Tearing apart a sci fi video game story, while drunk, before writing a paper involving six. You cannot get more bro than this.

Oh man, I can't believe I wrote this thread while drunk.


Thanks man! But I have a **** hangover now. The essay was sh it, the six was great, but now my head hurts like no other.

In Crysis 1... no character knew what happened...in Crysis 2 there is always someone to explain...
Crytek should have let us discover the story with "finesse".
I remember in Crysis 1 with nomad when you discover the alien ship..it was kinda surprising and well done!

crysis 2 is a reboot of the series

http://www.g4tv.com/videos/46829/E3-201 ... quality=hd

they keep some of the plot from the first game but changed most of it for the ps3/360 kids to make it easier to understand

And dont forget that this is few years into the future and maybe those aliens answered the distress call and came to help?

I wouldn't count on it. The Triangulum Galaxy (M33) is 3 million ly from Earth. So it would take 3 million years for the signal to reach the galaxy and then it would take them 3 million years to actually go to Earth (given that they can travel at light-speed!)

And dont forget that this is few years into the future and maybe those aliens answered the distress call and came to help?

I wouldn't count on it. The Triangulum Galaxy (M33) is 3 million ly from Earth. So it would take 3 million years for the signal to reach the galaxy and then it would take them 3 million years to actually go to Earth (given that they can travel at light-speed!)

NOTE: Sci-Fi does not always follow the rules of physics.

they keep some of the plot from the first game but changed most of it for the ps3/360 kids to make it easier to understand

Yet many people in the PC section seem to be unable to understand a range of plot ideas...

Not trying to be a fanboy but if this game was pc exclusive i'm pretty sure the story would have mad a lot more sense, they could go on from crysis 1 while now they had actually to do some kind of restart so console people who didn't play nr1 can follow the story line.

Crysis 2 and crysis 1 are like farcry and farcry2.I dont understand why CELL hunts prophet.Crynet is the developers of nano suit. They can create hundreds of nano suits instead of hunting down prophet.Also i dont understand why the Manhattan virus cant affect the CELL soldiers(they dont wear nano suit.).The character name prophet is the only thing common between crysis 1 and 2.

At the ending of C2 it tells you why the aliens are red, grunts kinda style.
SPOILER
Well, in crysis 1 remember when you find the big blue alien base kinda thing? In the end of crysis 2 prophet tells you that there was also one of theso in New York, but a red one, and there are also **** tons of other bases around the world probably each one with diffrent alien type.

Still it doesn't explain what the **** happen to all theso 999999999 blue flying aliens.

Crysis2 = Deusix2. Completely ***ed up story, gameplay, and scenery. Thank you consoles

Morgans a dike smoker that's why. He may as well hook up with Michael Bay for Transformers 4 or something.

Crysis 2 and crysis 1 are like farcry and farcry2.I dont understand why CELL hunts prophet.Crynet is the developers of nano suit. They can create hundreds of nano suits instead of hunting down prophet.Also i dont understand why the Manhattan virus cant affect the CELL soldiers(they dont wear nano suit.).The character name prophet is the only thing common between crysis 1 and 2.

LOL what? have you not played the game at all or just played it and not pay attention to not 1 thing that has been going on? CELL is obviously working for hargreave. hargreave wanted that specific suit back and hell even in the prophet trailer prophet himself said hargreave didnt expect to find alcatraz.

and lol crysis has nothing in common but prophet? what? tara strickland? even though they pulled a halo 2 move with that and hell they showed flash backs of crysis 1 and warhead.

and 1 more thing crysis 1 didnt even explain much about the aliens in the first place hell they didnt even have a name all we know is they are millions of years old race and they sent out a signal in the first game.
im glad we didnt play as nomad again that had to be one of the worst characters i played in my life in a good game now psycho they need to bring back

Having a blank protagonist with no emotion and being so submissive (too submissive) in taking orders just made things unsatisfactory.
He's a special forces soldier, of course he follows orders.

So here is an actual, decent, engaging story for the game. Now it's bad, right? I mean, now it's straight out of a B rated movie, amirite? Surely. Now the game requires you to use your brain to understand the story in full. You aren't willing or you aren't capable of doing that, so that angers you. It confuses you.
"Heh, you peasants just aren't sophisticated enough to understand the immense complexity of this VIDYA GAYME plot!"

crysis 2 is a reboot of the series

http://www.g4tv.com/videos/46829/E3-201 ... quality=hd

they keep some of the plot from the first game but changed most of it for the ps3/360 kids to make it easier to understand

It's not a reboot FFS it's a damn sequel. The events of the first game play a major part in C2's plot continuity, where you even paying attention to the abundant amount of exposition the game throws at you?

crysis 2 is a reboot of the series

http://www.g4tv.com/videos/46829/E3-201 ... quality=hd

they keep some of the plot from the first game but changed most of it for the ps3/360 kids to make it easier to understand

It's not a reboot FFS it's a damn sequel. The events of the first game play a major part in C2's plot continuity, where you even paying attention to the abundant amount of exposition the game throws at you?

lol i dont think people even know what a reboot is like if this game was a reboot how come they showed flash backs of crysis 1 and warhead and even mentioned about the island i swear people are idiots if this was a reboot crysis 1 wouldnt even be mention in the slightest bit prophet wouldnt even exist

Crysis 2 and crysis 1 are like farcry and farcry2.I dont understand why CELL hunts prophet.Crynet is the developers of nano suit. They can create hundreds of nano suits instead of hunting down prophet.Also i dont understand why the Manhattan virus cant affect the CELL soldiers(they dont wear nano suit.).The character name prophet is the only thing common between crysis 1 and 2.

If you payed full attention to the plot you'd understand that Hargreave wants the suit and Lockhart wants revenge on prophet. The nanosuit 2 is worth billions of dollars.... The manhattan virus does affect CELL soldiers,eg: the end of the level Dead Men Walking. You're a fool I tellz you.

At the ending of C2 it tells you why the aliens are red, grunts kinda style.
SPOILER
Well, in crysis 1 remember when you find the big blue alien base kinda thing? In the end of crysis 2 prophet tells you that there was also one of theso in New York, but a red one, and there are also **** tons of other bases around the world probably each one with diffrent alien type.

Still it doesn't explain what the **** happen to all theso 999999999 blue flying aliens.
Yes The aliens developed on Earth and have tons of bases throughout Earth. Different Colours=Different Races. Also the Battle of the Lingshan Islands wasn't finished yet, thats what the new comic coming out is going to explain .

Wow. A bunch of barely educated people complaining about Richard Morgan's job, without even really knowing what part he had in the story development or understanding the plot in full in either of the games.

There was never any hint of Hargreave in the first game. Nothing about symbiosis. Nothing notable about the nanosuit program and definitely nothing about the nanosuit being any part of killing the aliens (in the sense that it is in Crysis 2). The first game's story wasn't anything special. Everything (which was actually very little) was spoon fed right into your mouth and the last 3rd of the game was a completely useless waste of resources that they should have spent focusing on the rest of the game.

So here is an actual, decent, engaging story for the game. Now it's bad, right? I mean, now it's straight out of a B rated movie, amirite? Surely. Now the game requires you to use your brain to understand the story in full. You aren't willing or you aren't capable of doing that, so that angers you. It confuses you.

The problem isn't the plot of this game, it's you. You are unable to understand it properly. Either because you're not intelligent enough, or you're not willing to understand it. Either way, you have absolutely no right to complain about Richard Morgan's job on the storyline. As far as story itself is concerned, this is most definitely one of the finest first person shooter games out there. Albeit, some parts of the story are told inconveniently. And if that's your complaint, you are wasting too much time worrying about details.

Go play the game again. Think about everything you hear and see. No, really, think about it. From what I can make out of your gibberish, you sure as hell don't understand the story of this game. And if EVEN THEN you feel like blowing smoke out of your arse, at least provide decent arguments as to why you think Richard Morgan didn't do a good enough job.


Thanks
Iceman
Iceman has it.

It's not a reboot FFS it's a damn sequel. The events of the first game play a major part in C2's plot continuity, where you even paying attention to the abundant amount of exposition the game throws at you?

It's a damn spin-off.

When you said "finished crysis 1" I obviously knew there would be C1 spoilers. Thanks for the warning that there would also be an assload of C2 spoilers. dike.

Wow. A bunch of barely educated people complaining about Richard Morgan's job, without even really knowing what part he had in the story development or understanding the plot in full in either of the games.

There was never any hint of Hargreave in the first game. Nothing about symbiosis. Nothing notable about the nanosuit program and definitely nothing about the nanosuit being any part of killing the aliens (in the sense that it is in Crysis 2). The first game's story wasn't anything special. Everything (which was actually very little) was spoon fed right into your mouth and the last 3rd of the game was a completely useless waste of resources that they should have spent focusing on the rest of the game.

So here is an actual, decent, engaging story for the game. Now it's bad, right? I mean, now it's straight out of a B rated movie, amirite? Surely. Now the game requires you to use your brain to understand the story in full. You aren't willing or you aren't capable of doing that, so that angers you. It confuses you.

The problem isn't the plot of this game, it's you. You are unable to understand it properly. Either because you're not intelligent enough, or you're not willing to understand it. Either way, you have absolutely no right to complain about Richard Morgan's job on the storyline. As far as story itself is concerned, this is most definitely one of the finest first person shooter games out there. Albeit, some parts of the story are told inconveniently. And if that's your complaint, you are wasting too much time worrying about details.

Go play the game again. Think about everything you hear and see. No, really, think about it. From what I can make out of your gibberish, you sure as hell don't understand the story of this game. And if EVEN THEN you feel like blowing smoke out of your arse, at least provide decent arguments as to why you think Richard Morgan didn't do a good enough job.


Thanks
Iceman

Wow, what a douche.

If you think Crysis2 is a good story, you need to read more. If you think this derivative, pulp sci-fi dreck is anything but a B movie script, then you have an adolescent's sensibility of story-telling. Normally I wouldn't criticize anybody for liking what I consider "bad writing" because I'm an English teacher and a writing tutor and that's just bad form for someone in my profession, but when you go all bombastic on a thread that's mostly thoughtful criticism, calling us unintelligent and saying that we have no right to criticize the plot (by far the stupidest part of your rant), then I feel justified in parting the curtain for you, my friend. You have sh!tty taste.

Richard Morgan MAY be a decent writer, but it certainly doesn't show in Crysis2.

The fact that there were no blue aliens and not even flying ones is a big enough plot hole.

I think the reason they could fly in Crysis 1, was because you only fight them in that zero-gravity environment. The rest of the time, you fight those flying... Oh wait.

Wow. A bunch of barely educated people complaining about Richard Morgan's job, without even really knowing what part he had in the story development or understanding the plot in full in either of the games.

There was never any hint of Hargreave in the first game. Nothing about symbiosis. Nothing notable about the nanosuit program and definitely nothing about the nanosuit being any part of killing the aliens (in the sense that it is in Crysis 2). The first game's story wasn't anything special. Everything (which was actually very little) was spoon fed right into your mouth and the last 3rd of the game was a completely useless waste of resources that they should have spent focusing on the rest of the game.

So here is an actual, decent, engaging story for the game. Now it's bad, right? I mean, now it's straight out of a B rated movie, amirite? Surely. Now the game requires you to use your brain to understand the story in full. You aren't willing or you aren't capable of doing that, so that angers you. It confuses you.

The problem isn't the plot of this game, it's you. You are unable to understand it properly. Either because you're not intelligent enough, or you're not willing to understand it. Either way, you have absolutely no right to complain about Richard Morgan's job on the storyline. As far as story itself is concerned, this is most definitely one of the finest first person shooter games out there. Albeit, some parts of the story are told inconveniently. And if that's your complaint, you are wasting too much time worrying about details.

Go play the game again. Think about everything you hear and see. No, really, think about it. From what I can make out of your gibberish, you sure as hell don't understand the story of this game. And if EVEN THEN you feel like blowing smoke out of your arse, at least provide decent arguments as to why you think Richard Morgan didn't do a good enough job.


Thanks
Iceman

Wow, what a douche.

If you think Crysis2 is a good story, you need to read more. If you think this derivative, pulp sci-fi dreck is anything but a B movie script, then you have an adolescent's sensibility of story-telling. Normally I wouldn't criticize anybody for liking what I consider "bad writing" because I'm an English teacher and a writing tutor and that's just bad form for someone in my profession, but when you go all bombastic on a thread that's mostly thoughtful criticism, calling us unintelligent and saying that we have no right to criticize the plot (by far the stupidest part of your rant), then I feel justified in parting the curtain for you, my friend. You have sh!tty taste.

Richard Morgan MAY be a decent writer, but it certainly doesn't show in Crysis2.

This. Morgan's "Altered Carbon" was a decent read, better than Crysis 2, but nowhere near the writing quality of Hugo-award winning novels like Hyperion (classic read for ANY sci-fi fan reader). Or even Ender's Game. Or The Giver. Morgan is, like you said, a decent writer, but not only does it not show in Crysis 2, CryTek could've hired a better writer to do the story.

Also, I like your writing style, flyingsaucerz

About the aliens....
People use vehicles, and do all our vehicles look the same? Nope.
In Crysis 1, the blue alien style failed and could be destroyed remotely and easily.
And so, the aliens adapted by changing their exoskeleton. It's even said that the aliens are slightly different now, so like from a different country.

Also, the aliens are using infectious spores now instead of freeze-sphere, because the freeze-sphere didn't succeed, and was too huge to be built in New York (As you see in the Core in Crysis 1)

Seriously, the Crysis 2 plot isn't spoon fed to you.
Turn on the subtitles, read the emails, pay attention.

Wow. A bunch of barely educated people complaining about Richard Morgan's job, without even really knowing what part he had in the story development or understanding the plot in full in either of the games.

There was never any hint of Hargreave in the first game. Nothing about symbiosis. Nothing notable about the nanosuit program and definitely nothing about the nanosuit being any part of killing the aliens (in the sense that it is in Crysis 2). The first game's story wasn't anything special. Everything (which was actually very little) was spoon fed right into your mouth and the last 3rd of the game was a completely useless waste of resources that they should have spent focusing on the rest of the game.

So here is an actual, decent, engaging story for the game. Now it's bad, right? I mean, now it's straight out of a B rated movie, amirite? Surely. Now the game requires you to use your brain to understand the story in full. You aren't willing or you aren't capable of doing that, so that angers you. It confuses you.

The problem isn't the plot of this game, it's you. You are unable to understand it properly. Either because you're not intelligent enough, or you're not willing to understand it. Either way, you have absolutely no right to complain about Richard Morgan's job on the storyline. As far as story itself is concerned, this is most definitely one of the finest first person shooter games out there. Albeit, some parts of the story are told inconveniently. And if that's your complaint, you are wasting too much time worrying about details.

Go play the game again. Think about everything you hear and see. No, really, think about it. From what I can make out of your gibberish, you sure as hell don't understand the story of this game. And if EVEN THEN you feel like blowing smoke out of your arse, at least provide decent arguments as to why you think Richard Morgan didn't do a good enough job.


Thanks
Iceman

Wow, what a douche.

If you think Crysis2 is a good story, you need to read more. If you think this derivative, pulp sci-fi dreck is anything but a B movie script, then you have an adolescent's sensibility of story-telling. Normally I wouldn't criticize anybody for liking what I consider "bad writing" because I'm an English teacher and a writing tutor and that's just bad form for someone in my profession, but when you go all bombastic on a thread that's mostly thoughtful criticism, calling us unintelligent and saying that we have no right to criticize the plot (by far the stupidest part of your rant), then I feel justified in parting the curtain for you, my friend. You have sh!tty taste.

Richard Morgan MAY be a decent writer, but it certainly doesn't show in Crysis2.

This. Morgan's "Altered Carbon" was a decent read, better than Crysis 2, but nowhere near the writing quality of Hugo-award winning novels like Hyperion (classic read for ANY sci-fi fan reader). Or even Ender's Game. Or The Giver. Morgan is, like you said, a decent writer, but not only does it not show in Crysis 2, CryTek could've hired a better writer to do the story.

Also, I like your writing style, flyingsaucerz

Thank you, sir

Why are people trying to defend the plot of C2? Are you desperately trying to find something to justify the money you spent buying the unmitigate turd that it is? The fact is it threw out the perfectly good characters, setting, plot and gameplay of C1 because somewhere along the chain of command someone was thoroughly beaten over the head with a pipe wrench until replacing everything that made Crysis, well, Crysis seemed like a good idea. I for one quite liked Nomad as a character, and as someone who was born English i loved the fact that Psycho was a British character who didnt die, turn evil or express a desire for crumpets in Crysis or Warhead. C2 just leaves so many plot holes its not funny.

Regards, Dan

Why are people trying to defend the plot of C2? Are you desperately trying to find something to justify the money you spent buying the unmitigate turd that it is? The fact is it threw out the perfectly good characters, setting, plot and gameplay of C1 because somewhere along the chain of command someone was thoroughly beaten over the head with a pipe wrench until replacing everything that made Crysis, well, Crysis seemed like a good idea. I for one quite liked Nomad as a character, and as someone who was born English i loved the fact that Psycho was a British character who didnt die, turn evil or express a desire for crumpets in Crysis or Warhead. C2 just leaves so many plot holes its not funny.

Regards, Dan

Notably, I liked Psycho too. He really didn't fit into the American stereotype perception of what an Englishman is like.

I think Nomad had a lot of potential as a character to fit into a sequel plot, as his personality was only suggestive of the military follower archetype in Crysis 1. He still defines himself to duty and the greater good (SPOILER: "Leave me! I'll take it down myself!" If it weren't for Strickland and the return of Prophet in the last cutscene of Crysis 1, Nomad would've been the next in command of Raptor squad, allowing for some Nanosuit squad combat in a sequel.

*MORE SPOILER*
Crysis 2's storyline wasn't terrible, but it wasn't grade A either. The plot twists were predictable. COME ON, did you REALLY not suspect Hargreave to backstab you when you first hear his voice? REALLY, you guys? And it was pretty obvious from the first Lockhart/Strickland cutscene that Strickland was a double agent. I felt that story could've fleshed out a little more.

It was NOT necessary (and STILL not necessary) to completely remove Psycho and Nomad out of the picture for Crysis 2. Maybe they were killed in physical form, but their Nanosuits retain their essence or whatever just like Alcatraz's suit retained Prophet's essence. Could CryTek bring Nomad and Psycho back in Crysis 3? Maybe. Will they? Buy EA's shares in the stock market to increase those chances lol!