no, this is not a critique thread nor a suggestion thread. This is a simple anolysis....a mere application of logic.

We know Crysis was a very good game, hell it was awesome in almost every aspect and this post is in no way aimed to diminish its accomplishments. We also all know Crysis 2 took on different directions incertain areas which have split parts of the fanbase...in particular I see a lot of back and forth is the dreaded open world VS action bubbles arguments.

Now...it is silly to argue about personal tastes but it is wrong to call Crytek "lazy" or "sell outs" for their decision to ditch the open world setting in crysis 2. Even if Crysis had been a PC only game the open world environment would have been abandoned in favor of the action bubbles setting since the reason behind it is not a purely technical one but a more artistic one.

The original Crysis came out in 07/08, it's now 2011 and crysis 2 is being released now that's a 3 years developement cycle....a cheap quick buck game (like some have called crysis 2) does not take a 3 years cycle. A quick aned cheap game does not have a 12 hours campaign mode.

But enough of that, I am digressing. What Nathan and other Crytek devs stated many times before is that in Crysis 2 they want to tell an awesome story.....argue as much as you like but an open world is setting is not yet fir for such task. Bioware is arguably one of the best storytelling studios and they know this well. Dragon age origins was in the works for 5+ years before the console version tagged along and STILL the basic idea was not to have an open world even when the game was supposed to be pc only (I could say the same about BG2....). Conversely Bethesday makes story driven RPGs too but invariably (TES...FO3) they deliver amazing open worlds but the story falls short compared to other titles because of the very nature of their setting.

Like it or not this decision was not a cop out....people should stop spouting to the dev team.

Well put.

You make some very valid points, and I am in agreement.

Very nice points

It really does tend to be linear shooters that have the best storylines. Even Black Ops had a really nice story (shame the multiplayer wasnt that great).

Open World games really stuggle to find that story element. RDR did suprisingly well. F:NV was alright.

If Crysis 2 can use both of these and do it well, we'll have a really good campaign. The storyline already looks fantastic.

Crysis was a sandbox game not an open world game, it's the same design, multiple approaches but fairly linear progression overall

Crysis was definately not open world. I could never just skip objectives. I got channeled by usually one of 2-3 semi-distinct routes from place to place where I could use the suit to... sneak up in stealth mode, pop into armor, and shoot some dudes. Originality in action. Occasionally I would snipe first, THEN stealth in, go armor and shoot some dudes. Maybe if there was a real building, I would jump on top of it, go prone, go armor, and shoot some dudes... WOW, so many choices. It was fun, but the graphics kept me going, not the gameplay. I expect a bit of a role reversal with C2, but I'm also confident that the graphics will remain eye-popping.

Or maybe sneak in a base through a poorly-defended flank, plant a bit of C4 on a watchtower, steal a truck, ram it into some koreans, blow up the watchtower, cloak and start going predator on the survivor's asses?

Or maybe sneak in a base through a poorly-defended flank, plant a bit of C4 on a watchtower, steal a truck, ram it into some koreans, blow up the watchtower, cloak and start going predator on the survivor's asses?

How often did a chance to do something REALLY unique show itself though? You could improvise whatever you wanted, but generally, it was efficient to stealth from cover to cover, hit em hard and fast, then mop up with stealth for changing cover. You may have been able to occasionally add a LITTLE flavor, but most of those chances came later in the game. Early on, at most you had a vehicle to blow up.

Edit: To be more specific, yes, there were usually some options, but I just really didn't feel the jungle and shacks really opened up the true mobility potential of the suit. There were too many positions that the best route was stealth+armor+assault rifle.

You could kick logs onto a Korean patrol in the first level. Just sayin'. In all fairness though, those posts holding the logs in are rather buggy, they don't always rip out.

Also, you could always punch down buildings on top of Koreans. Nothing like bursting the bubble of a chilling squad by bringing down the house on them. Also in the first level.

To be fair Crysis doesn't really have that much of an open world. Sure you can skin a few NK patrol check points and just swim across the sea, and you can enter an enemy base from several entrances, but most of the time the routes you can take are restricted.

Take the hostage rescue mission for example. Almost the entire base is surrounded by an impenetrable mine field, and any attempts to deactivate the minefield will most likely bring the entire NK army onto you. So the only way is through the main entrance. Once you are in there you have only two choice - sneak quietly or rise hell, which will most definitely get you killed on higher difficulties. The same goes for many other key locations.

To be fair Crysis doesn't really have that much of an open world. Sure you can skin a few NK patrol check points and just swim across the sea, and you can enter an enemy base from several entrances, but most of the time the routes you can take are restricted.

Take the hostage rescue mission for example. Almost the entire base is surrounded by an impenetrable mine field, and any attempts to deactivate the minefield will most likely bring the entire NK army onto you. So the only way is through the main entrance. Once you are in there you have only two choice - sneak quietly or rise hell, which will most definitely get you killed on higher difficulties. The same goes for many other key locations.

Actually, you can infiltrate the school and reach the hostage undetected. I did it about a week ago replaying Crysis 1 to get ready for 2. However, you can't leave until you blow up those two tanks, so it's impossible to LEAVE undetected. But there is a small patch of land on the water side of the village that does not have mines.

But overall your assessment is correct. Crysis 1 was linear, but gave you multiple ways to complete an objective. Crysis 2 just reduces the amount of boring dead-space in between objectives.

I wanted to punctualize a few things.

I agree with those who said that crysis 1 was more linear than open world games (forgive me but I am a console gamer...my experience with it is 2nd hand). The fact Crysis 2 allows one to do away with fluffy transition sequences is still a sign of a renewed focus on Crytek's behalf togive us 12 hours of progressing, well paced cinematic story. Again...not laziness but a design choice with a concrete, logical, purpose aimed to offer a better experience. Having learned from the previous experience Crytek will now give truly viable alternative to go through each bubble.

to Evildeed...your comparison is very unfair, out of context and ill conceived. Several shooters did become more linear as opposed to give you a whole level (floor) to explore like Doom would or Duke Nukem 3d or whatever but it has been since 1997 (and prior) that good shooters have adopted the "bubble" model....so yes the progression of the game flow might look more linear but the action is not and a lotof people would rather have that than something akin to what is seen in the first panel of your picture. Even games that were VERY linear took on a similar route (like GoW2) which left the level design you are showing to peculiar shooters like say the original dead space (dead space 2 became more linear but still awesome) or something inwhich backtracking is integral part of the gameplay.

I agree with most of what you say, but I think a open-world setting works just fine for storytelling. Just ask the Fallout series!

I think there needs to be a main 'path', but it needs to branch out along the way which reveals more backstory, should you choose to explore. Similar to the occasional radio you'd find early on in Crysis.

And the diagram is win, sir! Sadly, that is exactly what Black Ops campaign is like. Might as well be on-rails.

yeah....fallout....compare its storytelling to a Bioware game, which one is more focused? Which one delivers the more cinematic experience?

I am not saying open world settings prevents storytelling altogether...just saying that a "bubble" setting allows for more focus