PC gamer gave Crysis 2 a fair review, they gave it an 89 which made sense to me because they also gave crysis 1 a 98. They didn't say it with words, but crysis 2 is definitely a downgrade. Most reviewers are under pressure to give big games good reviews anyway. Personally I'd give it an 85, its a decent game but certainly not a great game and nowhere near the level crysis 1 and warhead were at.


Your claim about reviewers being pressured to give better scores is unproven, but if you want to go that way, you could say IGN was pressured into scoring Crysis 1 a 98. It works both ways.

Here's where people are disappointed I think. Crysis 1 was a HUGE generational leap in graphics from what came before it. Crysis 2 is not as big a leap in quality. There are technology limits and I don't think that big of a graphical leap can be made very often. However, even though IGN scored Crysis 2 lower than the first, they also state "PC players in particular are in for a treat - Crysis 2 is easily in the running for best looking game on the platform." When it was released, the leap forward was BETTER than Crisis 2. But comparing the two, the second one just looks and plays and performs better. You give it an 85, and I can accept that. It's the people that say it's **** and it's a console port that I take issue with.

Well, Ok, so even if they were strong armed into giving the two games a higher score? (which they probably weren't), Crysis still made nearly 10 points higher then Crysis 2, which was the point that you missed. Crysis>Crysis 2.

And it's so blatantly obviously a console port down to the most basic features, you really do have to be pretty blind not to see it, that or have never played a console FPS.

Proning, leaning,.


perfect example of a troll who hasn't played the game. Leaning is IN FACT in Crysis 2.

PC gamer gave Crysis 2 a fair review, they gave it an 89 which made sense to me because they also gave crysis 1 a 98. They didn't say it with words, but crysis 2 is definitely a downgrade. Most reviewers are under pressure to give big games good reviews anyway. Personally I'd give it an 85, its a decent game but certainly not a great game and nowhere near the level crysis 1 and warhead were at.


Your claim about reviewers being pressured to give better scores is unproven, but if you want to go that way, you could say IGN was pressured into scoring Crysis 1 a 98. It works both ways.

Here's where people are disappointed I think. Crysis 1 was a HUGE generational leap in graphics from what came before it. Crysis 2 is not as big a leap in quality. There are technology limits and I don't think that big of a graphical leap can be made very often. However, even though IGN scored Crysis 2 lower than the first, they also state "PC players in particular are in for a treat - Crysis 2 is easily in the running for best looking game on the platform." When it was released, the leap forward was BETTER than Crisis 2. But comparing the two, the second one just looks and plays and performs better. You give it an 85, and I can accept that. It's the people that say it's **** and it's a console port that I take issue with.

I'd still be disappointed if the graphics were identical to those in Crysis 1. A big part of my disappointment involves the linearization and general "dumbing down" of the gameplay. The large, open-world setting and environments that encouraged creative tactical thinking were removed to better suit a multiplatform game.

Rendering a huge, outdoor island like the one from Crysis would have been impossible on consoles, so the setting was changed to a city, where the draw distances were shorter and it would be less taxing than a tropical paradise full of trees and foliage and surrounded by ocean. This in turn led to a more linearized campaign (although it should not have, necessarily). The console controllers limited our control options, as crynetsecurity pointed out - we can no longer prone, the nanosuit is dumbed-down and reduced in strength, there's no dedicated grenade key, etc.

I could go on, but you should be getting a pretty good picture about why I feel this way. It's not just about graphics.

perfect example of a troll who hasn't played the game. Leaning is IN FACT in Crysis 2.


It's not the same kind of leaning that was in Crysis - it's not nearly as robust. The leaning in Crysis 2 only works on certain geometry and objects. In the original Crysis you leaned by pressing Q or E. You didn't have to find a special wall or barricade for it to work - it worked on ANYTHING. Trees, vehicles, buildings, you name it.

The fact that you say this makes me wonder if you actually have played the original Crysis. If you have, you should know immediately what he's talking about.

You can only crouch in C2, you can fully go prone in C. A step back? Yes!

Also, leaning was annoyingly overemphasized for consoleers to the extent of every time you were in cover, it would tell you to press mouse to to pop out of cover, which was actually more annoying and less streamlined then Crysis the original.

Borss, have you signed the petitions yet?

Were all arguing MOSTLY opinions here, which is akin to banging your head on the wall.

The fact that you say this makes me wonder if you actually have played the original Crysis. If you have, you should know immediately what he's talking about.


And your quote makes me wonder if you've actually played Crysis 2. Q and E are armor and cloak now. It was a design decision that I THINK is for the better.

The fact that you say this makes me wonder if you actually have played the original Crysis. If you have, you should know immediately what he's talking about.


And your quote makes me wonder if you've actually played Crysis 2. Q and E are armor and cloak now. It was a design decision that I THINK is for the better.

How does that even make sense? I described perfectly how the "lean" works in Crysis 2. But to be honest, it's more of a cover system, akin to something from Mass Effect 2. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, I just think the leaning from the original Crysis was better because I didin't have to worry about finding the canned "lean" locations.

It's not a port.

PLEASE you PEOPLE NEED TO GO RESEARCH HOW THE **** CRYENGINE 3 WORKS SHEESH!!! >_>

Rage is over.

Anyways, the game was built on every platform simultaneously. MEANING, on 360 Crysis 2 is a 360 game, on PS3 its a PS3 game, on PC its a PC game.

THE ONLY PROBLEM is that the PC version obviously utilizes exclusive features necessary. EA didn't give Crytek enough time to finish the game. SOOOOOOOOOOOOO, that's why there are patches and updates.

The whole dumbing down or worse textures....yeah, it was done to WORK on consoles. Crytek only managed to squeeze in a bit of improvement to the PC version before release (like better water, lightings, shadows, and even some better textures). It's just now, we must wait for patches and patches and patches and updates in order to have the game finished.

IN ADDITION, it seems people have found out the ability to make modded custom texture packs for more awesome textures. I'm not going to care for them since I always stick with official texture packs and updates by Crytek, but I thought I might just throw that out there.

This is a multiplatform game. Just because it works on consoles =/= port.

It's not a port.

PLEASE you PEOPLE NEED TO GO RESEARCH HOW THE **** CRYENGINE 3 WORKS SHEESH!!! >_>

Rage is over.

Anyways, the game was built on every platform simultaneously. MEANING, on 360 Crysis 2 is a 360 game, on PS3 its a PS3 game, on PC its a PC game.

THE ONLY PROBLEM is that the PC version obviously utilizes exclusive features necessary. EA didn't give Crytek enough time to finish the game. SOOOOOOOOOOOOO, that's why there are patches and updates.

The whole dumbing down or worse textures....yeah, it was done to WORK on consoles. Crytek only managed to squeeze in a bit of improvement to the PC version before release (like better water, lightings, shadows, and even some better textures). It's just now, we must wait for patches and patches and patches and updates in order to have the game finished.

IN ADDITION, it seems people have found out the ability to make modded custom texture packs for more awesome textures. I'm not going to care for them since I always stick with official texture packs and updates by Crytek, but I thought I might just throw that out there.

This is a multiplatform game. Just because it works on consoles =/= port.

Before the day 1 patch, the main menu screen on the PC version said:

"PRESS START TO BEGIN."

Please, be so kind as to tell me the location of my keyboard's start button.

It's a console port. Don't try to argue otherwise.

However, contrary to what many people on this forum will tell you, it IS possible to make a GOOD console port. Unfortunately, Crytek has (so far) missed that mark.

How does that even make sense? I described perfectly how the "lean" works in Crysis 2. But to be honest, it's more of a cover system, akin to something from Mass Effect 2. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, I just think the leaning from the original Crysis was better because I didin't have to worry about finding the canned "lean" locations.


I was being a smartass because you were doubting whether or not I played Crysis 1 because I didn't spell out the game mechanics. I like regular lean buttons too and would rather not have to find "canned spots", but I'd rather have suit modes on Q and E. Although in Crysis one, I don't remember being able to lean "up and over" like you can in the 2nd and I rather like that ability.

Were arguing in mostly opinion? Is it just opinion that you cannot go prone in Crysis 2?

Q and E are armor and cloak now. It was a design decision that I THINK is for the better.

Q and E are typical lean keys for PC FPS games, so that's not a really great design decision made by a gamer who has background in PC gaming. Perhaps whoever decided the key layout was unaware of some subtle points of PC games.

Oh SilentP.

This is a multiplatform game. Just because it works on consoles =/= port.

There seem to be far too many "compromises" made, such as textures (consoles have limited resources and can't scale as well as a PC can). CryEngine 3 when it was released looked great (like really great), that was what, almost two years ago now? I'm not seeing all of the features shown in that demo filtering down into this game (from what i've seen so far).

(rant)

Perhaps my expectations were too high, but then if my PC costs 10 x the price of a console, yeah sure my expectations are higher, i have much better hardware that isn't being used by developers hell bent on product cycles and cutting corners when releasing games for my chosen platform.

(/rant)

I know right? How dare Crytek develop 1 game universally instead of a console version. And a completely seperate PC version! WHERES MY SILVER SPOON GODDAMNIT! JEEVES!?

MAXIMUM CONSOLE

Q and E are armor and cloak now. It was a design decision that I THINK is for the better.

Q and E are typical lean keys for PC FPS games, so that's not a really great design decision made by a gamer who has background in PC gaming. Perhaps whoever decided the key layout was unaware of some subtle points of PC games.

Oh SilentP.

This is a multiplatform game. Just because it works on consoles =/= port.

There seem to be far too many "compromises" made, such as textures (consoles have limited resources and can't scale as well as a PC can). CryEngine 3 when it was released looked great (like really great), that was what, almost two years ago now? I'm not seeing all of the features shown in that demo filtering down into this game (from what i've seen so far).

(rant)

Perhaps my expectations were too high, but then if my PC costs 10 x the price of a console, yeah sure my expectations are higher, i have much better hardware that isn't being used by developers hell bent on product cycles and cutting corners when releasing games for my chosen platform.

(/rant)

You mean the Q and E keys that "lean" that no-one ever used anyway. Yes. How dare crytek remove lean!

who says no one used it? I used lean ALL the time.

Simple question, is this a watered down game thrown at the PC via CryEngine 3?

From everything i've read this isn't a heavily PC centric game but far more console gamer orientated.

...devs being lazy and not creating a game direct for PC and then dumbing it down for console gamers.



True, true, true..

I know right? How dare Crytek develop 1 game universally instead of a console version. And a completely seperate PC version! WHERES MY SILVER SPOON GODDAMNIT! JEEVES!?

Lol'd.

That isn't really what i expect. I really do not see how they simply can not make the game to it's absolute best on PC, then slowly nerf it to x y z hardware limitations for the console gamers.

It's not as though console gamers miss features they've never had is it? However nerfing the PC version is noticable for those of us who choose the PC as our game platform (a versatile platform that can be used for more than games).

I've no objection to Crytek milking the console crowd for money, none what-so-ever. I however do object to being milked along with them if the game doesn't come anywhere close to PC game standards.

Nothing i've seen in this thread indicates my observations were far off the mark, so i guess i'll take my money elsewhere. Sadly no silver spoon here, everything i've got has been hard earned. I expect devs to work hard for their money as well.

Thanks for the feedback guys.

I love how when someone doesn't agree with a review they accuse them of being payed off. All 21 metacritic reviewers and all 15 gamerankings.com reviewers were payed off? What about the games they give **** scores too? Crysis to looks better, that's a fact. You're just a sheep following the herd. You just over hyped the game for yourself and set yourself up to be let down.
Dude, the hype was freaking created by Crytek.

Look at this thread. http://www.gamesas.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=14005 Your perceived memories are overtaking reality. I do own the original. It doesn't look or play as good as the second. And the gameplay in the second is WAY more fun. It's not a console port. The PC version looks and plays a lot better. I have the xbox version also. People just have a bug up their ass because it's no longer a PC exclusive. Get over it. It's business. There's more money to be made on consoles.
Gameplay being way more fun is a matter of opinion. I, for one, do not find it fun at all. I feel that is a valid opinion as I just got a PC and bought Crysis 1 and 2 one day apart, installed both, and am finding Crysis 1 a lot more enjoyable (and no, I have not run in to any bugs at all in Crysis 2 (both SP and MP)). Damn it, Crysis 2 was so c**p that I stopped playing it halfway through. And you must have a skewed perception of graphics: "It doesn't look or play as good as the second"? What? You mustn't be playing Crysis 1 on Very High. It beats Crysis 2 by a long shot. And don't give me crap about lightning not looking as good: All you have to do is turn HDR and Bloom up excessively in the autoexec.cfg in Crysis 1 and BAM! you have Crysis 2 lighting. I grant that, yes, Crysis 1 does not play as well as 2, but that is because 2 is toned down so far that if I push two cars next to each other (both next to a tree) and explode one car, the other is not affected AT ALL and neither is the foliage of the tree. It is pathetic. And tell me why when I throw a grenade at a destroyed car, the car is not physically affected by the grenade, and why is it that when I shoot a crate only its sides are destroyed?

And if it "Looks and plays better", then explain this, f**ker: http://www.eurogamer.net/videos/crysis-2-pc-360-ps3-face-off-comparison?size=hd

Yeah, yeah, the framerate is better and the contrast slightly different, but that is all.

Your argument about it no longer being a PC exclusive and that people need to get over it, it's business, is complete BS. For one, it was said, and I quote:Nathan Camarillo says the studio hasn't "consolified" it for the new audience on the Xbox 360 and PS3. Camarillo says that Crysis 2 is a PC game made to fit on a console, not the other way round.

Speaking in a video interview with Games.On.Net, Camarillo said that Crytek wanted to bring a Crysis-like gameplay experience to consoles - something he thought that it lacked - and that fundamentally meant that the PC had to be the primary platform.
Yeah, sure dude -- our hype was totally uncalled for. A company blatantly lying to its future customers is very concerning "business".

And the reason I say that most of the trolls haven't played Crysis 2 is because they say it looks like crap, when it doesn't. They call it a console port, and if you play it on PC it's pretty clear that the PC version is superior. And they complain about missing features that aren't actually missing.

A lot of features are missing. DX11, for one, which was promised; and quality textures, too. And the BS posted in the thread you pasted is flawed. The majority of textures from Crysis 2 are terrible compared to the majority of Crysis 1 textures that are good. It's like giving someone a box of oranges, in which the ratio of good oranges to bad were, say (random numbers) 100:1, then a year later promising a better box of oranges then giving them said box which has a ratio of good oranges to bad of 1:100, then when they complain that the second box was bad compared to the first, you say "Oh, no, see, look, the first one had bad oranges as well -- you can't argue!" It's f***ing idiocy at it's maximum. And at least with Crysis 1 you could freaking add better textures. Can we do that with Crysis 2? That thread is also completely missing the point when he lists reflections. So what if Crysis 1 had them. A game sequel is supposed to be superior to its predecessor. Yet the reflections weren't fixed despite that the engine, too, is supposed to be superior.

Well, Ok, so even if they were strong armed into giving the two games a higher score? (which they probably weren't), Crysis still made nearly 10 points higher then Crysis 2, which was the point that you missed. Crysis>Crysis 2.

And it's so blatantly obviously a console port down to the most basic features, you really do have to be pretty blind not to see it, that or have never played a console FPS.
He's a troll. Also, he claims to own it on the Xbox 360.

In conclusion:

Does Borss enjoy being bent over by game devs and then being f**ked in the a*se by them with sandpaper co***ms?

If what Borss says is true, then this forum is just a massive f**kfest of trolls trolling trolls.

I found an awesome portrait of Borss, using Google Images search:



TL;DR
Borss is a god damned troll.

PS: LOL, uh Borss? You're clearly not aware of the precedents that had transpired in that thread you linked, such as all the evidence in it aside from the OP pointing in the POLAR OPPOSITE direction of the point your trying to make?

IE, evidence that is damning to the notion that Crysis 2 has higher graphics then Crysis 1.

- Low quality textures / limited graphics options (console port / CryEngine 3 limitation)
- NO DX11 (console port / CryEngine 3 limitation)

So opinions please? Is the above true?

All your points are true for Crysis 2.

BUT don't blame CryEngine 3! Crysis 2 fails badly because of it being on consoles, once a Indie PC developer gets their hands on CryEngine 3 magick will happen.

+1

I agree with RankWinner.

If the tech video of CryEngine 3 is to be believed, then CryEngine 3 is to die for.

The review sites were either paid or were reviewing it on Xbox.

The burden of proof is on you. Good luck!

Also, what's all this about Battlefield 3 being the savior of PC gaming? It's as if shooters are the only genre available to all of you. What about Bethesda games with all of its (PC-only) mods? StarCraft II plus its two expansions, Diablo III with its two expansions, MMOs...?

- Level design maybe is smaller, but it compensates in height. Each area has more layers of depth (that really sounds like inception)
- AI is magnificent, best one I've ever seen. You have to play it on the highest difficulty though
- I've heard about the low quality textures. Half the quality from Crysis 1. I don't know if this is true
- No DX11 is a serious clue for console port since xbox 360 runs on DirectX 9
- Haven't played Crysis 1, So I don't really know
- Haven't seen any map glitches.

I just finished C1 today (finished C2 sunday or so). First off, C2 plays way better and smoother, at least on my system (running C2 at 1920x1080 and extreme, C1 at 1920x1080 @ high 8x AA).
My pc is a core 2 duo E8500, GTX 460 1gig MSI oc'd, 4gigs of 800MHz ram. Definitely NOT the best system in the world by any measure, but it gets the job done. C2 looks better imo, at least while your moving and fighting stuff. If you pause, and start zooming in on every single texture, then yes C1 in Dx10 looks better. However at speed both games look very good, and C2 plays smoother.

I have had the most issues and bugs with c1. Falling through the world 20 times in the last battle on the ship, game crashing at weird times, fps drops for some weird reasons etc. The game is still a very good game though.
I haven't had ANY of those issues with C2, at all. The A.I has not improved overly much since C1. C.E.L.L sweeps are way better done by the soldiers than the KPA. I must say that the aliens interacted better with the environment in C1, unless it wasn't on purpose that the big ass flying alien machine would hide behind the bridge on the ship and sneak up slowly behind me . There wasn't anything like that in C2, although the alien grunts would storm you and try to knock you over buildings or into their commando/heavy firelines (pretty decent imo).

The atmosphere was a bit more tense in C1, at least inside the alien structure, than, f ex the fight in central station/the streets outside. However, I don't play a game like crysis to get spooked by an alien skipping away through a tunnel at the edge of my sight. I play a game like crysis to get the feel of being in an action movie, and C2 delivered that way better than C1.

All in all in my opinion, even if it might be a bit of a messy read (sorry! ), both games are very good, but C2 is more the kind of game that I like in this genre (would have, possibly, thought it better if it was a fully open NYC, but the action and the grip on me was better in C2). Bear in mind I did play and finish C2 before C1, however it also made me want to play C1 and Warhead.

Yes one of the biggest gripes is missing out on DX11 from the start. That really should have been something in from day one. No need to fret over what happened in the past, DX11 is coming, which means another SP play through. Gief!

- Gimme some C2 DLC SP storyline!