afaik it's because whilst the game is great looking, it's allso horribly optimized on higher settings-Sh1fty- wrote:
It's funny that 3 years later there's still hardly anybody that can run Crysis on max graphics.
I quite liked alot of stuff in it tbh...SamTheMan wrote:
high settings or not, crysis sucked
Last edited by FloppY_ (2010-08-07 18:32:14)
Last edited by Scratch[USA] (2010-08-13 05:25:18)
Old...
Well the only old bit is the Pinger bit, everything prior to entering Grand Central is new footage.FloppY_ wrote:
Old...
It's basically a remix ruining the "The Pinger" trailer...
Not really... I saw than in an interview ~1 month ago... I think it was on GT or IGN...M.O.A.B wrote:
Well the only old bit is the Pinger bit, everything prior to entering Grand Central is new footage.FloppY_ wrote:
Old...
It's basically a remix ruining the "The Pinger" trailer...
well since it's being developed for console kids who never played the first one...-Sh1fty- wrote:
I'm disappointed at where this is going. Crysis was about melting your PC with random objects being thrown at Koreans and epic jungle combat. Now we're getting this shitty urban combat with fugly aliens and crappy graphics (IMO).
I can't wait to get a rig up again and play the original Crysis and Warhead.
I know I'm being very judgmental for a few minutes of footage. I'm just not convinced this is Crysis.
Linear games can be a far more awesome experience than "open" games...AussieReaper wrote:
Looks very linear.
Indeed. Far Cry 2 was just boring, and it felt as if nothing was really a true gaming experience. I know that sounds lame, gay etc, but some games are good when they're designed so that the player follows the same path.FloppY_ wrote:
Linear games can be a far more awesome experience than "open" games...AussieReaper wrote:
Looks very linear.
HL2 + Episodes has proven this...
An open game can be rather pointless if you don't have a clear objective to carry out - as Kustav says aka FarCry.FloppY_ wrote:
Linear games can be a far more awesome experience than "open" games...AussieReaper wrote:
Looks very linear.
HL2 + Episodes has proven this...
Linear's generally better for the story and intensity aspects, but it depends how its executed. I do like how you can approach things differently though, action or stealth, regardless of how often the concept has been used.AussieReaper wrote:
An open game can be rather pointless if you don't have a clear objective to carry out - as Kustav says aka FarCry.FloppY_ wrote:
Linear games can be a far more awesome experience than "open" games...AussieReaper wrote:
Looks very linear.
HL2 + Episodes has proven this...
Crysis 1 suffered in the fact that it was open, and you could execute a mission a number of ways, but you were still very much boxed into a set area and could never explore the island on your lonesome and find anything worth the effort of looking for anyway.
I do enjoy linear games, Doom II is very linear yet quite brilliant.
Crysis 2 though, looks linear in the Cod4 SP style linear. Like you're getting shuffled around from one point to another and the in between is always a set path anyway.
because it's being built and marketed for consolersFinray wrote:
Why the fuck do devs release their gameplay videos from a console point of view.. I'd much rather see rapid reticule response, and better graphics, than that trailer.
Oh, I had fun with it, but I didn't play it very far or seriously. I was mostly experimenting with the engine.SamTheMan wrote:
high settings or not, crysis sucked
unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Oh, I had fun with it, but I didn't play it very far or seriously. I was mostly experimenting with the engine.SamTheMan wrote:
high settings or not, crysis sucked
unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Do that too much and they'll swarm you.