People who say the graphics are horrible, are you and I even playing the same game or are you playing half like 1 thinking its crysis 2, i dont even understand what you are on about even in a remote sense. The game looks at least on par with crysis 1 if not slightly better with the improved lighting and shadows.

I understand there are some bugs that need to be fixed but other than that its a good game, everyone saying otherwise is just biased.

Slightly better doesn't cut it after how long it has taken and how much technology has improved. Don't know if you got the news flash, but PC Gamers were an afterthought in the whole creation of the game. PC < PS3 < X360. Half-Life 1 might have looked better. hahahah. Playing on Extreme settings, I still fail to see how this game was supposed to make my system stop in its tracks. High frame rates and max settings and still the game looks subpar to console games? ha.

PC Gamers were an afterthought in the whole creation of the game. PC < PS3 < X360. .

How does this change the fact its still pretty much the best looking game out there?

Dude. Bad Company 2 looked and played better than this heap of crap. I think the amount of people who wish they could get their money back for this game ..speaks volumes. I don't know what game you're playing. I can't take you seriously right now.

Dude. Bad Company 2 looked and played better than this heap of crap. I think the amount of people who wish they could get their money back for this game ..speaks volumes. I don't know what game you're playing. I can't take you seriously right now.

ok then get off these forums and go play bf2 thinking it looks better despite the fact it doesnt even come close, bb hf.

People who say the graphics are horrible, are you and I even playing the same game or are you playing half like 1 thinking its crysis 2, i dont even understand what you are on about even in a remote sense. The game looks at least on par with crysis 1 if not slightly better with the improved lighting and shadows.

I understand there are some bugs that need to be fixed but other than that its a good game, everyone saying otherwise is just biased.
Pi$$ ff you noob with a sh!tty computer so all graphics look the same. Buy some real **** then f*ck around with graphics and you will sh!t your pants when you realize how bad crysis 2 is.

LOL @ op... I think he's reverse trolling to garner attention. hahaha.

It's not. Crysis 1 looked better with Extreme Mod and the Ultra Texture Pack (the one that was like 4 GB or something).

Crysis 2 has really REALLY low textures. They compromise that by having "oustanding shadows and lighting". But let's face it, wherever you see great shadows and lighting, you happen to be in a small enclosed space. Even when you see "shadows" at long range objects with your binoculars, they're super pixelated. Don't believe me? Try walking towards that long range object and notice how the shadow suddenly smooths itself out. Crysis 2 cheats its shadows even on the highest setting. Crysis 1 was honest, and even more brutally honest with the Extreme mods.

Have you noticed that in the later missions (I think it's Hive, or Heart or something) you definitely have large spaces, but then there's mysteriously very few meshes with dynamic shadows?

Crysis 2 did what Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare did. Killed texture detail but made shadows and lighting really good at SHORT RANGE ONLY. No more do we have large encompassing sections like the tank mission in Crysis 1. Imagine Crysis 2 trying to render that. Just imagine it. It wouldn't run well.

People who say the graphics are horrible, are you and I even playing the same game or are you playing half like 1 thinking its crysis 2, i dont even understand what you are on about even in a remote sense. The game looks at least on par with crysis 1 if not slightly better with the improved lighting and shadows.

I understand there are some bugs that need to be fixed but other than that its a good game, everyone saying otherwise is just biased.
Pi$$ ff you noob with a sh!tty computer so all graphics look the same. Buy some real **** then f*ck around with graphics and you will sh!t your pants when you realize how bad crysis 2 is.
hmm, the game looks good for me, and bad for you, kinda makes me wonder who has the better PC here.

Slightly better doesn't cut it after how long it has taken and how much technology has improved. Don't know if you got the news flash, but PC Gamers were an afterthought in the whole creation of the game. PC < PS3 < X360. Half-Life 1 might have looked better. hahahah. Playing on Extreme settings, I still fail to see how this game was supposed to make my system stop in its tracks. High frame rates and max settings and still the game looks subpar to console games? ha.

I don't know what console games you are playing but there's nothing I've seen that looks remotely like Crysis 2 on Extreme on ps3 or xbox. To say HL1 looked better is non-sense.

From the beginning of Crysis 2's development, CryTek was screaming at the top of their lungs that their intent was to make the engine run smoother, NOT cripple any rig that runs it. So don't bich that it runs well and doesn't bog your system down. Enjoy it.

Slightly better doesn't cut it after how long it has taken and how much technology has improved. Don't know if you got the news flash, but PC Gamers were an afterthought in the whole creation of the game. PC < PS3 < X360. Half-Life 1 might have looked better. hahahah. Playing on Extreme settings, I still fail to see how this game was supposed to make my system stop in its tracks. High frame rates and max settings and still the game looks subpar to console games? ha.

I was under the impression that the whole idea of using a new engine was so that more systems could run it well. It was never intended to "make my system stop in its tracks". The only reason Crysis 1 did that was because it was so poorly optimised.

LMAO.

Hey guys, I just bought a 2011 Porsche Boxter and it's only SLIGHTLY better than the 2007 model.

makes a lot of sense imo. it also has missing paint and one wheel missing, kind of like how crysis 2 has missing elements to the game and dumbed down options.

People who say the graphics are horrible, are you and I even playing the same game or are you playing half like 1 thinking its crysis 2, i dont even understand what you are on about even in a remote sense. The game looks at least on par with crysis 1 if not slightly better with the improved lighting and shadows.

I understand there are some bugs that need to be fixed but other than that its a good game, everyone saying otherwise is just biased.

You better be careful with your optimism, since this forum has turned into a cesspool of whiners.

I love the game, my only complaints are bugs and graphical glitches which I described in my Pop ups topic on this forum. Most of the people complaining cant even think of proper tactics in SP. Same happened to Far cry 2, everyone hates this game and I tought far cry 2 was a good game.

hey OP, can I have the same drugs you're on so I can enjoy this game ?

Why is that people are not allowed to be positive about Crysis 2? Everyone who is, is being attacted instantly.

Why is that people are not allowed to be positive about Crysis 2? Everyone who is, is being attacted instantly.

i agree 100% the minute something good is said about this game everyone seems to loss it

im having fun playing it, as much as i did with part 1

i agree 100% the minute something good is said about this game everyone seems to loss it

im having fun playing it, as much as i did with part 1

X2, I could only play a few hours yesterday (a few level) but I had a blast. I'm selective with my game genre but Crysis 2 was a must for me. I so loved the first one and WH. I have a new rig since a week (2600K OC at 4.4ghz, GTX 580, 8gig of 1600 ram, 30in LG at 2560 x 1600. One reason i bought a good hi end rig was for Crysis 2... or is it to replay 1

My only bug (must the only one???) was my OC at 4.4, for fun I went back to no OC at 3.5 or so, no more bug.

I'M a flight simmer (FSX with 30 payed addon) and this game is so buggy on win7 64. FPS as low as 8 sometime.
But again, going back to 3.5ghz seem to solve everything.

Retarded Picture

That's the edition I ordered... dunno why everyone's complaining. Get a better couch? Mine's quad-core.

Never mind that the first Crysis had none of those features either.

kind of like how crysis 2 has missing elements to the game and dumbed down options.

They're just catering to the audience. I've been called a retard by a guy who can't spell, and I'm still waiting for more.

All I know is that every pc game I've ever played, I've played on the highest settings possible and haven't had any problems. I played this on the highest settings and it didn't look good at all. I played Crysis 1 again after this for a bit and it completely wowed me like the first time I played it.

I still play Crysis and Crysis: Warhead frequently. I was not dissapointed with Crysis 2 but, I was not as impressed as I thought I would be.

I play Warhead on enthusiast settings and get excellent smooth game play although the game pushes my RIG to its limits, its using everything my RIG can pump out. Crysis 2 was supposed to be the next generation game, it was supposed to be the NEW benchmark, it was supposed to be the game that would force me to justify spending a thousand bucks for 2x6990's just to play the game on low settings. WTF happened?

Now I will say this:

The game looks great and the game play is good if not better then the original. I think a lot of hard work went into making the buildings and surroundings look realistic. I think that the difference between the games accounts for a lot of the misconception. Crysis and Warhead have A LOT of wide open space play so A LOT of energy probably went into the scenery like flowers,leaves, and palm trees. Crysis 2 is set in a city so the comparison has to come from looking at the buildings and other non-living things.

Over all I think that the building comparisons show improvement but the foliage textures has defiantly decreased. Crytec and EA will have to do some serious patching to make this game what I expected.

Dude. Bad Company 2 looked and played better than this heap of crap. I think the amount of people who wish they could get their money back for this game ..speaks volumes. I don't know what game you're playing. I can't take you seriously right now.

If you have a dvd version of the game you CAN get your money back.

I still play Crysis and Crysis: Warhead frequently. I was not dissapointed with Crysis 2 but, I was not as impressed as I thought I would be.

I play Warhead on enthusiast settings and get excellent smooth game play although the game pushes my RIG to its limits, its using everything my RIG can pump out. Crysis 2 was supposed to be the next generation game, it was supposed to be the NEW benchmark, it was supposed to be the game that would force me to justify spending a thousand bucks for 2x6990's just to play the game on low settings. WTF happened?


Why the Graphics do not looks so epic is because it not a pc exclusive like C1 was. sadly the 360 is so far out of date it not even funny. You can get a pc that runs 10 times better then the 360 for 500 dollars easy. Is it the best deal? Hell No. Still anything made for the 360 will look 10 years old. Hate the 360 PoS system. The only reassion games are still using DVD is because of the 360. We should be gaming in blueray by now.

Now I will say this:

The game looks great and the game play is good if not better then the original. I think a lot of hard work went into making the buildings and surroundings look realistic. I think that the difference between the games accounts for a lot of the misconception. Crysis and Warhead have A LOT of wide open space play so A LOT of energy probably went into the scenery like flowers,leaves, and palm trees. Crysis 2 is set in a city so the comparison has to come from looking at the buildings and other non-living things.

Over all I think that the building comparisons show improvement but the foliage textures has defiantly decreased. Crytec and EA will have to do some serious patching to make this game what I expected.

Well yeah the spent most of their budget on the jungle and eviroment. The game looked wonderful but played like a ton of bricks.

Crysis 2's graphics are an illusion, really. At first, you look at the game and think "huh, this looks freakin' awesome!" Most console gamers are content with that. But the people who played the **** out of Crysis, the people who modded their rigs to be able to max it out, etc. know the difference between good graphics and bad ones. Crysis had an honest engine that stressed everything to the limits to render as much detail as possible without cutting any corners. Crysis 2 cuts a huge number of them, especially including texture detail.

tl;dr Crysis 2 looks good on the surface, but the engine running it is dumbed down and can't match the raw power of the CryEngine 2. It's like comparing a Lamborghini (CryEngine 2) to a Lexus (CryEngine 3). They both look good, but one is significantly more powerful and can do a lot more at the cost of high maintenance.

I dont think the engine itself is dumbed down honestly, i think the game was just designed around the limitations of the weakest platform making it easier to port from one system to another.

Hey, trolls --

Try turning up your settings... http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/03/22/use-console-commands-to-enable-hidden-graphic-settings-options-in-crysis-2/