Right reply to the general thread.

Firstly this is the kind of gamer I am (note the video itself is terrible, bad music backing bad FPS and quality, but it proves my point):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVyE9e9na8A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tx-ycMM2nI

I remember getting to the point of 50% rail accuracy on a **** 200 DpI mouse in Q3, and generally have played quite a lot of FPS.

Now For most games that have come out, I'm as upset as the rest of you about the change in gaming towards more simplified 'I click the person's face/general area and they die', however the issue is people have stopped being upset about the gameplay, and now moved onto other silly things, people who obviously are either looking at their old games with rose coloured glasses, or didn't play them in the first place.

All games have bugs, take for instance the modern classic S.T.A.L.K.E.R, I couldn't actually physically finish that until about the 3rd or 4th patch due to the multitude of crashes and bugs. And yes there are cheaters, and compared to most games it is very simple to cheat, but at the same time THAT isn't anything new either. Now yes if this was 2 months+ after launch, the complaints would be valid, but this is 11-7 days, 11-7 days to do something that is very very complex.

Game development isn't about how bug free your 1.0 build is, but when the customers find those game breaking bugs (And they ALWAYS will) how well you deal with them, and less then one month just isn't enough time to judge.

And a quick thing, the textures thing is just smart optimization. To notice any difference you have to zoom in and place them side by side. In return for the very minor difference, you've reduced the RAM useage by a power of 2. Good texture creation isn't about making them all super OMG detailed, but making them as small as possible without people noticing.

good post but I don't think you get it.
Crytek isn't a new developer that tries to get his foot into the gaming industry, Crytek is a company that did 2 games in the past that were absolutely pushing PC gaming forward. Now when you see what technology they had already 4 years ago, and how well done everything was - I mean when I played Far Cry and Crysis I really felt how much work and "love" they put into their game - it's just kinda sad to see how Crysis 2 did not take a step forward. There are very good things in Crysis 2, but it's depressing if you just imagine what a game Crysis 2 could have been if they just did it for PC and just strived to make the best game ever like they did with Far Cry and Crysis.

Read this.

http://www.kotaku.com.au/2011/04/12-ways-consoles-are-hurting-pc-gaming/

crysis 1 sold 3 million in retailIt took Crysis 1 a year to reach 1 million sales.

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/99063-25-crysis-sales-exceed-million

It went platinum on Q3 2008. The game launched in 2007 AFAIK?



Your reading skills fail hard friend.. very hard...

Crysis got launched on the 16th november 2007.. EAs 3rd finance quarter ended on the 31st december 2007. So the game sold more then 1 million games in less then 2 months. For a PC game back in this days it was very very good.

Love it when console drones spew fud like no tomorrow, I wouldn't be suprised if crysis 2 sales will be worse then crysis 1 over the same time periode, even when they combine all platforms toghter.

>not a console port
>PRESS START
>ADJUST YOUR TV
>PRESS F TO LOOK AT **** HAPPENING EVEN IF YOU COULD JUST LOOK AT IT ANYWAY
>Textures are actually half the size Crysis 1' textures

Yep, it's a console port.
Oh and doesn't matter if they fixed the messages in a patch, the fact still stands.
Oh and the MP is a ripoff of CoD, they could have expanded on the Battlefield-like nature of the first one but decided instead to please the CoD console-kiddies.

We're angry at what this game could have been, and how bad it's being run(hackers doing anything in MP, .ini custom configs working in **** MP LIKE IT'S A 1998 GAME).
It's been clearly done with consoles in mind, even if it's thanks to the Pc that Crysis rose to glory.
Oh and we paid for it, so as customers we have the rights to complain about it.

BAWW.

Fanboy in denial.
Explain to me why all the MP **** is clientside, and why there is no anticheat protection if it's not a console port, hell even PB would be better than nothing.
I play Bad Company 2 and even if it has PB I met like 1 hacker in 60 hours of MP gameplay.

u work in crytek?

A little bit of advise I know no one will take:

1) To the haters out there... quit biching. You are NOT convincing anyone to push they mouse away. All you are doing is showing yourselves to be whiny little pricks who likely need their naptime.

2) To all the fanatics.... why are you bothering with these people... I mean, if you are trolling them, I get it... I mean.. hell, they are basically bending over and yelling "please sir, can I have another" while you hold the pattle! But.... if you are trying to seriously convince anyone... why the **** are you bothering? You can't tell babies they are wrong, for all they will do is cry.

3) To Crytek... all kidding aside, you made a great game.... and a **** mp... but this is about what I expect out of you. Congrats, Im pleased... and I will likely never bother with your MP anyway... so... go you?

I think some ppl in here are being hypocrites... PC gamers being elitist?? Just because they probably spent a lot of money on new hardware, just for Crysis 2... Hell, I did the same thing, I upgraded from SLI GeForce 9800 GTX+'s to a GTX 460, just so I could have DX11 support for Crysis 2. Lo and behold, SLI support in this game is broken. Still a good game, but no matter how you slice it, the PC community was severely let down.

Imagine my surprise, when it turns out the game only does DX9, probably for now and ever... Still, it's nice to have a videocard with 1GB of video RAM now (9800 GTX+'s only have 512mb each), it can handle a lot.

Some people spend a lot on their PC's, they like having top-notch graphics horsepower, whereas others don't so much care for the graphics. I only have a single GTX 460 (with room for another one for SLI), but it's plenty for any game at 1680x1050. My PC was actually not expensive at all.

That's another thing, that age-old argument about PC's costing thousands of dollars to play games... Yes, you can spend as much or as a little as you want on a PC, hell you can have a decent gaming PC for less than $500 these days, and that includes EVERYTHING. You end up easily spending at least $300-$400 on a console, after buying all of the extra peripherals for it. And don't forget about the big-ass HDTV, do they seriously think we're stupid? You don't buy an Xbox360 or a PS3, and not have a big 47" HDTV to play it on, that also considerably drives the cost up... You're looking at $1000 easily, if you want maximum gameplay from a console... You can have an outstanding PC for $1000, and the hardware in it won't be outdated either.

Read this.

http://www.kotaku.com.au/2011/04/12-ways-consoles-are-hurting-pc-gaming/


AMEN.

You know,back in the days you buyed a game and really had a FULL GAME without gamebreaking bugs (yeah here a little glitch and there a tiny bug but nothing you really have to be pissed about) now, 10 years later developers sell you Alpha Versions for 40-60 euro.





This 1000000000000x

I gave up on this game. I still to this day still cannot play it and am waiting for a patch so I can. Literally, I cannot play it. When you see these multimillion dollar, shoddy AAA released with gamebreaking glitches or bugs that make you completely UNABLE TO PLAY, it kind of makes it pretty sadc to me. What makes it even more sad is when those developer apologists get angry at YOU for not being able to play a game you just payed $60 for and want answers.

I've literally had someone tell me, "It's not their fault you can't play it. Who cares, not their problem." YES, it IS their problem. And to inform everyone before I start getting replies that my hardware might not be "good enough", I have a 1100T AMD processor and XFX 6870's in CF. If that's not good enough, idk what is. Especially with this game still running on DX9.

I suppose I wouldn't be as pissed off at this game if it wasnt for the fact that Crytek is keeping their mouths shut about anything pertaining to an update ETA or if they are going to release one at all. No communication at all between the developer and the consumer. It's just horrible business practice.

You know,back in the days you buyed a game and really had a FULL GAME without gamebreaking bugs (yeah here a little glitch and there a tiny bug but nothing you really have to be pissed about) now, 10 years later developers sell you Alpha Versions for 40-60 euro.




That's because back in the days, full games weren't even near the size of 2 GB let alone 7-8 GBs and that had very weak graphical standards compared to today AND their net codes for online play, for the ones that had it (very few back then tho) were not nearly as difficult to compensate for as it is for the more demanding and diverse one today.

Read this.

http://www.kotaku.com.au/2011/04/12-ways-consoles-are-hurting-pc-gaming/


AMEN.

One thing I want to mention in regards to that article is that PC gaming has not been getting as much damage from consoles as let's say all the way back to the PS2/xbox days. THAT was bad....Devil May Cry 3 PC anyone?

Yeah well Capcom learned their lesson well. DMC4 on PC is the best port I've ever seen. It's actually ported to consoles now and written on PC first. They do all their games like this now.