[QUOTE="Gnr_Helsing"][QUOTE="bignice12"][QUOTE="Gnr_Helsing"]Only new standards Crysis set for FPS are graphics. What are the others? Do tell.04dcarraher
No, if you have read the reviews they are praising the game play. The whole GS review destroys the "crysis is only graphics" theory.
Qoute from the review "Crysis raises the expectations for every shooter to follow when it comes to graphics, interactivity, environments, immersiveness, AI, and gameplay. Quite simply, Crysis represents the first-person shooter at its finest, most evolved form."
Black had destructible enviroments so did Red Faction series. HL series had interactive enviroments, Far Cry was immersive, Halo series have good A.I.The gameplay in Crysis wasn't genre defining. Maybe it was the demo I played. Plan on picking it up 2moro at Gamestop, since Best doesnt get theirs until 2:00 in the afternoon.
Well I played and beaten Crysis within 6 hours on my friend's Pc. Some things have Farcry clone written all over it, some new ideas that are cool like the suit and some elements, but the game is so average to me. Story is good graphics are great if you have a pc that can play it on medium or higher. But the replay value of this game muh. And the ending is wide open for a 2nd Crysis. Aliens are easier to kill than the Koreans sometimes. Buildings/sheds fall apart as if they were made without nails. Shooting,and blowing stuff up is cool but Crysis is a FarCry Clone with a suit and aliens.
My feelings exactly. It took me 7 hours to beat on Delta difficulty. It's Far Cry with better graphics and physics, suit tricks, and North Koreans and Aliens instead of Mercs and Trigens. Far Cry was actually better in some ways - the characters and situations in Far Cry were more interesting, and the game itself had that campy humor which added to the fun. These things are missing from Crysis.
Log in to comment