Crysis 2 Review

Steve Butts

New member
Jun 1, 2010
1,003
0
0
Crysis 2 Review

Until they make a nano-suit for a man of my carriage, this?ll have to do.

Read Full Article
 
Jul 22, 2009
3,596
0
0
Hmm the reviews are really praising this...

Looks like I'll probably pick it up eventually, but unfortunately it's been bumped from my 'must have' list by THQ and Bethesda combined...
 

Jaime_Wolf

New member
Jul 17, 2009
1,194
0
0
I've really been enjoying Crysis 2. Probably one of the better shooters I've played in the last couple of years.

Speaking mostly of the multiplayer:
I'd say the most important aspect in favour of the game is the pacing. The gameplay is very much like CoD, but almost every addition makes for a faster game without sacrificing some of the nicer CoD aspects. So low health, high damage, and good accuracy makes tactical movement important, but sprinting, stealth, jump height, ledge-grabbing, and even the more vertical level layout all speed things up considerably. The level layouts are actually some of the best I've seen in an FPS, actually making use of three-dimensional space in a way that feels realistic without any feeling that the third dimension of movement was just tacked on for gameplay.

The only issues I've had have been with the multiplayer servers and stat servers, which have both been having some problems. But really, those are launch problems and will be/have been fixed pretty quickly.
 

D_987

New member
Jun 15, 2008
4,839
0
0
If Crysis 2 falls short in any one key area, it's story. Or maybe it's better to say that the story falls short because of the way it's told. The plot itself might be actually enjoyable. The problem is that all the elements are jumbled together and parceled out seemingly at random. You don't even know who your character is supposed to be until a few hours into the game. Even then your character is defined entirely by what he does, which makes all the accompanying melodrama (not to mention the I-so-saw-that-coming twist towards the end), kind of unsatisfying. The campaign itself clocks in around 10 hours, which is long enough to be satisfying, but not so long that you're not likely to go back and play it a different way.
http://kotaku.com/#!5513872/crysis-2-writer-on-modern-warfare-2-story-jesus-what-have-you-been-doing

"I thought Modern Warfare 2 was an immense disappointment," Morgan told CVG. "It was a massive stepdown from CoD4. What I thought when I played it was, 'Jesus guys, what have you been doing? You've not ramped anything up. The story is worse and the game doesn't really hang together, it's just a bunch of mission levels.'"

"It made no sense. It was totally implausible," Morgan added. "It doesn't resolve. Basically, all the things that bad storytelling does. I just think they were way too impressed with themselves and that's always a danger. It's just unfortunate."
Yeah, the writer doesn't sound like a complete hypocrite or anything...

Regardless, I actually cancelled my pre-order of this game after playing the demo, I'll probably get it when the price drops slightly; as the reviews of the single player sound highly promising.
 

HerbertTheHamster

New member
Apr 6, 2009
1,007
0
0
Crysis 2 is very mediocre, 5/10 at most. The thing that bugs me most is that the FOV is like 45 or something, it's like the nanosuit blocks out 80% of your vision.

Sadly, game reviews can never be taken seriously because 8/10 is a "decent" score for AAA games.
 

D_987

New member
Jun 15, 2008
4,839
0
0
HerbertTheHamster said:
Crysis 2 is very mediocre, 5/10 at most. The thing that bugs me most is that the FOV is like 45 or something, it's like the nanosuit blocks out 80% of your vision.

Sadly, game reviews can never be taken seriously because 8/10 is a "decent" score for AAA games.
Or people just don't have the same opinion as you regarding the game...
 
Apr 28, 2008
14,634
0
0
I don't know, I fail to see how New York is a fresh environment. Been there in plenty of games.

As for the review itself, don't agree that much. Then again I played on the PC, and I was pretty underwhelmed. Especially in the multiplayer. Just felt too much like Call of Duty to me, But with the ability to jump high and go invisible. And they could have done so much more with it. They take the nanosuit, a pretty interesting device, and put it into an uninteresting multilayer experience. There's just so much more you could do with it.

Like a race mode, players race through a City, Mirror's Edge style, and have to use all of the suits powers to navigate it.

Or a predator-type game, where one player has all the suits powers activated(cloak, strength), and "hunts" the other players.

Or Time Attack challenges, to see how fast you can clear an area. Would require expert use of the suit, and could be fun.

But no, they just go for a Call of Duty clone. God dammit.

Haven't played the single-player fully yet, since I just played at a friend's place. But the story was rather fun. Multiplayer was just boring. I'll get it when the price drops.
 

HerbertTheHamster

New member
Apr 6, 2009
1,007
0
0
D_987 said:
HerbertTheHamster said:
Crysis 2 is very mediocre, 5/10 at most. The thing that bugs me most is that the FOV is like 45 or something, it's like the nanosuit blocks out 80% of your vision.

Sadly, game reviews can never be taken seriously because 8/10 is a "decent" score for AAA games.
Or people just don't have the same opinion as you regarding the game...
This is true, but I'm referring to the industry as a whole. When a movie or book is average it gets a 5/10. When a game is average it gets a 7/10 or a 8/10.
 

teebeeohh

New member
Jun 17, 2009
2,896
0
0
yes, crysis is awesome and i am sitting on box that will not open until i upgrade my hardware in may
 

RA92

New member
Jan 1, 2011
3,079
0
0
Crysis 1 could support 32 players in its MP instead of this measly 16, and the maps were way larger as well. Considering people buy FPS titles these days mostly for the MP, this is downgraded.
 

Armored Prayer

New member
Mar 10, 2009
5,319
0
0
I agree with one part of the review, pretty graphics and set pieces are pretty. I also like the idea of switching tactics during battle that actually play different.

I might actually try this game out now, seems like something I'd really enjoy.
 

The Zango

Resident stoner and Yognaught
Apr 30, 2009
3,706
0
0
Argh! Why did I order this game from Play.com?! If I'd ordered it from somewhere reliable I could be playing it NOW! Seriously, the wait to play this game is horrible, especially since it looks absolutely awesome.
 

antman9000

New member
Jun 13, 2008
51
0
0
hmm i should play crysis 1 first lol. which i shall do soon, for $10. then buy this when its on special or something.
 

DaHero

New member
Jan 10, 2011
789
0
0
I'm not buying this story. From what I can tell there are lots of options but I can guarantee in multiplayer it'll be exactly like CoD tactic-less berserk spraying.
 

IBlackKiteI

New member
Mar 12, 2010
1,613
0
0
Jaime_Wolf said:
I've really been enjoying Crysis 2. Probably one of the better shooters I've played in the last couple of years.

Speaking mostly of the multiplayer:
I'd say the most important aspect in favour of the game is the pacing. The gameplay is very much like CoD, but almost every addition makes for a faster game without sacrificing some of the nicer CoD aspects. So low health, high damage, and good accuracy makes tactical movement important, but sprinting, stealth, jump height, ledge-grabbing, and even the more vertical level layout all speed things up considerably. The level layouts are actually some of the best I've seen in an FPS, actually making use of three-dimensional space in a way that feels realistic without any feeling that the third dimension of movement was just tacked on for gameplay.

The only issues I've had have been with the multiplayer servers and stat servers, which have both been having some problems. But really, those are launch problems and will be/have been fixed pretty quickly.
Finally, someone who knows what they're talking about in regards to Crysis.

I'll probably grab this eventually, personally I don't much care for stories anymore. I'd just like a good, fun shooter.
 

silverbullet1989

New member
Jun 7, 2009
391
0
0
why are the aliens now red instead of blue =P but seriously, ive just finished it, im confused as hell but i bloody enjoyed every min of it... i wish that they had linked back to the first game a bit more... to me now, everything from the first game seems to have been forgotten, apart from prophet
 

Delusibeta

Reachin' out...
Mar 7, 2010
2,594
0
0
Do note that this is based on the 360 version, thus most complaints about the PC version (poor textures, complete lack of graphics options, sheer laziness in porting) doesn't apply.
 

Easton Dark

New member
Jan 2, 2011
2,366
0
0
So they actually added true stealth kills this time. Good.

I mean, I was happy to use quick buttons to uncloak, switch to strength mode, bash enemies in the back of the head, then switch back to stealth in less than a second, but I like the idea of neck-snapping more.
 

Netrigan

New member
Sep 29, 2010
1,924
0
0
D_987 said:
If Crysis 2 falls short in any one key area, it's story. Or maybe it's better to say that the story falls short because of the way it's told. The plot itself might be actually enjoyable. The problem is that all the elements are jumbled together and parceled out seemingly at random. You don't even know who your character is supposed to be until a few hours into the game. Even then your character is defined entirely by what he does, which makes all the accompanying melodrama (not to mention the I-so-saw-that-coming twist towards the end), kind of unsatisfying. The campaign itself clocks in around 10 hours, which is long enough to be satisfying, but not so long that you're not likely to go back and play it a different way.
http://kotaku.com/#!5513872/crysis-2-writer-on-modern-warfare-2-story-jesus-what-have-you-been-doing

"I thought Modern Warfare 2 was an immense disappointment," Morgan told CVG. "It was a massive stepdown from CoD4. What I thought when I played it was, 'Jesus guys, what have you been doing? You've not ramped anything up. The story is worse and the game doesn't really hang together, it's just a bunch of mission levels.'"

"It made no sense. It was totally implausible," Morgan added. "It doesn't resolve. Basically, all the things that bad storytelling does. I just think they were way too impressed with themselves and that's always a danger. It's just unfortunate."
Yeah, the writer doesn't sound like a complete hypocrite or anything...

Regardless, I actually cancelled my pre-order of this game after playing the demo, I'll probably get it when the price drops slightly; as the reviews of the single player sound highly promising.
He didn't say he'd tell a good story, merely that it would actually hang together :)

Just played MW2 for the first time and on a pure gaming level, I was satisfied... but there seems to be little doubt that it was a bunch of cool set-pieces linked together by a story that was never in danger of actually making any sort of sense.

After I played it, I thought for several minutes about what had just happened, couldn't make heads nor tails of it, read the plot synopsis on Wikipedia, re-read the plot synopsis on Wikipedia, read it again... then gave up trying to make any sort of sense of what had happened in the game. Why were they in Brazil... don't know, but it made for a cool level. Why did they attack a Russian gulag... don't know but it made a cool level. Somehow these two things were linked, but why a arms dealer in Brazil would be leading them to Capt. Price does not make sense on any level known to man.

But it was fucking cool.

And, ultimately, that's the problem with MW2. And whatever the problems the Crysis 2 story might have, it sounds as though there actually is one.
 

Distorted Stu

New member
Sep 22, 2009
4,229
0
0
I loved it, just wish the sotry could o fbeen told a bit better. Also, the voice acting.. OH LORD THE VOICE ACTING
 

Wicky_42

New member
Sep 15, 2008
2,468
0
0
Ok, 10hr campaign is good, but I still want to know how it performs on PC before I'd spend money on it. The multiplayer demo did not spark my interest at all, I'd only be getting it for the single player and the graphics - here's hoping they see fit to incorporate Dx11 sometime in the near future...
 

cainx10a

New member
May 17, 2008
2,191
0
0
Netrigan said:
D_987 said:
If Crysis 2 falls short in any one key area, it's story. Or maybe it's better to say that the story falls short because of the way it's told. The plot itself might be actually enjoyable. The problem is that all the elements are jumbled together and parceled out seemingly at random. You don't even know who your character is supposed to be until a few hours into the game. Even then your character is defined entirely by what he does, which makes all the accompanying melodrama (not to mention the I-so-saw-that-coming twist towards the end), kind of unsatisfying. The campaign itself clocks in around 10 hours, which is long enough to be satisfying, but not so long that you're not likely to go back and play it a different way.
http://kotaku.com/#!5513872/crysis-2-writer-on-modern-warfare-2-story-jesus-what-have-you-been-doing

"I thought Modern Warfare 2 was an immense disappointment," Morgan told CVG. "It was a massive stepdown from CoD4. What I thought when I played it was, 'Jesus guys, what have you been doing? You've not ramped anything up. The story is worse and the game doesn't really hang together, it's just a bunch of mission levels.'"

"It made no sense. It was totally implausible," Morgan added. "It doesn't resolve. Basically, all the things that bad storytelling does. I just think they were way too impressed with themselves and that's always a danger. It's just unfortunate."
Yeah, the writer doesn't sound like a complete hypocrite or anything...

Regardless, I actually cancelled my pre-order of this game after playing the demo, I'll probably get it when the price drops slightly; as the reviews of the single player sound highly promising.
He didn't say he'd tell a good story, merely that it would actually hang together :)

Just played MW2 for the first time and on a pure gaming level, I was satisfied... but there seems to be little doubt that it was a bunch of cool set-pieces linked together by a story that was never in danger of actually making any sort of sense.

After I played it, I thought for several minutes about what had just happened, couldn't make heads nor tails of it, read the plot synopsis on Wikipedia, re-read the plot synopsis on Wikipedia, read it again... then gave up trying to make any sort of sense of what had happened in the game. Why were they in Brazil... don't know, but it made for a cool level. Why did they attack a Russian gulag... don't know but it made a cool level. Somehow these two things were linked, but why a arms dealer in Brazil would be leading them to Capt. Price does not make sense on any level known to man.

But it was fucking cool.

And, ultimately, that's the problem with MW2. And whatever the problems the Crysis 2 story might have, it sounds as though there actually is one.
1/ they went to brazil to track the dude who provided the munitions used to kill the russian civilians ... hoping it would help them get a clue as to where Makarov would be... not sure if that's how they got the info about Makarov's supposed enemy

2/ they went to the gulag to rescue a mustachioed enemy of Makarov, hoping he might give them some lead to capture him

3/ MW2 storyline was a messed, too bad IW is kinda dead, and I doubt the remnants working on MW3 will have any clue on how to follow-up on the storyline or even have the technical pro-efficiency that IW had. They did upgrade the CoD4 engine beautifully to the one used in MW2, unlike Treyarch.
 

fullboat

New member
Mar 10, 2011
4
0
0
I assume this is the Xbox 360 review, as Crytek did not provide the PC or PS3 games to reviewers.

It would be very helpful if when people did game reviews they indicated what platform they reviewed the game on.

I know a lot of PC gamers are very disappointed with a lot of aspects of Crysis 2.
 

Steve Butts

New member
Jun 1, 2010
1,003
0
0
HerbertTheHamster said:
D_987 said:
HerbertTheHamster said:
Crysis 2 is very mediocre, 5/10 at most. The thing that bugs me most is that the FOV is like 45 or something, it's like the nanosuit blocks out 80% of your vision.

Sadly, game reviews can never be taken seriously because 8/10 is a "decent" score for AAA games.
Or people just don't have the same opinion as you regarding the game...
This is true, but I'm referring to the industry as a whole. When a movie or book is average it gets a 5/10. When a game is average it gets a 7/10 or a 8/10.
I disagree. Honestly, I think game critics are too harsh these days. I've played a lot of games that score generally around 60-70 that were pretty enjoyable. Not the greatest games but definitely worth a look, despite what critics say.

Standards are so high now, it seems like if something doesn't get a 95 it isn't worth a purchase.
 

NewYork_Comedian

New member
Nov 28, 2009
1,046
0
0
Crysis 1 was one of the best games ive ever played, so either way im going to get this anyway. Glad to see almost all the reviews are positive though.
 

Hungry Donner

Henchman
Mar 19, 2009
1,369
0
0
I was a big fan of the original so it was nice to get a review from someone else who enjoyed it as well.
 

Valanthe

New member
Sep 24, 2009
655
0
0
fullboat said:
I assume this is the Xbox 360 review, as Crytek did not provide the PC or PS3 games to reviewers.

It would be very helpful if when people did game reviews they indicated what platform they reviewed the game on.

I know a lot of PC gamers are very disappointed with a lot of aspects of Crysis 2.
If you read the article, it states right at the end end above the product information,

"This review was based on the Xbox 360 version of the game."
 

Still Life

New member
Sep 22, 2010
1,137
0
0
I haven't had this much fun in a shooter for a while now. Crysis 2 has a lot of depth in its gameplay for a fast-paced shooter. Considering that Crytek have managed to go multiplatform and still maintain very high quality visuals also makes it a technical achievement.

The story takes time to warm up, but it answers all the fundamentals by the end and actually gives us closure -- unlike the first game.
 

D_987

New member
Jun 15, 2008
4,839
0
0
Netrigan said:
He didn't say he'd tell a good story, merely that it would actually hang together :)
Hence the bolded section "The problem is that all the elements are jumbled together and parceled out seemingly at random", the reviewer implies the elements of the story, much like MW2, are jumbled.
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
Biggest problem for me playing through the story right now is the enemies that can sometimes see you even when you've cloaked before you've gone in the same room as them.

They've flunked a bit on the story too so far as well, which is annoying given the two names behind it. Say what you will of the original game's story, but it was coherent, and I could tell you how I got from the first beach to where I was at the end of the game. Here, I just seem to black out at the end of every section and wake up randomly closer to where I need to be.

I seem to be getting a lot of AI issues also - seems either broken to the point where they can see me when cloaked like I said, or I'm standing right in front of them and they simply walk in the opposite direction. This does seem to be varying wildly from person to person as far as I can tell though.

Still enjoying it.

Oh, and the thing with the PC graphics menu is absurd. 3 presets? And how can it be marked 'high' if its the lowest setting? Still, runs great and looks great.
 

Twilight_guy

Sight, Sound, and Mind
Nov 24, 2008
7,131
0
0
And yet I still don't care. Nice review but nothing that I saw or read really got me interested enough to go out and buy it.
 

Baneat

New member
Jul 18, 2008
2,762
0
0
HerbertTheHamster said:
D_987 said:
HerbertTheHamster said:
Crysis 2 is very mediocre, 5/10 at most. The thing that bugs me most is that the FOV is like 45 or something, it's like the nanosuit blocks out 80% of your vision.

Sadly, game reviews can never be taken seriously because 8/10 is a "decent" score for AAA games.
Or people just don't have the same opinion as you regarding the game...
This is true, but I'm referring to the industry as a whole. When a movie or book is average it gets a 5/10. When a game is average it gets a 7/10 or a 8/10.
Hint: score systems are an attempt to objectivise the subjective, I've never even read a book that had these score things on it.

Anyway:
Here are the settings I had placed into my launch options for crysis 2 demo
"C:\Program Files (x86)\Electronic Arts\Crytek\Crysis 2 Demo\bin32\Crysis2Demo.exe" +cl_fov=90 +r_DrawNearFoV = 90 +pl_movement.power_sprint_targetFov = 90 +g_skipIntro=1

Skip intro and constant FoV of 90, I think all the console commands are still functional, there just isn't an easy, in-game way to do the more basic things (bloom/HDR, AA etc.), because I've heard of people altering the bloom and stuff in Crysis 2.
 

Drakmorg

Local Cat
Aug 15, 2008
18,504
0
0
Meh, never had any interest in the Crysis series at all, and this review has failed to change my opinion.

Then again maybe I'm just biased because it looks like all they did was take Call of Duty and shove Halo Reach armor powers into it.
 

ImprovizoR

New member
Dec 6, 2009
1,952
0
0
There is absolutely nothing remarkable about this game. Nothing at all. Not even graphics. It's a simple modern shooter with some aliens and a nano-suit that essentially plays just like call of duty. So call me a PC fanboy all you want but it's a FACT that Crysis 2 is dumbed down for consoles. Even the interface is consolized for crying out loud! Animations look like they were ripped straight from call of duty. The overall atmosphere and the feel of the game is completely ruined. It feels like any other FPS on the market. I can see why console gamers will like it. It is fresh for consoles. It isn't fresh on PC. PC has Crysis 1 and Warhead. This game is a disgrace in all aspects. All those little things that made Crysis special are now gone.

A.I. is retarded. You don't even need the nano-suit in most cases while in Crysis 1 it was essential. And when you use it the game becomes a walk in the park. Almost literally in some cases where you just walk past enemies while cloaked. And if you shoot one you jut need to wait a few seconds for energy to recharge and cloak again. And they just leave you alone.
Nano-suit is dumbed down. Now you can't sprint without using your super-speed the way you could in Crysis 1. Armor mode and strength mode are combined making the game even easier and less tactical. Binoculars is a nano-suit mode. You can't dual wield weapons. You can't carry more than 2 weapons and an RPG.

The setting is very unimaginative. All of the stuff you hear about the city looking great might be true if you compare Crysis 2 to every other console shooter, CoD primarily. But you have to compare it to it's predecessor and when you do you will realize how unoriginal the setting is. And level design is linear and boring.

Story is dreadful. I don't even know why am I doing things in this game anyway. A mute character gets a suit against his will and knowledge and then he starts doing errands for everyone he meets without asking questions. The mute character in Crysis 2 makes the story even dumber and more meaningless than it already is. You just can't feel any connection to anything that's going on. It just doesn't matter. The story fails to pull you in because even though it's a FIRST PERSON game it feels like you're an outsider who just happened to be there and everything that happens is out of your reach. It's like you can't do anything unless you're told too. And what you're being told doesn't make sense because of the way it's told. It makes the single player pretty much meaningless. And did I mention how the story doesn't make any sense whatsoever? And I have to mention that none of the questions from Crysis 1 were answered. So if you were hoping to find out what happened on the island after the events of Crysis 1 you will be disappointed.
 

ZeroMachine

New member
Oct 11, 2008
4,397
0
0
Netrigan said:
D_987 said:
If Crysis 2 falls short in any one key area, it's story. Or maybe it's better to say that the story falls short because of the way it's told. The plot itself might be actually enjoyable. The problem is that all the elements are jumbled together and parceled out seemingly at random. You don't even know who your character is supposed to be until a few hours into the game. Even then your character is defined entirely by what he does, which makes all the accompanying melodrama (not to mention the I-so-saw-that-coming twist towards the end), kind of unsatisfying. The campaign itself clocks in around 10 hours, which is long enough to be satisfying, but not so long that you're not likely to go back and play it a different way.
http://kotaku.com/#!5513872/crysis-2-writer-on-modern-warfare-2-story-jesus-what-have-you-been-doing

"I thought Modern Warfare 2 was an immense disappointment," Morgan told CVG. "It was a massive stepdown from CoD4. What I thought when I played it was, 'Jesus guys, what have you been doing? You've not ramped anything up. The story is worse and the game doesn't really hang together, it's just a bunch of mission levels.'"

"It made no sense. It was totally implausible," Morgan added. "It doesn't resolve. Basically, all the things that bad storytelling does. I just think they were way too impressed with themselves and that's always a danger. It's just unfortunate."
Yeah, the writer doesn't sound like a complete hypocrite or anything...

Regardless, I actually cancelled my pre-order of this game after playing the demo, I'll probably get it when the price drops slightly; as the reviews of the single player sound highly promising.
He didn't say he'd tell a good story, merely that it would actually hang together :)

Just played MW2 for the first time and on a pure gaming level, I was satisfied... but there seems to be little doubt that it was a bunch of cool set-pieces linked together by a story that was never in danger of actually making any sort of sense.

After I played it, I thought for several minutes about what had just happened, couldn't make heads nor tails of it, read the plot synopsis on Wikipedia, re-read the plot synopsis on Wikipedia, read it again... then gave up trying to make any sort of sense of what had happened in the game. Why were they in Brazil... don't know, but it made for a cool level. Why did they attack a Russian gulag... don't know but it made a cool level. Somehow these two things were linked, but why a arms dealer in Brazil would be leading them to Capt. Price does not make sense on any level known to man.

But it was fucking cool.

And, ultimately, that's the problem with MW2. And whatever the problems the Crysis 2 story might have, it sounds as though there actually is one.
They were in Brazil to track down someone linked to Makarov and his weapon supplies. That led them to the gulag because the guy confessed that Makarov wanted someone, namely Price, dead, most likely for his involvement with the death of Zakhaev in Modern Warfare 1, whom Makarov viewed an an idol and martyr.

Why the hell does everyone has such an issue understanding the story of Modern Warfare 2? I don't get it... It's a simple story, if a little convoluted. Am I playing a different game? Gah...

Anyways, I think I may get this when I get a better PC. I saw it in 3D at PAX East and it looked awesome, and I actually kind of enjoyed the demo, so I don't see why not. Better get the first one first, though...
 

infohippie

New member
Oct 1, 2009
2,369
0
0
So, sounds like they've simplified the nanosuit a fair bit when it was already simple enough. They've apparently not bothered to put a lot of effort into the story and only ten hours for the single-player campaign? Are Crytek kidding here? I loved Crysis 1, and Crysis Warhead, but I don't think I'll be buying this.

"The game also includes a tactical vision mode that highlights on the screen key locations where certain types of play might be appropriate. It might, for instance, call out a sniping position on a roof, or a subway entrance you can use to sneak around behind your enemies."
Really? And console gamers wonder why PC gamers complain that console versions cause PC franchises to get dumbed down. Looks like Crysis 2 is the perfect illustration of why such complaints are made.
 

Steve Butts

New member
Jun 1, 2010
1,003
0
0
Drakmorg said:
Meh, never had any interest in the Crysis series at all, and this review has failed to change my opinion.

Then again maybe I'm just biased because it looks like all they did was take Call of Duty and shove Halo Reach armor powers into it.
Crysis was out long before Halo Reach.

Crysis' 'power armour' as you call it, was, therefore, out long before Halo Reach.

Try again.
 

tautologico

e^(i * pi) + 1 = 0
Apr 5, 2010
725
0
0
I want to try it sometime, but play Crysis 1 first. I never got the first, though, because of SecuROM. I don't mind DRM in general, but I don't want a program eating my CPU away.
 

MGlBlaze

New member
Oct 28, 2009
1,079
0
0
Delusibeta said:
Do note that this is based on the 360 version, thus most complaints about the PC version (poor textures, complete lack of graphics options, sheer laziness in porting) doesn't apply.
I haven't noticed any texture problems yet.

I will say the lack of customisable graphics is a little alloying though; it lets you set the screen resolution and change all the settings in general, but without using console commands you can't set individual components separately. I can run it at max settings with 1680x1050, but hypothetically if I didn't have a fairly good graphics card and I didn't care about the anti-aliasing but I did care about model and texture detail, I wouldn't be able to make that choice to get an 'optimal' graphical experience for me.

Also, the 45 degree FOV is kinda sucky. I like having 90 so it's actually somewhat close to what a human's field of vision is (Although that's still quite far off; A human eyeball's vision covers 155 degrees horizonaly and 125 degrees vertically.).

At least there isn't auto-aim. I don't like auto-aim you can't turn off on any PC version. I'd be insulted if it turned out I've been playing with auto-aim so far.
...Please tell me the PC version either has no auto-aim or has auto-aim you can easily turn off and is forced off in most multiplayer servers...
 

ImmortalDrifter

New member
Jan 6, 2011
662
0
0
MGlBlaze said:
Delusibeta said:
Do note that this is based on the 360 version, thus most complaints about the PC version (poor textures, complete lack of graphics options, sheer laziness in porting) doesn't apply.
I haven't noticed any texture problems yet.

I will say the lack of customisable graphics is a little alloying though; it lets you set the screen resolution and change all the settings in general, but without using console commands you can't set individual components separately. I can run it at max settings with 1680x1050, but hypothetically if I didn't have a fairly good graphics card and I didn't care about the anti-aliasing but I did care about model and texture detail, I wouldn't be able to make that choice to get an 'optimal' graphical experience for me.

Also, the 45 degree FOV is kinda sucky. I like having 90 so it's actually somewhat close to what a human's field of vision is (Although that's still quite far off; A human eyeball's vision covers 155 degrees horizonaly and 125 degrees vertically.).

At least there isn't auto-aim. I'd be insulted if there was auto-aim you couldn't turn off on the PC version.
...Please tell me the PC version either has no auto-aim or has auto-aim you can easily turn off and is forced off in most multiplayer servers...
Rest easy, there is none.
 

cainx10a

New member
May 17, 2008
2,191
0
0
lithium.jelly said:
So, sounds like they've simplified the nanosuit a fair bit when it was already simple enough. They've apparently not bothered to put a lot of effort into the story and only ten hours for the single-player campaign? Are Crytek kidding here? I loved Crysis 1, and Crysis Warhead, but I don't think I'll be buying this.

"The game also includes a tactical vision mode that highlights on the screen key locations where certain types of play might be appropriate. It might, for instance, call out a sniping position on a roof, or a subway entrance you can use to sneak around behind your enemies."
Really? And console gamers wonder why PC gamers complain that console versions cause PC franchises to get dumbed down. Looks like Crysis 2 is the perfect illustration of why such complaints are made.
1. They didn't simplify the nanosuit, they simplified the nanosuit interface, instead of the radial menu, you press specific keys to activate the different abilities of the suit. E for Camo, Q for Armor etc ... So the default mode you are in, is separate from Armor mode, turning your character into a real tank in a firefight. I believe Warhead had the same interface, going to re-install it later on tonight. Strength and Speed has been streamlined, and definitely feels more natural than in Crysis. Switching to strength just for the sake of punching people or jumping higher was a real annoyance, sure it took some practice to naturally switch between those modes, but in the long run, it was an annoyance. Crysis 2 version of STR and SPD is definitely much more easier to use when need be. Not to mention the addition of sliding while meleing/shooting is fantastic, as well as the stealth melee kills which is a great and efficient way of dispatching enemies, then going back in stealth mode.

Additionally, the nanosuit can be upgraded, kinda like having perks in CoD MP, you get 3 slots, and 3 options in each, you want your character to run without making noise? Or do you want another feature that highlight the patrol patterns of the enemies? Etc ... That make the nanosuit feel feature-heavy, unlike the relatively simplistic suit in Crysis 1. Replaying that one atm.

2. Going from Windows 95 to 98 to XP to Vista, ever noticed how each OS try to hold your hand by treating you like a baby? That's how GUI are developed, they want to give the user an easy-to-use interface, but that doesn't always mean you need to stick to the information those little popups and help dialogues want you to do. You will always find experts messing around with their OS to improve their experience with it. Like editing MSConfig to prevent some services from launching on startup. Guess what, that's exactly what the new Visor does.

For beginners, they might be overwhelmed with the different options available to them, when handing a combat scenario. This is Crysis, I mean, you could go in all gun-blazing, or find a vantage point and pick off people from a distance, or go in close like the Predator and what them panic as you slit their throats and snap some necks, while they desperately try to locate you. So the Visor, gives them a few choices "Go here if you want to snipe, or why don't your explore this location here?". And guess what, you don't need to follow those instructions, they are just there if you really need them. I am however, not sure if you can hide it, but from a lore/story point of view, it makes sense to have that as a feature, since there is, I believe, an AI assisting you, or embedded within the Nanosuit.

3. The only thing I can say right now, PC Gamers (I believe I fall within this category) are acting like children. z0mg, no DX11 support, z0mg, this game looks great, I am having trouble thinking about this "more, more, better graphics, they need to be better!!!!" attitude some gamers are taking with this game atm (at least, on the steam forums), Crysis 1 was gorgeous granted, + with more fauna and flora, the game is definitely more cpu/gpu extensive than a game set within an urban setting should be. Yet this game engine is definitely optimized, better than the Crysis engine is. It runs smoothly, and look damn fine to my eyes.

It might not have the huge, massive open world environment as crysis, but you definitely go from one action sequence to the next faster than in Crysis. while crysis definitely has a good amount of these combat sequences, from ambushing patrols to convoys and attacking little outposts of Koreans, Crysis 2 makes up with a more cinematic feeling to it, the cutscenes and "quick time events" are well done etc ... The game definitely feels easy on Normal, I would assume I would be more prone to play carefully on Hard, but then again, Crysis was easy on Hard as well if you prepared your assault carefully.

4. About the Story and main protagonist, like someone just recently added, it does feel a bit goofy how he is mute, and follows orders without questioning them, almost as if he was a little doggy. But seriously, Gordon Freeman never spoke one damn word, and he still managed to save Humanity! Give this Prophet look-alike a chance.

5. Also, how did the aliens go from Freezeray to Squid-rinator?
 

Waaghpowa

Needs more Dakka
Apr 13, 2010
3,073
0
0
Drakmorg said:
Then again maybe I'm just biased because it looks like all they did was take Call of Duty and shove Halo Reach armor powers into it.
Yes, because CoD and Halo were so revolutionary that everything is copying them.

OT: I'm really enjoying this game, just as good, if not better than the original and easier to run on the PC.



MGlBlaze said:
Also, the 45 degree FOV is kinda sucky. I like having 90 so it's actually somewhat close to what a human's field of vision is (Although that's still quite far off; A human eyeball's vision covers 155 degrees horizonaly and 125 degrees vertically.).
There's a user created program for everything from FOV to advanced graphics. rather than use the developer console, use this. http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1807934
 

SyphonX

Coffee Bandit
Mar 22, 2009
956
0
0
Crysis 2 is a huge step backward from Crysis 1.

I didn't realize they would make so much cuts for the console development, but they did. For instance, on PC, there are no graphics options. Absolutely none. You can choose from a few presets (e.g. Extreme) and that is all. As a PC game, this is probably the worst entry for lack of customization ever, and that is saying a lot. Second, the Field of View is tremendously awful, just awful. It made me dizzy.

No destructible environments, the levels are very narrow and linear, the AI is poor and it turns into space invaders 95% of the time.

To be perfectly honest, this is an awful game. This would be a great first franchise entry for a company, but as a sequel to one of the greatest PC technical achievements ever, this is a flop. For anyone that doesn't realize this, you are in denial, including the delusional folks at PC Gamer who failed to report on this. Or you are simply who they are catering to with this entry, such as people who enjoy CoD and think it's mediocre mechanics are the greatest technical achievements ever.

I started playing the game, and couldn't finish it. The plot is mostly an incoherent mess, and everything is strung together. Honestly, I was flabbergasted by how mediocre it is.
 

ModusPwnens

New member
Jun 6, 2010
19
0
0
I've been playing this on the 360 today, and it does look damn good. The textures, however, are really nothing special on the xbox - you'll definitely get much higher resolution textures on the PC, I'd imagine by some distance.

Good game so far! A few things seem kind of weird though. I've read a lot about the AI in this game, and I've found that, playing on Veteran, it's mostly decent - mostly. Enemies react how you'd expect them to react, but they don't ever come up with any cool strategies of their own. After about 25 minutes I think I knew pretty much every AI subroutine, and it's nowhere near as dynamic as say, Halo's AI. As I said, most of the time it's ok, but sometimes (quite frequently) enemies just become *retarded*.

For example, I was on this rooftop sniping at some dudes. One enemy soldier comes up a flight of stairs towards me, runs into a lamppost, and just continues running into the lamppost. His teammates behind him are shooting at me, and they end up killing him lol. Future products of America's education system right there.

One thing that REALLY annoys me is the narrow field of view. This is ok when you're panning your camera around taking in the view, but when some asshole alien knocks you over, the tight viewing angle makes it unnecessarily difficult to aim at close range. I find that I'll often swing around and pan right past the alien, either that or he just fills the whole fucking field of view. The controls aren't the smoothest either, but it's good enough.
 

Zhukov

The Laughing Arsehole
Dec 29, 2009
13,768
0
0
I'd say that was an accurate review.

I'll probably snap this up when it goes on sale.
 

SyphonX

Coffee Bandit
Mar 22, 2009
956
0
0
Here is a metacritic user review I found, that pretty much sums up all the major flaws with this sequel:

(user: deskrit) http://www.metacritic.com/user/deskrit
Lets get this out of the way: graphically speaking, Crysis 2 is noticeably behind the original, both artistically and technically. This should not be a surprise given the console oriented nature of the title. A side effect that has been turned into part of the games advertising is that "it runs better than Crysis 1 because of the optimizations". This is not true, it runs better because the game is so much smaller in scope and the fidelity has been reduced. I will also point out that the entire graphical options menu has been removed, replaced with 3 presets ala Metro 2033. Make of that what you will. (SyphonX input: actually, Metro 2033 has a bunch of customization options.)

The worst aspect, though, comes from the console oriented gameplay. Gone is the intuitive nano-suit from the original game, replaced by what boils down to a handful of hot keyed spells with some upgrades. Strength and speed are now "automatic" which, gameplay wise, means they are no longer present; your jump and sprint are now equivalent to the original strength and speed. The cloak and armor work more or less the same, but the means by which you pick them has been changed to a simple hotkey instead of the radial "jinking" of the first game(which had options for both, as well as combination keys for activation), which cuts the possibility of those awesome predator style murder fests that you might have enacted, or watched on youtube. Those wont be happening anymore. Partly because of the suit, mainly because of the layout and philosophy of the game. The entire game just feels alot more homogenized.

The levels and engagements are totally linear now, there are only a handful of encounters that have multiple approaches. You no longer have any real tactical choice, but there is the illusion of it by means of very deliberate, obvious, and caged approaches that never go beyond "forward charge with assault weapon down street with plenty of overturned cars to duck behind" or "obviously open building window with sniper ammo in the closet". That's pretty much it. There is no sneaking, no grabbing a guy in cloak, jumping on a building and throwing him into the ocean before any of his buddies can react. No planting bombs on a roadway used by a jeep, waiting in the forest for it to come by and BOOM. No cloaking behind a rock and firing a silenced rifle bullet into the gas tank of a passing truck, and watching while the crew runs screaming into the ocean before picking off the couple of guys who survived.

The sprawling jungle is gone, replaced by a cityscape that would have a hard time fitting its entirety into the first section of the original game. This is a console shooter ported to PC with the word Crysis stamped on the box. It is as enjoyable as any other game of this genre, perhaps one of the better ones in fact, but dont be fooled by the pedigree. This is not the Crysis 2 you thought it would be.
 

ModusPwnens

New member
Jun 6, 2010
19
0
0
A minor critique, but the achievements in this game are fairly disappointing. There's huge scope for ridiculous achievements, given all the cool shit you can do with the nano suit, but the achievements are mostly just "you beat level 1" and "you killed 5 dudes with a pistol".
 

brumley53

New member
Oct 19, 2009
253
0
0
I couldn't care about any of the things that most PC gamers are bitching about, my main problem is that they removed Strength and speed mode, some people will say it streamlined it but it actually made it worse. If you get used to switching suit modes in crysis 1(which wasn't that hard) you could do some amazing things that you can't do in crysis 2 because of the removal of strength and speed.
 

Abedeus

New member
Sep 14, 2008
7,412
0
0
HerbertTheHamster said:
D_987 said:
HerbertTheHamster said:
Crysis 2 is very mediocre, 5/10 at most. The thing that bugs me most is that the FOV is like 45 or something, it's like the nanosuit blocks out 80% of your vision.

Sadly, game reviews can never be taken seriously because 8/10 is a "decent" score for AAA games.
Or people just don't have the same opinion as you regarding the game...
This is true, but I'm referring to the industry as a whole. When a movie or book is average it gets a 5/10. When a game is average it gets a 7/10 or a 8/10.
Maybe the game is just NOT average?
 

figday

New member
Mar 22, 2011
407
0
0
hmm, im quite skeptical with this review (and others).
i immediately cancelled my pre-order after trying out the demo which is Crysis Of Duty 2.

i mean, i LOVED the original! one of the prettiest and best FPS ive ever played. And now the nano powers got nerfed to invisibility and armour only (i guess its because controllers doesnt have that much buttons). No quick save? seriously? that means almost no room to test out various approaches on enemy bases, no fun! Yes it has sprint, but compared with the max-speed in C1, its like your playing as Usain Bolt rather than The Flash. No max-strength, no more satisfaction when you jump up a huge obstacle when turning on the max-strength like before. And now your playing as Alcatraz, the hell happened to Nomad?!

what the hell is going on with sequels this year? definitely gonna wait for a HUGE sale on this one, because im sure i wont regret not playing it now.

/waiting for Yahtzee to review this. And DA2 as well.
 

m72_ar

New member
Oct 27, 2010
145
0
0
Wicky_42 said:
Ok, 10hr campaign is good, but I still want to know how it performs on PC before I'd spend money on it. The multiplayer demo did not spark my interest at all, I'd only be getting it for the single player and the graphics - here's hoping they see fit to incorporate Dx11 sometime in the near future...
It run quite well on my 4 year old machine.
Core2Quad 2.66 GHz
2GB of ram
ATi 5770 1GB

Run it on very high on 1440x900 (I have a relatively small monitor) with no hiccups at all.
At least early in the game
 

m72_ar

New member
Oct 27, 2010
145
0
0
SyphonX said:
Here is a metacritic user review I found, that pretty much sums up all the major flaws with this sequel:

(user: deskrit) http://www.metacritic.com/user/deskrit

The worst aspect, though, comes from the console oriented gameplay. Gone is the intuitive nano-suit from the original game, replaced by what boils down to a handful of hot keyed spells with some upgrades. Strength and speed are now "automatic" which, gameplay wise, means they are no longer present; your jump and sprint are now equivalent to the original strength and speed. The cloak and armor work more or less the same, but the means by which you pick them has been changed to a simple hotkey instead of the radial "jinking" of the first game(which had options for both, as well as combination keys for activation), which cuts the possibility of those awesome predator style murder fests that you might have enacted, or watched on youtube. Those wont be happening anymore. Partly because of the suit, mainly because of the layout and philosophy of the game. The entire game just feels alot more homogenized.
radial power selection in Crysis 1 is good?

Using that radial menu is extremely annoying and unintuitive, the moment i realize i can activate cloak by double tapping crouch I never used that radial menu again.
 

JourneyThroughHell

New member
Sep 21, 2009
5,010
0
0
Alright, Steve, I know you respond to questions, so, yeah...
Steve Butts said:
are as tired of Call of Duty clones as I am
Which CoD clones? What are those infinite CoD clones everyone is talking about, apart from MoH and Homefront?

OT: So, the story sucks, huh. Guess that trash-talking the writer did was only that, trash-talking.
 

MJpoland

Regular Member
Legacy
Apr 12, 2020
54
0
11
Country
Poland
Game is pretty enjoyable, besides some bugs... AI really looks somehow broken, enemy soldiers are acting in weird way (like soldier, who is away about 200 metres sees me and shoots me for a few minutes, but those 10 metres away from me (however below) don't notice me at all... where is so called "I heard shots" thing? Not to mention the fact of soldiers running into objects or into themselves... AI in Crysis 1 was for sure much better, I don't remember any of those problems

And my favourite bug, the space-wrapping shotgun :D
http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/7058/crysisg.jpg
 

Droppa Deuce

New member
Dec 23, 2010
154
0
0
HerbertTheHamster said:
Crysis 2 is very mediocre, 5/10 at most. The thing that bugs me most is that the FOV is like 45 or something, it's like the nanosuit blocks out 80% of your vision.

Sadly, game reviews can never be taken seriously because 8/10 is a "decent" score for AAA games.
After reading Eurogamer's review and their Digital Foundry article, it really does seem like a 6/10 game.

When I see 8/10 I am rarely impressed. I only buy AAA titles now, I can't afford to take the risk with games that are getting such mixed reviews. I'll prob rent this, but it won't be a first week buy.

My PS3 collection now is Demon Souls, MGS4, MvC3. Unchartered 2, MW2, Arkham Asylum.
 

Jamous

New member
Apr 14, 2009
1,942
0
0
Oh but Steve, didn't you know? Wood is stronger than anything when put into door form! :D
m72_ar said:
Using that radial menu is extremely annoying and unintuitive, the moment i realize i can activate cloak by double tapping crouch I never used that radial menu again.
OMG YOU CAN DO THAT?!? I HAVE NOT LIVED YET. Excuse me, I must leave that I might live a little. ;D
 

Serving UpSmiles

New member
Aug 4, 2010
962
0
0
Raiyan 1.0 said:
Crysis 1 could support 32 players in its MP instead of this measly 16, and the maps were way larger as well. Considering people buy FPS titles these days mostly for the MP, this is downgraded.
But crysis 1's multiplayer was crap....
 

Netrigan

New member
Sep 29, 2010
1,924
0
0
ZeroMachine said:
They were in Brazil to track down someone linked to Makarov and his weapon supplies. That led them to the gulag because the guy confessed that Makarov wanted someone, namely Price, dead, most likely for his involvement with the death of Zakhaev in Modern Warfare 1, whom Makarov viewed an an idol and martyr.

Why the hell does everyone has such an issue understanding the story of Modern Warfare 2? I don't get it... It's a simple story, if a little convoluted. Am I playing a different game? Gah...
Constant narrative switches in Act I & II and highly implausible plot developments will do that to you.

Having the weapon supplier give them the name of a guy that Makarov wants to kill... who just so happens to be your lost Captain from the first game... who doesn't actually have information needed to get to Makarov... but whose sideways thinking saves the day.

That's not a logical progression. That's a writer desperately making pieces fit. There's a reason why truth is stranger than fiction... we demand out fiction make sense.

As legend goes, all of the set pieces of Mission Impossible II were put together *before* anyone wrote a script. Likewise, it's a pretty cool movie, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. MW2 is not so much a story that was written, but a story that was script doctored.
 

Serving UpSmiles

New member
Aug 4, 2010
962
0
0
SyphonX said:
Crysis 2 is a huge step backward from Crysis 1.

I didn't realize they would make so much cuts for the console development, but they did. For instance, on PC, there are no graphics options. Absolutely none. You can choose from a few presets (e.g. Extreme) and that is all. As a PC game, this is probably the worst entry for lack of customization ever, and that is saying a lot. Second, the Field of View is tremendously awful, just awful. It made me dizzy.

No destructible environments, the levels are very narrow and linear, the AI is poor and it turns into space invaders 95% of the time.

To be perfectly honest, this is an awful game. This would be a great first franchise entry for a company, but as a sequel to one of the greatest PC technical achievements ever, this is a flop. For anyone that doesn't realize this, you are in denial, including the delusional folks at PC Gamer who failed to report on this. Or you are simply who they are catering to with this entry, such as people who enjoy CoD and think it's mediocre mechanics are the greatest technical achievements ever.

I started playing the game, and couldn't finish it. The plot is mostly an incoherent mess, and everything is strung together. Honestly, I was flabbergasted by how mediocre it is.
ImprovizoR said:
There is absolutely nothing remarkable about this game. Nothing at all. Not even graphics. It's a simple modern shooter with some aliens and a nano-suit that essentially plays just like call of duty. So call me a PC fanboy all you want but it's a FACT that Crysis 2 is dumbed down for consoles. Even the interface is consolized for crying out loud! Animations look like they were ripped straight from call of duty. The overall atmosphere and the feel of the game is completely ruined. It feels like any other FPS on the market. I can see why console gamers will like it. It is fresh for consoles. It isn't fresh on PC. PC has Crysis 1 and Warhead. This game is a disgrace in all aspects. All those little things that made Crysis special are now gone.

A.I. is retarded. You don't even need the nano-suit in most cases while in Crysis 1 it was essential. And when you use it the game becomes a walk in the park. Almost literally in some cases where you just walk past enemies while cloaked. And if you shoot one you jut need to wait a few seconds for energy to recharge and cloak again. And they just leave you alone.
Nano-suit is dumbed down. Now you can't sprint without using your super-speed the way you could in Crysis 1. Armor mode and strength mode are combined making the game even easier and less tactical. Binoculars is a nano-suit mode. You can't dual wield weapons. You can't carry more than 2 weapons and an RPG.

The setting is very unimaginative. All of the stuff you hear about the city looking great might be true if you compare Crysis 2 to every other console shooter, CoD primarily. But you have to compare it to it's predecessor and when you do you will realize how unoriginal the setting is. And level design is linear and boring.

Story is dreadful. I don't even know why am I doing things in this game anyway. A mute character gets a suit against his will and knowledge and then he starts doing errands for everyone he meets without asking questions. The mute character in Crysis 2 makes the story even dumber and more meaningless than it already is. You just can't feel any connection to anything that's going on. It just doesn't matter. The story fails to pull you in because even though it's a FIRST PERSON game it feels like you're an outsider who just happened to be there and everything that happens is out of your reach. It's like you can't do anything unless you're told too. And what you're being told doesn't make sense because of the way it's told. It makes the single player pretty much meaningless. And did I mention how the story doesn't make any sense whatsoever? And I have to mention that none of the questions from Crysis 1 were answered. So if you were hoping to find out what happened on the island after the events of Crysis 1 you will be disappointed.
Seriously why can't people just focus on the good aspects of the game instead of the negative ones, like the great graphics, weapons and interface and all.... :/
 

Asehujiko

New member
Feb 25, 2008
2,119
0
0
Wicky_42 said:
Ok, 10hr campaign is good, but I still want to know how it performs on PC before I'd spend money on it. The multiplayer demo did not spark my interest at all, I'd only be getting it for the single player and the graphics - here's hoping they see fit to incorporate Dx11 sometime in the near future...
It's standards 2006 graphics shitport tripe. Should run on your microwave by now.

If all reviewers are saying exactly the same, it's probably whispered into their ears by a marketing director.
 

Cowabungaa

New member
Feb 10, 2008
10,806
0
0
cainx10a said:
4. About the Story and main protagonist, like someone just recently added, it does feel a bit goofy how he is mute, and follows orders without questioning them, almost as if he was a little doggy. But seriously, Gordon Freeman never spoke one damn word, and he still managed to save Humanity! Give this Prophet look-alike a chance.
So far this is my biggest gripe with the game as well, especially because Crysis 1 did this beautifully well. Thanks to it staying in first person view, bar some loading screens, the story flowed very well despite being not all that special. It made the whole thing very immersive.

Crysis 1 took the Half Life road, which in my opinion is the best way of telling a first person (shooter) story, barely ever really cutting you out of the action. Crysis 2 however, despite not even being half-way through, is already doing that a lot. They pretty much completely skipped the tunnel beneath Wall Street Church, all you get is a little tactical thing ala CoD showing you were you traveled. And that's just one example. Real shame.
MJpoland said:
Game is pretty enjoyable, besides some bugs... AI really looks somehow broken, enemy soldiers are acting in weird way (like soldier, who is away about 200 metres sees me and shoots me for a few minutes, but those 10 metres away from me (however below) don't notice me at all... where is so called "I heard shots" thing? Not to mention the fact of soldiers running into objects or into themselves... AI in Crysis 1 was for sure much better, I don't remember any of those problems

And my favourite bug, the space-wrapping shotgun :D
http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/7058/crysisg.jpg
I had a little bug for a while that every time I wanted to look through my K-VOLT's sights the gun went all warpy and twitchy for a second or so, like Alexander was practicing his Gun Kata or something.

I don't recognise that AI thingy though. Soldiers were pretty observant with me, and each time I shot someone they checked up on him after a few seconds, going all "Please come in!" and switching to their alert mode, spotting me in Cloak mode more than once.

You're right about the bumping into things though. I had a group of 3 alien grunts that were apparently clusterfucked together somehow. Sure was a perfect rocket opportunity. Shame that wasted 300 nano-catalyst. But Crysis 1 wasn't free of AI issues either:
It was also incredibly easy to abuse the cloak function. Them Koreans really needed some glasses.
Asehujiko said:
If all reviewers are saying exactly the same, it's probably whispered into their ears by a marketing director.
Or, you know, they agree. Just a guess.
 

Asehujiko

New member
Feb 25, 2008
2,119
0
0
Serving UpSmiles said:
Seriously why can't people just focus on the good aspects of the game instead of the negative ones, like the great graphics, weapons and interface and all.... :/
Because all of the things you mentioned are worse then the first game?
Cowabungaa said:
Or, you know, they agree. Just a guess.
And they all conveniently ignored exactly the same problems like this being a downgrade from crysis 1, the lack of customization, modding support and being a large lump of console cancer in general by sheer coincidence?
 

Cowabungaa

New member
Feb 10, 2008
10,806
0
0
Asehujiko said:
And they all conveniently ignored exactly the same problems like this being a downgrade from crysis 1, the lack of customization, modding support and being a large lump of console cancer in general by sheer coincidence?
I don't know about the modding support, but you are at least right about the customisation thing. It's rather silly that we don't have proper graphical sliders and all that jazz to optimise performance.

However, I'd say saying that it's a 'large lump of console cancer' is an overreaction. The fact that the interface is streamlined (definitely not a downgrade in my view) is not so much a console thing, works brilliant on the PC as well, the fact that our multiplayer still works with dedicated servers and a proper lobby ain't a console thing either and the fact that they screwed up the narrative (which they did address) isn't to blame on consoles either. I also don't even nearly agree that this Crysis 2 is '2006 graphics shitport tripe', where you got that from is a mystery to me.

As for the rest, I'm having a blast with this.
 

tehroc

New member
Jul 6, 2009
1,293
0
0
008Zulu said:
10 hours huh? Not worth it.
How long did it take you to go through Black Ops? 5 hours at most? Yet I bet you'll be buying the next one no matter what.

If you have a 360 and like FPS shooters, Crysis 2 is a must play title. Biggest complaint, no dedicated servers for multiplayer. Cmon EA has always been good at providing dedicated servers for their games, why is this one using a P2P system?
 

Steve Butts

New member
Jun 1, 2010
1,003
0
0
Raiyan 1.0 said:
Considering people buy FPS titles these days mostly for the MP
I object to this statement, as I really don't give a crap about multiplayer most of the time.

Crysis 2 is obviously single player focused since it has a 12 hour campaign instead of the 5-6 hour campaign that most Call of Duty games seem to have these days.

I find it saddening how many people are actually calling the game mediocre simply because they did not like the multiplayer while pretty much just ignoring the single player game.
 

Steve Butts

New member
Jun 1, 2010
1,003
0
0
JourneyThroughHell said:
Alright, Steve, I know you respond to questions, so, yeah...
Steve Butts said:
are as tired of Call of Duty clones as I am
Which CoD clones? What are those infinite CoD clones everyone is talking about, apart from MoH and Homefront?
Well, just sticking with the past two years or so, we've had two official Call of Duty games, plus Medal of Honor and Homefront. But there's also been Breach and Blacklight, Arma and OpFlash, MAG and SOCOM. And that's just off the top of my head. Depending on your definitions, some of those may not technically be clones, but they all stick very close to the content and tone that have made COD such a success.

In any case, having nearly a dozen games which cover so much of the same territory all released with 24 months is just too much.

This was the kind of crap we used to see in the PC market years ago, when we'd get four different Star Trek games all being released within weeks of each other. Back then people used to claim one of the benefits of the console catalog was that it didn't encourage that sort of saturation. But everyone is chasing Call of Duty now, which creates even more restrictions for developers working in the already narrow console market.

When a game like Crysis comes along and delivers an experience that isn't like the last five shooters I just played, I think it's worth taking notice. Hopefully it encourages other developers to take a chance. To be fair, the game was first developed on the PC free from some of the expectations of the console market, but there's no reason a success here can't help us broaden the definition of the current gen shooter.
 

RA92

New member
Jan 1, 2011
3,079
0
0
Hardcore_gamer said:
Raiyan 1.0 said:
Considering people buy FPS titles these days mostly for the MP
I object to this statement, as I really don't give a crap about multiplayer most of the time.

Crysis 2 is obviously single player focused since it has a 12 hour campaign instead of the 5-6 hour campaign that most Call of Duty games seem to have these days.

I find it saddening how many people are actually calling the game mediocre simply because they did not like the multiplayer while pretty much just ignoring the single player game.
And your point is...? Crysis 1 had a longer campaign with destructible open world environment. Crysis 2 is way too linear for my taste.

Like I said, this is a huge step back.
 

JourneyThroughHell

New member
Sep 21, 2009
5,010
0
0
Steve Butts said:
I appreciate you took time to respond. Don't mind me doing the same thing.

Steve Butts said:
Breach and Blacklight
Kind of, but those are budget shooters, you expect that sort ot thing.
Steve Butts said:
Arma and OpFlash
Arma is a super realistic PC shooter that can't possibly be compared to CoD. Latest OF - maybe.

Steve Butts said:
MAG and SOCOM
MAG's a Battlefield knockoff, SOCOM's a Ghost Recon one.

I can see where you're coming from - most of these games are military FPS games set somewhere in the Middle East and have Americans and other European nations shooting bad guys. But, that's the setting and, really, you can't say Prototype's a Grand Theft Auto clone just for them both being set in a fake-y NYC.

Gameplay-wise, these games are quite different. In fact, I know a lot of people who, based on the demo, got the impression that Crysis 2 is more of a CoD knockoff than most of the games listed. Me being one of them.

Yes, people are chasing CoD. And, yes, this clearly works. After all, Homefront sold really well even without being anything spectacular. But is that really a bad thing? Every shooter that's trying to be like CoD still brings its own thing and usually lifts only the things that worked in CoD as well as in other games. The RPG elements in multiplayer, the perks, the killstreaks. Doesn't Crysis 2 have all of that? And it's hardly a ripoff.

There's an over-saturation of military FPS games, sure. But straight-up CoD clones? Hardly so.

Then again I am a huge series fanboy, so I don't really mind.
 

Seneschal

Blessed are the righteous
Jun 27, 2009
561
0
0
ZeroMachine said:
They were in Brazil to track down someone linked to Makarov and his weapon supplies. That led them to the gulag because the guy confessed that Makarov wanted someone, namely Price, dead, most likely for his involvement with the death of Zakhaev in Modern Warfare 1, whom Makarov viewed an an idol and martyr.

Why the hell does everyone has such an issue understanding the story of Modern Warfare 2? I don't get it... It's a simple story, if a little convoluted. Am I playing a different game? Gah...

Anyways, I think I may get this when I get a better PC. I saw it in 3D at PAX East and it looked awesome, and I actually kind of enjoyed the demo, so I don't see why not. Better get the first one first, though...
That makes no sense. It isn't convoluted, it isn't even connected. So, someone in Brazil supplied Makarov with weapons. On the verge of war, the best special forces unit in the world goes to South America to track this guy who might not know anything, and certainly doesn't know where Makarov is now. He inexplicably knows about someone whom Makarov wants dead. That someone is in a russian gulag, he could have been killed by Makarov at any time, knows nothing, means nothing, and is just a hook to get Price back. How they justified this expense of military assets is never explained. Oh, and this aimless little sidequest takes up most of Act 1 and 2.

I'm not surprised that they can hire Morgan, a published sci-fi bestseller writer, and still botch the story. Crysis 2 has a bad story because it's a shooter. Shooters inherently lack the capacity to carry a dramatic arc because they require that your character does not interact with anything other than his guns, that he doesn't speak (because a voiced first-person role is confusing and distracting), that the tension doesn't drop, and that you never face insurmountable odds because that would break the difficulty. They represent a tiny facet of potential events in a story (namely, gunfights) and build a 5-10-hour experience on that. If the story ends up being good, it is mostly divorced from the actual gameplay, or at least isn't reinforced by it.

However, setting, environment, tone, pacing, atmosphere - this is where a shooter can shine just like any other game. And many do, especially those often-mentioned gems like Bioshock and Deus Ex, but that doesn't make their story any better. They just make their worlds more fleshed-out and plausible. It's always the same goal-oriented filler, with an epic background event if the writers are any good. Crysis 1 lacked any focus in this area, and was mostly what you made it be and how you chose to play it. The sequel seems to aim at more consistency, but it again gets bogged down in stupid plots and exposition that never did shooters any good.
 

Bluntknife

New member
Sep 8, 2008
372
0
0
I have every intention of getting this game...eventually.

Once they have a patch out for DX11 and fixed the issues with people connecting to multiplayer.

Or I might just hold off until a sale on steam.
 

Frostbite3789

New member
Jul 12, 2010
1,778
0
0
HerbertTheHamster said:
D_987 said:
HerbertTheHamster said:
Crysis 2 is very mediocre, 5/10 at most. The thing that bugs me most is that the FOV is like 45 or something, it's like the nanosuit blocks out 80% of your vision.

Sadly, game reviews can never be taken seriously because 8/10 is a "decent" score for AAA games.
Or people just don't have the same opinion as you regarding the game...
This is true, but I'm referring to the industry as a whole. When a movie or book is average it gets a 5/10. When a game is average it gets a 7/10 or a 8/10.
Exhibit A: http://www.halolz.com/2011/01/16/how-gamers-interpret-review-scores/

OT: I'll probably get it eventually. It looks pretty neat.
 

ShenCS

New member
Aug 24, 2010
173
0
0
I like how the review is full of gushing praise and saying that the flaws don't mean much, but still only gives it four stars. Some games get given 5 stars (usually deservedly), but talk about how meaningful the flaws are. Odd.
 

Steve Butts

New member
Jun 1, 2010
1,003
0
0
JourneyThroughHell said:
I can see where you're coming from - most of these games are military FPS games set somewhere in the Middle East and have Americans and other European nations shooting bad guys. But, that's the setting and, really, you can't say Prototype's a Grand Theft Auto clone just for them both being set in a fake-y NYC.

Gameplay-wise, these games are quite different. In fact, I know a lot of people who, based on the demo, got the impression that Crysis 2 is more of a CoD knockoff than most of the games listed. Me being one of them.
It seems like you're disagreeing with me while also basically saying exactly what I said. There are a ton of brown-toned military themed games and the differences between them are negligible.
 

JourneyThroughHell

New member
Sep 21, 2009
5,010
0
0
Steve Butts said:
It seems like you're disagreeing with me while also basically saying exactly what I said. There are a ton of brown-toned military themed games and the differences between them are negligible.
I didn't say anything about the differences being negligible.

If you're going to state that the differences between Arma and CoD are negligible because they're both about shooting modern guns at insurgents, that's going to be a wrong statement.
 

008Zulu_v1legacy

New member
Sep 6, 2009
6,019
0
0
tehroc said:
How long did it take you to go through Black Ops? 5 hours at most? Yet I bet you'll be buying the next one no matter what.

If you have a 360 and like FPS shooters, Crysis 2 is a must play title. Biggest complaint, no dedicated servers for multiplayer. Cmon EA has always been good at providing dedicated servers for their games, why is this one using a P2P system?
Didnt buy Black Ops. PC gamer. Hate multiplayer in general.
 

Waaghpowa

Needs more Dakka
Apr 13, 2010
3,073
0
0
JourneyThroughHell said:
Any FPS game is a Doom clone!! rawr! But seriously, as similar as a lot of shooters are to following the CoD model, some of them are actually quite good. If it weren't for the massive amount of hackers on Homefront I would still be playing that.
 

duchaked

New member
Dec 25, 2008
4,451
0
0
ah man, as much as I wanna get through Homefront for the story not the gameplay, I now really wanna play Crysis 2 for the gameplay
of course graphics, even on the consoles (seriously!), but still... guess it's not a problem considering DNF is now delayed (who didn't see THAT coming >:p bahaha)
 

duchaked

New member
Dec 25, 2008
4,451
0
0
tehroc said:
008Zulu said:
10 hours huh? Not worth it.
How long did it take you to go through Black Ops? 5 hours at most? Yet I bet you'll be buying the next one no matter what.

If you have a 360 and like FPS shooters, Crysis 2 is a must play title. Biggest complaint, no dedicated servers for multiplayer. Cmon EA has always been good at providing dedicated servers for their games, why is this one using a P2P system?
dude when I heard Crysis 2's campaign was 10-11 hours long I was lke "whoa this might be worth more than a rental"

=.= man...these short FPS campaigns really have become a staple of the genre. sighhh
 

pubesz

New member
May 20, 2009
24
0
0
Great review Steve! Yeah I would also have a problem at the stomach area :)
 

Impertinent

New member
Jun 13, 2009
5
0
0
Could we get a control option where the grenades are mapped to the face buttons . This game is awesome ,but throwing a grenade is a bit of a chore especially in a frantic round of MP . the rocket launcher is mapped to the d-pad how about a d-pad option for grenades ?
 

Continuity

New member
May 20, 2010
2,053
0
0
HerbertTheHamster said:
D_987 said:
HerbertTheHamster said:
Crysis 2 is very mediocre, 5/10 at most. The thing that bugs me most is that the FOV is like 45 or something, it's like the nanosuit blocks out 80% of your vision.

Sadly, game reviews can never be taken seriously because 8/10 is a "decent" score for AAA games.
Or people just don't have the same opinion as you regarding the game...
This is true, but I'm referring to the industry as a whole. When a movie or book is average it gets a 5/10. When a game is average it gets a 7/10 or a 8/10.
meh, we all know how it works so it doesn't really matter.

10/10 = They paid me

9/10 = Fantastic game

8/10 = Great game

7/10 = Good but with some shortcomings

6/10 = Game breaking flaws or incredibly bland

anything less = I will spoon my eyes out rather than play this.
 

Fieldy409_v1legacy

New member
Oct 9, 2008
2,686
0
0
Seneschal said:
ZeroMachine said:
They were in Brazil to track down someone linked to Makarov and his weapon supplies. That led them to the gulag because the guy confessed that Makarov wanted someone, namely Price, dead, most likely for his involvement with the death of Zakhaev in Modern Warfare 1, whom Makarov viewed an an idol and martyr.

Why the hell does everyone has such an issue understanding the story of Modern Warfare 2? I don't get it... It's a simple story, if a little convoluted. Am I playing a different game? Gah...

Anyways, I think I may get this when I get a better PC. I saw it in 3D at PAX East and it looked awesome, and I actually kind of enjoyed the demo, so I don't see why not. Better get the first one first, though...
That makes no sense. It isn't convoluted, it isn't even connected. So, someone in Brazil supplied Makarov with weapons. On the verge of war, the best special forces unit in the world goes to South America to track this guy who might not know anything, and certainly doesn't know where Makarov is now. He inexplicably knows about someone whom Makarov wants dead. That someone is in a russian gulag, he could have been killed by Makarov at any time, knows nothing, means nothing, and is just a hook to get Price back. How they justified this expense of military assets is never explained. Oh, and this aimless little sidequest takes up most of Act 1 and 2.

I'm not surprised that they can hire Morgan, a published sci-fi bestseller writer, and still botch the story. Crysis 2 has a bad story because it's a shooter. Shooters inherently lack the capacity to carry a dramatic arc because they require that your character does not interact with anything other than his guns, that he doesn't speak (because a voiced first-person role is confusing and distracting), that the tension doesn't drop, and that you never face insurmountable odds because that would break the difficulty. They represent a tiny facet of potential events in a story (namely, gunfights) and build a 5-10-hour experience on that. If the story ends up being good, it is mostly divorced from the actual gameplay, or at least isn't reinforced by it.

However, setting, environment, tone, pacing, atmosphere - this is where a shooter can shine just like any other game. And many do, especially those often-mentioned gems like Bioshock and Deus Ex, but that doesn't make their story any better. They just make their worlds more fleshed-out and plausible. It's always the same goal-oriented filler, with an epic background event if the writers are any good. Crysis 1 lacked any focus in this area, and was mostly what you made it be and how you chose to play it. The sequel seems to aim at more consistency, but it again gets bogged down in stupid plots and exposition that never did shooters any good.
you dont think bioshocks story is any good?
 

Reveras

New member
Nov 9, 2009
465
0
0
Well this would be some pc version action


Edit: 1080p if ya watch on youtube.
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
HerbertTheHamster said:
Crysis 2 is very mediocre, 5/10 at most. The thing that bugs me most is that the FOV is like 45 or something, it's like the nanosuit blocks out 80% of your vision.

Sadly, game reviews can never be taken seriously because 8/10 is a "decent" score for AAA games.
Yeah, the FOV is weird, although like the other guy said, different people have different opinions to you. The most you can hope for is that the more people like it, the more chance you have of liking it.
 

Steve Butts

New member
Jun 1, 2010
1,003
0
0
HerbertTheHamster said:
D_987 said:
HerbertTheHamster said:
Crysis 2 is very mediocre, 5/10 at most. The thing that bugs me most is that the FOV is like 45 or something, it's like the nanosuit blocks out 80% of your vision.

Sadly, game reviews can never be taken seriously because 8/10 is a "decent" score for AAA games.
Or people just don't have the same opinion as you regarding the game...
This is true, but I'm referring to the industry as a whole. When a movie or book is average it gets a 5/10. When a game is average it gets a 7/10 or a 8/10.
Depends on the reviewers. I watch Reviews on the Run, streaming online and for them an average game is 5/10 not 7.
 

Duffeknol

New member
Aug 28, 2010
897
0
0
I've got a question, just cause I'm curious. Why do you guys (usually) review the console version of a game and not the PC one? It's not criticism, I just really want to know :)
 

mechanixis

New member
Oct 16, 2009
1,136
0
0
Thank you, Crytek. In a market saturated with gritty, brown, one-dimensional shooters, Crysis 2 is a refreshing alternative.
What? What grittier and browner games than Crysis 2 are saturating the market, exactly?

I'm sorry, but this strawman of the Horrible Brown Video Game is really starting to get under my skin. Crysis 2 is a first-person shooter about a man in a robot suit who fights aliens and PMCs to protect America. In what way is that not the blandest, most overdone thing possible? Why is it forgiven for being the illegitimate child of Halo and Modern Warfare because it includes the color green?
 

Steve Butts

New member
Jun 1, 2010
1,003
0
0
This game just f**king sucks.
The AI is bad enough to be game breaking. There is almost zero point in approaching a goal with the idea of using stealth because they can see through terrain and will look at you regardless of their alert level to your presence.
The graphics are good...For DX9.
Overall the graphics suck. It's a smart system that gives the impression of DX10 features by using pseudo-depth of field by blurring the edges of the screen, but why the hell is it DX9 only? The first Crysis was DX10!
The story line is a nonsensical mess, the enemies repetitive enough to be tamed through run & gun gameplay and the setting is extremely forgettable.

And then there are the PC only issues. Firstly auto-aim on the PC is ridiculous. Secondly the 3 graphic options take the piss. Secondly the claim of PC first. Don't lie Crytek, especially when your lies are so obvious. Thirdly the controls are just sh*t, utter, utter sh*t.
Press 1 for your gun
Press it again to cycle to your next gun.
Press 1 twice in succession for your grenades.
Press 2 to change weapon mode.
Press 3 for Rocket Laucher.
So to go from shotgun - > rocket launcher -> assault rifle is impossible.

Here's a radical idea. 1 for first weapons, 2 for second weapon, 3 for launcher, 4 for grenade, x for rate of fire. Not like that hasn't been done in almost every other game on the market...

All this game has done is make me appreciate Bullet Storm more.

For someone who is new to shooters, 8/10. To any veteran 4/10. Functional, just, and nothing that hasn't been done before, and done better.
 

Seneschal

Blessed are the righteous
Jun 27, 2009
561
0
0
Fieldy409 said:
you dont think bioshocks story is any good?
The plot itself, not really. What exactly is the meaning and value behind spending a few hours saving the trees in Arcadia or assembling a Big Daddy suit? There isn't any, it's just entertainment. Filler, if you're feeling bitter. Toying with the issue of player agency is the only thing for which Bioshock needs an interactive medium, otherwise the plot would just as well fit a book. And that book would probably be labelled "young-adult pulp-adventure" like thousands of other books.

But pretty much all games are like this. Classical narrative theory falls apart disastrously when forced into an interactive environment. JRPGs are a good example - their stories are often long and complex (actual depth... varies wildly), but they usually have zero interactivity. Playing through them is an entirely separated addition, like a novel with an exploration and stat micromanagement meta-game. And then you compare them to HL2, which is similarly linear but less abstract and with a few more freedoms (seamless transition, no interruptions, no cutscenes, first-person only), and a complex dramatic story becomes completely impossible through conventional exposition. Players gain palpable interactivity, and won't be held down before walls of exposition - they jump around the room and click on stuff while NPCs chat in the background and give the bare-minimum of story, most of which ends up being told through optional interactions with the environment.

Shooters will always have these problems when trying to force the player to care for their story, whether it's a typical juvenile power-fantasy or a masterpiece of literature. Traditional storytelling largely doesn't work, cannot support the drama, and isn't at the centre of attention. Games have other ways of shining.
 

Azmael Silverlance

Pirate Warlord!
Oct 20, 2009
756
0
0
Why do you guys put the same video twice in your reviews? Im always like....oooh yay 2 video review EPIC...and then it turns out its the same o_O
 

Akisa

New member
Jan 7, 2010
493
0
0
Serving UpSmiles said:
Seriously why can't people just focus on the good aspects of the game instead of the negative ones, like the great graphics, weapons and interface and all.... :/
Well one of the weak point is the graphics... So yeah....

Note this is comparison to Crysis 1
 

ninjajoeman

New member
Mar 13, 2009
934
0
0
HerbertTheHamster said:
D_987 said:
HerbertTheHamster said:
Crysis 2 is very mediocre, 5/10 at most. The thing that bugs me most is that the FOV is like 45 or something, it's like the nanosuit blocks out 80% of your vision.

Sadly, game reviews can never be taken seriously because 8/10 is a "decent" score for AAA games.
Or people just don't have the same opinion as you regarding the game...
This is true, but I'm referring to the industry as a whole. When a movie or book is average it gets a 5/10. When a game is average it gets a 7/10 or a 8/10.
because getting a C is better then getting an F?
 

Popido

New member
Oct 21, 2010
716
0
0
ninjajoeman said:
HerbertTheHamster said:
D_987 said:
HerbertTheHamster said:
Crysis 2 is very mediocre, 5/10 at most. The thing that bugs me most is that the FOV is like 45 or something, it's like the nanosuit blocks out 80% of your vision.

Sadly, game reviews can never be taken seriously because 8/10 is a "decent" score for AAA games.
Or people just don't have the same opinion as you regarding the game...
This is true, but I'm referring to the industry as a whole. When a movie or book is average it gets a 5/10. When a game is average it gets a 7/10 or a 8/10.
because getting a C is better then getting an F?
The reviews are less detailed and less thoughtful.

Hey the game was great! I personally enjoyed it, but some [del]haters[/del] people didnt like it so imma gonna gief it 9/10!!! Thats gotta place it right next to ... you get the idea.
 

CardinalPiggles

New member
Jun 24, 2010
3,226
0
0
hmm i think i will get this when the price drops, maybe by a third at least

Irridium said:
Like a race mode, players race through a City, Mirror's Edge style, and have to use all of the suits powers to navigate it.

Or a predator-type game, where one player has all the suits powers activated(cloak, strength), and "hunts" the other players.

Or Time Attack challenges, to see how fast you can clear an area. Would require expert use of the suit.
goddamit man why arent u designing games urself!!! those ideas sound awesome.
 

s_h_a_d_o

Mr Propellerhead
Jun 15, 2010
134
0
0
Baneat said:
Anyway:
Here are the settings I had placed into my launch options for crysis 2 demo
"C:\Program Files (x86)\Electronic Arts\Crytek\Crysis 2 Demo\bin32\Crysis2Demo.exe" +cl_fov=90 +r_DrawNearFoV = 90 +pl_movement.power_sprint_targetFov = 90 +g_skipIntro=1

Skip intro and constant FoV of 90, I think all the console commands are still functional, there just isn't an easy, in-game way to do the more basic things (bloom/HDR, AA etc.), because I've heard of people altering the bloom and stuff in Crysis 2.
One can create an autoexec.cfg file to define graphics settings for the game - a chap called Wasdie [http://www.wasdie.blogspot.com/] has created a little app to do just that ...
[http://www.gamespot.com/users/Wasdie/show_blog_entry.php?topic_id=m-100-25916748]



The image links to further info if anyone's interested.
 

Baneat

New member
Jul 18, 2008
2,762
0
0
s_h_a_d_o said:
Baneat said:
Anyway:
Here are the settings I had placed into my launch options for crysis 2 demo
"C:\Program Files (x86)\Electronic Arts\Crytek\Crysis 2 Demo\bin32\Crysis2Demo.exe" +cl_fov=90 +r_DrawNearFoV = 90 +pl_movement.power_sprint_targetFov = 90 +g_skipIntro=1

Skip intro and constant FoV of 90, I think all the console commands are still functional, there just isn't an easy, in-game way to do the more basic things (bloom/HDR, AA etc.), because I've heard of people altering the bloom and stuff in Crysis 2.
One can create an autoexec.cfg file to define graphics settings for the game - a chap called Wasdie [http://www.wasdie.blogspot.com/] has created a little app to do just that ...
[http://www.gamespot.com/users/Wasdie/show_blog_entry.php?topic_id=m-100-25916748]



The image links to further info if anyone's interested.
I use this now :) but at the time of writing he hadn't made this great tool, supposedly an offocial crytek implementation of this will arrive soon.

1.6 for that tool's out now, it adds "Extreme" settings to each of those variables.
 

Aphex Demon

New member
Aug 23, 2010
1,280
0
0
I bet people who bought Homefront are kicking themselves in the head.

This game is fantastic..
 

Steve Butts

New member
Jun 1, 2010
1,003
0
0
Irridium said:
I don't know, I fail to see how New York is a fresh environment. Been there in plenty of games.

Haven't played the single-player fully yet, since I just played at a friend's place. But the story was rather fun. Multiplayer was just boring. I'll get it when the price drops.
Nuff said.

New York has been used a little, films are far more guilty of this. What games are you referring to exactly?

Besides, this is a very good take on what a ruined and nearly abandoned New York would feel like to fight in, IMO.

I love the game, really do. I never really like COD, and this does a very good job of realising the best parts of its competitor and making some things their own and doing away with lame tactics and shoddy play being shockingly effective.

Chuck in a story which surpasses any cod game(IMO) and you've got a great title, definitely worth entry fee. Not to mention, the graphics make EVERYTHING else out now look like wank.
 

Steve Butts

New member
Jun 1, 2010
1,003
0
0
mechanixis said:
Thank you, Crytek. In a market saturated with gritty, brown, one-dimensional shooters, Crysis 2 is a refreshing alternative.
What? What grittier and browner games than Crysis 2 are saturating the market, exactly?

I'm sorry, but this strawman of the Horrible Brown Video Game is really starting to get under my skin. Crysis 2 is a first-person shooter about a man in a robot suit who fights aliens and PMCs to protect America. In what way is that not the blandest, most overdone thing possible? Why is it forgiven for being the illegitimate child of Halo and Modern Warfare because it includes the color green?
Steve has listed some from the last 2 years, but, for one thing, the game isn't actually saturated in brown/bland colour schemes. Also, the robot suit makes such a huge difference I can only assume you've not played the game. Being able to jump an entire story, turn invisible, kick cars at people or cover yourself in armor makes a huge difference over basically being a soldier. Which HAS been done to death, you have to admit that.

Besides, the vast majority of shooters these days have begun blending into a super-realistic cover heavy mish mash of everyone trying to make the 125607234587 dollars that MW2 did. Crysis 2 is a breath of fresh air, especially in the multiplayer.
 

PopcornAvenger

New member
Jul 15, 2008
265
0
0
Unfortunately it sounds like Crytek has moved in the exact opposite direction from what made the first Crysis such a great game for me. Shortened singleplayer with much more linear gameplay, more "console-friendly" controls and modes of operation for the nanosuit, low rez graphics and lower graphic requirements overall. A big focus on multiplayer, which I could care less about.

I liked Crysis better than Warhead because of the open-world sandbox play, the ability to tackle a scenario using a variety of tactics, angle of approach, and weapons. There were objectives to meet, sure, but I could perform them on my timetable and have fun without cutscenes interupting my play every fifteen minutes. It sounds like Crysis2 has gone even further in the wrong direction.

*sigh*. Well, it sounds to me like another great PC franchise afflicted by multiplatform design and constraints. Like DA2, it's going on the "wait until it's on the bargain rack and heavily discounted before buying" shelf.
 
Apr 28, 2008
14,634
0
0
Tin Man said:
Irridium said:
I don't know, I fail to see how New York is a fresh environment. Been there in plenty of games.

Haven't played the single-player fully yet, since I just played at a friend's place. But the story was rather fun. Multiplayer was just boring. I'll get it when the price drops.
Nuff said.

New York has been used a little, films are far more guilty of this. What games are you referring to exactly?
Here's the games I've played that were set in New York:
The Warriors
World in Conflict
Prototype
Spider Man(pretty much all the games, but the ones I've played are the PS1 game, the PS2 games, and Web of Shadows)
Freedom Fighters
Max Paine 1+2
The Darkness
Deus Ex
Fahrenheit/Indigo Prophecy
Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory
Turning Point: Fall of Liberty
Max Paine 1+2
True Crime: New York City
The Godfather 1+2

And now for games based in cities that are closely based on New York.
GTA 3
GTA IV
Mafia 2
Infamous

Games I haven't played that I know are set in New York:
Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty
Syphon Filter 1+2
Legendary
Alone in the Dark

So yeah, while quite a few of those games are great, I'm sick and damn tired of New York.
 
Apr 28, 2008
14,634
0
0
s_h_a_d_o said:
Baneat said:
Anyway:
Here are the settings I had placed into my launch options for crysis 2 demo
"C:\Program Files (x86)\Electronic Arts\Crytek\Crysis 2 Demo\bin32\Crysis2Demo.exe" +cl_fov=90 +r_DrawNearFoV = 90 +pl_movement.power_sprint_targetFov = 90 +g_skipIntro=1

Skip intro and constant FoV of 90, I think all the console commands are still functional, there just isn't an easy, in-game way to do the more basic things (bloom/HDR, AA etc.), because I've heard of people altering the bloom and stuff in Crysis 2.
One can create an autoexec.cfg file to define graphics settings for the game - a chap called Wasdie [http://www.wasdie.blogspot.com/] has created a little app to do just that ...
[http://www.gamespot.com/users/Wasdie/show_blog_entry.php?topic_id=m-100-25916748]



The image links to further info if anyone's interested.
One has to wonder why the hell that wasn't in the final game in the first place.
 

TheComedown

New member
Aug 24, 2009
1,554
0
0
Raiyan 1.0 said:
Crysis 1 could support 32 players in its MP instead of this measly 16, and the maps were way larger as well. Considering people buy FPS titles these days mostly for the MP, this is downgraded.
2 things, there are loads of people that still play FPS games for the single player (I play for both, depends on the game but for the most part I am more interested in the SP)

Crysis 1 was PC exclusive, running on future computers with dedicated servers, with maps 3-4 times the size of the ones in crysis 2.

Crysis 2 is on the consoles, no dedicated servers(as far as i know) which makes it a lot harder to fit 32 players into a single map, not that you would want to when the maps are that small. Again the map size has to do with the constraints of the consoles.

If your problems are with the games multiplayer be pointing the finger at the consoles.
 

Steve Butts

New member
Jun 1, 2010
1,003
0
0
Irridium said:
Tin Man said:
Irridium said:
I don't know, I fail to see how New York is a fresh environment. Been there in plenty of games.

Haven't played the single-player fully yet, since I just played at a friend's place. But the story was rather fun. Multiplayer was just boring. I'll get it when the price drops.
Nuff said.

New York has been used a little, films are far more guilty of this. What games are you referring to exactly?
Here's the games I've played that were set in New York:
The Warriors
World in Conflict
Prototype
Spider Man(pretty much all the games, but the ones I've played are the PS1 game, the PS2 games, and Web of Shadows)
Freedom Fighters
Max Paine 1+2
The Darkness
Deus Ex
Fahrenheit/Indigo Prophecy
Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory
Turning Point: Fall of Liberty
Max Paine 1+2
True Crime: New York City
The Godfather 1+2

And now for games based in cities that are closely based on New York.
GTA 3
GTA IV
Mafia 2
Infamous

Games I haven't played that I know are set in New York:
Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty
Syphon Filter 1+2
Legendary
Alone in the Dark

So yeah, while quite a few of those games are great, I'm sick and damn tired of New York.
Touche sir. Touche. I haven't heard of some or played most of those, but I respect the effort. Don't get me wrong, I too am a bit sick of New York as a whole, which is why I kind of enjoy it being in ruins this time round =p. Kind of like New Raccoon City in a way...
 

MrTub

New member
Mar 12, 2009
1,742
0
0
TheComedown said:
Raiyan 1.0 said:
Crysis 1 could support 32 players in its MP instead of this measly 16, and the maps were way larger as well. Considering people buy FPS titles these days mostly for the MP, this is downgraded.
2 things, there are loads of people that still play FPS games for the single player (I play for both, depends on the game but for the most part I am more interested in the SP)

Crysis 1 was PC exclusive, running on future computers with dedicated servers, with maps 3-4 times the size of the ones in crysis 2.

Crysis 2 is on the consoles, no dedicated servers(as far as i know) which makes it a lot harder to fit 32 players into a single map, not that you would want to when the maps are that small. Again the map size has to do with the constraints of the consoles.

If your problems are with the games multiplayer be pointing the finger at the consoles.
There are dedicated servers on pc.
 

Smooth Operator

New member
Oct 5, 2010
8,162
0
0
Thank you, Crytek. In a market saturated with gritty, brown, one-dimensional shooters, Crysis 2 is a refreshing alternative.
It's true actually, it doesn't remind me at all of some other shooters... (yes it was sarcasm)
 

TheComedown

New member
Aug 24, 2009
1,554
0
0
Tubez said:
TheComedown said:
Raiyan 1.0 said:
Crysis 1 could support 32 players in its MP instead of this measly 16, and the maps were way larger as well. Considering people buy FPS titles these days mostly for the MP, this is downgraded.
2 things, there are loads of people that still play FPS games for the single player (I play for both, depends on the game but for the most part I am more interested in the SP)

Crysis 1 was PC exclusive, running on future computers with dedicated servers, with maps 3-4 times the size of the ones in crysis 2.

Crysis 2 is on the consoles, no dedicated servers(as far as i know) which makes it a lot harder to fit 32 players into a single map, not that you would want to when the maps are that small. Again the map size has to do with the constraints of the consoles.

If your problems are with the games multiplayer be pointing the finger at the consoles.
There are dedicated servers on pc.
Yes I know this. I own the PC version. I don't see your point as I stated before putting 32 players into the maps they have in Crysis 2 would turn into a massive cluster fuck.
 

MrTub

New member
Mar 12, 2009
1,742
0
0
TheComedown said:
Tubez said:
TheComedown said:
Raiyan 1.0 said:
Crysis 1 could support 32 players in its MP instead of this measly 16, and the maps were way larger as well. Considering people buy FPS titles these days mostly for the MP, this is downgraded.
2 things, there are loads of people that still play FPS games for the single player (I play for both, depends on the game but for the most part I am more interested in the SP)

Crysis 1 was PC exclusive, running on future computers with dedicated servers, with maps 3-4 times the size of the ones in crysis 2.

Crysis 2 is on the consoles, no dedicated servers(as far as i know) which makes it a lot harder to fit 32 players into a single map, not that you would want to when the maps are that small. Again the map size has to do with the constraints of the consoles.

If your problems are with the games multiplayer be pointing the finger at the consoles.
There are dedicated servers on pc.
Yes I know this. I own the PC version. I don't see your point as I stated before putting 32 players into the maps they have in Crysis 2 would turn into a massive cluster fuck.
My bad, I misread and though you said that there was no dedicated servers on pc
 

docbox1567

New member
Nov 10, 2009
61
0
0
?One of the most enjoyable shooters I?ve played in several months.??

Really? In months? How noncommittal can you get? That?s like saying, ?Hey Dorothy, you?re one of the hottest girls I?ve kissed in months.? What does ?one of? mean? Do you mean one of the ten best shooters, one hundred best shooters, ten billion best shooters? This statement is supposed to be your barebones assessment of the game and it falls flat because it?s phenomenally not committed. You might as well say, ?I really, kind of, not very much, could of, possibly liked or disliked the game.?

?I get the feeling it?s not the plot, but the way its? been told.?

Why don?t you know? To write a review you need to formulate an opinion, but it sounds like you haven?t thought much about it. The plot isn?t that great and you don?t have a clue why is not good critiquing. Think about why it works and why it doesn?t, make a review about it and you?ll be awesome.
 

Spencer Brower

Yummies Employee of the Montth
Sep 16, 2010
66
0
0
Crysis 1 was a fantastic looking shooter that played well and was very very good. Crysis 2 is a diluted version of it and is merely mediocre. for all the console scrubs i'm sure it will be le shit, but if you played the first game on PC it will be a kick in the balls. NOT WORTH 60 BUCKS!
 

Bernzz

Assumed Lurker
Legacy
Apr 9, 2020
1,655
2
43
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
SteelStallion said:
HerbertTheHamster said:
D_987 said:
HerbertTheHamster said:
Crysis 2 is very mediocre, 5/10 at most. The thing that bugs me most is that the FOV is like 45 or something, it's like the nanosuit blocks out 80% of your vision.

Sadly, game reviews can never be taken seriously because 8/10 is a "decent" score for AAA games.
Or people just don't have the same opinion as you regarding the game...
This is true, but I'm referring to the industry as a whole. When a movie or book is average it gets a 5/10. When a game is average it gets a 7/10 or a 8/10.
I disagree. Honestly, I think game critics are too harsh these days. I've played a lot of games that score generally around 60-70 that were pretty enjoyable. Not the greatest games but definitely worth a look, despite what critics say.

Standards are so high now, it seems like if something doesn't get a 95 it isn't worth a purchase.
One sticks out in my mind. Aliens vs Predator, early 2010 release. Yahtzee hated it, but this didn't surprise or deter me. My problem was Gamespot. They gave it a 5.5/10. I found the game to be amazingly fun, especially as the Alien, and will pick it up again at random and play through one of the campaigns, and have amazing fun along the way.
 

ukkopucko

New member
Apr 3, 2011
4
0
0
It's just like some typical FPS games which doesnt worth 60 euro...maybe I can give it a try when the price drops after several months..
 

Gregg Lonsdale

New member
Jan 14, 2011
184
0
0
I don't get why the story focused on Prophet so much, he was never all that interesting. They had the right idea when they made Crysis: Warhead and based the entire game around the guy from Transporter. Anyway, graphics beautiful, gameplay varied, Multiplayer can go up itself, the end.