .... your not alone in the game at all.

Generic is NOT:

Fully Destructable Enviroments which effect AI and Gameplay.

Destructable Viechles (no health bars, PROPER sabotage)

Nano-suit offering "Evasion" "Stealth" or "Brute Strenght" approach to every aspect of the game.

NO corridor "inside levels" without options for Stealth.

3 Different Enviroments (Effecting EVERYTHING not just LOOK like all previous games)

A Multiplayer which mixes BATTLEFIELDS and COUNTERSTRIKE - with dynamic day/night and Alien Tech landings during the maps.

Real Movie "Blockbuster Graphics" (overexagurated effects blended with realism).

From what Ive heard, good soundtrack so far.

Good Array of Weapons, from all your convential weapons to Alien Weapons which are not Lazers (Freeze orientated).

Custimisable weapons (You should see the Hominh Addon for the rocket launcher ...)

Teamates that can die off permenently, they are not 100% nescarrary but do make events easier ect.

Very open Maps the "Bubble domes" kind of setup is great, just basically means theyre will be encampments in alot of places that are optional.

Generic how exactly? You know whats Generic? Halo and Uneal Tournement, and I love UT, but Crysis ..... is far from generic, those 2 games are the KINGS of generic.

Crysis is far from generic. It has those features that other games don't have. Halo is the definition of generic.

"I'm talking about the physics, environment, and interaction. Even if the developer's aren't staying absolutely true to reality, there's still trying to make a slippery slope argument using the game's setting: If there were such a scenario taking place, then such and such would happen. They still have to deal with the hurdle of interacting with the Koreans; obviously you don't play an invincible character, otherwise you wouldn't have much need for sneaking. So having huge fire-fights with them as well as aliean lifeforms just doesn't mesh well with an emulation of reality."

Nvm after reading that, you clearly havnt seen much of the game, and are just bashing something that has alot of hype, hype that Killzone 2 or the other games you mentioned will ever reach, let alone reach the rating this will recieve.

I think it's overated by alot of hermits. Well that being there only worthwhile game this year they have to be happy about something.cyprus646

Yea I know man! Us Wii owners get mario party 8, 9, 10, raving rabids 2, ea playground, dewey, and a bunch of other crappy mini game compilations!