I've realized why alot of people hate GT. It adheres to realism. Most people think of racing as it is in Need for Speed with nitro boosts, and crazy drifting at ever turn, decals on your car, cops on your ass but GT just keeps it simple. GT isnt trying to wow you with special effects or that rad paint job ,GT is a simulator. Polyphony is only concerned with getting the driving down perfectly. The whole GT situation is like Ace Combat buffs who buy flight simulator and call it crappy. You are playing the game for the wrong reasons.II_Seraphim_II

What you say there better describes Forza games. They're the ones with 3 different temperature readings per tyre that accurately simulates the cars' contact with the road, the suspention and roll physics and not to forget touching a barrier and spinning out of control. I would say, more so, Forza games adhere to realism and is considered more of a simulator.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="Communistsheep"]

I don't care how much eye candy crysis is, it's still has a terrible online and little replayabillity. purdy graphics don't make a game good.

Communistsheep

All 'in your opinion' right??

I mean, the game when reviewed was praised for its 'gameplay'. It received AAA scores across the boards. So based on that, obviously your just stating your own opinion right and not simply trying to state as fact that crysis has bad gameplay, right?

Oh I also liked your remark about mods "I dont like relying on other people to make the game better". I just found that so insightful on what mods really bring to a game. I mean ignore that they are essentially free content, offer tons of replayability to the original game etc.

Crysis has better charcter models I agree, but Mass Effect :lol:ONLYDOD

Mass Effect's faces do appear to have higher resolution textures and especially normal mapping but I suspect more polys have gone into making the Heavy Rain models. Mass Effect looks sharper while Heavy Rain seems to have better post processing like a lot of PS3 games. Those are my observations anyway.

Crysis just pushes way more higher resolution textures, normal maps and polys on the models. From a technical point of view its a no contest.

[QUOTE="DAZZER7"]

[QUOTE="BoloTheGreat"] The gameplay on the singleplayer is mindblowing though, you are not one of those blinded consoleites that goes "Waahh! Crysis was teh boring! Waaah!" Becuase it was praised accross the board for a reason, it is a freaking awesome game no matter what settings you play it on.

Crysis wars isn't as bad as people try and make out either, costom map are great fun and the community keeps on thrwoing up endless new things like mods, maps, even whole campaigns so i don't see how it has "Little re-playability".

The game plays through in an almost unique way every time, i recently watch a freind play some of it (who incedentally has barely played any PC games) and he swipes up a precision rife i didn't even know was there and starts head-shoting dudes. It's a great game for any shooter fan, infact just a couple of days ago I hosted a BBQ and before hand a few of the guys had a go on Crysis, the responce from a PS3/ KZ2 owner was at first "Narrr no game can look better than KZ" Which proply changed to "JESUS WEPT!!" :P

Also the game has north Koreans, Nanosuits and alines, how can you fault that?!

marklarmer

I know I love this ignorant argument. It's basically "she's pretty, blonde and has a big chest...she must not be very bright!"

Crysis looks so good it MUST have bad gameplay :roll:

That analogy is based on the assumption that the only people who didn't like Crysis are the ones who haven't played it, which is obviously false...not to mention the fact it more highlights your ignorance towards the opinions of people who did play it and didn't like it. Not that I'm defending the TCs somewhat warped opinion, but there does seem to be a general consensus amongst PC gamers on this board that if you didn't enjoy Crysis then you're obviously just a consolite who doesn't know how to play it properly. Whether that's true or not still won't change the fact that all these tiresome threads always end up with people being insulted because their opinions don't align with other peoples opinions.

My ignorance to other peoples opinions...eh?

I'm simply pointing out, albeit in a sarcastic way that many people (not all) assume the game has nice graphics but terrible gameplay. You see such posts all the time, you know the one-line retorts that are common in every Crysis thread lol.

Now with that said, I'm in no way dismissing those who have played the game and are critical of the gameplay, but to arbitarily declare the game has bad gameplay without any kind of objective argumentis the real ignorance here, right?

Plug a controller into Dirt2 and this game is ok... not so good and kinda boring, but plug an Xbox360 wireless wheel and turn on force feedback... this **** just got REAL! its so fun!

Fisher122

Cool, thats exactly what I was going to ask. I'm going to go download it.

The bumper cars, geez people, theres vids of fm3 doing the same things. Rail riding on each other around corners. Even a vid of Fm3 with a car going head on into a mountain at 80+ and no damage. Actually I'm still looking for a vid of fm3 that shows damage.

Remember the demo on stage at E3, the guy Tboned a car in fm3 and neither car flipped or nothing. But strangly enough I can't find that exact vid now on GS, only a portion of that vid is now on GS, not in its entirety. I mean atleast the one vid of GT5 the car door fell off and slide across the track :)

GreyFoXX4

Thats because you can turn off damage on Forza 3 like in Forza 2. However, the amount of times in Forza 2 I have been racing along on the Nissan Speedway and I have grazed the wall slightly by going into a corner too quickly and slightly oversteering. You touch the wall and bam debris flies from your can, you spin round, you certainly cannot ride walls with damage on.

The same goes for that New York circuit, the amount of times, I have over estimated the first corner, started braking way too late and hit the barrier and wrecked the car. Sometimes I've been able to limp to the pits, other times its been a race restart.

[QUOTE="Communistsheep"]

I don't care how much eye candy crysis is, it's still has a terrible online and little replayabillity. purdy graphics don't make a game good.

BoloTheGreat

Crysis wars isn't as bad as people try and make out either, costom map are great fun and the community keeps on thrwoing up endless new things like mods, maps, even whole campaigns so i don't see how it has "Little re-playability".

The game plays through in an almost unique way every time, i recently watch a freind play some of it (who incedentally has barely played any PC games) and he swipes up a precision rife i didn't even know was there and starts head-shoting dudes. It's a great game for any shooter fan, infact just a couple of days ago I hosted a BBQ and before hand a few of the guys had a go on Crysis, the responce from a PS3/ KZ2 owner was at first "Narrr no game can look better than KZ" Which proply changed to "JESUS WEPT!!" :P

Also the game has north Koreans, Nanosuits and alines, how can you fault that?!

I know I love this ignorant argument. It's basically "she's pretty, blonde and has a big chest...she must not be very bright!"

Crysis looks so good it MUST have bad gameplay :roll:

TC this is System Wars...this IS the place for everyone to come brag about their system one way or another, that is the whole point of this place to compare/discuss each system. Hermits, Sheep, Lems and Cows all do it.

[QUOTE="adamosmaki"]Pc. BTW that pc tower looks amazingunkownuser432

http://www.hitechreview.com/gaming/high-end-gaming-tower-prototype-by-bmw-group-designworks-usa-and-thermaltake/5892/

Tis a thing of beauty! I want one :D

Wow, out of those screens posted by TC, HL2 just jumps out at you. It shows how it is one game engine that has really aged well. I've always loved the water in the source engine.