Do you think we will get a game like Crysis on PC again?

  • 54 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for lostrib
lostrib

49999

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#51  Edited By lostrib
Member since 2009 • 49999 Posts

@SEANMCAD said:

@lostrib said:

@SEANMCAD said:

@lostrib said:

@SEANMCAD said:

I am unclear why Arma 3 isnt getting much more coverage

it's a niche game

what do you mean and how so?

are you serious? it's a realistic military sim. The game is only popular with a relatively small subset of the gaming community. It does not have great appeal to the general market

yes I really dont understand actually.

I mean military sim or not so what. I have played it and it feels like a game to me and the graphics are very intense and it has features that would be the like a TitanFall fall to its knees.

I think your argument is very weak.

It only doesnt appeal to the masses because they have been marketed.

So Forza???

It's a niche game, appealing just to those that want a very realistic military game.

Avatar image for lostrib
lostrib

49999

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#53  Edited By lostrib
Member since 2009 • 49999 Posts

@SEANMCAD said:

@lostrib said:

@SEANMCAD said:

@lostrib said:

@SEANMCAD said:

@lostrib said:

@SEANMCAD said:

I am unclear why Arma 3 isnt getting much more coverage

it's a niche game

what do you mean and how so?

are you serious? it's a realistic military sim. The game is only popular with a relatively small subset of the gaming community. It does not have great appeal to the general market

yes I really dont understand actually.

I mean military sim or not so what. I have played it and it feels like a game to me and the graphics are very intense and it has features that would be the like a TitanFall fall to its knees.

I think your argument is very weak.

It only doesnt appeal to the masses because they have been marketed.

So Forza???

It's a niche game, appealing just to those that want a very realistic military game.

Is FORZA 5 a niche game that appeals to those who want a very realistic racing game?

Or are those interested in the military genre a small subset of gamers?

man this forum is funny.

Forza isn't really a realistic racing series. There maybe a large number of gamers that are interested in Military themed games like COD and BF, but a relatively small portion of gamers want a realistic military game like ARMA. how is this difficult to understand.

Avatar image for stuff238
stuff238

3284

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#54  Edited By stuff238
Member since 2012 • 3284 Posts

LMAO at "Star citizen" fanboys. It does not even look that good. Plus it has horrible wall detection. Your character floats through spaceships and buildings. Do the developers even know what they are doing? Are they capable of creating invisible barriers? Can they create floors I can walk on? Because it looks like a floaty underwhelming mess.

I have watched all the videos and have been following this game, but it looks horrible for what they have been paid so far. I agree with the other guy. They probably took half the money to buy brand new houses, retirement funds, new cars etc.

Avatar image for Gargus
Gargus

2147

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#55  Edited By Gargus
Member since 2006 • 2147 Posts

@meganfocks said:

Do you think we will get a game like Crysis 2007 on PC again? And by that I mean a game that pushes the boundaries of what is possible, Crysis was graphics king for many years and it is still widely used for benchmarking after all this time.

Discuss.

No, it never was a graphics king.

Crysis ended up getting this huge PC following touting it as the most powerful PC game ever. They used it as a banner to shoot their fanboyisms allover the place shouting "Its so powerful it brings my massive PC to its knees. Weep pathetic non PC gamers at how awesomely powerful it is!!!!!" and the game became synonymous as being a graphics king hog because it bogged down computers.

But the reality of the matter is.....it wasn't graphics king or powerful at all. It simply earned the title of being graphics king because it was a graphics card hog. The problem with it being a PC destroyer was that it was poorly coded, and not optimized at all. It ran like shit because it was shit, not because it was a graphics hog. When the 2nd patch launched for it performance was improved by like 30%, if the game was so powerful how the hell did it get such a huge performance bump out of a single patch? And then later its performance was increased another oh......75% by a fan made .ini file proving the game was just not optimized at all by crytek.

At the end of the day who cares? It looked pretty.........ok how exactly does that make it this legendarily awesome game? It was still just a shooter. A generic military style shooter at that. Unreal 1 had more exciting graphics because it was unique and had its own identity in terms of graphics while crysis was a jungle with military guys in military vehicles, and robot aliens......yawn.

Not to mention, how damn sad is it that PC fanboys still have to stroke this game in order to get a boner?

Avatar image for clyde46
clyde46

49061

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#56  Edited By clyde46
Member since 2005 • 49061 Posts

@Gargus said:

@meganfocks said:

Do you think we will get a game like Crysis 2007 on PC again? And by that I mean a game that pushes the boundaries of what is possible, Crysis was graphics king for many years and it is still widely used for benchmarking after all this time.

Discuss.

No, it never was a graphics king.

Crysis ended up getting this huge PC following touting it as the most powerful PC game ever. They used it as a banner to shoot their fanboyisms allover the place shouting "Its so powerful it brings my massive PC to its knees. Weep pathetic non PC gamers at how awesomely powerful it is!!!!!" and the game became synonymous as being a graphics king hog because it bogged down computers.

But the reality of the matter is.....it wasn't graphics king or powerful at all. It simply earned the title of being graphics king because it was a graphics card hog. The problem with it being a PC destroyer was that it was poorly coded, and not optimized at all. It ran like shit because it was shit, not because it was a graphics hog. When the 2nd patch launched for it performance was improved by like 30%, if the game was so powerful how the hell did it get such a huge performance bump out of a single patch? And then later its performance was increased another oh......75% by a fan made .ini file proving the game was just not optimized at all by crytek.

At the end of the day who cares? It looked pretty.........ok how exactly does that make it this legendarily awesome game? It was still just a shooter. A generic military style shooter at that. Unreal 1 had more exciting graphics because it was unique and had its own identity in terms of graphics while crysis was a jungle with military guys in military vehicles, and robot aliens......yawn.

Not to mention, how damn sad is it that PC fanboys still have to stroke this game in order to get a boner?

Holy cow you sound mad. Are you always this angry?