It doesn't seem overly intelligent to me. He starts by calling Crysis 1 an extended tech demo and then goes on to talk about how he loves the gameplay of Crysis 2 highlighting all the same gameplay features that existed already in the previous game.
I haven't played C2 SP yet but plenty of experience with the MP, plus online accounts from people who have played both SP tell me that the nano suit in the second is not superior to the first, in fact IMO at least its lacking in several respects.
Crysis 1 was highly critically acclaimed when it launched, the gameplay IMO was superb and no closer to "an extended tech demo" than many other "story light" AAA FPS's like the CoD series for example. I'm always suspicious of the motives of anyone who make that claim, espacially if they then go on to explain how much they enjoy the gameplay of C2 based on the use of the nanosuit. How is the core gameplay that different? The reviewer reveals his lack of experience in the first game by talking about "navigating menu's to access nanosuit powers". Presumably by that he's talking about the 1/4 second mouse flicks required to switch between powers which incidentally is a lot easier to do in the first than in the sequel which also uses a similar rotary menu system which tends to stick a lot, at least in MP.
BTW Cyan, I've been meaning to ask what the deal is with your sig?
Who do you think has been owned? I guess if there was anyone out there short sighted enough to make the claim that Crysis 2, a game designed from the ground up to run on consoles, wouldn't run well on consoles then yeah they've been owned. But of course Crysis 2 is a "Far Cry" from Crysis which as expected, does not run on consoles. Yeah Crysis 2 looks great. And on the PC, thanks (pretty much exclusively) to its superior lighting it can even be argued to look better than the original. But it's still a very different game utilising smaller, more confined and less interactive environments so there's not really a great deal to be concluded from the fact that it runs on consoles. Note I didn't use the modifer "well" given the raft of complaints from console gamers about image quality, LOD and framerate.
I just found the statement fun, oh the joys of acting like a little boy ; ) Seriously, I sometimes get involved in things like this. But I guess I should know better... -sigh-
I will change it later. As for who has been owned, I think pretty much everyone that thought Crysis couldn't run on consoles, from PC gamers to some console gamers. It's not my intention to offend people.
Gaming wise, I am a console gamer, first and foremost. I must admit though that the game tries to make a lot more than the consoles can chew, but I really love and appreciate Crytek's positive attitude trying to make the game run on consoles with 99% of the effects on.
The framerate is very solid in general and the times you get to see the very visible, typical *Crysis 2 only* effects running, in all their glory, the game just looks stunning.
It's a work of beauty.
Sometimes I went like; "I've never ever seen anything like this".
In order to appreciate the extent of the graphics quality and how far they went you just need a good PC --just thinking about the DX11 version it gives me the chills.
Anyway, nVidia have showed the fastest video card of the world in their official release video,
and guess which game they have chosen to show off its outstanding capabilities? Yes, obviously Crysis 2. It never stops. xD
Also the Crysis 2 Maximum Graphics Edition is pretty nice, from the box, to the graphics card, and the t-shirt. Wish I had the spare money to buy one, :smile: but I'd need a new PC too.
By all regards it makes perfect sense that the game looks beautiful regardless it runs on the PC, the PS3 or 360.
