At least play Crysis before you even start a comparison on destructibles. Crysis 2 has only scripted events and decals.

Crysis 2 doesnt have a day night cycle, the time of day is completely static. If you stand around in Crysis the sun moves in the sky, shadows react accordingly and eventually day becomes night. Do you honestly think having some levels set at day and some at night is a day night cycle? Hilarious.

All you are doing with this thread is making yourself look stupid.
What the hell? You should really learn to read my posts, dude, saying things I meant different. I said that for example the first Level has TWO different sun positions and time of day, NOT that it was morning in the first, and day in the second. It was in ONE SINGLE LEVEL. And the same thing happens in Crysis 1, too. Damnit, in Relic, when you go into the research camp, to get Dr. Rosenthal, it's evening, with the sun beein visible. Now when you go out, it is completely dark (although only one minute pasted). Where's the difference??? Read, goddamnit! Let me make another video. To show you that destructible isn't only scripted.

Played both crysis 1 and warhead twice and crysis 2 demo(pc) and crysis 2 lets GTA IV look like a pc exclusive in terms of crysis 1/warhead vs crysis 2. PS:c2 demo and retail does not differ much so that argument is void.

Why do you think it's biased.

Because it doesn't favor C1, I'm guessing. Yawn.

The video does favor Crysis 1 though. Learn to read?

From the starters comparison-
4/9 points for Crysis
2/9 points are a tie <- This includes destructibles which the OP thinks are the same in both games lmao
3/9 points for Crysis 2

Crysis 1 is the better looking game and only console players or people with extremely low end computers will claim otherwise.

Why is it biased? Every time Crysis 1 wins a point, in the OPs opinion, it follows on with "WELL CRYIS 2 BLABLA NOT SO BAD EITHER"

Oh and destructibles are a draw? Dont make me laugh. That alone wrecks any credibility the OP has. I would be surprised if hes even played Crysis after claiming that.

Then there is the part where he thinks Crysis 2 water > Crysis 1 water... hilarity ensues.

And whoever posted that Crysis 2 has better lighting, you need to grow some eyeballs and learn to use them because Crysis 1 DESTROYS Crysis 2 for lighting. Crysis 2 doesnt even have a day/night cycle.

Water, lighting and destructibles are three fields where Crysis 1 has the biggest edge over Crysis 2 and yet you blind douches are here saying Crysis 2 bests in all of them? LOL.

+1

Lightning... Look, when we see the foliage reacting to the lightning in C1, and then in C2, the lightning in C2 surely looks better. Then Crysis 2 has lense flares and other nice lightning effects wich just looks good. The only thing are the sunshafts. There has C1 a better quality.

I don't know man. I get where you are coming from and will respect your opinion, but Crysis 1 lighting just looks more fluid throughout. The flares look good, but they are way too overused. Crysis 2 lighting looks choppy and unrealistic.

Of course when it comes to the amount of dynamic light sources that can be in one level at a time, Crysis 2 obliterates Crysis. They were poorly implemented though. It just didn't feel right with me. Then again, a lot of the game didn't.

Crysis 1 is the better looking game and only console players or people with extremely low end computers will claim otherwise.

Oh and destructibles are a draw? Dont make me laugh. That alone wrecks any credibility the OP has. I would be surprised if hes even played Crysis after claiming that.

Then there is the part where he thinks Crysis 2 water > Crysis 1 water... hilarity ensues.



1. C1 definitely looks better.

2. Destructibility: Draw
- In C1: you can shoot the trees, tires, fuel tanks, shacks...
- In C2: can shoot some concrete pillars, barriers, benches, chairs, tables, a few trees, big trucks' fuel tanks, glass...

3. Water: Draw
- C1's looks more beautiful C2's muddy water but that's due to different art direction.

So, Hedgehog8, my friend, just made for you:



Don't say there's nothing to destroy in C2.

1. C1 definitely looks better.

2. Destructibility: Draw
- In C1: you can shoot the trees, tires, fuel tanks, shacks...
- In C2: can shoot some concrete pillars, barriers, benches, chairs, tables, a few trees, big trucks' fuel tanks, glass...

3. Water: Draw
- C1's looks more beautiful C2's muddy water but that's due to different art direction.

That's what I was saying all along.

There is one thing people forget is that the environmental interactivity of C2 blows C1's out of water. There are so much stuff you can grab or kick in C2, on the other hand, not so much in C1. So are C2's physics really worse than C1's ?

Best comparison i've seen man, good work on it JustNameless I agree with you on that so many people have been unjustly comparing C1 and C2, biased over C2 by showing the worst of it and sometimes even comparing it with Crysis 1 graphic mods, just silly eh -_-. They are both spectacular games in their own. I strongly agree with what Flames21891 posted too.
I'm beginning to tire of all the "Crysis 1 has better graphics because the texture resolution and polygon count is higher" argument.

Does anyone remember when Normal Mapping came out? I think that was one of the staples of FEAR back in the day. It allowed for detailed objects using less polygons. The result? Something could be rendered with less polygons and still look great, which helped performance IMMENSELY.

Maybe Crytek stepped back and thought "Hmmm, instead of using the brutal method of making everyone's PC render insanely high-res textures and piling on a ridiculous polygon count, maybe we can scale it back and use a few tricks that will only have a MINOR effect on the graphical quality as a whole, but ensure Crysis 2 runs beautifully on a wider range of systems."

And, even with that scaling back, the game still looks pretty damn good. Show me a game that is currently out (minus C1) that significantly tops C2 graphically.

You want to know where most of this hate is honestly coming from? Expectations. People expected another game that won't be playable on mainstream systems until years later just so they can justify their quad SLI setup. Because of this, they aren't taking things at face value. Maybe Crytek wasn't going for bleeding edge tech, but pushing the limits of scalability. That's an impressive feat in and of itself.

All in all, I'm tired of people saying this game looks bad. Compare it to a plethora of other PC titles and you'll quickly see that they only took a baby step back from C1 for the sake of scalability. That also means, if C1 is clearly still the best looking game to date, and C2 isn't far off, doesn't that mean that C2 is still graphically superior to everything but its big brother?
That's all so true. There is no current game that looks better than C2 (other than C1), a lot of the people complaining just had expectations of it being an un-optimised high poly, high res textured game. That's not all what makes a game look good. Crytek still made it look fantastic with the techniques they applied to make it optimised. The lighting in particular is the most realistic ever done in a game it looks as good as any CG movie out there, but in real time :O! Crytek amaze me.

i dont think destruction is a draw. There is damage/physics at almost everything you shoot at in Crysis 1.

Crysis 2 looks good, but Crysis 1 looks better. That, in the eyes of some pc gamers is a significant downgrade. they want to be able to choose to play it at Crysis 1 standards, not only in Crysis 2 consolized standards. when you play the game and really think about it, something is holding Crysis 2 back when it can be much more.

So, Hedgehog8, my friend, just made for you:



Don't say there's nothing to destroy in C2.

1. C1 definitely looks better.

2. Destructibility: Draw
- In C1: you can shoot the trees, tires, fuel tanks, shacks...
- In C2: can shoot some concrete pillars, barriers, benches, chairs, tables, a few trees, big trucks' fuel tanks, glass...

3. Water: Draw
- C1's looks more beautiful C2's muddy water but that's due to different art direction.

That's what I was saying all along.

Most (if not all) of the destruction shown there is simply decals or scripted events. Its not physically changing the environment in a dynamic way. This is something you seem to not understand. You think that shooting a wall and having bullet holes painted onto it is destruction.

There is one thing people forget is that the environmental interactivity of C2 blows C1's out of water. There are so much stuff you can grab or kick in C2, on the other hand, not so much in C1. So are C2's physics really worse than C1's ?

Do you even know what you are talking about? The amount of objects you can grab or interact with isnt game physics. Oh and C1 has many more objects you can grab than C2. Try playing it.

It's funny for me. I played Crysis and Crysis Warhead twice and Crysis 2 once (now starting my second time). All three games are absoultely brilliant. I love them all. Kudos to Crytek for this pure awesomeness.

I have a feeling people didn't want Crysis 2 to be a cool game, instead they wanted copy pasta of Crysis' jungle just with ultra dx11.5 exclusive for quadruple Core I7 and sli's pc for 3% elitists. Grow up some ballz and eyes people. Don't be stupid blind graphic whores. Maybe try other games availble on the market, like Poopfront with graphics equal to Half-Life 2 and campaign 3-4 hours long.

And before you say BF3 - not released, and trailers, must admit, are promising for a good game, but not as pumped as you talk about it. I'm expecting it to be also awesome game, but please, not a killer.

And yes, I Maximum Mad.

There is one thing people forget is that the environmental interactivity of C2 blows C1's out of water. There are so much stuff you can grab or kick in C2, on the other hand, not so much in C1. So are C2's physics really worse than C1's ?

Oh and C1 has many more objects you can grab than C2. Try playing it.
Nope.

Most (if not all) of the destruction shown there is simply decals or scripted events. Its not physically changing the environment in a dynamic way. This is something you seem to not understand. You think that shooting a wall and having bullet holes painted onto it is destruction.

Lol. LOLOLOL. Trollolol. You can't be serious.
Did you even WATCHED the video? Because I think, you just talked BS... I destroyed concrete, cars, benches. That's not "bullet holes painted onto it", these things break and fall apart. Lights can be shot off the ceiling, concrete walls (in most occasions cover) are destroyed, and... You obviously just don't want to accept it, huh? Look, nothing in this video is scripted, it's physic based destruction. It doesn't fall apart, because Crytek wanted it to do so at that point in the game. It's caused by your, and your enemies actions... And when I shoot a concrete railing, and at that exact point, a bit of it breaks out and falls down with physics and does not disappear and can be kicked around, IT SURELY is NO decal. Please, think before you speak!

Most (if not all) of the destruction shown there is simply decals or scripted events. Its not physically changing the environment in a dynamic way. This is something you seem to not understand. You think that shooting a wall and having bullet holes painted onto it is destruction.

Lol. LOLOLOL. Trollolol. You can't be serious.
Did you even WATCHED the video? Because I think, you just talked BS... I destroyed concrete, cars, benches. That's not "bullet holes painted onto it", these things break and fall apart. Lights can be shot off the ceiling, concrete walls (in most occasions cover) are destroyed, and... You obviously just don't want to accept it, huh? Look, nothing in this video is scripted, it's physic based destruction. It doesn't fall apart, because Crytek wanted it to do so at that point in the game. It's caused by your, and your enemies actions... And when I shoot a concrete railing, and at that exact point, a bit of it breaks out and falls down with physics and does not disappear and can be kicked around, IT SURELY is NO decal. Please, think before you speak!

He doesnt know what he's talking about.

That's my guess all along...

Rly sad. 4 years of development and what do we get? small, linear maps, worse graphics, destruction and A.I. Thanks consoles.

Rly sad. 4 years of development and what do we get? small, linear maps, worse graphics, destruction and A.I. Thanks consoles.
Crysis 1 was linear, too, just with wider paths. That's Crysis 2, too...

Worse Graphics... You come in a thread where I was taking my time to create a proper comparison, and you don't even look at it. -____________-

Destruction, look at most of the posts before you... Damn people, READ! Something you all didn't learn that properely, huh?

Destruction, look at most of the posts before you... Damn people, READ! Something you all didn't learn that properely, huh?

I know it's annoying, but you shouldn't get mad over what people do on the internet. Some people are going to be immature and obnoxious because they are safely behind a computer screen. That is just a fact I am afraid. The best you can do is debate with the mature ones and ignore all the others.

Yes... You're right.

I know that Crysis 1 was linear aswell but in a MUCH more wider way. It still was a sandbox game. But then there were a HUGE amount of player created maps in Crysis 1. I recently played a huge custom map which literally would have taken hours to run from the other side of the island to the other.

I did look at your comparison video and the previously posted comments but the only things in graphics that were done better in C2 in my opinion were the explosions.

and the destruction... Oh c'mon you gotta agree that Crysis 2 lacked it, the first thing I did when I played the game was shoot a window that was 100 meters away and it didn't react in any way. In the first Crysis everything reacted, you could tear down buildings with your hands with the realtime destruction and shoot hundreds of trees if you wanted to. you could shoot tired from the cars and shoot their gas tanks. In C2 there were only a few of the walls that truly reacted and some scripted moments.

People will argue about the graphics because Crysis 1 aimed for photorealism while Crysis 2 had a more comic (Killzone) type of look to it. They have a whole different art styles, but C1 had details, view distance and really sharp textures which really made it look better from C2.

Btw you should check out a graphics mod called Real Lifesis if your system can handle it. Brings a nice DoF and custom ToD's which give the game a very impressive photorealistic look.

As a wise man once said "he who drinks from the fountain first will die but the man who waits will find splendor." LOL,made that up. But for real. lets try to debate maturely. I honestly thought c2s graphics were great. and yes i did play c1

The first video *is* biased. Anyone who can't see that is in denial. Nice job finding one of those 5 trees we can actually destroy, though.

Btw, didn't gamespot do a detailed comparison? Much better and more true than this crap.

Crysis 2 will be a good game if they fixes the AI bugs.I dont care fancy DX11.

The first video *is* biased. Anyone who can't see that is in denial. Nice job finding one of those 5 trees we can actually destroy, though.

Btw, didn't gamespot do a detailed comparison? Much better and more true than this crap.
I gotta agree with that one, just checked out Gamespots comparison and realized that this 1 is as biased as hell.

The first video *is* biased. Anyone who can't see that is in denial. Nice job finding one of those 5 trees we can actually destroy, though.

Btw, didn't gamespot do a detailed comparison? Much better and more true than this crap.
Gamespot is just as biased as this one is, only instead of choosing destructible objects in Crysis 2 they chose non-destructible objects.