Somewhat Disappointed With Crysis

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

link590o

Quite honestly, I expected a bit more out of Crysis than what it gave. To me, it felt like a combination of Counter Strike, Command and Conquer Generals, Fear, and a little bit of Bioshock to a degree.

Capturing alien bases, first person shooter, and limited powers such as invisibility or super strength. I dunno man...It felt unoriginal, and too familiar. I mean sure, the graphics are sweet and the weapons are fun. But overall, there wasn't anything gamers haven't experienced before. Considering what we've been seeing with other modern games, to me, Crysis was somewhat of a let down.

That's just my opinion. Obviously, if you loved Counter Strike and Fear, you'll love this game. But I've made my point.
 
Less than inspiring

Im suprised you even played that on the lowest settings, given your system specs. Anyway, I too felt somewhat the same. Not much was given thought to structuring a storyline. Anyone remember when they released AVP on the pc about 4 or so years ago? Sound similar? So far, its an all-so-familiar shooter, just like you said with FEAR. I guess we have another DOOM3 on our hands: a highly anticipated next generation graphics engine with a less than inspiring story. And doom3 actually had more of a story going for it than crysis is shaping up to be. Not to mention the fear factor in doom3 was great in my opinion.

On a side note: For people wanting to know what they can do with an older system trying to play crysis, i have my rig as an example: I was able to crank up the graphics a few notches with a 1024x768 reso. from the bottom barrel 800x600 which, of course for me, it defaulted to. medium settings on all except water and sound, No AA or antisoptic filter on a p4 3ghz, nvidia 7800gs 256mb agp, and 1 gig ram. And I have to say it looked great for low to med quality settings. Didnt run without some hicups when the action picked up but still not bad.
 
OH. yeah. i didn't play it on this computer. i played it on a friend's.


anyway...now that i've got that out of the way, this idea sorta struck me before....it's from EA. considering their products, why am i surprised? i should've expected it to be disappointing considering their reputation.
 
you got feeling like CS correct lol

when you go into the hardest mode [delta] enemy shot you if you reveal them even the slightest of your body part.

What I like about Crysis is not just the graphic, but the ability to do thing that non of other FPS offer.

Go stealth, run next to a Korean solider. Choke his neck, use him as a shield, toss him as an object or use him to bring down the whole house. Just watching the whole house fall was pretty fun.

Go strenght mode, leap up high and get a head shot from below, how cool is that? :D

I gonna make other video from those above idea to let you guys get a better picture tehe

BTW what setting did you used to play Crysis, link's?
 
well, even though some of my friend's computers are better than mine, they're certainly not the best. as in, they didn't have the 8800 gt or ultra, or the 2900 hd. so i couldn't play it very easily at its full glory. if i had to pin it as a setting, it would've been bordering low to medium. i had a bunch of extra settings turned off, particularly the ones that surkitz mentioned. and i played on a lower reso. i wanted a little eye candy, but i wanted to preserve frames above all else. what i saw wasn't that bad. i agree. it sure looks great. but you have to admit this:

even though you're allowed to do some cool things like going strength, jumping and getting a headshot, there are other games that allow much more freedom in terms of fun things you can do. take metal gear solid as the example. you can knock the guards out and move them places, throw them in lockers, throw yourself into a locker to hide from the guards, knock the guards out and then shoot them in their sleep, knock them out and use them to sign into a locked room, yell at them not to move and put their hands up, hide in a cardboard box...i could go on forever.

the point is that even though crysis does offer some nice things, it could have gone above and beyond and it didn't. and the lack of a storyline was sort of a turn off. i like to know what's going on, why are there aliens here in the first place, why do i hate them, why are we attacking them, what do we gain from it, what's the ultimate goal? stuff like that. it's too cut and dry for me.
 
A factor that is getting us all hot around the collar (aside from the graphical achievements of course) is the attention to detail in the action itself. Like the fact that enemies trip over roots or fall over when chasing you etc. This novelty is nice but will soon wear off and we'll have to wait and see how compelling the story is, the immersion which brings the real satisfaction. Unfortunately a weak story will tip the whole wagon, but I'm remaining optimistic. :) In a way too much hype can be a bad thing cos I'm betting many will go in now expecting a near perfect game. Its like our mental virginity will already be broken. Expect a decent (ish) game and hopefully we'll be pleasantly surprised.
 
I'll reserve judgment until I play the full game. The devs didn't want you to fully grasp the story in the demo because that would spoil the fun. Not to mention their new method of storytelling which they call ambient storytelling. This is where the player must extrapolate bits of info from the environment and what's going on in it just like real life. Some won't fully understand the story because they won't pay enough attention or lack the analytical skills to interpret what they're being given. Yes there are many familiar elements in the game and story, but everything under the sun has limitations. I'm optimistic about this game and look forward to playing it!
 
well in regards to needing to be analytical, that to me leaves only one question:

will it alienate too many people?

not everyone is smart enough to be able to put together the whole thing and see the bigger picture. it's almost like making a movie based on an extremely intellectual concept. on the one hand, you have the devs showing off how smart they can be and how awesome their game can be. and on the other hand, you have the average kid that doesn't know how to think that way yet.

stories as intricate as this one might turn out to be might be a bit much without the narrator or the characters helping you to understand what's happening and why. to me that says that a lot of people won't want to play it just because of the fact that you have to be smart to understand it at all. sure, for the privileged, this is going to be an amazing brain teaser, something that we can enjoy immensely. but it takes somewhat of a military mind for something like this. thinking with tact, and trying to be a step ahead of the game. i feel pity for the ones that want to play it but can't comprehend it.
 
IMO there is a distinct dichotomy among gamers: those that care about the story and those that will play anything as long as the GFX are good. With that being said I predict that Crysis will sell just fine and noone will feel alienated! I say dichotomy because often those that yearn for a good story aren't extremely concerned with GFX and a great many diehard ubber GFX-heads could care less about the underlying story(the latter being more absolute than the former). The team at Crytek has undoubtedly considered the wants of the gamut of gamers, it's just that they're promoting the GFX above all else for marketing purposes!
 
I got to say that I rather liked the demo. Can't wait till the game comes out. But then again I rather like anything were I can be in exciting combat. I will have to wait and see how good the story line is but I am into all the scifi stuff so a bit of alien would be cool. Which sounds like that is what the game is about. Aliens trying to take over the universe.... sweet. :D lol
 
I have to agree with the original poster. Crysis has been a complete let-down to me. I find CoD4 is a much better value with much better gameplay.

Crysis seems to be a good graphics benchmark but really leaves the whole "game" itself falling flat. At that, the graphics engine really runs poorly and inefficiently even on the highest end hardware, plus controls, gameplay, AI and whatnot- all very, very rough and in need of work/tuning.

I'd prefer if the goal is to make a visual benchmark, do what FutureMark does and just make a benchmark. Games should be left to developers that are more interested in a immersive, fun, well designed, tight-controlled, compelling gaming experience vs. just lots of fancy graphics & graphics features.
 
as i remarked earlier, it's from EAgames. EA has been putting out very crappy titles for a long time. they manage to pull their weight because people still buy these games due to their appealing graphics, only to learn later the game just blows.

Call of Duty has almost set a quality benchmark. the kinds of missions they come up with, the variety of weapons, the graphics, the realism, and all the other aspects that are incorporated make it a fantastic series.

crysis has only half the items i mentioned.
 
Perhaps I have too limited of exposure to really comment, but I played the demos for Crysis and CoD4, and while I thought both were enjoyable, I thought Crysis was more fun and looked better.
 
SNGX1275 said:
Perhaps I have too limited of exposure to really comment..
Click to expand...
Nah, I don't really think that's possible since one's enjoyment and entertainment value experienced is very subjective.

It's a lot like movies- you take any given movie and you'll have some folks that thought it was great, and some that thought it was horrible, and some in-between (average).

What one finds of interest or enjoyable is all to the individual. :)
 
Playing games just for the looks is really stupid, This is especially why I hate EA... All they do is remake the same game over, add better graphics or 1 extra feature from the previous game and call it "Sims 2: The Extra piece of crap you wont ever play because you're too busy playing a game like CS or something!"

The main reason I dislike EA is because they bought out a good company called WestWood ( original creators of C&C ) and turned it into a piece of garbage... I agree, Crysis was disappointing considering the hype they put out for it

They should come up with something original, crysis just felt like a FarCry remake but instead of on a beach with a revolver, you're just a "Ub3rpr0 h4x0r cyber robot ninja" killing random people or blowing up a house
 
lawl

i like your various descriptions. they sound like something i would say. if you couldn't tell from that last sentence, i couldn't agree with ya more, Time.

EA probably won't get the idea unless we all start to boycott their products. until they get their act together and make something playable, i don't think their games are worth paying attention to.

if they pulled a 2kgames, and made something amazing like bioshock, then they'd be a respectable company. but this is assuming they get it together, and start catering to hardcore gamers with high standards.
 
but this is assuming they get it together, and start catering to hardcore gamers with high standards.
Click to expand...

Actually, EA is mostly for casual gamers ( note their sports games & their crappy sims ) They just recently started doing stuff like crysis, although they had almost nothing to do with it except publishing it
 
I downloaded and played the demo soley because of the hype. I do very little pc gaming (or console for that matter). But this game had enough attention that I thought I wanted it, plus I had an 8800GTS so I figured I'd give it a shot. It looks fantastic with the mix of medium and high that I can play it on, and it is pretty fun.

Maybe it is because I'm such a casual gamer that I liked it, I may have missed any repetativeness of other FPS games. I hope some of you guys aren't disliking Crysis just because your systems can't handle it.
 
Crysis is a mazzive disappointment to me the graphics are very poor even on high on direct X9 with my 2900 XT, Amd 2.9Ghz x2 and 2Gb of Ram and if i put the anti-aliasing on the game just lags. Gameplay on the singleplayer is boring just walking around a mazzive jungle shooting japs with a rubbish storyline and the multiplayer maps are far too big and boring all that hype and waiting and its the worst game ever mine is getting selt on E-Bay ! ! ! ! 4 / 10 (call of duty 4 kicks crysis out the door )
 
Picked up COD4 on friday and beat it by saturday afternoon... I have to agree that it's a better game than Crysis in most respects. Crysis very high DX10 is pretty stunning visually, but the story isn't as cohesive or engaging as COD. IGN gave HL2:E2, COD4 and Crysis all 9.4... I enjoyed E2 the most, COD 2nd and Crysis least of the 3.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Julio Franco
Valorant hands-on: Mix of hardcore action and magical powers kicks ***
Replies
4
Views
2K
Nobina
Nobina
Ivan Franco
Metro Exodus: Impressions from 30 hours of gameplay
Replies
5
Views
3K
Puiu
Puiu

Latest posts

Back