ok KING_OF_CRAP i can't resist sorry but i'm the OP so i'm allowed , you are totally misunderstanding what Avatar is, you talk about the story where the story in Avatar is just an excuse to let you see what they have done, they have INVENTED A PLANET, from a single tree to animal species, they have invented a corporation with fleets and robots, they have invented a "human like" race, using revolutionary 3d technics with an outstanding realism, every frame of that movie is pure art, i've seen that 3 times and every time there's something new to see, you think you're clever because you predict the story in 2 minutes where even the most idiot in the world has done the same, your comments about the movie only demonstrate how superficially you have watched it and how blind you are.

is like people whining about crysis 1 story plot (that was not that bad imho) without realizing how excellent the game was for all of the other aspects, so excellent that still today is the most photorealistic game ever made.

Said that can you please stfu about Avatar here? go to http://www.imdb.com and write a review there and let us talk about the crysis 2 3d mode here.

i will not read any of your next reply anymore so save your time for something else

thank you

clearly you did not understand the movie if you think the anti american part was about greedy corporations. It was anti american because it attempted (BUT FAILED) to show how sweet and innocent the Indians were before we took their land. When in actuality the brutality of the Indian culture was worse than that of the United Stated, which the movie clearly did not show.

Also it attempted but still failed at showing the United states only invades countries for oil, in other words he attempted to show that the Iraq war was unjustified and we are only there for oil. Which is ****. Also invading countries for a resources like oil is perfectly reasonable to invade a country.

And just FYI The world runs on oil whether or not you like it.

And no crap that every story has been done before, but when it is as predictable as Avatar that is what tells me the movie svcked. I should not be able to figure out every character and there backgrounds, as well as the whole story within just 20 minutes into the movie.

People are just svckered into the "oooo" & "AHHHH" of the special effects (Which were not that great) and forget about the story. All anti American aside the movie was terrible. BTW I am not against anti American movies, for example I loved Full Metal Jacket.

And to finish, YES the way you articulate the language you were born to speak can make you opinion more valid than another. Having a knowledge of the language you are born to speak shows you have an education and tells the reader that you may know what you are talking about. Again that is an assumption to the reader but most of the time its true.

First: Anti-American? I would call it a slap in the face to all humanity. And I freeking LOVED it. That was what made Avatar so good. But yeah, it had OK effects and it had an old but still good story which was told in a new way, a quite interresting way, which helped make it a really good movie. I have jet to see a movie that gives me the same "Wow, that was a good movie" efffect as Avatar did.

Second:Oil a good reason to invade a country? Perhaps. But not after trying to get it peacefully ofcourse. And not if it is oil that the invaded country needs.
I can understand USA invading for example Norway to get oil if we start taking blood prices or refuses to sell it
But if we do that because we are in great need of that oil to ourself, the US should respect that.

Third: Yes, you are right about language

And so sorry for going offtopic. But I just can't resist the urge to answer things like this

Edit:
Woah, I have something ontopic too, actually

Yes, they should have made an "real" 3D mode for C2 PC with the option to use the console 3D for low-end PCs. But they didn't, so to bad for you early adopters and stop whining : )

It could have been a slap to humanity BUT considering James Cameron is a flaming democrat he naturally hates the United States, that is why i say it was anti american. You have to understand the director to understand the point he is trying make. And the US would not invade a country for oil if that country is an ally (Such as Norway) and Norway needed it. The US has never invaded a country for oil and i do not think it will ever happen.

US has SOOO much oil we would never need to invade. Unfortunately we have environmental IDIOTS who do not want to drill for oil.

..but please don't quote me on it.

Well; you really can't have the best 3D solutions real-time. Crysis 2 3D is fine, i've seen it at my friend's house, though.

yeah if you look at it for a while it look gorgeous, but it's just a matter of time to realize that there's something wrong if you are used to 3d.
any d3d game have a better 3d solution than this crysis 2 atm , even 8 years old games gives a better stereoscopic image actually.
i really don't see the point to hack nvidia 3d vision and change it to this solution, they was probably short on time to do a proper 3d for pc and they have just used the same they have used for crappy consoles, we always come back to the same problem, the same of dx11 and other matters caused by the simultaneous developing for consoles.

usually 3d is done by nvidia driver, but to get a good one with no problems the game has to be tweaked a bit from developers, if not usually shadows, motion blur, depth of field and other stuff are not rendered properly, also developers must implement a 3d crosshair, else it's just unplayable (like the first crysis), but this requires time obviously

i hope i have put this into their attention for future patches, this will not only be fixed for crysis 2, but for all future games that will use this engine, and considering the excellent work they have done i bet there will be plenty of that in the future.
I totally agree with you and I hope Crytek will cooperate with Nvidia to fully support 3D Vision (the halo on the gun and the oddly rendered objects don't look gorgeous at all), maybe with the future DX11 patch, in whatever form it comes out (I'm saying this because I guess it requires some engine rewriting). Please users, try to stay on topic if you're interested on this matter

this thread needs to be nuked with a nuclear bomb

this thread needs to be nuked with a nuclear bomb

Why? This game is supposed to be 3d compatible (that's what the box says), so there's nothing wrong in requesting better 3d support

i guess is talking about all the off-topic threads

Kudos, tigermaster, I agree let's talk about the 3D. The 3D svcks compared Aavtar the movie, Avatar the game, and pretty much every other shooter worth comparing it to using 3D software.

We were promised true 3D support and the fact is if you want a near flawless 3D gaming experience with a Crytek game then just play Far Cry with 3D vision.

So I would just like Crytek to tell us if true 3D support will be available with a future patch.

Kudos, tigermaster, I agree let's talk about the 3D. The 3D svcks compared Aavtar the movie, Avatar the game, and pretty much every other shooter worth comparing it to using 3D software.

We were promised true 3D support and the fact is if you want a near flawless 3D gaming experience with a Crytek game then just play Far Cry with 3D vision.

So I would just like Crytek to tell us if true 3D support will be available with a future patch.
the same question here...

Guess Nvidia may be able to do something about 3D in this game like they did with other non-3D Vision native apps (i.e. Darksiders), but I think Crytek should indeed cooperate. Maybe a real advanced graphics menu could help

Crytek don't care of PC
may be some later after year passed