bit-gamer.net

Crysis Was Terrible

Comments 101 to 125 of 217

Reply
javaman 14th June 2010, 16:29 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by CardJoe
And that's why we score Call of Pripyat etc very harshly. When it was first released it was unplayable. We revisited it after and found it fun, giving an improved score, but still...it needed mods.

I don't see where the question comes from really, as the logical answer is held within it. Without the mods, Stalker wasn't half as much fun. Mods were good. Stalker was OK. You can't add those two qualitative statements together and announce that Stalker is amazing.

The question was more from curiosity cause STALKER seemed to get a good review considering and as you say, its a game that needs mods. Tho because of the mod community it is a fantastic game. Oblivion too done well without mods tho IMO morrowind was far better. If it wasn't for mods I wouldn't play oblivion. That why I got it on PC rather than console too
mastorofpuppetz 14th June 2010, 16:30 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by CardJoe
And that's why we score Call of Pripyat etc very harshly. When it was first released it was unplayable. We revisited it after and found it fun, giving an improved score, but still...it needed mods.

I don't see where the question comes from really, as the logical answer is held within it. Without the mods, Stalker wasn't half as much fun. Mods were good. Stalker was OK. You can't add those two qualitative statements together and announce that Stalker is amazing.

Dont you mean Clear Sky? COP was stable at launch.
b5k 14th June 2010, 16:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by javaman
Source and Unreal engins were and have been improved on over time where as Cry engine launched straight in an attempt to beat them.
Unreal Engine 3 hasn't really "been improved over time" as much as you may think. Unreal Engine 3 was released and has had 1 major update, taking it to Unreal Engine 3.5. Not only that, but Unreal Engine 3 has been used in over 90 games.

Source Engine isn't even next generation! It's old school! Source engine still uses heavily pre-compiled level structures and the source code in it could take you all the way back to Quake 1...Oh yes. Cause the Source engine is based off the GLDSrc engine that is based off id Tech 2 (Quake 1/2 Engine) which was made in 1997(ish?). Sure, they've added a helluva lot of whistles and bells on top of the Source engine, but it's still got its roots(remember who to thank for every Source engine based game now).

CryENGINE 1 (FarCry) wasn't even used for anything but FarCry (recently Aion Online) and CryENGINE 2 is better for developer adoption, but shockly bad compared to even ID Tech 1(Wolf3d/Doom Engine). So what's CryENGINE's problem? Well, who'd want to fish around in some developers home grown engine designed specifically to achieve one fixed task, over the top graphics, when you can get the Unreal 3 engine and make it to exactly that for a fraction of the license and developer costs?
Quote:
Maybe if more games adopted it, it would of been optimised better.
This is NOT how development works. If CryTEKs business model was to chuck out a shitty running graphics engine that looked staggeringly pretty, then slowly optimize it as people use it more and more, they'd be knee deep in **** by now (they prolly are actually).

The above is just a silly comment. People adopt engines because they're efficient and scalable, not because they've been promised it might become efficient and scalable in the future if they get enough revenue from license sales.
Quote:
Hopefully Cry engine3 is more optimised, at least similar levels of detail would be nice.
I will say that if they manage to make it run worse than CryENGINE with out making it look any better, I'll eat my hat. I doubt, once again, you'll see any major improvement over other existing technologies (CryEngine 1/2 weren't that better than other developers offerings) but the whole thing will run slower than what other developers have to offer (as usual...).
Quote:
If it is gonna push systems, at least make it a noticable improvement to justify it.
You could say the same thing about CryENGINE 1 / 2 in my eyes.
CardJoe 14th June 2010, 16:37 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by javaman
The question was more from curiosity cause STALKER seemed to get a good review considering and as you say, its a game that needs mods. Tho because of the mod community it is a fantastic game. Oblivion too done well without mods tho IMO morrowind was far better. If it wasn't for mods I wouldn't play oblivion. That why I got it on PC rather than console too

Ah, I see. In that case, bear in mind that the original STALKER was reviewed before I was at Bit-tech. It was done by TrustedReview's Andrew Vandervell in the interrim period between my predecessor, Ryan, and I. It was a time of lawlessness and anarchy, compared to what is now a time of anarchy and ruggedly handsome games editors.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastorofpuppetz
Dont you mean Clear Sky? COP was stable at launch.

Indeed. I stand corrected.
thehippoz 14th June 2010, 16:42 Quote
bought the game on release and never regretted.. I was part of the mp beta and could play the game full up on a crt (1024x768).. but back in 2007 you needed a minimum 8800gtx which was overclocked to ultra speeds+

thing is a lot of supposed enthusiasts at the time were nothing but console gamers with a lot of money.. so they were trying to play it on higher res lcd panels and sli/tri sli wasn't even working on release.. so the bashing started

I showed my buds what it looked like on crt and I gotta say the game looked like your in the freaking woods.. totally impressed with the game and gameplay to be honest

all the crying came from emachine gamers and the fake enthusiast crowd.. they just couldn't run it because of their native res- so it sucked

warhead I actually got a buzz at the end of that game.. I think they're brilliant games- you just have to have the rig to see it like it was supposed to be seen.. those screens you have in the article don't even look right :D
Hovis 14th June 2010, 17:10 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by CardJoe
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hovis
One time I had to assault some guys in a little rickety village, so I pinched a truck drove it into the buildings, smashed them to bits, dived out, lit the fuel tank of the truck on fire, turned invisible and legged it into some bushes to hide. Chaos ensured. It was beautiful. For that to happen in any other high end FPS it'd have to be scripted, and it'd the -only- way to do it. No FPS comes close to the freedom of engagement that Crysis has

I'd like to point out that I've done exactly the same thing in Far Cry 2, many times. True, the buildings don't collapse. And it's a Camoflage Suit, rather than an Invisibility mode, but still. Truck, crash, dive, blow up, hide, confusion.

There's nothing in your description which would have to be scripted nowadays.

Also, there's a difference between being able to knock down huts and trees and true destructible terrain.

Without the ability to smash the houses the pieces the whole "I smash your house to pieces!" plan kind of fails though. You end up just looking like you're pished and bumping into things that ought to fall down yet doesn't.
CardJoe 14th June 2010, 17:19 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hovis
Without the ability to smash the houses the pieces the whole "I smash your house to pieces!" plan kind of fails though. You end up just looking like you're pished and bumping into things that ought to fall down yet doesn't.

Fine, if buildings falling over is so important to you, I did the exact same thing in Red Faction: Guerrilla - and there the buildings were bigger, fell down better AND I WAS IN SPACE.

Car, Crash, Explode, Run Away.
thehippoz 14th June 2010, 17:23 Quote
red faction is over the top =] you gotta remember the game came out 3 years ago.. it was pretty nice to see trees fall over back then.. what did we have before other than jedi knight.. oh I loved choking out people in mp :o

I dunno it's easy to judge old games.. I still think the game was great for it's time
CardJoe 14th June 2010, 17:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by thehippoz
red faction is over the top =] you gotta remember the game came out 3 years ago.. it was pretty nice to see trees fall over back then.. what did we have before other than jedi knight.. oh I loved choking out people in mp :o

I dunno it's easy to judge old games.. I still think the game was great for it's time

Red Faction is hardly a spring chicken.

As for trees falling over; that's Crysis' killer feature? Really?
thehippoz 14th June 2010, 17:36 Quote
think the combos were pretty good.. I mean remember getting into the alien ship and being flushed down the toilet tubes- the game had a lot of different things going for it.. warhead thought was even better- far as a shooter goes they're pretty good

the train where your busting heles and ground troops was a lot of fun.. I know they do this stuff on console all the time- but they don't have the graphics crysis does- not even close
Action_Parsnip 14th June 2010, 17:37 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by lacuna
Quote:
Originally Posted by Action_Parsnip

You da man. Thats the level where you have an m16 with enough bullets to kill the little monkey trigen, running towards you ready to insta swipe you to death in under 10 seconds, if you hit him with every single one. Then you have to leg it and jump blindly off a huge freaking waterfall, then dodge certain death many many times from them on. It was epic i tellz ya!

Or alternatively, don't pick up the gun and just run past the first trigen (can run faster without a gun), straight off the waterfall and run up the stream (in the water) to the river, then to the helicopter to trigger the cut scene. Following the cut scene just run straight up the hill to the armoury inside the walls. The human trigens are too slow to catch you

Oh this rings a bell. The trigens cant follow you into the water isnt that right? But theres a few rocket mega trigens running a bout so dont hang around. This all sounds very familiar.
CardJoe 14th June 2010, 17:39 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Action_Parsnip
Oh this rings a bell. The trigens cant follow you into the water isnt that right? But theres a few rocket mega trigens running a bout so dont hang around. This all sounds very familiar.

Yes, so you run to the downed helicopter and use the minigun. Easy.
Spuzzell 14th June 2010, 17:39 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by CardJoe
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hovis
Without the ability to smash the houses the pieces the whole "I smash your house to pieces!" plan kind of fails though. You end up just looking like you're pished and bumping into things that ought to fall down yet doesn't.

Fine, if buildings falling over is so important to you, I did the exact same thing in Red Faction: Guerrilla - and there the buildings were bigger, fell down better AND I WAS IN SPACE.

Car, Crash, Explode, Run Away.

That's not what happens in Far Cry 2. You can't get out of a car while it's moving, so basically you're parking next to a magically indestructible corrugated iron shack and then getting out.

Then you can shoot at the car for 5 minutes before it catches on fire. Or throw a grenade, either is fine. Any surviving goons will know exactly where you are whatever you're wearing, and will shoot you with unerring accuracy from so far away you can hardly see them through your stupidly restrictive monocle, which, by the way, you can only use if you get your map out first.

When you do finally get close enough to shoot back, they happily take multiple hits to the head from your mounted machine gun before even going 'ouch'.

Once that chore is over, you head around the next corner, look at your map, realise you've taken a wrong turn, turn around.. AND THE WHOLE DAMN LOT OF THEM HAVE RESPAWNED.

Then you give up and, in what should be an open world action game full of exciting travel and memorable firefights, you take the bus. Because that's actually more fun.

I seem to have ranted. Basically, Crysis is more fun than Far Cry 2. For lots of reasons, but mostly because it makes travelling around on foot preferable to riding in a bus.
CardJoe 14th June 2010, 18:17 Quote
Coincidentally, this article has timed in with EA Week on Steam. Crysis is 50 percent off today.
tristanperry 14th June 2010, 18:25 Quote
The article itself seemed fair enough. I think Crysis is great game, even though I agree with some parts of the article (i.e. the nanosuit wasn't as 'fluid' as suggested, and some of the characters were annoying)

But overall the article seems to be flame-bait on purpose.

As I say, the content seems fair enough at times. But the title is pure flame-bait IMO.

"Crysis Was Terrible" was the headline. Then the article explains this by saying:

"Crysis was extremely good looking, you have to give it that."
"They made a decent shooter"
"an average game" [twice]

So despite the headline and nature of parts of the article, the overall conclusion being made by the article was that it's an average game (gameplay-wise) with amazing graphics.

And - to me - a game with amazing graphics and average gameplay doesn't equate to being "terrible"
SlowMotionSuicide 14th June 2010, 18:39 Quote
When I first saw the title I immediatly went for comments to indulge in some epic Gunsmith rage. So please do deliver.

I don't care what the author thinks about the game, personally I found myself playing it time after the time, both Crysis and Warhead are installed on my rig and I still play them, and enjoy them frequently. It's not many a game I keep playing for over two years consecutively.

Carry on the flamewar!!
Spuzzell 14th June 2010, 18:49 Quote
I was wrong, you can jump out of some moving vehicles in Far Cry 2!

Cars don't work for this though, by the time you've got the door open and jumped out they've basically stopped moving.
Gunsmith 14th June 2010, 19:07 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlowMotionSuicide
When I first saw the title I immediatly went for comments to indulge in some epic Gunsmith rage. So please do deliver.

theres only one woman who has the right to tell me what to do and its not you.

sammich, NAO
Chombo 14th June 2010, 19:07 Quote
I really have to ask what the point of this article is? Bagging on Crysis is way out of fashion.

What this whole article boils down to is another person's opinion of a 3 year old game that they just can't let go of. Admittedly the author gets a better soap box than the average forum troll but still it all amounts to the same thing anyway.
Rkiver 14th June 2010, 19:14 Quote
Hey, at least it wasn't Halo.
Gunsmith 14th June 2010, 19:17 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rkiver
Hey, at least it wasn't Halo.

that would have been a good way to bring everyone together, we could have all torn it to pieces.
Ficky Pucker 14th June 2010, 19:25 Quote
the game was good, it went crap as the aliens showed up.
Smilodon 14th June 2010, 19:54 Quote
May I ask what the point of this article were? A forum thread in the gaming section, sure. But an entire article on the front page just for someone to express their feelings about a 3 year old game? Please don't start making articles just for "padding".



Anyway, my opinion:

Crysis was never anything more than a tech demo. It never claimed to have class-leading gameplay either. However, they did manage to create a simple (talking game play here) shooter that was fun to play and that worked well on a computer, unlike the consolified crap companies make these days.

And since they have been mentioned in this thread I just have to comment on two other games as well:

Bioshock: Wonderful visuals, but my god did the game play suck... Claustrophobic levels with very boring enemies only broken up by the big daddies, which were fun the first couple of times but quickly turned into a proper annoyance.

Far cry2: Nice level design, but horrible game play. They should really make more than 5 missions in a game that big.
modfx 14th June 2010, 20:46 Quote
I think crysis was brilliant...up to the last few levels, I only played it through to the end once, but i occasionally pick up one of the mid levels from time to time to do a GTAesque rampage which I think is what its best for really. The main problem is that if it wasnt for the amount of hype it recieved it, this article probably wouldnt even exist. The bar Crytek set themselves was too high and much like STALKER the end result would be a decent game in itself, but unfortunately nothing close to what they set out to achieve. IMHO the only studio that has lived up to the hype behind they're games is Valve and they have quite rightfully set the benchmark for every other game in the same genre as the Half-Life series...just look how many people have mentioned Half-Life in this thread.....
Rogan 14th June 2010, 20:49 Quote
These retrospective articles seem to do a good job of being the polar opposite of my opinion. Every time.

gg
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums