So for the most part, I've been a console gamer for the past 3 or 4 years. Specs and resolution and DX whatever has never been a factor for me, I based games solely on fun gameplay. Aside from the fact that this game barely works in Multi-player, I am very pleased with the fact that it provides all around a fun experience.

Like I said before, it seems like a lot of people who, in their defense, have come to expect certain perks with their PC games, aren't giving this game a fair shot. I've heard that DX11 is coming with a patch, and some advanced graphic settings will be too (I love the graphics as is). I guess what I'm getting at is this: What do you guys think that have actually played the game?

Please.

STFU until you play crysis and warhead. Then come back and apologize...





fyi ive been playing the game at a friends house (not buying this ****) and so far lots of meh and dissapointment...

OMG! people are not mad at the game because its boring or lame. they are pissed because they were promised stuff (A LOT OF STUFF) and non of it was delivered other than the fact the game came out.

Played both of them to see what the hype was about, thats WHY I bought this game.

I brought up the fact that I was a console gamer to display the fact that DX11 and advanced graphic options aren't my priority, fun gameplay is. It seems like so many people are pissed off about luxuries native to their platform, that they forget that the game is a throughly enjoyable experience, when actually playable.

DX11 Because you can't fight progress! Somebody should make a website.

I brought up the fact that I was a console gamer to display the fact that DX11 and advanced graphic options aren't my priority, fun gameplay is. It seems like so many people are pissed off about luxuries native to their platform, that they forget that the game is a throughly enjoyable experience, when actually playable.

Every pc gamer owns all consoles!

I brought up the fact that I was a console gamer to display the fact that DX11 and advanced graphic options aren't my priority, fun gameplay is. It seems like so many people are pissed off about luxuries native to their platform, that they forget that the game is a throughly enjoyable experience, when actually playable.

I dont think you understand gameplay. In this day in age a lot of the gameplay is centered on the way it looks. good gameplay means you have good immersion in a game. A game could have amazing voice acting, great controls, and solid story but if the visuals are lacking you are not getting the full gameplay experience.

I brought up the fact that I was a console gamer to display the fact that DX11 and advanced graphic options aren't my priority, fun gameplay is. It seems like so many people are pissed off about luxuries native to their platform, that they forget that the game is a throughly enjoyable experience, when actually playable.

Every pc gamer owns all consoles!

I don't have any and the only ones in this generation I had were left at my house and I never actually played them (well I did but I git bored in about 5 minutes).

I brought up the fact that I was a console gamer to display the fact that DX11 and advanced graphic options aren't my priority, fun gameplay is. It seems like so many people are pissed off about luxuries native to their platform, that they forget that the game is a throughly enjoyable experience, when actually playable.

Exactly "when actually playable" 72+ hours in and I still can't even access the multiplayer.

As for DX11 .. may help.. may not. But what you don't understand is that the PC graphic settings are important to the PC gamer because it allows us to tweak the appearance of the game which makes it more enjoyable.

The campaign is ok I guess... not as much fun as the open environment of the first 2, which gave you a lot of tactical options.

aaubballerkc32 - I can tell ya my quick opinion as a PC gamer, though I have not completed the whole campaign yet. I'm stuck somewhere in a middle of it - got bored.

"it's actually playable" - yes. I consider many games playable though, including the Minesweeper.
You ask about all around experience - well, it's below average. Game gives you one patch, and two choices - cloak or armor mode. It doesn't have any depth or strategy, while AI have serve navigation and IQ problems.
It's not about graphics really, even though there's so much focus on the forum on it, but that's Crytek fault alone. Crytek promised mind-blowing graphics, they delivered 4-years old graphics. It's like... imagine you buy PS3, than play brand new breathtaking PS3 game. You wait 3 years and sequel is released - a sequel made for... PS2 and ported to PS3 without any changes. That's kinda how it looks like telling the story in conslole-players language.

Problem is in playability. Crysis 1 was like an open sandbox - you got an objective and a huge map with many points of interest - depending on what you did and where you go the mission changed and you got it more or less difficult. You could do many various things in many locations trying the same mission 3 or 4 times, each one visiting other regions of map and seeing unseen locations. Crysis 2 feels like one of worst missions in C1 where you had to fly in narrow corridors all the time along pre-defined path, and there wasn't much to do there. It was a mission many players never ever tried to replay cause it was so boring, but now - it's how ENTIRE GAME was made, like the worst part of prequel.
Oh, and let's not forget about MP - Crysis had it playable but bit flawed, Crysis Wars (addon to Crysis) got it very good, though there were areas for improvements pointed out by community billions of times during the years. Crysis 2 removes everything that was good in Crysis 1 (vehicles, multidimensional combat, feeling that you fight in a nanosuit, good maps, good gamemodes, and so on) and besides adding very few good ideas (mostly the anti-camping stuff) it throws in amount of bugs unseen for ages in any big MP-oriented title release. Imagine that many people can't play MP at all despite of pre-ordering the limited or Nano edition, or they have serve problems with playing online.

Another problem is storyline and characters - Crysis 1 was criticized for flat storyline and lack of character development, Crysis Warhead fixed it introducing one of best-made characters in computer games - Psycho. Crysis 2 takes the worst parts of Crysis 1, erased everything that was good, and throws it into one basket forgetting about legacy entirely. Ties between Crysis 1 and Crysis 2 are so rich that they could not exist at all in a first place. Characters... well, the Alcatraz is souless puppet, and there isn't really anyone besides him to fill the hole. Also you completely loose the feeling of being a part of something bigger, feels like a single guy went for hunting even despite of best attempts to make game interesting from Crytek.

So to sum it up - no, the PC players ain't pissed because the game lacks "luxuries native to their platform", they are pissed off because Crytek spent 2 years on creating a sequel to the game that's far worse than the original product. Sadly.

Ugh.

Crysis 2 is better than Crysis. It hasn't really taken away anything what made Crysis great but improved many things. The big maps are gone but the core gameplay stays exactly the same because even though Crysis had large maps you always had to travel to a certain smaller area and all the action took place in that smaller area JUST LIKE IN CRYSIS 2. Except in Crysis 2 those smaller areas are much more fleshed out and better designed with more gameplay options. Sure you can't tackle on (boring) optional missions and they have effectively removed the boring bits where you travel through repetitive landscape with not much to do and instead delivered a game with much better pacing and presentation.

On a technical level, Crysis 2 doesn't live up to the Crysis fame because even though it looks better it doesn't try to break the mold in the same way Crysis did. It's still technically impressive because it runs so much smoother than Crysis does and the fact that Crytek managed to bring Crysis 2 to consoles is worthy of respect. It's true that Crysis 2 does still feel different from Crysis since you don't have as much freedom to just play around (SO MUCH FUN TO SHOOT DOWN THOSE TREES) so as a sandbox it's inferior but as a game it's without a doubt the superior of the two. I also love how everyone seems to have forgotten that only first half of Crysis was great and the second half wasn't nearly as good and much more linear than Crysis 2 is. But I guess that doesn't matter to you people, you're just looking for another excuse to whine. The hilarious thing is that if Crysis 2 was exactly like it was and it was only released on the PC, most people would be saying how brilliant it is. But alas, the so called "master race" are filled with people with questionable IQ and they'll do anything to try to justify spending $3,000 on their new shiny PC.

TL;DR Crysis 2 is the better game. Both are great and while Crysis 2 is a different experience from Crysis it manages to maintain the core gameplay while improving on all the fundamentals.

Every pc gamer owns all consoles!

Where the **** did you come up with that absolute garbage? No REAL PC player would ever waste his money on a **** worthless console. We spend our money on components and rigs. That would be like a race car driver buying a Pinto.


It was a joke in reference to the fact that EVERY game console can be emulated except for the PS3 and xbox 360.

As for "No REAL PC player"... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

You want to know what I think? I cant believe I wasted $60 on this ****. You're better off playing crysis 1 if you have a capable pc, because this game is barely half as good as the first was. Great graphics for console, terrible graphics for pc. The plot is filled with holes and the pacing feels awkward, and they practically act like the first game never happened. The whole story (especially the end) is so cliched and overdone in hollywood its shocking, at least it was to me, because crysis 1 was filled with great unique ideas and had a much more realistic and epic ending. Don't even get me started on the gameplay, I mean they made the new nanosuit so much more slow and weak than the first its just sad, no more choking enemies and punching them in the face at the same time, I guess the new nanosuit cant handle that kind of action. No more first person driving, proning, leaning, you cant even aim down sights with a laser sight attached. I had such high hopes for this game because of crysis 1, and was let down badly. Dont waste your money man.

Hmmm ... wrong. Crysis was not linear. There were choke-points you had to get through but other than that you always had numerous options as to how to get to them. Or around some of the more difficult areas. I am 60 yrs old. For me the enjoyment of Crysis 1 was the tactical options. I had to think my way through. With this game its point forward and run and gun. My reflexes aren't so good at that.. lol

(I am getting my ass handed to me on a regular basis..heheh)

Having said that, I am enjoying the campaign to a certain degree. But have not been able to even access the multiplayer making my purchase of the LE version a total waste.

Ugh.

Crysis 2 is better than Crysis. It hasn't really taken away anything what made Crysis great but improved many things. The big maps are gone but the core gameplay stays exactly the same because even though Crysis had large maps you always had to travel to a certain smaller area and all the action took place in that smaller area JUST LIKE IN CRYSIS 2. Except in Crysis 2 those smaller areas are much more fleshed out and better designed with more gameplay options. Sure you can't tackle on (boring) optional missions and they have effectively removed the boring bits where you travel through repetitive landscape with not much to do and instead delivered a game with much better pacing and presentation.

On a technical level, Crysis 2 doesn't live up to the Crysis fame because even though it looks better it doesn't try to break the mold in the same way Crysis did. It's still technically impressive because it runs so much smoother than Crysis does and the fact that Crytek managed to bring Crysis 2 to consoles is worthy of respect. It's true that Crysis 2 does still feel different from Crysis since you don't have as much freedom to just play around (SO MUCH FUN TO SHOOT DOWN THOSE TREES) so as a sandbox it's inferior but as a game it's without a doubt the superior of the two. I also love how everyone seems to have forgotten that only first half of Crysis was great and the second half wasn't nearly as good and much more linear than Crysis 2 is. But I guess that doesn't matter to you people, you're just looking for another excuse to whine. The hilarious thing is that if Crysis 2 was exactly like it was and it was only released on the PC, most people would be saying how brilliant it is. But alas, the so called "master race" are filled with people with questionable IQ and they'll do anything to try to justify spending $3,000 on their new shiny PC.

TL;DR Crysis 2 is the better game. Both are great and while Crysis 2 is a different experience from Crysis it manages to maintain the core gameplay while improving on all the fundamentals.

What he said.

Here's the thing, a lot of people are **** hating because they are idiots. I'll explain why they cry:

1-Several promised things aren't delivered; Now see, Crytek simply DIDN'T FINISH the PC version of Crysis 2. They didn't have time. THUS, because of this, they are releasing and finsihing through patches (and they already confirmed advanced graphics and DX11 graphics).

2-Gameplay not like Crysis 1; Now this is retarded,because now many people are overrating Crysis 1. First off, I loved the first game so much....AMAZING GAMEPLAY!! But I STILL REMEMBER that many people complained it was boring. **** hypocrits. Those same people are now supporting it due to them wanting to hate Crysis 2. They are not fans of Crytek, they are mere trolls. I think Crysis 2 improves on Crysis 1's gameplay. There's STILL sandbox (i admit, there's less sandboxiness than the first game, but it still exists and is still noticeable), multiple ways to tackle a situation, destructible environment and etc., it's just now it's in a city, has more in your face action (which was very needed to the series), and the mechanics are streamlined.

3-Consolization/Port; This is just mere stupidity here. It's impossible for Crysis 2 to be a port because the way CryEngine 3 works is that the game is made for all platforms simultaneously. No need to port, it's unneccessary with this new engine. Also, the consolization only applies to the streamlining. And IMO, i like the streamlining. People just want the game to NOT WORK on consoles and to work only on PC. They want it to be total crap on consoles. But Crytek wanted to make one of the best games for consoles AND PC, that works for BOTH. And they achieved that. People are just heavy fanboy RETARDS.

4-Crytek isn't answering the community; Yes they are, but see, they can't respond rapidly. EA didn't give them a good release date window, they never finished off Crysis 2 to the fullest. There's issues on PS3, 360, AND PC that they have to fix and address. People are just impatient.

And that's it. You may be a console gamer for 3-4 years, but what you said is right. Crysis 1 was bashed on for being hard to run and for the gameplay svcking. Now the same haters are hypocritical, LOVING the gameplay, multiplayer, and benchmark status of Crysis, JUST BECAUSE they hate Crysis 2. **** them, **** all these haters. Stupid trolls need to leave the forums, they should not be considered members of the PC community, because they are embarrasing me and TRUE PC gamers.

Hmmm ... wrong. Crysis was not linear. There were choke-points you had to get through but other than that you always had numerous options as to how to get to them. Or around some of the more difficult areas. I am 60 yrs old. For me the enjoyment of Crysis 1 was the tactical options. I had to think my way through. With this game its point forward and run and gun. My reflexes aren't so good at that.. lol

(I am getting my ass handed to me on a regular basis..heheh)

Having said that, I am enjoying the campaign to a certain degree. But have not been able to even access the multiplayer making my purchase of the LE version a total waste.


Crysis 1 WAS linear -_-" This has been established back in 2007. It's a sandbox. If it was non linear, then I could go run through the ENTIRE ISLAND without the game trying to stop me with barriers or something.......the game takes a piece of the island, and places you in their for each level.

I brought up the fact that I was a console gamer to display the fact that DX11 and advanced graphic options aren't my priority, fun gameplay is. It seems like so many people are pissed off about luxuries native to their platform, that they forget that the game is a throughly enjoyable experience, when actually playable.

Console gamers ,will never understand PC gamer.
PC community is ELiTe gamers and you`re deffinetly not fitting in.
So plz go grab your controller and put it in your mouth.

Check this Video and u will Know exactly Why Alot of PC got sooo pissed off !
http://www.gamesas.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=13735

Here's the thing, a lot of people are **** hating because they are idiots. I'll explain why they cry:

1-Several promised things aren't delivered; Now see, Crytek simply DIDN'T FINISH the PC version of Crysis 2. They didn't have time. THUS, because of this, they are releasing and finsihing through patches (and they already confirmed advanced graphics and DX11 graphics).

2-Gameplay not like Crysis 1; Now this is retarded,because now many people are overrating Crysis 1. First off, I loved the first game so much....AMAZING GAMEPLAY!! But I STILL REMEMBER that many people complained it was boring. **** hypocrits. Those same people are now supporting it due to them wanting to hate Crysis 2. They are not fans of Crytek, they are mere trolls. I think Crysis 2 improves on Crysis 1's gameplay. There's STILL sandbox (i admit, there's less sandboxiness than the first game, but it still exists and is still noticeable), multiple ways to tackle a situation, destructible environment and etc., it's just now it's in a city, has more in your face action (which was very needed to the series), and the mechanics are streamlined.

3-Consolization/Port; This is just mere stupidity here. It's impossible for Crysis 2 to be a port because the way CryEngine 3 works is that the game is made for all platforms simultaneously. No need to port, it's unneccessary with this new engine. Also, the consolization only applies to the streamlining. And IMO, i like the streamlining. People just want the game to NOT WORK on consoles and to work only on PC. They want it to be total crap on consoles. But Crytek wanted to make one of the best games for consoles AND PC, that works for BOTH. And they achieved that. People are just heavy fanboy RETARDS.

4-Crytek isn't answering the community; Yes they are, but see, they can't respond rapidly. EA didn't give them a good release date window, they never finished off Crysis 2 to the fullest. There's issues on PS3, 360, AND PC that they have to fix and address. People are just impatient.

And that's it. You may be a console gamer for 3-4 years, but what you said is right. Crysis 1 was bashed on for being hard to run and for the gameplay svcking. Now the same haters are hypocritical, LOVING the gameplay, multiplayer, and benchmark status of Crysis, JUST BECAUSE they hate Crysis 2. **** them, **** all these haters. Stupid trolls need to leave the forums, they should not be considered members of the PC community, because they are embarrasing me and TRUE PC gamers.

Hmmm ... wrong. Crysis was not linear. There were choke-points you had to get through but other than that you always had numerous options as to how to get to them. Or around some of the more difficult areas. I am 60 yrs old. For me the enjoyment of Crysis 1 was the tactical options. I had to think my way through. With this game its point forward and run and gun. My reflexes aren't so good at that.. lol

(I am getting my ass handed to me on a regular basis..heheh)

Having said that, I am enjoying the campaign to a certain degree. But have not been able to even access the multiplayer making my purchase of the LE version a total waste.


Crysis 1 WAS linear -_-" This has been established back in 2007. It's a sandbox. If it was non linear, then I could go run through the ENTIRE ISLAND without the game trying to stop me with barriers or something.......the game takes a piece of the island, and places you in their for each level.

I brought up the fact that I was a console gamer to display the fact that DX11 and advanced graphic options aren't my priority, fun gameplay is. It seems like so many people are pissed off about luxuries native to their platform, that they forget that the game is a throughly enjoyable experience, when actually playable.

Console gamers ,will never understand PC gamer.
PC community is ELiTe gamers and you`re deffinetly not fitting in.
So plz go grab your controller and put it in your mouth.

Check this Video and u will Know exactly Why Alot of PC got sooo pissed off !
http://www.gamesas.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=13735

Hmmm ... wrong. Crysis was not linear. There were choke-points you had to get through but other than that you always had numerous options as to how to get to them. Or around some of the more difficult areas. I am 60 yrs old. For me the enjoyment of Crysis 1 was the tactical options. I had to think my way through. With this game its point forward and run and gun. My reflexes aren't so good at that.. lol

(I am getting my ass handed to me on a regular basis..heheh)

Having said that, I am enjoying the campaign to a certain degree. But have not been able to even access the multiplayer making my purchase of the LE version a total waste.
It was. Each level had maybe one or two optional missions to do which weren't fleshed out at all, it was just along the lines of "go to this location and press that button". There was always one real objective and no alternative missions to take. The freedom of Crysis was limited to whether you want to take a route to the objective location through forest or beach where nothing happens or by road where something might happen. Woo-friggin-doo!

I do admit that I miss some of the more open elements of Crysis. I loved the second level which let you choose how to infiltrate the village. It's pretty much the only level of Crysis which justified the large map around it. The assault level which ended at the harbor was pretty cool too because even though it was linear there was action taking place all over the map. But other than that, it was ALWAYS about gameplay very similar to Crysis 2. Go to a small area within the big sandbox and complete your objective. I can honestly understand that Crysis 2's approach might make some people feel claustrophobic (in lack of better word) since Crysis also let you choose the direction where you'd approach the objective area and you could retreat if needed but it's a fair tradeoff for much better pacing, great presentation and excellent set pieces. Not to mention that the vertical element in Crysis 2's sandboxes really make them that much more fun.

I don't want to sound like I think Crysis is a bad game; it's not. It's one of my favorite FPSes and I like it a lot. I think Crysis does some things better than Crysis 2 does and it has its charm. However, Crysis 2 maintains what makes it Crysis while giving you another kind of experience. I truly and genuinely think Crysis 2 is a better game overall but I also understand if someone prefers Crysis, it's up to your taste. However, to make ridiculous claims like saying Crysis 2 is a bad game or that it's graphically bad for PC standards is just hilariously stupid. I have seen some people say so retarded things that it's downright amazing and it's a shame they can't acknowledge the effort Crytek has put into Crysis 2.