http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=65705

http://www.gamesas.com/forums/topic5645/

We got this covered already. And yes, this is some pretty cool stuff. I do indeed hope it does come out, but since it's all for the army I guess not. :\

Well, obviously, this is what most of us want. Not some arcade 6 vs 6 bs. We want an Arma 2 like game in CryEngine 3. Large maps, vehicles, aircraft, ships, subs, power struggle type game.

Well, obviously, this is what most of us want. Not some arcade 6 vs 6 bs. We want an Arma 2 like game in CryEngine 3. Large maps, vehicles, aircraft, ships, subs, power struggle type game.
Well sometimes maybe a change is for good. So far Crysis 2 MP looks better then Crysis.

Well, obviously, this is what most of us want. Not some arcade 6 vs 6 bs. We want an Arma 2 like game in CryEngine 3. Large maps, vehicles, aircraft, ships, subs, power struggle type game.

Why don't you just play Arma 2 then?

Yes CE3 is amazing, but really, Crysis wasn't that fun when someone was dominating you in the aircraft (VTOL to be exact). Unless a constraint system was in place, I wouldn't like to play against someone who has a higher chance of winning because he has an aircraft.

Well, obviously, this is what most of us want. Not some arcade 6 vs 6 bs. We want an Arma 2 like game in CryEngine 3. Large maps, vehicles, aircraft, ships, subs, power struggle type game.

Why don't you just play Arma 2 then?

Yes CE3 is amazing, but really, Crysis wasn't that fun when someone was dominating you in the aircraft (VTOL to be exact). Unless a constraint system was in place, I wouldn't like to play against someone who has a higher chance of winning because he has an aircraft.
oh. my. god. finally, someone sees from my point of view, thanks sahdev. Crysis 2 multiplayer cant afford to b like crysis 1 but with better graphics. the multiplayer was frustrating, and you always died in a stupid way once or twice. crysis 2 looks more balanced and constrained, but definantly n a good way.

Hahaha! Seems like people who weren't skilled enough to play well in the original Crysis multiplayer are more thrilled to see Crysis 2 multiplayer. If vehicles are too much for you, then you should play in a map without vehicles. The option should be there. Crysis 2 removing the option only makes the multiplayer worse. Also, if you find the multiplayer in the original Crysis frustrating, then wait until you encounter the killstreak nonsense in Crysis 2 multiplayer.

Crysis 2 multiplayer may turn out to be decent, but I highly doubt it will reach the awesomeness of the original.

I won't be playing it. Its just another COD, only smaller. Hey Crytek, I don't what you guys have been doing all this time, but there's enough CODs in the world. Why don't you give us something worth calling Crysis 2?

Hahaha! Seems like people who weren't skilled enough to play well in the original Crysis multiplayer are more thrilled to see Crysis 2 multiplayer. If vehicles are too much for you, then you should play in a map without vehicles. The option should be there. Crysis 2 removing the option only makes the multiplayer worse. Also, if you find the multiplayer in the original Crysis frustrating, then wait until you encounter the killstreak nonsense in Crysis 2 multiplayer.

Crysis 2 multiplayer may turn out to be decent, but I highly doubt it will reach the awesomeness of the original.
Bad? No I wasnt bad at it. I like more condensed and more balanced, smaller places then the whole Battlefield Bad Company 2 or Battlefield in general maps where you got 3 or 5 and you got potholes of errors and places that will make your team or side either be at an advantage or disadvantage. That slight tip in the scale could make a difference in most people K/D ratio.

Also do more reading about the Killstreaks.

THEY ARE ONLY ACTIVATED BY DOG TAGS, which means you have to be moving around and cant camp like in games akin to COD or Medal of Honor.

I really dont know the whole goose of Crysis 2 MP but thats part of how the Killstreaks work.

And lastly, how could you say that? Your INFERING off of really dumb biased opnions and reads that the multiplayer will not live up. Wait till the game comes out and play the game and we will see if its "as frustrating".

I won't be playing it. Its just another COD, only smaller. Hey Crytek, I don't what you guys have been doing all this time, but there's enough CODs in the world. Why don't you give us something worth calling Crysis 2?
Nerd Rage.

Look you seen 2 maps that arent even THAT small and are huge compared to Black Ops Nuketown and other small maps.

These maps are medium sized.

Also you HAVENT tried the game. When you do then try to dismiss it as a unworthy sequel.

Also you dismiss it as since there shortening the size of MP maps the whole game is not worthy. This could be a postive outcome. It could make the game even more enjoyable.

ALSO there are AND quote me on this, 12 MAPS for MP. Whats the chances of one being a big sized map?

I've seen enough videos of it all. I get the very bad feeling that Crytek just made this to make some money. Looks like they've been working on other projects as well. This is going to be nothing more than an XBox port for the PC players, and it isn't going to do well in that market. This game was made for the XBox to make money.

I'm fine with it. But its not a game I or many other PC players are going to buy. We didn't spend a LOT of money on our PCs to play XBox games. Hopefully, Crytek will release for sale what are in those videos that were posted. And there's no reason they can't. DCS makes flight simulations for the military, and they sell them to the public as well. DCS: Black Shark, and now DCS: Warthog. It would be great for the two companies to come together on a sim. DCS has very high level flight sims. In their Black Shark sim, almost every switch on the panels are clickable.

Bad? No I wasnt bad at it. I like more condensed and more balanced, smaller places then the whole Battlefield Bad Company 2 or Battlefield in general maps where you got 3 or 5 and you got potholes of errors and places that will make your team or side either be at an advantage or disadvantage. That slight tip in the scale could make a difference in most people K/D ratio.

The maps in Crysis varied greatly in size. There were giant, large, medium, small, and tiny maps. The multiplayer in Crysis is quite balanced, actually. You're being somewhat vague, but from what I understand you're talking about important control points on maps. Yeah, it's called TACTICS. You need to prioritize and work as a team to cover key points.

Also do more reading about the Killstreaks.

THEY ARE ONLY ACTIVATED BY DOG TAGS, which means you have to be moving around and cant camp like in games akin to COD or Medal of Honor.

I really dont know the whole goose of Crysis 2 MP but thats part of how the Killstreaks work.

Killstreaks are highly unnecessary no matter how it is implemented. Sure, camping in one way may be decreased, but then there could be people who camp, wait until someone dies, then rushes to get the dog tag, if that is possible. Heck, you can still camp, you just need to find a place where people will die closer to you. In the end, you're getting rewarded for picking up a tag.

On top of that, there are loadouts, which really restrict how one plays during actual combat since pick-ups are not available and so there is even less resource management. Crysis 2's multiplayer just seems dumbed-down. Also, the game has a level-up system. These things are NEVER balanced. Players with more experience points have more options and therefore a huge advantage over others with less experience points.

And lastly, how could you say that? Your INFERING off of really dumb biased opnions and reads that the multiplayer will not live up. Wait till the game comes out and play the game and we will see if its "as frustrating".

It's called prior experience. Crysis 2's multiplayer is not original. It's quite derivative, actually. I can tell from the elements we have been shown that it will not live up to the original's multiplayer.

Yeah, so far, all I see is a COD / BF:BC2 type game with 6 vs. 6 players / no vehicles. All you can have with that is small maps. If Crysis 2 wants PC players, they're going to have to do better than that.

The only reason I would buy this, is if it has a good Sandbox Editor and I can "port" Crysis Wars over to it.

Bad? No I wasnt bad at it. I like more condensed and more balanced, smaller places then the whole Battlefield Bad Company 2 or Battlefield in general maps where you got 3 or 5 and you got potholes of errors and places that will make your team or side either be at an advantage or disadvantage. That slight tip in the scale could make a difference in most people K/D ratio.

The maps in Crysis varied greatly in size. There were giant, large, medium, small, and tiny maps. The multiplayer in Crysis is quite balanced, actually. You're being somewhat vague, but from what I understand you're talking about important control points on maps. Yeah, it's called TACTICS. You need to prioritize and work as a team to cover key points.

Also do more reading about the Killstreaks.

THEY ARE ONLY ACTIVATED BY DOG TAGS, which means you have to be moving around and cant camp like in games akin to COD or Medal of Honor.

I really dont know the whole goose of Crysis 2 MP but thats part of how the Killstreaks work.

Killstreaks are highly unnecessary no matter how it is implemented. Sure, camping in one way may be decreased, but then there could be people who camp, wait until someone dies, then rushes to get the dog tag, if that is possible. Heck, you can still camp, you just need to find a place where people will die closer to you. In the end, you're getting rewarded for picking up a tag.

On top of that, there are loadouts, which really restrict how one plays during actual combat since pick-ups are not available and so there is even less resource management. Crysis 2's multiplayer just seems dumbed-down. Also, the game has a level-up system. These things are NEVER balanced. Players with more experience points have more options and therefore a huge advantage over others with less experience points.

And lastly, how could you say that? Your INFERING off of really dumb biased opnions and reads that the multiplayer will not live up. Wait till the game comes out and play the game and we will see if its "as frustrating".

It's called prior experience. Crysis 2's multiplayer is not original. It's quite derivative, actually. I can tell from the elements we have been shown that it will not live up to the original's multiplayer.
They dont live up the original, your right, but again its something different to give a new audience and the veteran audience something to play that you could play if your 6 and yet, you cant master.

I was a avid player at smaller and slower paced games like Halo and Call of Duty. Halo is pretty balanced and the ablities, something Crysis 2 takes, makes stradgy out of something so small. You dont need to scale a map and add vehicles to get TACTICS, you just need to make something thats balanced and small, deeper with abilies and perks like the ones seen in Crysis 2.

These abilities give room to great team play, therefore not clipping Crysis MP elements.

Crysis MP was good but again not a contender with the giants of Halo and COD.

Im not saying it was bad and yes Halo and COD have faults and the Killstreaks system has its faults BUT Please dont tell me that nothing was flawed with Crysis.

Yeah, so far, all I see is a COD / BF:BC2 type game with 6 vs. 6 players / no vehicles. All you can have with that is small maps. If Crysis 2 wants PC players, they're going to have to do better than that.

The only reason I would buy this, is if it has a good Sandbox Editor and I can "port" Crysis Wars over to it.
Those arent great reasons to buy this. It just seems like you just want mods and to make mods.

Also Counter Strike is a great smaller type FPS game, and PC fans LOVE it. Team Fortesses 2 is a FPS game thats not huge but its getting hell of a lot love. Also NEITHER have vehicles. Still one of the most popular games in Steam.

Yeah, so far, all I see is a COD / BF:BC2 type game with 6 vs. 6 players / no vehicles. All you can have with that is small maps. If Crysis 2 wants PC players, they're going to have to do better than that.

The only reason I would buy this, is if it has a good Sandbox Editor and I can "port" Crysis Wars over to it.
Those arent great reasons to buy this. It just seems like you just want mods and to make mods.

Also Counter Strike is a great smaller type FPS game, and PC fans LOVE it. Team Fortesses 2 is a FPS game thats not huge but its getting hell of a lot love. Also NEITHER have vehicles. Still one of the most popular games in Steam.

Yes, for people who don't have modern computers.

Yeah, so far, all I see is a COD / BF:BC2 type game with 6 vs. 6 players / no vehicles. All you can have with that is small maps. If Crysis 2 wants PC players, they're going to have to do better than that.

The only reason I would buy this, is if it has a good Sandbox Editor and I can "port" Crysis Wars over to it.
Those arent great reasons to buy this. It just seems like you just want mods and to make mods.

Also Counter Strike is a great smaller type FPS game, and PC fans LOVE it. Team Fortesses 2 is a FPS game thats not huge but its getting hell of a lot love. Also NEITHER have vehicles. Still one of the most popular games in Steam.

Yes, for people who don't have modern computers.
In hard economic times I doubt most are thinking, LETS GET A 1000 dollar gaming PC!

Also my friend runs a Dual Monitor setup filled with a computer that costs as much as a Super Computer, yet all he runs is TF2 and Half Life 2 over Garrys Mod.

Well, that doesn't say much for his intelligence. I used to play all those games too, but then I bought a better computer and moved on to better games / sims. And hey, if your a gamer, you'll eat cardboard to save up for a better computer. The flight sim fanatics are the worst, with their custom pits and $500 dollar joysticks.

Crysis Wars was good, but it could be better. It seems to me, Crytek is really only interested in making as much money as possible off this next game, hence the XBox / PS3 thing. This game really wasn't made for a PC, only as an afterthought. Its what us PC gamers call a "port", no matter how Crytek tries to spin it.

Well, that doesn't say much for his intelligence. I used to play all those games too, but then I bought a better computer and moved on to better games / sims. And hey, if your a gamer, you'll eat cardboard to save up for a better computer. The flight sim fanatics are the worst, with their custom pits and $500 dollar joysticks.

Crysis Wars was good, but it could be better. It seems to me, Crytek is really only interested in making as much money as possible off this next game, hence the XBox / PS3 thing. This game really wasn't made for a PC, only as an afterthought. Its what us PC gamers call a "port", no matter how Crytek tries to spin it.
To your first paragraph: The dude loves those games and doesnt care for games that are only visually appealing. He loves Quake style shooters.

Also Gamers, yes, but most wouldnt. I give you this, PC gamers who have had the chance to work with a great compelling rig will make you want to eat cardboard so you could keep it up to snuff.

But a lot of gamers these days are those who either play casual games or console gamers. So they rather buy a console then just buy a few games a year which the average homeowner could do.

Also Crytek is moving on. Activision is looked at like egotiscal assholes but they are on Forbes List as one of the smartest companies around. Crytek wants more people to know what Crysis is. When Crysis first came out, I thought of it as a benchmark. After playing it, a tad bit, I have found out why it got so much buzz to Pc gamers. BUT Console gamers who I tell "Hey you need to get Crysis 2!" They say, "WTF is Crysis? Is that that one **** game?"

Also it wasnt one person. I had to show at least most of my friends who arent PC gamers the beauty of Crysis 2 before they started to think of it as a good game.

My friend is buying the game because he loves COD and Halo and Crysis 2 MP seems like his alley.

Crytek is trying to juggle two audiences, two different demons, the MP and SP.

Plus Crytek wants to do the Console Audience what it did with the PC audience with Crysis. I think they will start showing off more maps and modes that are more for the PC audience.

Just wait. I think you guys are dismissing Crytek as a dying breed.

A Squaresoft thats turning into a SquareEnix.

Just wait. I think you guys are dismissing Crytek as a dying breed.


We are. They're going backwards.

Just wait. I think you guys are dismissing Crytek as a dying breed.


We are. They're going backwards.
You dont know that lol. Your infering from looks.

Whats that old saying? Video is everthing?

It might look better on the PC, but the 6 vs 6 / no vehicles just says it all.

Whats that old saying? Video is everthing?

It might look better on the PC, but the 6 vs 6 / no vehicles just says it all.
Video isnt everything.

I bought MW2 because it looked good. Turns out it was **** and utter giant dissapointment. But guess what I did? I looked at all the gameplay videos and i found it looking up to snuff.

Again Infering is the word your using. But even some of your points make me thinking even infering isnt what your doing.

They dont live up the original, your right, but again its something different to give a new audience and the veteran audience something to play that you could play if your 6 and yet, you cant master.

I was a avid player at smaller and slower paced games like Halo and Call of Duty. Halo is pretty balanced and the ablities, something Crysis 2 takes, makes stradgy out of something so small. You dont need to scale a map and add vehicles to get TACTICS, you just need to make something thats balanced and small, deeper with abilies and perks like the ones seen in Crysis 2.

These abilities give room to great team play, therefore not clipping Crysis MP elements.

Crysis MP was good but again not a contender with the giants of Halo and COD.

Im not saying it was bad and yes Halo and COD have faults and the Killstreaks system has its faults BUT Please dont tell me that nothing was flawed with Crysis.

You're a fan of Halo. It all makes sense now. Halo is a slow dumbed-down pile of crap with very few options. Crysis multiplayer is several thousand levels ABOVE trash like Halo and Call of Duty. I never said tactics only came from large levels and vehicles. If you didn't svck so hard at Crysis, you'd have realized that there is a lot more to the game.

Every game has faults, but the strengths of Crysis far outshines its weaknesses, unlike crap like Halo which is just mediocre simplistic garbage. The killstreak system in Call of Duty is absolutely horrible. Automatic rewards for killing multiple people in a row is an incredibly stupid idea. If you can kill that many people in a row then you don't need any more help.

Can't you guys have a conversation without calling each other names and constantly badgering about each others intelligence/experience?

We already have a thread on Realtime Immersive's work as linked in the second post.

/closed