I'll agree that the story was... stupid, but I'll be damned if it wasn't fun to play, and in the end, that's what I'm looking for with a shooter.
I agree with your comments on the single-player, but I forgot to take my anti-stupid medication this morning so I have to ask you:Rooster Cogburn said:I'm going to be murdered for this, but MW1's multiplayer didn't work. It was like a bunch of great ideas were thrown into a bag, shaken up and dumped out. None of the features seemed to fit in with everything else. 'Martyrdom' anyone? Gren' spam? It was an over-sized, awesome mess. MW2's multiplayer flows much better, and everything seems to make more sense in the context of the game.
The single player experience seems to have undergone the opposite transformation. MW2 is packed with great ideas that add up to a big mess. I won't say MW1 had a brilliant story, but it was delivered in a coherent and engaging way which made the 'big' moments dramatic, instead of just a spectacle.
A) He is a critically acclaimed Science Fiction writer with serveral novels.Anticitizen_Two said:This guy seems really confident in his writing skills, especially when you consider that he's a FREAKIN' CRYSIS WRITER.
Well then you were horribly misinformed, or you know some rather shallow gamers. You what's shocking? Crysis WASN'T a mere tech demo that ignorant fools slate it off to be, it was ya know...a GOOD and FUN game *shock and awe*.shotgunbob said:last time I checked people bought Crysis to brag that their PC could run it at 50 FPS not to actually play it