OK, so it's pretty obvious to anyone who loved Crysis and Crysis Warhead why this game svcks. It's all been said. It's been dumbed down and consolised to absolute buggery, the heart has been completely ripped out of it, Sonic and Sega all stars racing feels like more of a PC game than this.

But what really makes me laugh is the apologists response to the Crysis 1 lovers reactions to Crysis 2. It pretty much goes like this:

"The original Crysis was overrated garbage anyway and this new game is what we really want".

In other words, they probably haven't even played Crysis or Crysis warhead properly, if at all.

And why does that bother you? Those people have an opinion. You have one too, but you advertise it as being a fact.

I just can't understand why people are wanting to belittle the original Crysis for what it was, while they trawl through the a game as bad as Crysis 2.

Beaten Crysis 4 times(all difficulties) and Warhead once and they are mediocre games at best from a FPS players standpoint(if one is a greenhorn at FPS games I can see how Crysis might have had some appeal when there's little to nothing to compare to). There was this big "Crysis Vs CoD4" thing back then since they were both released reasonably close to eachother and the Crysis fanbois were all raving about the "openess" and graphics of Crysis Vs the gameplay of the CoD4 fanbois. Dont need to tell anyone who won that fight as CoD4 is still one of the biggest MP FPS games out there and the singleplayer is hailed as one of the best modern FPS games while Crysis is concidered little more then a Benchmarking Tool. Only logical that people(even Crytek) makes their games more like CoD4 as a result since it simply proves what the majority of gamers want. Sure I'd go for more advanced FPS games like ARMA or the original OPF but as it is companies wont make games just for me.

I think they are both pretty cool games. Crysis 2 has been pretty fun so far.

What's even worse is that people act as if this is some huge series of revered games, when there has only been 3.....
One of the 3 was an expansion...

but yea, I've been diggin Crysis 2 so far, definitely not like Crysis 1; but I think that's why it's called Crysis 2

I agree they should have come out the gate better than they did. It’s bad when you have the older crisis games with more destruction on older hardware. Why should you produce something that has less? It’s like buying a car you buy a new one for more performance, reliability and NEW or BETTER options.

I just can't understand why people are wanting to belittle the original Crysis for what it was, while they trawl through the a game as bad as Crysis 2.

Well, the only thing you can do is to accept and respect their opinion.

Point is: if Crysis 2 would have extreme PC requirements, people would moan about not being able to play the game properly. Crytek tried to get the best of both: graphics ánd gameplay. Whether they failed or not, opinions differ.

In addition: give it some time people. You're expecting magic.

Consolisation does piss me off very much and I agree that Crysis 2 was consolised. Heart was ripped out, but not completely. Sure, there is no real speed mode, no on the fly customization, perks and kill streaks like in Call of Duty series, no open spaces, no vehicles (but I dont care about that one), no power struggle, laser sight is worse, you can't move in cool way like in Crysis (circle jumps), grenades are dumbed down [...], BUT it is still very good game, with best graphic ever seen, all in realtime, there will be sandbox 3, there will be laser sight and singleplayer mode seems to fantastic. Besides, maybe mods will turn it to more like Crysis Wars game.

Crytek ripped MY HEART OUT!

they are mediocre games at best
I realise you say you've played the original games, but this is what I'm talking about. Crysis and Warhead weren't "mediocre games at best", they were excellent, innovative, intuative and epic. And it's ironic that you would use this word to describe a game like Crysis, while giving good rep to Crysis 2.

It's funny, because one of the meanings of the word "mediocre", is ordinary. Ordinary is a perfect word to describe Crysis 2 and an unsuitable word to describe Crysis 1. Crysis 2 has nothing original about it at all, and mainly borrowed from COD style game. What little it does have of originality is taken from the proper Crysis game.

on max resolution and extreme graphic settings, i don't see how this is even considered one of the best looking pc games out there. i think if you keep repeating it..maybe you think it becomes true after a while? :sigh: i was torn between buying the PS3 version and this one. after reading how horrible the ps3 one was vs. the x360 one..i bought the PC one cause well i have a pretty nice system. I think the stuff they scraqed from the bottom of the barrel is the PC version of Crysis 2.

Yeah, I never even mentioned the graphics. But I don't think this game looks anywhere near as nice as the original, apart from maybe the lighting.

Give me the sharpness and clarity of the original over this low res textured smudge-fest, anyday. Sometimes I wonder if some of the guys who rate Crysis 2 graphics over Cryisis Warhead have ever even played a game at native resolution before

It doesn't even matter what Crysis 2 gameplay is like, no matter how good it is thats no reason not to have better graphics.

they are mediocre games at best
I realise you say you've played the original games, but this is what I'm talking about. Crysis and Warhead weren't "mediocre games at best", they were excellent, innovative, intuative and epic. And it's ironic that you would use this word to describe a game like Crysis, while giving good rep to Crysis 2.

It's funny, because one of the meanings of the word "mediocre", is ordinary. Ordinary is a perfect word to describe Crysis 2 and an unsuitable word to describe Crysis 1. Crysis 2 has nothing original about it at all, and mainly borrowed from COD style game. What little it does have of originality is taken from the proper Crysis game.

The thing is that if you've played alot of FPS games there were nothing original or innovative about Crysis.

Special "powers": FarCry: Instincts, Deus Ex Series etc
Open Maps: Operation Eagle, IGN Series, Dues Ex etc
Weapon Customization: Deus Ex, Rainbow Six etc

and so on. Neither side had anything new just that CoD4 was better and making old stuff better.

The thing is that if you've played alot of FPS games there were nothing original or innovative about Crysis.

Special "powers": FarCry: Instincts, Deus Ex Series etc
Open Maps: Operation Eagle, IGN Series, Dues Ex etc
Weapon Customization: Deus Ex, Rainbow Six etc

and so on. Neither side had anything new just that CoD4 was better and making old stuff better.

Seconded. You want a revolutionary FPS? Wolfenstein 3D. I've played the first Crysis a couple times, and the only thing awesome and innovative about it was that the Koreans spoke Korean on higher difficulty levels. It was a gorgeous game, but basically no different from playing Grand Theft Auto while only working for one gang. (Also, no totally awesome radio stations.)

they are mediocre games at best
I realise you say you've played the original games, but this is what I'm talking about. Crysis and Warhead weren't "mediocre games at best", they were excellent, innovative, intuative and epic. And it's ironic that you would use this word to describe a game like Crysis, while giving good rep to Crysis 2.

It's funny, because one of the meanings of the word "mediocre", is ordinary. Ordinary is a perfect word to describe Crysis 2 and an unsuitable word to describe Crysis 1. Crysis 2 has nothing original about it at all, and mainly borrowed from COD style game. What little it does have of originality is taken from the proper Crysis game.

I kinda liked crysis2, consolidized but refreshing game, but youre 100% Correct, its nothing like crysis 1.

Nicely said.

LOL... funny comparisons here...

I just can't understand why people are wanting to belittle the original Crysis for what it was, while they trawl through the a game as bad as Crysis 2.

Well, the only thing you can do is to accept and respect their opinion.

Point is: if Crysis 2 would have extreme PC requirements, people would moan about not being able to play the game properly. Crytek tried to get the best of both: graphics ánd gameplay. Whether they failed or not, opinions differ.

In addition: give it some time people. You're expecting magic.

I happen to *like* Crysis 2 as-is.

Unlike some, I don't have high-end hardware.

I don't even have midrange hardware.

(And no, I don't own a console-next-generation or otherwise.)

I have budget hardware.

Celeron DC E3400 (upgraded from E1200 I used to play the MP demo, which I had no issues with).

AMD HD5450.

3 GB DDR2 SDRAM.

Yet Crysis 2 (at 1280x720) likes it just fine.

Notice that all the folks doing the screaming are the high-end PC-hardware braggarts that spent a mint expecting another hardware-bruising PC-eater (which the original Crysis was, as even Kyle Bennett of [H]ardOCP admits). The complaints are legion.

No DX11 at launch.

Multi-GPU issues.

No uber-textures.

Notice, however, that the midrange single-GPU PC folks aren't complaining. Hmm....wonder why?

Could it be that they are actually having fun playing a game that doesn't require that they upgrade anything (let alone darn near everything)?

"The original Crysis was overrated garbage anyway and this new game is what we really want".


Lol, TRANSLATION: "Mommies 10 year old PC couldn't run it and threw up".

id be happy overall if they would give a option to remove the **** motion blur crap untill they do i cant play it as i literally puke. sli support would be super too but mainly removal of motion blur

i really dont get why they are having so many issues after they had a multiplayer beta for the game?

"The original Crysis was overrated garbage anyway and this new game is what we really want".


Lol, TRANSLATION: "Mommies 10 year old PC couldn't run it and threw up".

More like "Finally! An FPS that doesn't have requirements that *everything* be high-end!"

High-end PC hardware has been the target of the PC FPS market since the days of DOS.

It may have actually reached its zenith (or nadir, depending on your POV) with the original Crysis.

Now we actually have an FPS that is playable on midrange (if not everyday) PC hardware, with a control system that is graspable by everyday folks. (This is the PC Forum, so let's leave consoles out of this, shall we?)

The folks doing the bashing or drankin da Haterade are listing their hardware specs, and I notice something in common - high-end PC hardware.

Guess what - you're an afterthought for once.

Usually when shooter developers pay such loving attention to your beloved uber-textures and uber-features, us ordinary folks with average hardware get the shaft while you largely ROTFLMA us and sneer - all the while saying "Upgrade or stay out of our sandbox, lamah!" That's even been true of most multiplatform shooters (such as the original Gears of War for PC).

Now we have a shooter for the average PC, that looks downright decent on average hardware.

No tons of tweakery required (if you have average hardware). Just install, activate, and play.

It's something that's been promised for gaming since Windows 9x, and has largely been the case for every genre *except* FPS titles - which have remained a tweakfest.

For sixteen years we've been waiting for an FPS that can be enjoyed by average PC owners with average midrange PC hardware - and it's here.

(The "sixteen years" is since the launch of Windows 95.)

The FPS Wall is down, and won't be going back up.

Wierd... I LOVED Crysis1 and Crysis Warhead and am enjoying Crysis2... Whats wrong with me! lol

USE THE GOOGLE TRASLATOR:
No entiendo como puede ser posible que a este nuevo juego lo esten haciendo pedazos apenas a 1 dia de estar lanzado. Es cierto del no soporte de DirectX11 (que sera parchado pronto), multiGPU, etc........ Pero creo que los graficos son muy buenos, el esfuerzo de los desarrolladores por hacer algo mejor, es de admirar. Estamos viviendo la misma historia cuando Crysis 1 fue lanzado, problemas, quejas, y todo eso fue corregido con el paso del tiempo hasta que llego al punto de ser el referente de lo que es ahora; estoy completamente convencido que Crysis 2, tendra la misma historia, no opino para las consolas porque no tengo, soy jugador de PC desde que salio Wolf3D. Tengo un Core i7 2600 8GB de RAM Intel DP67BG y una EVGA GTX 580, si tengo ese equipo, es porque no creo ser tan ignorante en este tema de Crysis 2 para opinar. Crytek ha olvidado algunas cosas en la version de PC, he leido mucho de esas quejas, pero como dije estoy seguro que se iran corrigiendo, y ya dejen de llorar, este juego se ira puliendo, lo sabemos y se convertira en referente. Nunca dije que es mejor que Crysis 1, pero no es razon para patear el trasero a los desarrolladores. Es mi opinion.