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.

- Smaller level design (console port)
- Glitchy AI + pathfinding (console port / limited resources)
- Low quality textures / limited graphics options (console port / CryEngine 3 limitation)
- NO DX11 (console port / CryEngine 3 limitation)
- Removal of certain features present in C1 such as suit modes (Console port / dumbing down)
- Map glitches (console port)

What is everyone's experience with the above? I've held off purchasing this game because it really does look like a console port to me. I can wait for BF3 and carry on playing BFBC2 (which has a lot of features C2 doesn't have) if this game isn't up to a true PC gamers level.

I'm not buying ports anymore, as much as i enjoyed C1 and Warhead, i refuse to support devs being lazy and not creating a game direct for PC and then dumbing it down for console gamers.

So opinions please? Is the above true?

Yes it's all true, it's also note worthy what they call "Cry Engine 3" is not an engine built from the ground up, but rather an "upgraded" version of Cryengine 2.


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!

C2 plays smoother because it's a much smaller game in comparison to the first two crysis. I got some midrange machines running the game on max with little or no issues. ( I think at 1440x900 resolution)

I would not pay for story because the second game simply didn't deliver on story, but to be honest neither did the first. But I feel the first game was more forgiving because of the benchmark they set with the technology at the time.

C2 plays smoother because it's a much smaller game in comparison to the first two crysis. I got some midrange machines running the game on max with little or no issues. ( I think at 1440x900 resolution)

I would not pay for story because the second game simply didn't deliver on story, but to be honest neither did the first. But I feel the first game was more forgiving because of the benchmark they set with the technology at the time.

Yes indeed, but while your playing it still gives you the illusion of being in a major city, even if you don't have the freedom to go wherever you want to. The first playthrough I didn't feel the need to go exploring.

For me its like an action movie (most fps games are like this), it has to keep you thrilled as much as possible, whilst delivering an, in the universe, believable story or acceptable at least. I liked the game as a whole, if you pick it apart (like with many top ranked action movies) you will most likely find alot of problems. I did not feel the need to go into those kinds of depths.

I have logged about 23hrs of crysis 2 playtime, most of it is SP, some is MP. What I would like to see, and what I miss is: DX10/11, and some better anticheat on MP. The reason being: So far I have been mostly entertained by the SP part of the game, whereas I can see the MP part be a very entertaining part of the game if there was some proper anti-cheat/hack in place.

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



Yes it's all true, it's also note worthy what they call "Cry Engine 3" is not an engine built from the ground up, but rather an "downgraded" version of Cryengine 2.





fixed for you

C2 plays smoother because it's a much smaller game in comparison to the first two crysis. I got some midrange machines running the game on max with little or no issues. ( I think at 1440x900 resolution)

I would not pay for story because the second game simply didn't deliver on story, but to be honest neither did the first. But I feel the first game was more forgiving because of the benchmark they set with the technology at the time.

Yes indeed, but while your playing it still gives you the illusion of being in a major city, even if you don't have the freedom to go wherever you want to. The first playthrough I didn't feel the need to go exploring.

For me its like an action movie (most fps games are like this), it has to keep you thrilled as much as possible, whilst delivering an, in the universe, believable story or acceptable at least. I liked the game as a whole, if you pick it apart (like with many top ranked action movies) you will most likely find alot of problems. I did not feel the need to go into those kinds of depths.

I have logged about 23hrs of crysis 2 playtime, most of it is SP, some is MP. What I would like to see, and what I miss is: DX10/11, and some better anticheat on MP. The reason being: So far I have been mostly entertained by the SP part of the game, whereas I can see the MP part be a very entertaining part of the game if there was some proper anti-cheat/hack in place.

Well even the DX9 release is missing features that were in the original crysis (DX9). The fact that a street lamp stops a tank while you're driving into them, or the fact I can't destroy much of my environment is something they could of done with DX9.

C2 plays smoother because it's a much smaller game in comparison to the first two crysis. I got some midrange machines running the game on max with little or no issues. ( I think at 1440x900 resolution)

I would not pay for story because the second game simply didn't deliver on story, but to be honest neither did the first. But I feel the first game was more forgiving because of the benchmark they set with the technology at the time.

Yes indeed, but while your playing it still gives you the illusion of being in a major city, even if you don't have the freedom to go wherever you want to. The first playthrough I didn't feel the need to go exploring.

For me its like an action movie (most fps games are like this), it has to keep you thrilled as much as possible, whilst delivering an, in the universe, believable story or acceptable at least. I liked the game as a whole, if you pick it apart (like with many top ranked action movies) you will most likely find alot of problems. I did not feel the need to go into those kinds of depths.

I have logged about 23hrs of crysis 2 playtime, most of it is SP, some is MP. What I would like to see, and what I miss is: DX10/11, and some better anticheat on MP. The reason being: So far I have been mostly entertained by the SP part of the game, whereas I can see the MP part be a very entertaining part of the game if there was some proper anti-cheat/hack in place.

Well even the DX9 release is missing features that were in the original crysis (DX9). The fact that a street lamp stops a tank while you're driving into them, or the fact I can't destroy much of my environment is something they could of done with DX9.

A slight loss of immersion, was alot of that in C1 too though. I had choppers fire missiles into medium sized trees and they didnt budge or even get a scratch.

Also, I felt that crysis 2 plays too much like halo. I'm essentially going from one point to another, killing aliens with one clip per alien, getting more ammo or another weapons and moving on.

Really, even the gun that shoots electric bolts reminds me of the halo plasma rifle.

The new alien design, (Completely ignoring the original.) I felt was cliche and I really preferred when they were flying robots that froze the hell out of you.

Read the reviews. All in the 90's. Don't listen to the forum trolls. Most haven't even played the game. Graphics are better than the original.
God sake Borrs stop pull sh1t here, it annoys much
visually Crysis 2 svck badly compared with Crysis 1 and it does not use huge % of CE3 capability
gamplay is svck the ballz and deeply consolisated
AI stuppid
much of things you are typing here is a bullsh1t
it is hard to explain to half-blinded man that snow is not yellow but white
get yourself to the doctor and check ur eyes

I agree the SP level design is pretty close to super mario, but that alone doesn't make this a console game. At least if I don't compare to C1. PC has always had all sorts of fps, and the first ones were exactly the HC deathmatch types. Consoles have only imitations of PC games, that are all fps's as whole.

What makes me question the PC game thing is the compatibility issues, including the lack of options.

Edit: Well, the cover system is quite console, though..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwaCQHZV41A&feature=BF&list=WLEF6864282728DA67&index=2

See for yourself

Damn.. I wonder how Crysis runs on my pc. Can DirectX 11 make these adjustments that we see in Crysis 1 possible?

IF EA **** up BF3 i think i might just throw away my PC and get a console as i will then beleive it is the end of PC gaming...

Get a console now-- you're already missing out on some very cool games. Racing/fighting games are way better on consoles. I just wish they would toss the damn trophy system already-- its so stupid and putting thousands of turds to collect throughout every game is a massive waste of development time.

IF EA **** up BF3 i think i might just throw away my PC and get a console as i will then beleive it is the end of PC gaming...

As much as it pains me to say it, I agree. In all seriousness, the only gems that brought me around to PC gaming was Crysis and the (original, not Bad Company) Battlefield franchise. Now that Crytek has made the decision to cater more toward the console audience, that just leaves DICE, and it will break my heart if they mess up BF3.

IF EA **** up BF3 i think i might just throw away my PC and get a console as i will then beleive it is the end of PC gaming...

As much as it pains me to say it, I agree. In all seriousness, the only gems that brought me around to PC gaming was Crysis and the (original, not Bad Company) Battlefield franchise. Now that Crytek has made the decision to cater more toward the console audience, that just leaves DICE, and it will break my heart if they mess up BF3.

I doubt they'll mess up BF3, but if they do, I'll just start playing more RTS and RPG games...

Crysis 2 is primarly a console game and the PC version is a byproduct.They developed it in the spare time as a timepass..

I doubt they'll mess up BF3, but if they do, I'll just start playing more RTS and RPG games...+1

Read the reviews. All in the 90's. Don't listen to the forum trolls. Most haven't even played the game. Graphics are better than the original.
does this bullsh!t helps you sleep better at night?

I'm trying to keep my head cool about BF3. There's a slim chance it will be as perfect as everyone hopes, BUT... Considering the facts like the previous "real" BF titles being rather decent and relatively unique type of a MP oriented game, the 3rd is getting an actual PC version and so on, I find it quite hard to see this game would be totally F*d up, or anything less than a decent game like it's predecessors.

C2 did everything the exact opposite. Like cutting off everything the weakest link (console) couldn't handle, cutting what made the previous titles original and awesome. Hyping and deceiving, like the BS marketing and videos with CE3 features that were cut out from the game, and so on...

Well, Even if BF3 ends up like C2, which is nearly impossible, I don't care. I play... no, I *BUY* games made with love. Games made by budding devs. On PC. You want to give up PC and go play your AAA big dollar burger games on a retro hardware DRM? Go ahead. That's what you should have done a long time ago.