I sure modes with vehicles will come latter, because so many people working on multiplayer of Crysis 2. 6 modes in multiplayer is not too much at all, not too much to kill Halo(hehe) yes? DLCs for must be truly awesome. IMHO.

It's a game for consoles,what do you expect?

Maps are probably tiny as well.Cod,with built in cheats(dumb nano suit)

It's a game for consoles,what do you expect?

no need to insult console players intelligence. Make a pc game, let console players see what it looks like and they'll play it if they want to. It'd actually rest quite well with most console players, as most of them don't want watered down crap either.

Unless you're chasing after the teen bandwagon

Quite frankly I see no issue. Crytek seems to be doing the right thing by lowering the player count, especially because they are going multiplatform. It is a good move to make the game more familiar to people first before jumping to something else. If you just throw large amounts of players in just because you can you get the dreaded "MAG" effect, where the game is cool, but isn't loveable. Now if they make a Crysis 3 then I can see them going big because they'll know what to do and what not to do for all platforms collectively.

The original crysis mp worked, and it worked well. When you already have something going for you, don't change the game plan. Add to it. I really enjoy the multiplayer right now. Many others do. Listen to the players, not the publisher. In the end the publisher makes more money so they're happy also. (Even if it doesn't seem like now)

The original crysis mp worked, and it worked well. When you already have something going for you, don't change the game plan. Add to it. I really enjoy the multiplayer right now. Many others do. Listen to the players, not the publisher. In the end the publisher makes more money so they're happy also. (Even if it doesn't seem like now)
I personally don't know how fun Crysis Wars is but it seems that console gamers tend to play and prefer smaller match sizes, though there are outliers such as BFBC2 which flourish. However I'm sure the decision to downsize was half trying to make a more action packed experience and half resolving console limitations. Though I'm sure consoles may be able to handle slightly more strain than what Crysis 2 can dish out, I bet Crytek is just being sure there isn't any room for unenjoyable error.

You talk about making the game more familiar before jumping to unknown territory, yet that is exactly what Crytek has done!

They have gutted this game from 16on16 large scale multi-environmental vehicular multiplayer to a 6on6 fragfest in the inner-city.

You talk about making the game more familiar before jumping to unknown territory, yet that is exactly what Crytek has done!

They have gutted this game from 16on16 large scale multi-environmental vehicular multiplayer to a 6on6 fragfest in the inner-city.
Right which comes back to my point. At least on the console side of gaming people are more familiar with small scale shooters. I understand people's disapproval (I too wished that they could have met a middle ground between consoles and PC) but since that didn't happen I looked at the bright side of things. The only place in New York that would be viable for large scale combat is Central Park, and who knows maybe they have a MP map for that already, and if not here's a hint Crytek.

Translated: Why argue about the Multiplayer features when its already been finalized by Crytek Uk. This thread was made during over-active times.

What? Finalized? There's still 3 months until release!

I don't like 6vs6 multiplayer but... maybe I will get used to it.

If I am correct there are 6 Multiplayer modes and only 2 were shown.I think the player count could be game specific.If power struggle returns then expect a full 12 on 12 assault ,which will be fun and chaotic.So totally we have Instant Team Action,Alien Crash Site......Instant Action and Power Struggle might return.I am curious about the other game modes....I hope it has kill streak like Medal OF Honor

familiar is boring, shake things up instead of chasing the money cow. It's one of the reasons the MMORPG genre has been so stagnant (aside from a few games like guild wars) since the introduction of WoW, everyone wants the same slice of the pie by remaking the pie people already play (well...eat).

Crytek, if you want to beat cod, don't copy cod, be your own game and gamers will then respect it. As it is, crysis 2 will probably be regarded as a game to coddy for halo players and too halo-ey for cod players, and too crap for other players who don't like the other two games.

familiar is boring, shake things up instead of chasing the money cow. It's one of the reasons the MMORPG genre has been so stagnant (aside from a few games like guild wars) since the introduction of WoW, everyone wants the same slice of the pie by remaking the pie people already play (well...eat).

Crytek, if you want to beat cod, don't copy cod, be your own game and gamers will then respect it. As it is, crysis 2 will probably be regarded as a game to coddy for halo players and too halo-ey for cod players, and too crap for other players who don't like the other two games.
CoD shouldn't be brought into this to begin with. Just because an apple and a tomato are both round and red, doesn't make them the same. My point is there is a very visible line between familiarity and completely copying a game. Crysis 2 may have similar player counts to CoD but by all means has no gameplay elements that scream CoD. I've said this before but people, no matter what system, should look past the few "CoD" like parts of the game and look at the many Crysis defining elements.

The ability to change suit modes, and run around a bit better through the map. Essentially all the rest is the cod formula we know and loathe.

FPS's have fell into the same trap as MMO's. One product did well, so all companies try making that product + a feature or two. It fails. The next MMO that will be huge is guild wars 2, and that is vastly different in play style (within the realms of still being a MMORPG) to WoW. The next big FPS will be radically different from CoD. Crysis 2 is CoD + one or two features.

There isn't very much the guys at Crytek can work with if they hope to appeal to the new crowd of console gamers. Still I see a large difference between CoD and Crysis 2.

1. The Nanosuit - It goes without saying that the Nanosuit will make for some interesting and more tactical firefights, from the looks of it you have to use your powers at the right time and makes less running and gunning invincibles.

2. The Maps - From what we've all seen so far from multiplayer, Crytek seems to like multilevel based maps. CoD is mostly a flat map with a few buildings and sometimes a single area set much higher above the map. The Rooftops map from Crysis 2 looks like a cleverly designed dynamic multilevel map where there are many areas above and below the player, where they can ambush or be ambushed.

3. Suit Modules - As much as people want to say that these are just "CoD perks" I see a wholes different title. I think these are more stylistic enhancements based on your style of play. CoD perks drastically change the way a class handles and so far the suit modules look to have a lesser effect on guns than CoD and have a more purpose based effect than CoD perks.

4. The Graphics - This may not be a multiplayer specific point but it needs to be said. CoD graphics are sub-par at best and it boggles my mind at how little the series has changed visually since CoD 4. Crysis 2 on the other hand looks beautiful and with an emphasis, the graphics are stunning and will most likely leave people coming back just to sight see (easy targets =])

5. More Objectives - CoD may have objective based gametypes but let's face it, people mostly care about kills. Considering this game has an EA mark on it I'm sure it has had some influence from the Battlefield series and hopefully they make some great objective based gameplay.

6. More Elements - With suit powers, unique gun attachments (ie. Decoy Projector), multiple elevations on a single map, and possibly vehicles (any confirmation on land based vehicles? I know piloting air vehicles are out) there are simply many more things to do and worry about. In CoD the only real annoyance are horribly imbalanced weapons and lag from terrible hosts.

7. Iconic Locations - CoD is riddled and cursed by nameless generic wargrounds where people feel no connection to, detracting from the overall immersive experience. Crysis 2 features maybe the most well known US city. Most people don't even have to know the name of some buildings to recognize them and in my opinion will make players feel more inclined to play.

These may only be a small amount of defining differences but overall these drastically change how a game looks and feels. Crysis 2 doesn't seem to be shaping up to be a CoD clone, it looks more like a nice and fresh break from the oh so generic shooters we hate. Honestly I think people are so tired of generic games that they nitpick at even the smallest hint, but I think that the new outweighs the old and immensely outweighs the generic.

6v6 on PC? You're kidding? See this is what drives users to pirate games. I'm going to do the right thing and buy the game and play single player but as for MP I'm not going to support it, I'll stick to BFBC2 until Battlefield 3 comes out. I just hope the PC campaign isn't linear and one directional like all console games.

6v6 on PC? You're kidding? See this is what drives users to pirate games. I'm going to do the right thing and buy the game and play single player but as for MP I'm not going to support it, I'll stick to BFBC2 until Battlefield 3 comes out. I just hope the PC campaign isn't linear and one directional like all console games.
I would like to start off saying that I play on both my Playstation 3 and my PC. Disregarding exclusive games, the increase in the number of players on PC compared to consoles are negligible. I have to say though, console games aren't all linear and there are many more PC games that are linear. Also I don't want to sound like I'm on the attack, but if you buy their game, whether you play online or not, you are indirectly supporting their multiplayer because you don't have to pay to play online.

6v6 on PC? You're kidding? See this is what drives users to pirate games. I'm going to do the right thing and buy the game and play single player but as for MP I'm not going to support it, I'll stick to BFBC2 until Battlefield 3 comes out. I just hope the PC campaign isn't linear and one directional like all console games.
I would like to start off saying that I play on both my Playstation 3 and my PC. Disregarding exclusive games, the increase in the number of players on PC compared to consoles are negligible. I have to say though, console games aren't all linear and there are many more PC games that are linear. Also I don't want to sound like I'm on the attack, but if you buy their game, whether you play online or not, you are indirectly supporting their multiplayer because you don't have to pay to play online.

lol I'm going to start off by saying when they see dwindling numbers on their servers thats considered unsupportive. I'm all for supporting Crytek but not the MP and thats what I'll be doing. And I play 360, PS3 and PC and I have to say that most PC games are not as linear as consoles and have way more options. I know this because I use my brain.

6v6 on PC? You're kidding? See this is what drives users to pirate games. I'm going to do the right thing and buy the game and play single player but as for MP I'm not going to support it, I'll stick to BFBC2 until Battlefield 3 comes out. I just hope the PC campaign isn't linear and one directional like all console games.
I would like to start off saying that I play on both my Playstation 3 and my PC. Disregarding exclusive games, the increase in the number of players on PC compared to consoles are negligible. I have to say though, console games aren't all linear and there are many more PC games that are linear. Also I don't want to sound like I'm on the attack, but if you buy their game, whether you play online or not, you are indirectly supporting their multiplayer because you don't have to pay to play online.

lol I'm going to start off by saying when they see dwindling numbers on their servers thats considered unsupportive. I'm all for supporting Crytek but not the MP and thats what I'll be doing. And I play 360, PS3 and PC and I have to say that most PC games are not as linear as consoles and have way more options. I know this because I use my brain.
I also use my brain, no need to insult my intelligence, I never insulted yours. Maybe it is my personal selection of games but currently I have more non-linear games on my PS3. I know that there are more popular open world games on the PC but those a few and far between. The only game I can think of right now that is a first person shooter and is truly non-linear is ArmA 2. I don't think the Crysis 2 multiplayer will dwindle, I think it flourish, but the point I was making is that once you buy the game you have paid Crytek and not much you do stops that from happening. Let's say we both wait until a possible demo or beta comes out (has there been one already?) and then make judgments on how 6v6 turns out. Hopefully I'm right and they do something innovative with the small numbers.

A little too late to reply but I'll do it anyway. Regarding Comfy's last post on page 32.

Familiar is boring? I disagree, look at Perimeter, the original was an unqiue RTS experience, the second was a complete disaster of a game (80% of the original features removed and the game feels like the average game with no brain usage). My point is that using a feature that people like will be better than integrating new features that you aren't sure that people will like.

A little too late to reply but I'll do it anyway. Regarding Comfy's last post on page 32.

Familiar is boring? I disagree, look at Perimeter, the original was an unqiue RTS experience, the second was a complete disaster of a game (80% of the original features removed and the game feels like the average game with no brain usage). My point is that using a feature that people like will be better than integrating new features that you aren't sure that people will like.

Then we may as well give up on gaming and go and all go watch x-factor. Better to try and fail then to never try at all. If no-one innovates or even evolves anything we may as well just all die right now, since there's no point being here apart from to exist.

Comfy the only real element of the game they are making familiar to players are the game sizes. Yes, that does effect how the game plays overall but there is plenty of innovation along next to it. What Crytek is doing is creating a gamespace that people recognize to showcase everything that they won't. A sort of ease in process.

That would seem okay, if you were playing with a small group of friends and not a major fan community. !!!

Really only 6v6 ya cant bump it up to say 8v8