I know i cant be the only with this on his mind. 1.9 looks to be GREAT with new textures as well as DX11 features. But what about distruction? Trees, small buildings, and even windows are NOT destructable! It already looks like the new DX11 patch will start putting loads on computers, so why not add a little bit more load for those who have the ability to handle it? I want to be able to destroy trees and at the very least the glass on the buildings.

no one stopping you from going out and making your own video game with destruction, so why dont u go do that then? with all this supposed knowledge you have about video games why arent u? yea thought so, u too stupid to, have fun sitting in your basemant doing nothing moron while rest of us have fun playing c2

no one stopping you from going out and making your own video game with destruction, so why dont u go do that then? with all this supposed knowledge you have about video games why arent u? yea thought so, u too stupid to, have fun sitting in your basemant doing nothing moron while rest of us have fun playing c2

He/she politely asked why there is no destruction and you come here hate. You are a **** douche.

Also the guy has a point, crytek has already showcased crysis 2's destruction. The engine is capable(well, duh). They only took it back because of the console versions.

no one stopping you from going out and making your own video game with destruction, so why dont u go do that then? with all this supposed knowledge you have about video games why arent u? yea thought so, u too stupid to, have fun sitting in your basemant doing nothing moron while rest of us have fun playing c2

lol?

Yea I miss the Crysis's destruction, it was fun blowing up things. It would be fun if Crytek or some modder can release a map featuring some heavy physics . Maybe an island like the original for example .

no one stopping you from going out and making your own video game with destruction, so why dont u go do that then? with all this supposed knowledge you have about video games why arent u? yea thought so, u too stupid to, have fun sitting in your basemant doing nothing moron while rest of us have fun playing c2

Your logic fails at multiple points. Makes you look stupid.

I know i cant be the only with this on his mind. 1.9 looks to be GREAT with new textures as well as DX11 features. But what about distruction? Trees, small buildings, and even windows are NOT destructable! It already looks like the new DX11 patch will start putting loads on computers, so why not add a little bit more load for those who have the ability to handle it? I want to be able to destroy trees and at the very least the glass on the buildings.

well the small trees do break and fall over, objects do fly around when shot at, the glass on the buildings do break and shatter if you shoot it or run through it, the cement around pillars and barriers do destruct and break apart, cars blow up and fall apart when you shoot them. and signs blow off when you shoot them. so there is alot of destructability, its just different. cities have more solid structures than huts in the jungle. yeah i agree more destructability would always be better, but crysis 2 desturctabliity is as good as any game i seen.

What kind of destruction did make Crysis 1 so sweet? The only destructible object unique to the crysis universe was the shacks, but I don't think you can find such in New York.

It was real great run into shacks with max speed holding an oil barrell, but the effect, I believe, would in real life (too) be vastly different with a concrete wall.

And as a fair comment, you could not smash concrete structures in Crysis 1 either.

no one stopping you from going out and making your own video game with destruction, so why dont u go do that then? with all this supposed knowledge you have about video games why arent u? yea thought so, u too stupid to, have fun sitting in your basemant doing nothing moron while rest of us have fun playing c2

Oh shut your damn trap

http://crytek.com/games/crysis2/overview > Videos

PROCEDURAL DESTRUCTION! RIGHT THERE! Can you read? It's supposed to be included, and it's supposed to be one of the shinning points of the CryEngine, that's what made it soooo much more better that the Frostbite 1 engine when it come out for BC1.

Hey wasn't BC1 a console exclusive? o_0

really....as good as any game you have seen.....funny..you have not played bfbc2 huh ?.... let's see craters in the ground (with c4, hand grenades, tanks,choppers, rpgs, at4s). blow up bridges, buildings (i mean level the structure/building to the ground k) take whole chunks out of a building leaving a huge hole. .50 cal does this as well plus grenades and 40mm nades. at what point do you think c2 compares ? please do tell.

i played c2 last night and was bored after 10 mins. Its the same as MW2, except way less perks and stuff to choose from. You say, well you have cloaking..yeah and everyone knows where all the hiding spots are by now.

C2 looks somewhat nice. But it is just a console corridor port game. most of us thought c2 would be an open world like c1, but i dont believe they ever said it would be. i personally think they figured fans would buy it just because of c1 game design. i did. i should have waited. however, EA gladly offered me another game or my money back. Money back and i still have the game. Maybe the dx11 will make the single player a little better. But really it's just a repetition just like MP.

Hey wasn't BC1 a console exclusive? o_0


Yes, but, comparisons beging on what engine does destruction better. My vote goes for CryEngine since it's not "Animated" Like on Frostbite 1, 1.5, a 2. CryEngine's destruction interacts with the environment while Frostbite's just does a smoke and mirror vanishing act.

I never really got the appeal with destruction. Sure I would like if trees fell, or something along those lines, but games like for example Battlefield 3 are just doing it way to exessivly I believe....

I never really got the appeal with destruction. Sure I would like if trees fell, or something along those lines, but games like for example Battlefield 3 are just doing it way to exessivly I believe....

The appeal to destruction is the reality aspect. With todays technology people want to see more and more real enviroments. Having destruction in a place like NYC would be amazing. If someone is being a chicken **** hiding behind covor (whether it be AI or online) i want to be able to demolish that cover and get to him.

most of us thought c2 would be an open world like c1.

Crysis 1 was never open world. It was also a corridor shooter, seeing as you were forced to traverse this "open world" in a choice of narrow corridors, with the odd tiny field. Sure, the world was all rendered in real time, but you couldnt just run off without being killed by super korean battleships, or limited by cliffs. Arma 2 + Xpacks is open world, Crysis/BF/Cock of Doody are not.

EDIT: by BF, i am of course referring to bad company series. The battlefields were open worlds on smallish maps.

Destruction in C1 ? Its been a year I've played this but as far as I recall, there is equivalent destruction in Crysis 2

C1 - Baracks made of metal plate walls (its not even destruction, its object movement), breaking trees and exploding cars

C2 - "Concrete stands" in the streets, Benches , Police Barriers, some Containers deformation, exploding cars (should I say with way better lightning effects)

All this to say; no Breaking trees in C2? Who cares, stop the whining

most of us thought c2 would be an open world like c1.

Crysis 1 was never open world. It was also a corridor shooter, seeing as you were forced to traverse this "open world" in a choice of narrow corridors, with the odd tiny field. Sure, the world was all rendered in real time, but you couldnt just run off without being killed by super korean battleships, or limited by cliffs. Arma 2 + Xpacks is open world, Crysis/BF/Cock of Doody are not.

EDIT: by BF, i am of course referring to bad company series. The battlefields were open worlds on smallish maps.

Crysis 1 was not leiner.

Destruction in C1 ? Its been a year I've played this but as far as I recall, there is equivalent destruction in Crysis 2

C1 - Baracks made of metal plate walls (its not even destruction, its object movement), breaking trees and exploding cars

C2 - "Concrete stands" in the streets, Benches , Police Barriers, some Containers deformation, exploding cars (should I say with way better lightning effects)

All this to say; no Breaking trees in C2? Who cares, stop the whining

LOL better lighting LOL. the lighting in C2 is a joke!

Crysis 1 had ONE way to go. i couldnt turn around and run the other way around the island if i felt like it, the long way to the objective. therefore its linear, because there is one path.

Crysis 1 had ONE way to go. i couldnt turn around and run the other way around the island if i felt like it, the long way to the objective. therefore its linear, because there is one path.

You clearly do not understand what linear is. Not having the ability to not run around an island is TOTTALY irrelivent to whether a game is linear. most of the times you could follow the trail or not, you could take a car or run, You could do this objective first or this one, you could do specific objectives in whatever order you wanted too. That is linear, which crysis 1 had.

All of those things you mentioned, you can do on Crysis 2. So therefore crysis 2 is not linear. You cant have it both ways.

lin·e·ar/?linē?r/Adjective


1. Arranged in or extending along a straight or nearly straight line: "linear arrangements".

2. Consisting of or predominantly formed using lines or outlines: "simple linear designs".

Crysis 1 first mission

Land - meet psycho, find dead guy, switch off jammer, head to outpost

Crysis 1 first mission 2nd attempt

(see above)


its the same everytime. BECAUSE ITS A STRAIGHT LINE AND DOES NOT DEVIATE, except for minor changes which the definition of linear accepts.

Now if it were grand theft auto, or arma 2, i could simply wander off and do my own thing, any bunch of objectives any time anywhere. you simply CANNOT do that in crysis 1, because it is the same everytime, because its a linear chain of objectives, through a linear design of corridors leading to a single point.

All of those things you mentioned, you can do on Crysis 2. So therefore crysis 2 is not linear. You cant have it both ways.

LOL no you cant.

No? you dont have multiple ways to approach an objective? that was pretty much the extent of non-linear in crysis 1. crysis 2 has the same options : Do i go left, take the high ground? do i take that sewer? do i run down the middle of the street? do i snipe from the building? maybe shoot the guys out of the car and take that? what am i missing here, that i can do in crysis 1 that i cant in crysis 2? because you cant leave the path in crysis 1 either because all there was is the path. a whole island, you can only follow a sliver of it because its a PATH.

No? you dont have multiple ways to approach an objective? that was pretty much the extent of non-linear in crysis 1. crysis 2 has the same options : Do i go left, take the high ground? do i take that sewer? do i run down the middle of the street? do i snipe from the building? maybe shoot the guys out of the car and take that? what am i missing here, that i can do in crysis 1 that i cant in crysis 2? because you cant leave the path in crysis 1 either because all there was is the path. a whole island, you can only follow a sliver of it because its a PATH.

there were about 2 or three spotes were you really had an option in C2. and no Crysis 1 you could go FAR off the path. I have done it a few times.