Kudos to X-Play, for being honest about Crysis

Since when is X-play a reliable source for reviews?????!?!?!?!?!?!?Spartan8907

[QUOTE="trix5817"][QUOTE="kevy619"]

[QUOTE="killab2oo5"][QUOTE="Vandalvideo"]Kudos to X-play for lying about Crysis? They give every freaking console game under the sun a 5/5, and then a game comes along that totally trumps all those gamse and suddenyl it gets a 3/5? Thats complete and utter bullocks. They were expecting some kind of linear corridor shooter like Halo or something. (relatively speaking).DrinkDuff

Not to mention gamplay wise, Crysis is behind the curve while Halo 3 is on the curve.

Halo 3 is pretty much a rehash of Halo 1. New vehicles and weapons does not make it "on the curve". Honestly, you just made a fool of yourself. Just about every reviewer has stated how amazing Crysis' gameplay was. It got a 98% from PC Gamer, tying for the highest score they've ever give (HL2 and Alpha Centuri were the only games to get 98% from PC Gamer). PC Gamer is very harsh in their reviews, and doesn't give out high scores like they're nothing. This is how most PC gaming sites/mags are. Unlike console gaming sites which give out 10/10's every day.

[QUOTE="cobrax75"]

fine, if your gonna use X-play....Ill use the escapis for Halo 3....it went something like this...."Halo 3 is generic crap and I cant see why in Hell so many people like it."

X-play is utter crap for reviews, they always were.

ChinoJamesKeene

I'd love to hear the Zero Punctuation review of Crysis.

X-play are retarded, agreed.

[QUOTE="DrinkDuff"]Everyone has different opinions, and honestly its PC gamer. Don't you think they might have a slight bias? When I see reviews by official xbox magazine I take them reviews with a grain a salt too. Anyway HL 1 was superior in every way (except graphics) yet you don't see that game with a 98%. froidnite

Since when is X-play a reliable source for reviews?????!?!?!?!?!?!?Spartan8907

[QUOTE="ChinoJamesKeene"][QUOTE="cobrax75"]

fine, if your gonna use X-play....Ill use the escapis for Halo 3....it went something like this...."Halo 3 is generic crap and I cant see why in Hell so many people like it."

X-play is utter crap for reviews, they always were.

DrinkDuff

I'd love to hear the Zero Punctuation review of Crysis.

X-play are retarded, agreed.

Did F.E.A.R. and HL 1 have something as revolutionary as the gravity gun? I thought not. HL2 had so much more element in it than just the shooter part. i.e. The Ravenholm level was a great survival horror game miniaturized in one level, can any other FPS say that?

Were using X-Play to say Crysis is overated? :lol:

Man, system wars gets worser everyday.

XPlay, ppffffffftttt :lol:

[QUOTE="cobrax75"]

fine, if your gonna use X-play....Ill use the escapis for Halo 3....it went something like this...."Halo 3 is generic crap and I cant see why in Hell so many people like it."

X-play is utter crap for reviews, they always were.

turgore

The escapist said that halo is average but he doesn't review the multiplayer component.

He said that he doesn't want to play with others(and I agree) why should the single player component be lackluster and to back it up the multiplayer is average.

[QUOTE="AdrianWerner"][QUOTE="wok7"][QUOTE="AdrianWerner"][QUOTE="wok7"]

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="wok7"]PC Gamers are so deprived of new games that think Crysis is actually revolutionary, XDwok7

Keep telling to yourseves : p, we'll believe you once a PC game actually gets some publicity.

Yeah..as they say "let's all eat sh#t, billions of flies can't be wrong" :D. I actualy consider little publicity to be a good recommendation. current mainstream gamign audience enjoys only the simpliest, most dumbed down games around. Any sign of complexity immiedietly scares them off. So i will stick to little publicized games.

People are lazy and do prefer simplicity thats true, whats also true is how consoles have the overall better games.

Sorry, but I don't consider shallow games to be "overall better"

Then explain the multiplatform games scoring better on consoles?

Because the standard of pc is alot higher than consoles? Compared to what we have and what you have games get a certain score. You have bioshock and praise it to death. But guess what we had system shock which owns bioshock in every way. Infact bioshock was probably dumbed down FOR consoles.

X-Play makes great reviews.

They don't make them as funny as they used to, but they are still spot on with reviews.

yeah gamespot thinks otherwise..oh and dont say "gamespot is unreliable " BS..remember this review was released when jeff was editor in chief..which means every review has to be approved by him..you know the same guy who doesnt take bribes from publishers.

[QUOTE="cobrax75"]

lol, X-play.....I still cant believe you think that they are actually good reviewers.

they are pretty much the laughingstock of this entire forum...and that was long before the Crysis review.

kevy619

They backed up the review with gameplay footage, regardless of how bad some of their old reviews have been. Maybe they have been inspired by Jeff.

you know how HARD it is to find those bugs? I never encountered ANY of them during my 2 play throughs of Crysis. the only bug I ever encountered was the rocket not having proper hit detection and not exploding... thats the ONLY bug I have EVER seen.

Nearly every review of Crysis has been glowing, so people have resorted to using the basic equivalent of Play Magazine for some type of ownage. Hilarious.

And $50 says that the people who claim that Crysis is just Far Cry with better graphics will say the same thing about Starcraft 2 and Starcraft. Because these people are close-minded simpletons.

x-play gives 5 stars to every big budget game. Every last one.goblaa

Metroid Prime 3: 4 out of 5

Crysis: 3 out of 5

[QUOTE="mistervengeance"]

any reviewer that uses a 5 scale is a joke....

you have to have at least 10 to be accurate.

wok7

10/10 is stupid becuase most often less than half of the available numbers are used, why do think GS changed to.5 intervals?

because they're lazy and it's easier to give a 9.5 score and explain why than to give a 9.6 score and explain why

Completely and utterly CORRECT...like usual.

Thank You : )

Crysis is far above and beyond "just a pretty Far Cry".

Alright, its a pretty version of Far Cry but with a little bit more gimmicks.

Crysis's gameplay combines four unique styles of gameplay in such a way that allows you traverse a fully dynamic world in hundreds of different ways.

lol, you mean just 4 variations of the same goal : /

PC has just as much advantage over consoles as it always had.

Graphics? no Sound? not really Control? Precision, but not comfort Genre variation? Hell no

The PC has some pretty incredibly exclusives coming in 2008, while the same really couldn't be said for the consoles.

What does the PC have over SSBB alone? Crysis was the biggest PC game since HL2, and you're lucky it didn't come with a superior 360 version.

Excuse me while I enjoy the dozens of great games coming to the PC that you straight up will not have.

Number Mnchers, Oregan Trail, and Rodents Revenge. You have a point here.

Not to mention Theres all the incentive in the world to buy games on the PC over consoles. Better graphics, better sound, more longevity, cheaper, etc.

It seems like there more incenetive to make games for the consoles because they sell better.

Higher PC standarts:)

By baised sources like PC Gaming mag, but otherwise PC games are held to lower standards: 1. Because more eefort is often put into the console version 2. PC games often dont have anything current to compete with acorss its own platform

Seriously though...multiplats usualy score better on the lead development platform. Hence Oblivion scoring better on 360 and Command and Conquer 3 scoring better on PC, when devs put the same ammount of effort into both versions then the scores are the same (hence orange box or CoD4 scoring the same on Pc and 360). It's no magic. When PC is the main platform the PC version scores higher, when 360 is the lead platform 360 version scores better, no mystery here.

Tell your freinds to stop thinking otherwise then.

The only reason why you see more multiplats scoring higher on consoles is that console games nowadays generaly get ported to PC more often than PC games get ported to consoles.

Because the console experience is superior.

Completely and utterly CORRECT...like usual.

Thank You : )

Crysis is far above and beyond "just a pretty Far Cry".

Alright, its a pretty version of Far Cry but with a little bit more gimmicks.

Crysis's gameplay combines four unique styles of gameplay in such a way that allows you traverse a fully dynamic world in hundreds of different ways.

lol, you mean just 4 variations of the same goal : /

PC has just as much advantage over consoles as it always had.

Graphics? no Sound? not really Control? Precision, but not comfort Genre variation? Hell no

The PC has some pretty incredibly exclusives coming in 2008, while the same really couldn't be said for the consoles.

What does the PC have over SSBB alone? Crysis was the biggest PC game since HL2, and you're lucky it didn't come with a superior 360 version.

Excuse me while I enjoy the dozens of great games coming to the PC that you straight up will not have.

Number Mnchers, Oregan Trail, and Rodents Revenge. You have a point here.

Not to mention Theres all the incentive in the world to buy games on the PC over consoles. Better graphics, better sound, more longevity, cheaper, etc.

It seems like there more incenetive to make games for the consoles because they sell better.

wok7

Higher PC standarts:)

By baised sources like PC Gaming mag, but otherwise PC games are held to lower standards: 1. Because more eefort is often put into the console version 2. PC games often dont have anything current to compete with acorss its own platform

Seriously though...multiplats usualy score better on the lead development platform. Hence Oblivion scoring better on 360 and Command and Conquer 3 scoring better on PC, when devs put the same ammount of effort into both versions then the scores are the same (hence orange box or CoD4 scoring the same on Pc and 360). It's no magic. When PC is the main platform the PC version scores higher, when 360 is the lead platform 360 version scores better, no mystery here.

Tell your freinds to stop thinking otherwise then.

The only reason why you see more multiplats scoring higher on consoles is that console games nowadays generaly get ported to PC more often than PC games get ported to consoles.

Because the console experience is superior.

wok7

[QUOTE="kevy619"]

[QUOTE="killab2oo5"][QUOTE="Vandalvideo"]Kudos to X-play for lying about Crysis? They give every freaking console game under the sun a 5/5, and then a game comes along that totally trumps all those gamse and suddenyl it gets a 3/5? Thats complete and utter bullocks. They were expecting some kind of linear corridor shooter like Halo or something. (relatively speaking).Vandalvideo

Not to mention gamplay wise, Crysis is behind the curve while Halo 3 is on the curve.

Again, wrong, its far more than that. Crysis has gameplay that is far and beyond the normal FPS game, with four distinct modes of play that combine to add multiple layers of depth. Graphics? Yes, higher resolution suppoer and overall higher options ultimately mean better graphics. Sound? Yes, EAX. Control? We can use gamepads fool. Genre variation? Yes, we have tons of genres you simply don't have like the dozens of simulation genres, adventure games, and others. You should check the "Why its good to be a PC Gamer 2008, we have the MOST announced exclusives and tons of great games. And besides, online distribution. Once again, Wok has no idea what hes talking about.Vandalvideo

Let's be honest: The PC doesn't have that many advantages over the console. The PS3, for example, supports up to 7.1 HD (as compared to 5.0)audio, and considering you can't really find games with 7.1 audio yet, I think consoles are okay in that department. PCs definitely have the edge in higher-end graphics, although the majority of people probably don't have PCs that significantly outperfom the 360/PS3 in this department. Control is again, fairly even, considering the PS3 has kb/m support (if we're talking the 360, then yes, if you like kb/m, the PC wins). Then again, I prefer controllers to mice, so to me the consoles have always been on at least equal footing with the PC. And in genre variation...Well, that's a draw too. Some genres are very well represented on the PC(WRPGs, FPS, RTS, MMO), but others have pretty pitiful representation (JRPG, Fighting, Platformers). It's hard to argue the PC's edge here, since it really comes down to which games you like more. Growing up I was a huge fan of Square's games, so the PC couldn't have interested me less. Now that I've expanded my horizons, I find that a combination of consoles stillfits my needs best, as my 360 and PS3 get a lot of the PC games I'm interested in (UT3, Oblivion, etc.), and I don't have to miss out on Japanese support.

The bottom line is this: Each platform has advantages and disadvantages; the reason the PC vs. console argument gets so heated is because both sides prefer the advantages of their platform, and can't understand why the other prefers the opposite.

Crysis is overrated for sure. Sure the Graphics are the best in a FPS ever but that's about the only thing great in Crysis. Not the Story, gameplay, or the A.I.

The bottom line is this: Each platform has advantages and disadvantages; the reason the PC vs. console argument gets so heated is because both sides prefer the advantages of their platform, and can't understand why the other prefers the opposite.SeanBond

[QUOTE="wok7"]

Higher PC standarts:)

By baised sources like PC Gaming mag, but otherwise PC games are held to lower standards: 1. Because more eefort is often put into the console version 2. PC games often dont have anything current to compete with acorss its own platform

Seriously though...multiplats usualy score better on the lead development platform. Hence Oblivion scoring better on 360 and Command and Conquer 3 scoring better on PC, when devs put the same ammount of effort into both versions then the scores are the same (hence orange box or CoD4 scoring the same on Pc and 360). It's no magic. When PC is the main platform the PC version scores higher, when 360 is the lead platform 360 version scores better, no mystery here.

Tell your freinds to stop thinking otherwise then.

The only reason why you see more multiplats scoring higher on consoles is that console games nowadays generaly get ported to PC more often than PC games get ported to consoles.

Because the console experience is superior.

Vandalvideo

lolnopointinarguingwithwok7rememberheclaimspcgamesdoesn'thaveHDresolution:D

[QUOTE="SeanBond"]The bottom line is this: Each platform has advantages and disadvantages; the reason the PC vs. console argument gets so heated is because both sides prefer the advantages of their platform, and can't understand why the other prefers the opposite.Vandalvideo

At least you admit it is preference. Besides, EAX and lossless audio aren't even really the same (sound effects vs. surround sound), so it's not really a "better or worse" situation. I've already agreed on the graphics end, but I think the rest is pretty much up in the air.

The only reason why you see more multiplats scoring higher on consoles is that console games nowadays generaly get ported to PC more often than PC games get ported to consoles.

Because the console experience is superior.

wok7

Nope it's because consoles are a bigger source of income. 3 console sales > pc sales.

Were using X-Play to say Crysis is overated? :lol:

Man, system wars gets worser everyday.

GoodkupoBan

so does your grammar?

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="SeanBond"]The bottom line is this: Each platform has advantages and disadvantages; the reason the PC vs. console argument gets so heated is because both sides prefer the advantages of their platform, and can't understand why the other prefers the opposite.SeanBond

At least you admit it is preference. Besides, EAX and lossless audio aren't even really the same (sound effects vs. surround sound), so it's not really a "better or worse" situation. I've already agreed on the graphics end, but I think the rest is pretty much up in the air.

X-Play has always been a far better reviewer than GS and they usually back up their ratings with real reasons unlike GS.meetroid8

Xplay also said halo 2 was the best in the series and I even think fan bois can admit that isn't true.

[QUOTE="meetroid8"]X-Play has always been a far better reviewer than GS and they usually back up their ratings with real reasons unlike GS.jangojay

I think relatively speaking it was....but overall it was Halo 3.

Xplay also said halo 2 was the best in the series and I even think fan bois can admit that isn't true.

I think relatively speaking it was.....in absolute terms Halo 3 was.

[QUOTE="wok7"][QUOTE="AdrianWerner"][QUOTE="wok7"]

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="wok7"]PC Gamers are so deprived of new games that think Crysis is actually revolutionary, XDAdrianWerner

Keep telling to yourseves : p, we'll believe you once a PC game actually gets some publicity.

Yeah..as they say "let's all eat sh#t, billions of flies can't be wrong" :D. I actualy consider little publicity to be a good recommendation. current mainstream gamign audience enjoys only the simpliest, most dumbed down games around. Any sign of complexity immiedietly scares them off. So i will stick to little publicized games.

People are lazy and do prefer simplicity thats true, whats also true is how consoles have the overall better games.

Sorry, but I don't consider shallow games to be "overall better"

Adrian, just give it up already like I have since 2006. The use of any sort of wit or logic is lost on those who clearly have no grasp of what the concept of 'right vs.wrong'. Let those who wish to swim blissfully in the pool of ignorance linger there forever while world passes them by. It's better to let such people fester amoung themselve unchecked until they're even sick of there own nauseating aurora of stupidity.

Your pity is wasted on them.

[QUOTE="meetroid8"]X-Play has always been a far better reviewer than GS and they usually back up their ratings with real reasons unlike GS.jangojay

Xplay also said halo 2 was the best in the series and I even think fan bois can admit that isn't true.

You mean it's not the best?

Ah, were using X-Play now I assume?

Forget Crysis is overwhelmingly AAA at almost every other publication, it makes sense to put our trust in a site that gives Assassin's Creed, Mass Effect and COD4 perfect scores. It's not like people are just using this to further their personal views.

Higher PC standarts:)

By baised sources like PC Gaming mag, but otherwise PC games are held to lower standards:wok7

No, most sites hold them to higher standards. Why? The PC has more games in every genre. Fact.

The PC is capable of superior visuals. Fact.

The PC has a long and prestigious online tradition. Fact.

THIS is why the PC is held to a higher standard.

1. Because more eefort is often put into the console versionwok7

You really think reviewers rate games based on how hard it was to develop :lol:

Console games are harder to develop because the console is a more cumbersome platform.

2. PC games often dont have anything current to compete with acorss its own platformwok7

Again, there are more games. Not to mention more highly rated games.

Because the console experience is superior.

wok7

Yes, paying more money for software, lowered visuals, butchered online and the clumsy controller sure leads to a superior experience.

Crysis is overrated for sure. Sure the Graphics are the best in a FPS ever but that's about the only thing great in Crysis. Not the Story, gameplay, or the A.I.

PS3_3DO

I highly beg to differ. I actually cared more about the game play in Crysis than the Graphics. They were just a nice plus to it. I can without a doubt say that it was my best fps experience ever (as far as game play goes. Ya I know the story does kinda suck.)

And the AI is MORE than fine. People are just outlining their weird problems they had with it that I have never encountered.

XPLAY reviews have their quirks but they are about on par with the "top" sites. JiveT

They gave Assasin's Creed, Mass Effect and COD4 perfect scores....

For giving Crysis an unbiased and truthful review. The game truly is a good game, for two years ago. They were even able to back up their claims by showing the dumb ai and broken physics, kudos. I hope Crytek watched the review, claiming that Halo 3 is 5 years behind pc fps and then releasing Crysis. Crytek must of been refering to graphics only.kevy619

That was a bull$h!t review they pulled off. What? A 3 out of 5 they gave it.

For giving Crysis an unbiased and truthful review. The game truly is a good game, for two years ago. They were even able to back up their claims by showing the dumb ai and broken physics, kudos. I hope Crytek watched the review, claiming that Halo 3 is 5 years behind pc fps and then releasing Crysis. Crytek must of been refering to graphics only.kevy619

That was a bull$h!t review they pulled off. What? A 3 out of 5 they gave it.

fine, if your gonna use X-play....Ill use the escapis for Halo 3....it went something like this...."Halo 3 is generic crap and I cant see why in Hell so many people like it."

X-play is utter crap for reviews, they always were.

cobrax75

i dont think theres no thread where someone doesnt bring Halo 3 into the arguement and bash it for no reason

By baised sources like PC Gaming mag, but otherwise PC games are held to lower standards: wok7

1. Because more eefort is often put into the console version 2. PC games often dont have anything current to compete with acorss its own platform
wok7

Because the console experience is superior.
wok7

Crysis is overrated for sure. Sure the Graphics are the best in a FPS ever but that's about the only thing great in Crysis. Not the Story, gameplay, or the A.I.

PS3_3DO

It has among the very best gameplay ever made in SP FPS. The only game greater than it is Stalker

[QUOTE="goblaa"]x-play gives 5 stars to every big budget game. Every last one.kevy619

They gave 3 to Crysis, which was big budget, heavily advertised and hyped.

It wasn't heavily advertised and was only hyped by hardcore gamers, most casual gamers don't even know anything about it. Also reviews by websites and especially TV shows are paid off half of the time. Just like in this whole Jeff fiasco.

Halo 3 is a lot more broken than Crysis, just go on down to youtube and watch video after video of the thousands of glitches in Halo 3. And the funniest thing is that I bet you've never even played Crysis.