GAMEPLAY OR GRAPHIC?

@xbhonner: Yup, you didn't watch it and you haven't played it. Thanks for confirming now go troll someone else.

If you do want to reply, how about that list of games with the same features as Crysis, like I asked you to show me.

One of the great tragedies of gaming, the popular perception of Cryteks association as a shallow technical showcase, with Naughty Dog placed on a pedestal as thee premier developer.

If anything, it's Naughty Dog that are all flash.

Comparatively Crytek delivered huge, open ended play-pens with a multitude of options for the player to go about business as they see fit.

My goodness this is an original question. I'll have to think about the answer, it's never been asked before. Hmm.

Obviously gameplay.

Its why No Man's Sky is trash... People forgive the graphics and don't really mind them to be honest but the gameplay?... Yeah its basically been taken out back and put down by the gaming community. Resource gathering for endless hours?... Take that s*** back Murray.

Too bad it's being heavily rewarded by gamers who really like burning money.

Gameplay doesn't sell anymore :(

Good games have both.

Hype sells games.

This game promised game play that would inspire... NO ONE in the industry told the gaming audience that all you will be doing is mining for hours on end.

Its why industry hype is the worst because these reviewers and "personalities" hype things that they HAVE played like its a 10/10 game and when its released they give it a 7/10... Like what just happened? When they initially played it a year ago they all acted like it was the second coming and got everyone excited.

People who ask this question always champion indie trash that basically copies great ideas from the past and delivers them repackaged with shite graphics today.

There is no reason any more to choose between graphics and gameplay we have come far enough to deliver both. A crap game will always be exactly that no matter how good or bad it looks but there are enough great looking games with great gameplay to choose from on every platform now (apart from Nintendo the perpetually 'retro' platform) that there is absolutely no need to play low grade indie trash or AAA trash with great graphics and crap gameplay.

PC, PS4 and Xbox One all have a huge amount of seriously good multiplats that deliver on every level. If you settle for less that's your choice. You choose to play dross. So STFU and don't complain.

@xbhonner Crysis has more gameplay than most shooters. Nanosuit makes for some really awesome sandbox physics gameplay. Atleast that is why i liked it. One of the few singleplayer campaigns in shooters that i have actually completed, since i'm usually unable to stay interested in generic shooter campaigns. i mostly play multiplayers.

You know how you know when a gameplay is good? You load a save file after completing a part, just because you want to play that part again. Happened a lot in Crysis.

Video games are always going to be a visual medium, so I think an argument could be made in favor of the aesthetics of a game. There are definitely games that I enjoy the aesthetic nature of more than the act of playing them for various reasons, e.g. cumbersome inventory management, clunky movement, or just a boring gameplay loop.

As video games expand in their scope and become more experimental and dive more into an immersive visual-"cinematic" experience, they can gain something new and innovative to the traditional gameplay loops and mechanics. I think a few recent releases, ABZU and No Man's Sky, and last year's GotY, The Witcher 3, represent this argument the best. ABZU and No Man's Sky main draw aren't deep gameplay mechanics, it's exploration and discovery of new environments which in itself is a form of gameplay, and I think this excitement over discovery and exploration in part comes from the impeccable visual design that both games offer. The Witcher 3, for me, offered the most when exploring the wilderness and various regions; the game's weak point is the traditional gameplay combat systems that are implemented. Witcher 3 works due to exploration of beautiful terrain and the driving narrative, not because of what would traditionally be called "gameplay". I know this might be seen as post that is arguing more for the exploration element of video games than the visual element, but in all three games that I have mentioned the visual element is tied to the exploration element. I think the argument, at least, needs to be made that the gameplay needs a visually pleasing pairing to gain recognition by many, something I think most in this forum would say they overlook.

I'm a PC gamer lad, I don't need to compromise

Yet Halo 1 and 2 were still fun as hell. Plus very few games actually give you some AI buddies to battle with. I remember the mexican guy in Halo 1 cracked me up with his enthusiasm. If they got killed, a drop off ship dropped in some more, those moments along with the vehicles were some of the most fun I had in that game.

Always gameplay. A game can look great and play like crap; I'm not into that at all. On the other hand, great gameplay is truly timeless - you can go back and play titles like Super Mario Bros. 3 on the NES and it still feels razor sharp today.

These are still aesthetically pleasing games. You're saying that 8-bit graphics should be considered bad, but I would dispute this. Same with SMB3 above.

Gameplay is easily more important. Which is why I primarily game on pc since most console games run at 30 fps which makes the gameplay less responsive, less precise and fast movements make the graphics jittery.

Better graphics on pc is just more icing on the cake.

i watched it. thanks for trolling.

after watching that video, all you do is "SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, AND THROW GRENADE ALL DAY LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG". Thanks for trolling in my thread though.

if you dont know what games who have the same feature as cryshit, then you probably born in 2007, only playing a few games in your sad life, and probably living in a remote village who doesnt have game store, or under a big rock

probably, but....still a "shoot and throw grenade" kind of games to me.

load a safe file after completing a part is not gameplay. gameplay is what you can do when you are playing

yes, crytek is not creative, and yes, ND is the premier developer.

if anything. you posted the first hour of uc4, and call it "all flash". whatever that shit means, please post all the gameplay that uc4 has.

comparatively, cysis deliver a boring game, where you "SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, SHOOT, AND THROW GRENADE ALL DAY LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG". A boring, uncreative, and mindless game. just look at this video here :

you totally misunderstood me. i mean load a save, because it's so fun that you want to play that part again.

sw's - graphics

Me - I like pretty graphics but I love great art sty1e more so. Last gen some of my favourite looking games where red steel 2 (FU uni with Zombiu), Mad World, Bayonetta because I liked how pretty they looked. This gen Games like Smash, mario kart, Wonderful 101, Child of light, street fighter I've found to look amazing more so than games like Uncharted, gears.

Gameplay with great 5tyle over graphics.

Lol Crysis has the best gameplay for back then and even now it still holds its ground. I've recently played through Crysis Warhead again and the combat is very solid. Superb games like FarCry 3 and Uncharted 4 have taken a page out of Crysis with the endless possibilities of assaulting a base, even now not many games can compare with Crysis 1's first half of the game...

I have to agree with uninspiredcup.

Crysis was way ahead of it's time, gameplay (and graphics ofc) wise with it's huge interactive levels. It gave the player so many ways to tackle different situations. Uncharted 1, 2 and 3 are mindless on rail games in comparison. It's almost blasphemy to mention them in the same sentence as Crysis. I haven't played UC4 though, which is said to be much better.

im totally not misunderstood you. i clearly said "load a save", and i said "load a save is not a gameplay". gameplay is what you can do when you are in "game mode". not "Menu Mode"

how is uncharted series are on rail games?

if there is a mindless game, its crysis, where you shoot, shoot, shoot, shoot, shoot, shoot, shoot, shoot, and throw grenade

What's really sad about you thinking Crysis has no gameplay, is that you're bringing up an 8 year old game to try an upset people. The likelihood is that no one will be talking about Uncharted 4 next year, let alone in 8 year's time, especially the 'gameplay'. Using a generic movie game that is nothing more than a linear set piece, cut scene extravaganza, with a cover system copied directly from an Xbox game, poor shooting mechanics and press "A" to climb like a monkey as a model of gameplay is very, very sad indeed. Especially when Tomb Raider and Assassin's Creed have already done the same thing better, several times.

I asked you a simple question and you can't give a simple answer, so will you please stop trying to insult me, especially when you obviously know absolutely nothing about me.

By the way it doesn't matter how many times you try repeating the same thing it will not make it come true. Even using lots of capital letters will not help at all. Additionally your opinion is not above question and it is certainly not the definition of fact. If you really want to change my mind then prove it.

HOLY SHIT MAN! i wasn't talking about loading a save being gameplay! Gameplay happens obviously AFTER you have loaded the save... holy crap man, what pills have you taken?

edit: also, let me guess; you actually thought your post was witty too, right? jesus... i try really hard to not get offensive here, but with that density of yours, i really now understand why you can't even appreciate games like Crysis.

UC1-3 are extremely linear. They are basically movie games, with mindless gameplay and QTEs.

Crysis is not just shooting, ofc there is a lot, given it's a first person shooter. It's has huge environments that are interactive. You can pick up/destroy objects, throw them at enemies etc. I once destroyed a helicopter with an exploding barrel that I shot after I thrown it in the air using strength-mode, next to the helicopter. There are many ways to tackle different situations. During one playthrough I was a like ghost, barely killed anyone in the first half of the game.

Uncharted games are like recent Michael Bay movies, simplistic and shallow, but there are a lot of people who like that. Although I haven't played UC4 yet, it's said to better than previous games.

GRAPHIC

I can go to bed with a fat woman and get my rocks off. Does that mean I'd not garner more pleasure from a supermodel as I would from a lard ass who fails to shave or take care of her hygiene?

Keep arguing that gameplay (i.e. the fat chick with the vagina) is all that matters. It is what the foundation lay upon, but nobody can convince me that sensuality, foreplay, and the appearance of a woman and her manner that is very good looking doesn't matter to the ultimate goal, or lend it tremendous pleasure when it's gotten.

You people reside in naivete, or embrace it.....for some reason or another.

I am sick of these threads. The highest rated games of all time have amazing graphics AND gameplay AND Music/sound AND Voice acting AND Atmosphere AND Story etc

Why can't we have both/everything?

Why does it have to be either or? Why are you lowering your standards?

I don't get people like you.

Gameplay wins every time.

Problem is, they'd have to be N64 or Ps1 games for that analogy to work for me.

When people are talking shit about Wii U or Xbox one graphical capabilities, the plot has been lost.

The analogy establishes principle, and counters the notion that gameplay is all that matters. Graphics come secondary, but they are a very close second. Gaming's a visual medium.

I'm just saying, in the context of today, graphical capabilities really don't matter much. There's shitty looking ps4 games and good looking ps2 games.

Though I agree that saying gameplay is all that matters is dumb.

im not trying to upset anyone, this kind of thread is everywhere on system wars. and lemme help you, crysis is 9 years old, if you are suck at math. Uncharted has good gameplay, Start from the crazy ass car chase scene, that scene where you dragged in a mud, the collapsing tower, all the puzzle solving gameplay, all better than Crysis's gameplay. Naughty dog just beat Crytek in gameplay creation skill. Crytek should just learn from ND on how to craete gameplay IMHO. instead of creating game with beautiful picture and less brainwork, they should make one with fun gameplay. Whats wrong with linear if i may ask? how do you define linear? dont you realize that many games that considered by many as BEST GAME OF ALL TIME are linear? or you just living under a big fucking rock this whole time or living in a remote village where there is no tv? (or probably you are just a kid who born in 2005? idk) What matter in a game is how the gameplay entertain the gamer, not just how "OHHH ITHZ LHINNEAR LHINNEART BROOOH". i know morons on the internet love to use the word "LHINNEAR" to look smart and sophisticated on forums, while they know nothing about games at all.

Cutscene extravaganza, movie game? how is it like that? dont you ever watch uc4 gameplay on youtube? go watch it, its full action, hell it will fullfill your "SHOOOOT SHOOT AND THROW GRENADE" taste of gaming. Its action plus brain games, a game that has graphic plus gameplay. Fun + Story. Shooting mechanic in this game also good, i dont see the difference between the shooting mechanic in this game and in other action games like just cause, gta, etc, it'll be better if you explain more detail on how the shooting mechanic is poor. Press A to climb is everywhere, and no one complains. Also, i dont see how the climbing is bad, or how its different drom Assasin creed and tomb raider, uc and those games has the same thing.

Also how its cover system copied from an xbox game???????, are you living in a remote village with no electricity, tv, or access to info???? One important thing that a kid who born in 2005 like you should know (or any morons who think xbox games invented anything) is that COVER SHOOTING IS EVERYWHERE BEFORE GEARS OF GAY WAR COPIED IT, try to play Resident evil 4!

i ask you first, what kind of thing crysis invented? is it just like any other video games who borrow everything from previous games?. if you ask me, i think Crysis is just COPIED everything that already exist. You know, i hate people (or fucking morons) who says "GHAME A INVHEYNTED THIZ FEATURE BROAH". Because almost every game copied, or taking feature from games before them. Unless its a game from 80s, or 90s, which is the place where so many genre and games feature and system born. Take a look at Crysis, and Uncharted. If you said cryshit invented something because it gathered something already invented in one bundle of game, then you are a moron. Additionally, ive never said that my opinion is the definition of fact, or above question.

HOLy shit man, you were talking about that, dont you remember your own comment? here :

"You know how you know when a gameplay is good? You load a save file after completing a part, just because you want to play that part again. Happened a lot in Crysis."

loading a saved game is not gameplay. and it happens alot in other games, not only in crysis. litteraly almost every games today has that load saved game feature.

edit : im not thinking that my post is witty, im not dense either. and crysis is shit because it is shit.

Whats wrong with linear if i may ask? how do you define linear? dont you realize that many games that considered by many as BEST GAME OF ALL TIME are linear? or you just living under a big fucking rock this whole time or living in a remote village where there is no tv? (or probably you are just a kid who born in 2005? idk) What matter in a game is how the gameplay entertain the gamer, not just how "OHHH ITHZ LHINNEAR LHINNEART BROOOH". i know morons on the internet love to use the word "LHINNEAR" to look smart and sophisticated on forums, while they know nothing about games at all. Fun in games is not only achieved by not being linear, it can comes from everything, depends on the developer's creativity.

Uc isnt movie games, its full action games. like that one crazy gameplay in uc3 where player fighting enemies in a flying plane, dangling in a cargo, this is just one example. How is it a "MHOVVIEH" game???, dont you ever watch uc gameplay on youtube?, honestly, UC is just like "just cause", with tomb raider theme. And the qte??? what qte??? you are mistaking RYSE for UC???? Like i said, uc is like just cause, or any other action games for that matter. How morons like you calling it "MHOVVIEH GHAYMES WITH KYU TI E" is baffling me. You clearly never play uc, and only hear gossip from internet.

OMG :DDD

LOADING THE SAVE IS NOT THE GAMEPLAY PART! YOU LOAD BECAUSE THERE IS GAMEPLAY AFTER THE LOAD! HOW DENSE ARE YOU MAN :DDDD

Just wondering.

Has anyone tallied how many minutes of cutscenes are there in UC4 and compare it to the number of hours of actual gameplay?

I mean if Crysis is shoot shoot shoot. UC4 might be watch watch watch. ;)

@jun_aka_pekto: Not sure how much gameplay there is, but there's enough cutscenes for 3 movies. 4 hours and 7 minutes worth.

BIG SPOILER ALERT FOR THOSE WHO HAVEN"T PLAYED THE GAME.

Old thread - locked.