Wow whats with all the retards that buy regular games to only play the MP, how is it fun to pay 65.00 for MP.Isn't that what games like M.A.G and shadowrun are for

Wow whats with all the retards that buy regular games to only play the MP, how is it fun to pay 65.00 for MP.Isn't that what games like M.A.G and shadowrun are for


What's even stupider is paying $65.00 for a campaign that you will play for a couple weeks and then never touch again. Multiplayer is where all the replay value comes from in shooters. Remember Bulletstorm? My point exactly. I think most people who only play campaigns are just renting from Gamefly then sending it back right after. For mutliplayer, it is worth the price if you get a few months of solid enjoyment from it.

I'm talking about the multiplayer only, I have no use for single player campaigns in shooters (just my preference). But Crysis 2 has to be the worst multiplayer experience I've ever had. Here are hte reasons why it is so terrible.

1. Poor framerate. I've played games where the framerate might dip when a lot of stuff is going on, but it wasn't terrible. In Crysis 2, the framerate is game breaking. Running around, the screen updates slightly faster than a power point slideshow. Close encounters tend to just be random, because neither player gets enough visual information on the screen to be able to react quickly enough.

2. Controls are sloppy and unresponsive. I turned up the sensitivity, but it doesn't help much. Pulling up sight and aiming at someone is clunky. It reminds me of the controls in Killzone 2 (though that was a solid game otherwise).

3. Lag/hit detection are embarrassingly bad. It can take a whole clip to kill someone, or it may just take a couple bullets, you never know. Gun battles are clumsy and awkward, and has nothing to do with skill, and everything to do with luck and lag. Aiming right at somebody and firing more shots doesn't mean you will win. Every gun fight I've been in seem to be both players struggling to stay on target. Close encoutners will have both players spraying and meleeing wildly. Midrange has people aiming and strafing, hoping enough shots will be detected. Long range gun fights seem to be nonexistant, and would be utterly pointless anyway.

4. Graphics are just terrible. Low resolution and muddy textures. This is one of the worst looking games I've played on the PS3. Even Black Ops has better graphics, and that's saying something. I can accept bad graphics if it means higher framerate and more responsive gameplay (Black Ops), but I get none of these benefits in Crysis 2.

5. People's playstyle have to accommodate the terrible framerate and lag. This means a lot of people just sit cloaked until you run by, then they switch on armor and shoot you. You can't turn around and shoot back accurately because of the lag and terrible controls. It's just not a fun game when 90% of the players are just sitting somewhere cloaked and waiting. But I can't blame them, it's almost the only way to guarantee you'll get a kill.

Overall I am hugely disappointed with this game. I paid 60 dollars for it, and it is so bad I never want to play it again. I will probably force myself to try it a few more times, to try to get my money's worth, but it's just a hideously bad game. I am really upset, because I was expecting this game to be amazing. I can't understand where all the positive critical reviews came from, but now that people are playing it, some of the negative reviews are starting to appear. Apparently this game is actually good on PC. But on PS3 (and Xbox from what I hear), it's just trash. There are no redeeming qualities to this game right now. Maybe they can fix some stuff via patches, but I don't think they can completely overhaul it enough to make it a good, playable game.








He is right its thrash at the moment because of the lagg and hitbox failures other then that its good, you guys ever seen when you kick a car? it takes 2 secounds before it get launched

Yep the multiplayer is where it is at for games. I hardly ever finish campaigns in games. I've gotten through an hour of Killzone 3 campaign and 2.5 days online. As for the online in this game, it is great if it wasn't for the terrible lag because p2p servers. Terrible hit detection, the people with the best connections have an insane advantage, and framerate has alot to do with the lag as well.

Players with good connection the advantage? Not in the lobbies I've been in... There was a dude with 1 single bar, I shot 2 mags (clean hits, cuz I ran behind him) on his back and he just kept running 'til I got shot in my back.

And there's something wrong with the hitdetection + killcam... Sometimes I get killed by people that never hit me if I look in the killcam... Other than that, this game is so much fun to play.

Once it took me 37 bullets to kill a dude who was just standing in a corner, he wasn't moving and I wasn't moving... ('cuz he seemed afk) and my crossair was on his body, so there is definatly something wrong with it...

Well if your that unhappy trade it in and stop trolling our forums with this garbage...

I don't think he's/she's trolling, at all. Agree or disagree, those are legitimate criticisms.

Notice how the OP doesn't have any problems with Homefront while others do. Hence, he enjoys the game more. He has problems with Crysis 2 while some others don't. Hence, these others enjoy it more. I come to these forums everyday and I read all these complaints about technical difficulties and graphical issues. Do I have these problems? No, and that's why I enjoy Crysis 2. I average 2-3 bars with a moderate NAT type and still haven't ran into lag, poor hit detection, or glitchy frame rates. I've read comments from others (even in this thread) that they have no problems going online either.

What gets on my nerves sometimes is that topics like this try and bad mouth the game as if the problems were universal. "Sorry but this game is really really bad" should have been "I don't like this game". Furthermore, keep in mind that Crysis 2 just came out less than a week ago. I can't think of any recent FPS title that was perfect upon launch. Black Ops had massive amounts of server issues (360, can't speak for the PS3). Halo Reach had its fair share of imbalance and glitches. Killzone 3 had long waiting times to get into MP as well as having the most overpowered SMG since the unpatched AK-74u. Everyone already knows what went wrong with Homefront. Does this mean there aren't people who enjoy these games? No, because I know I enjoy them, especially after they were patched. Just give Crytek feedback in a respectful manner and they will listen.

If you think black ops looks better than this game then I really doubt you own this game at all.

Well if your that unhappy trade it in and stop trolling our forums with this garbage...

I don't think he's/she's trolling, at all. Agree or disagree, those are legitimate criticisms.

Only thing bothering me is the hitdetection and killcam... 'cause the graphics are awesome, the controls are same as COD? except for the grenades...

You die, you look in killcam and according to the killcam that person didn't hit you at all... That svcks. Other than that I have a lot more fun playing Crysis 2 than COD...

The hit detection is brutal sometimes.

I understand there is a difference between hitting someone with their Max Armour enabled, and hitting someone without it.

But still, there has been countless times where I have unloaded a full clip with the feline, then switched to secondary for a few shots, then melee attacked one or two strikes, only to be hit with a single melee attack and die.

And I am not saying that this has happened once or twice. It has happened a lot.
And I know how to shoot in an FPS, so it is not me, for sure.

The hit marker system needs fixing.

Indeed once I killed someone without even getting a single hitmarker... And I run around with armor a lot only to then get killed in 1 or 2 shots by someone (according to the sounds I hear and hits I see on my screen) then I look in the killcam and he's just spraying on me...

Or people that don't hit me at all, I don't care if I die, but atleast let me see how. xD

What gets on my nerves sometimes is that topics like this try and bad mouth the game as if the problems were universal. "Sorry but this game is really really bad" should have been "I don't like this game".

Might be the best post in this thread yet.

I've had issues with lag,but I've had matches without it too.People think that dedicated servers is the answer,and it very well might be,but dedicated doesn't mean that this game will run perfect.

I've played two FPS games that run on dedicated servers,MAG and Homefront.Mag had potential to go down as the greatest FPS of all time,but Zipper screwed the pooch on that one by adding random bullet spread and changing a lot of guns power.People subsequently left because when they patched in those changes,BFBC2 was released,and people wanted to play that instead.Due to the mass exodus,Zipper was forced to shut down servers.The game ran perfectly in the first months with little to no lag at all,while hosting 256 players.

Kaos promised in a podcast that they released about a week or so before t he game came out,that they had contingency plans in place for technical issues.They either flat out lied or they are just incompetent,because that game still has issues.

Both games have the problem of freezing mid match,and problems connecting players to games.Is that a coincidence that they have the same issues and both are using dedicated servers? I don't think so.

I can't take opinions of this game seriously from someone with the name Famaug, obviously a CoD fankid

The op has SOME very valid points, all the MP gameplay issues he mentioned im am expiriencing, i disagree about the graphics and comparisons though but anyway......

it is understandable how one would come on to a forum directly related to the game in question and drag it though the mud, its through sheer frustration and annoyance that this potentiialy brilliant product is just not working as it should, its just an outright tease, if the op did not care for the game im sure he would have simply traded it in but what good does that do crytek?
they need to know what is going wrong for certain players and they can't expect for consumers after they have paid decent money for thier product only to find that it is not working as it should to come on here and sedately describe the issues.

coming on to the forums and posting "the game is great" "game works fine for me".............is outright useless, what interest do crytek have in the game working for some and not all, if people do not post thier issues on this forums how will crytek know that thier game has faults?

i can assure you that crytek would rather sit there and listen to the very unhappy customers who could do damage to thier brand amoung his/her friends, than the customers who just want to blow smoke

Yeah seriously get this garbage put of here. If you don't like the game than shut the f*** up and leave the forum. Haha go back to your horrible game homefront you piece of garbage. Cheers!

you have got to be kidding me- C2 svcks but homefront runs great? anyone who has both of these games has got to know that this info shoots this guy's argument out of the water. i have never had a worse experience with a video game than the experience i had with homefront. to say that that game runs better than C2, right now, is a joke. c'mon!

i think maybe famaug works for THQ or something. unless there is something wrong with his ps3.

critic: "best looking game on consoles"
famaug: "worst looking game on the ps3"

This game is not perfect, but what game is.

As much as i like this game, it has got its flaws.

Im loving the Campaign so far, the graphics are amazing, but the AI is just shocking.

As for the Multiplayer, its too laggy and the hit detection is just awful, you cant kill anyone at long range at all, a few patches will hopefully fix this though.

This game is not perfect, but what game is.

As much as i like this game, it has got its flaws.

Im loving the Campaign so far, the graphics are amazing, but the AI is just shocking.

As for the Multiplayer, its too laggy and the hit detection is just awful, you cant kill anyone at long range at all, a few patches will hopefully fix this though.



long range is easy to kill ppl just aim off the target alittle bit, the hit detection seems off just because server side lag its fcking up hit detection alot.

but yeah game has flaws but multi is still fun a hell.

if they keep it updated it has potential for lots of stuff .

but when brink or battlefield 3 comes out you know it will just fade away and fast

Yeah seriously get this garbage put of here. If you don't like the game than shut the f*** up and leave the forum. Haha go back to your horrible game homefront you piece of garbage. Cheers!

Wow you are an immature person. I was half expecting you to brag about your basketball skills after that intelligent rant. And no, I think I'll stay right here in this forum and share my honest opinion.

the only thing i dont like is that, well it's kinda hard seeing enemies even with the visor thingie majigy. My tv is a 52 inch 1080 p bravia 2010 model w/o 3d 240 hz and i use a really good hdmi. everything elsse is ok tho might be returning it

You you saying that call of duty looks better than crysis is not opinion good sir, it's pretty retarded. Im Doubting the fact that you have played the game or that you can see properly. But as for the lag and all the mp bugs I'll agree with some of your statements. I know it's against your nature you should really check out the campaign before you trade it in.

The game is broken on both consoles. The lag is truly pathetic. The host advantage is the worst I've seen since Gears of War. The more people live in a fantasy world where the game doesn't have horrendous lag and the hit detection isn't pathetic (unless your host that is), the longer these devs will take to fix the obvious freakin problem. Delusional or not, the problem IS there....

Well if your that unhappy trade it in and stop trolling our forums with this garbage, I adore what Crytek have done and commend them for giving us a truly unique and masterpeice of technical achievement, yes the frame rate svcks but that hopefully will be patched, the hit detection seems fine to me but I actually do aim and not rely on auto aim to do my work for me, the melee system is fun much better than the garabge 1 hit kill other popular FPS has it gives you a chance to reply by BOOM headshotting them, most people who complain about this game are COD and Battlefield fanboys who can't adapt to this game's pace my attitude is adapt or die or in your case trade the game in you obviously don't get what makes Crysis 2 better than ANY FPS today..


I play a variety of games, including COD, Killzone, Homefront and more. I know what a smooth, functioning game is supposed to look like. Crysis 2 is not a technical masterpiece, it is garbage. It may be good on the PC, but on PS3 it is just trash. I can even get over the sloppy controls if the gameplay makes up for it, like I did with Killzone 2. But the gameplay is just terrible in Crysis 2. I get the concept behind Crysis 2, and if it had been done well it *would* be a masterpiece. But the game has a cheap tacky feel to it, it is very obvious that Crytek have never developed for consoles before and don't really know what they are doing here. There are stuningly beautiful games that run at solid 30 frames per second (Uncahrted, Killzone, etc). But Crysis 2 not only has a low framerate, but the graphics are poor on top of it! It is simply unbelievably bad. I enjoyed Crysis 1 on PC, I thought it was a smooth, polished experience. Crysis 2 just svcks. Raggedly laggy graphics and gameplay are just not fun. I was hoping COD would finally have some real competition, but unfortunately Crysis 2 is not anywhere near the smooth enjoyable experience of COD. Which is sad, because it is obvious they are trying REALLY hard to make a COD type shooter. I can understand when a Battlefield or Killzone fan says "You're just a COD fanboy, you can't appreciate this game". They have a point, because those games are completely different from COD. But Crysis 2 is very clearly trying to emulate the COD experience as closely as possible, aside from the futuristic setting. The thing about COD is, it runs at a smooth 60 fps, with acceptable to good graphics. Crysis has bad framerate, which can't even stay at 30. It seems to dip down to 15-20 for the majority of the gameplay. And the textures are just muddy and horrible. Even aiming down sight, the graphics of the sight are blurry. This is not a good thing. My criticisms are substantial, I'm not just angry that I can't do well, or whatever other nonsense you can come up with. I've played good games and bad games, and Crysis 2 is a bad game.

I don't think they can patch fix the framerate, so you may be waiting a long time for that. Low framerate is due to bad coding, plain and simple. They can do bad coding on the PC, because lots of people will have super fact PCs that can still give a high quality experience, even if the coding is sloppy. Consoles are a completely different endeavor. You have to work hard to optimize your code to work with the limited hardware capabilities of consoles. Sloppy code results in poor performance. It is obvious they reduced the graphical quality to get the framerate better. If they wanted to patch fix the framerate, they'd have to reduce to graphical quality even more, and it would look downright hideous. This is just failure of a game. I know a turd when I see it, and that's exactly what we have with Crysis 2.

You repeat yourself to much, unprofessional .
NUFF SAID

This game is not perfect, but what game is.

As much as i like this game, it has got its flaws.

Im loving the Campaign so far, the graphics are amazing, but the AI is just shocking.

As for the Multiplayer, its too laggy and the hit detection is just awful, you cant kill anyone at long range at all, a few patches will hopefully fix this though.



long range is easy to kill ppl just aim off the target alittle bit, the hit detection seems off just because server side lag its fcking up hit detection alot.

but yeah game has flaws but multi is still fun a hell.

if they keep it updated it has potential for lots of stuff .

but when brink or battlefield 3 comes out you know it will just fade away and fast

I tend to agree,but what scares me about Brink is that it will be running P2P as well.

I'm no computer expert,but honestly,without dedicated servers,what patches short of being able to pick a particular host can they do?

Earlier this afternoon,most of my games were a three green bar connection,and I was playing pretty well,but just a bit ago,I was two yellow bars or less,and let's just say I wouldn't have felt bad about rage quiting.

Well, it's obvious that there are some legitimate issues with the game, particularly in Multi-player, imo. No-one can come on here and say "This game is totally dysfunctional" and no-one can come on and say "This game is absolutely glitch-free" either.

Let's give them some time to work on some patches.




But just to be safe...
ADD MORE CONTROL BUTTON LAYOUT OPTIONS PLEASE. (Lower triggers instead of upper ones)