Crysis Reviews - Page 2

IGN Review -- 9.4:
http://pc.ign.com/articles/834/834614p1.html

1up's Shawn Elliot gave the single-player a sobering 8.0 .

WARNING: There's some unmarked spoilers in that review, so I'll sum up:

-it looks fantastic
-choose-your-tactics gameplay is wonderful
-the AI can be brilliant in parts and brain-dead in others
-a shift towards the end upsets the excellent flow the game

10-15 hours of gameplay! A welcome change for a state of the art FPS

I'll wait for the bargain bin.

EA is not getting any more of my money!
AND I won't have to get a new graphics card. My current one tears up COD4.
Bet Crysis will be like Prey... You play it once and never again. At least Prey's multi was fun.

lol just because you don't like EA doesn't mean Crysis is a bad game. Just buy it used if you don't want to let EA prosper from your $50

I've played the demo a dozen times and with the all weapons hack. Can't stand the MAXIMUM POWER voice every time I use the suit or the voice from The Unit TV show. The game feels like a ported arcade or console game. EA really dumbed down what would have been a great game had Crytek gone with another company. The Helo is a joke.

Listening to their podcast, I think he's into MP more than SP. I think that may have colored his review. Anyway, I'll see in a few days.

If you hate the game why are you still posting in this thread? We get it-you don't like it. No one is going to force you to buy it.

To me it feels just like Far Cry, only with more visual ooomph. To the critic above who thinks its a dumbed down arcade or console game, I am left scratching my head: Compared to what does this game feel dumbed down?

Exactly. 5 hours for a SP game is ridiculous (COD4).

Did it strike anyone as odd that someone would play the demo to a game they hated a dozen times?? Anyway, I use the female voice for the suit and thought it sounded pretty cool.

I ended up playing the demo 12 times because when it came out I tested it on 2 different computers to see how it played at different settings. Then I found the all weapons mod so I thought I'd try that out. Just couldn't get into it.
Dumbed down means there is no improvement over FC except for a coat of paint. Wait till you fly the helicopter. It's no PC game.

Again...

And Again

Do you know how to get a Logitech Rumblepad 2 Vibration Feedback PC Gamepad to work in Crysis ???

I disagree with your assessment of this game, it feels like a worthy upgrade to Far Cry, meaning they didn't mess with what made Far Cry work.

As for flying the helicopter and it feeling like a console, what were you expecting?

Hello HeadRusch,
Well you can see the enemies coming a mile away like FC. Just felt like a kiddie game.
There is no rudder for the chopper, just mouse control. Vehicles felt clumsy.
BF2 was fun to fly aircraft/vehicles
The "flickering" trees on the hillsides are still there as they come into view.
New beta driver today for SLI 169.09

Sorry, I don't.

I can't see any difference in this game versus, say, BF2 which you reference above. I can see enemies a mile away there, too.

Can't comment on the vehicle controls but the trucks feel the same as BF2 to me. Also like how they let you control the MG even if you are the driver alone in the vehicle, gives it some extra fun.

But everyone is entitled to their opinion. on the PS3 everyone loved Resistance, I think the game is hopelessly dull to play. Everyone loved Halo on the Xbox (Multi, specifically) and to me its Multi is less interesting than Quake was back in the day......so everyone has different expectations.

For what its worth, I'm currently going through MOH:Airborne and after adjusting to its style of play am finding it quite fun in SP.

Hello,
I guess I must have played the original FC too much ha ha.
On the hard setting or whatever it's called you have to switch to the gunners position to use the MG on vehicles.
I've been waiting for Crytek to make another game since FC came out because I liked it so much. But since then other games have come out and now this just seams old. Some people may wish it was only 5 hrs long after they play it.
Read another review this morning, I'll link if I remember where it was, that sounded like they were tiptoeing around their summation of the game trying not to reveal their expectations were not fulfilled. I'm sure a lot of people will buy the game but there are a lot of new games and I have other bills to pay so I can't buy them all.
Or... maybe it just gamers burnout!
Later

Edit: HeadRusch you a correct about BF2. I never liked the SP much but got hooked on the MP.
Maybe the Crysis MP will be a gas.

Here's my review: it rocks! I only had time to play for about 90 minutes last night, but it's a ton of fun. It also runs better than the demo-I'm running at 1650x1080 2AA all on high. I haven't tried the very high hack that worked in the demo yet. My system: quad core, 8800gtx, windows xp, 4gb ram. Anyone else get it yet?

Great to hear!

Mine should be delivered today or tomorrow. What does FRAPS report on your system at "high" settings?

I'll admit that Crysis technically looks more realistic. The shadows and level of detail which the bushes are modelled is very nice. But to me it just feels sort of artificial and not very "earthy".

BFVietnam was a jungle that I'd rather be in than the jungle in Crysis. Physics, sound, character models, textures, etc all contribute to that feeling. I just feel like the Crysis environment isn't the whole package considering the era we are in.

Not knocking the game but I had the same feeling with Far Cry too.

One of my own Vietnam screens that I had online already..

Is this jungle modelled below really that much worse than the "feel" of the jungle you get from Crysis?

I guess I just disagree with you on this. The BF:V jungle, to me, seemed woefully lax, considering the jungle in VietCong which game out a year or more earlier than BF:V looked far more realistic to my eyes, plus I thought the animation in BF:V was terrible on the troops, etc, textures were all terrible, just like Battlefield 1942, everything seemed sacrificed for the sake of getting 32 or 64 people in the battle in multiplayer.

FarCry looked a little cartoony, but it had the most realistic islands I've ever fought on, expecially when vegitation would block your view of enemies and monsters. The water, the vehicles you could pilot, the weapon selection and the graphics were all amazing. The enemy troops looked a little on the cartoony side to me, but that was my only gripe.

I would say that the jungles of BF:V can't hold a candle to Farcry, let alone Crysis. I would even go so far as to say that BF:V can't hold a candle to VietCong. But thats just IMHO, some people swore by BF:1942, but I found the game simplistic and dull.

I can't believe you guys are comparing that to Crysis. If you prefer that then that's fine, but it looks like a PS2 game to me.