|
little review after playing a bunch of matches:
graphics are ok i guess. worse than crysis 1, better than 90% of the other shooters. dx 11 might boost it a little in the final release, since demo is only dx9. also the game has a lot lower system requirements than i expected. i run it with a e8400 dual core and a gf460 at max setting in 1650x1050.
multiplayer is dissappointing so far. i dont see this game ever have a competetive scene. it mostly feels like 12 guys running arround on a map and no teamwork at all. what i find most annyoing is the fact that u almost never know where ur enemies are. u must always be afraid of getting attacked from behind and damn, u die fast in that game. so nearly all death u just dont stand a chance, because enemy saw u first. i did best with camping stealthed, but this isnt exactly fun.
i would give the multiplayer a 6 out of 10. hope the singleplayer can deliver.
|
So it runs better than crysis 1. im sitting steady at 30-40fps @ 1680x1050 with this setup:
intel core 2 duo e7400 OCD to 3.4 ghz
GTX 275
4 gb ddr2 RAM
velociraptor hdd
win 7 x64
note this is with the highest graphics settings. unfortunately theres nothing to tweak, there are 3 option for the graphics: gamer, advanced, and hardcore. im on hardcore obviously, runs fine, looks really good. My complaints stem from to much COD which i hate, and the multiplayer feels to similar to cod, BUT the armor abilites are really great, mainly cloack which i abuse all the time.
All in all, great for a few games if you just wanna kill stuff, fairly fast paced, and most pc's will run it, and the graphics i will say are unique and worth a look. Go try it folks.
|
On March 02 2011 02:17 whiteLotus wrote:
is it only me or game looks like another horible console port?
not just you
|
When I saw the comparison screens between the new crytek engine and the first one I had zero intentions of ever touching crysis 2, and from the gameplay I've seen in video's etc on youtube from the dev leak I most certainly will never play the game.
|
Well, i guess i will have to get a new computer, or mabye just not buy the game, hmmmm.
EDIT: apparently it has worse graphics than crysis 1, mabye i just wont get it.
|
Edit* hmmm, does it actually look worse? The graphics tab doesn't let you choose anything in the demo.
|
because it looks worse than a 3 year old predecessor whilst having much smaller maps? and just so it could work on consoles?
|
|
|
(In response to all you complaining about the graphics)
I don't think the retail version is a direct console port. iirc Crytek made sure that the PC version would allow much higher graphics compared to consoles because PCs obviously have better hardware; rather then continue the cycle of console ports now-a-days which gimps PC graphics.
There's no reason for a company like Crytek who has built their reputation in the gaming world around graphics to shoot themselves in the foot and give PC gamers some half-baked console port which has terrible graphics and can run on anything.
According to: http://www.gamersmint.com/crysis-2-recommended-and-highly-recommended-pc-specs-revealed/ the "highly recommended specs" are: 3GHz Core i7 4GB RAM GTX560Ti / HD4870 X2 1.8GB Video Memory DirectX 11 Shader Model 3.0/4.0 Windows 7, 30fps @ 1920 x 1200
edit: Not to mention the fact that why would you buy a game purely for graphics? Sure Crysis 1 looked great but I found the gameplay to be fantastic as well.
|
Crytek made sure that the PC version would allow much higher graphics
no, they SAID they will make sure. well newsflash for you, game developers lie. also even if what they say is true, and it looks better than on consoles, still doesnt mean it looks better than crysis 1 on pc.
anyway the issue isnt if it looks better than console versions or not (it obviously should, considering how much more powerful and expensive pcs are), its whether it looks state of the art. thats what people are expecting from crytek games, along with huge sandbox like maps (which the campaign doesnt have, it plays more like a cod clone than a crytek game). they're supposed to push the limits. you dont push the limits by looking worse than your aged predecessor.
the most depressing thing is, it doesnt even work that much better than crysis 2. on maximum details im getting the same framerates on both, but one has enormous maps filled with lush jungles, the other is a corridor shooter with environments basically made out of huge boxes.
also you mentioned not buying a game cause of graphics, and i agree. i played crysis 1 and warhead a couple of times through cause of fun and freeform gameplay. but when i tried playing the leaked beta i got bored after a few levels, not cause its unfinished or anything, but cause the gameplay was butchered.
|
On March 02 2011 04:38 WiljushkA wrote:
the most depressing thing is, it doesnt even work that much better than crysis 2. on maximum details im getting the same framerates on both, but one has enormous maps filled with lush jungles, the other is a corridor shooter with environments basically made out of huge boxes.
Yeah but this is only the demo right. Who's to say that they left out the highest/higher graphical settings for the official release? If this was another company sure but being Crysis I'd doubt they'd gimp themselves so much.
edit: Game play aside though. A lot of people seem to be hating on the aiming assist on already and such and I can't speak to the game play. If the game play blows well sure thats sucks (since I enjoyed the game play of Crysis 1) and then the graphics don't really matter so much.
|
but why would they gimp themselves with negative marketing thats bound to enrage customers (unless thats the only thing they can show)? also nobody releases demos with incomplete graphics anymore, it doesnt make any sense.
and anyway, why would a leaked beta (used by crytek's own people) and demo both have the same intentionally limited options. why for a beta? and dont say they're incomplete cause development isnt finished, its probably bloody well finished cause they send games to printing much earlier than 1 month prior to the release.
|
I'm enjoying the game. and recommend others to try it out.
|
Just played a few hours of the multiplayer beta. It's a terrible COD clone with some shitty gimmicks like invisibility, making the game even more hide'n'seek than it has to. Not to mention the game is a consolized mess, with auto-aim and mouse acceleration on by default. This game is to quake 3 what halo wars is to starcraf. might be fun but if you're looking for an FPS with depth keep looking.
|
On March 02 2011 04:50 WiljushkA wrote:
but why would they gimp themselves with negative marketing thats bound to enrage customers (unless thats the only thing they can show)? also nobody releases demos with incomplete graphics anymore, it doesnt make any sense.
and anyway, why would a leaked beta (used by crytek's own people) and demo both have the same intentionally limited options. why for a beta? and dont say they're incomplete cause development isnt finished, its probably bloody well finished cause they send games to printing much earlier than 1 month prior to the release.
Well some people seem to be saying they may have left out the higher textures to save bandwidith, and that theres no DX-11 options. Wasn't there initially reports that there wasn't going to be a PC demo which sparked an out-roar from PC users? It could be that they simply did a console port of the 360 multiplayer demo hence the apparent "press the start button" at the start of the demo.
That being said no idea as to why the leaked beta has limited options other than maybe it not being 100% finished and they hadn't thrown them in yet, dunno.
{Again, I haven't played the leaked beta or the multiplayer demo. I'm just going off what people have said in regards to the demo so far so feel free to correct me}.
Edit: autoaim being on by default could be more evidence of a potential console-to-pc demo port.
|
Ughhhh just bought killzone 3 too...I should have gotten this imo ;/
|
I fear Crysis has been raped by console faggotry. ;/ Let's see how it pans out.
I'll only play the singleplayer campaign as these kind of games always have horrible multiplayer.
|
Interesting gameplay, not used to emphasis on playing vertically.
|
Basically Crytek lied and console ported Crysis 2. Its happened many times before but Crytek was a shinning example of PC game development. Pushing both graphics and exploring new gameplay elements.
Due to greed however they fell back and started to cut features and dumb down their games in general for a wider CoD audience.
|
Just played the demo. I think it's pretty fun. It adds interesting elements with the whole cloak and armor abilities. Personally, I thought the graphics were exceptional.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
