[360, PS3] Crysis 2
- Thread starter ultragpu
- Start date
Not like I've taken an official poll or anything but I can't recall how many times I've seen posts by console gamers talking about Crysis. I think it's established it's name pretty well with both crowds.
(((interference)))
Veteran
Agree, with this, i've owned all the Halo's, the two MWs, the two Gears and KZ2 as well.
And it's silly to think that console gamers wouldn't be interested in Crysis 2. They most definitely will, EVERYONE (well at least any FPS player) has heard of Crysis, PC or console and they'll be definitely interested in it's sequel if they can play it on consoles.
I bet there are a lot more people who wanted to play Crysis than actually did play it - due to the prohibitive system requirements.
I dunno, I still think they're late to the party. Every other dev had to compete with each other's ideas, and keep tweaking their multiplayer design through several iterations with millions of active players. But Crytek has worked in a virtual vacuum with no other serious PC-only dev and a lot less feedback from a smaller community (that invested heavily in modding, though).
I mean, who can compete with the scripted set pieces of a COD game? And they're gonna let you fly a Mi-24 on top of it all... Or have you seen the full list of configuration options for Firefight in Reach?
These are the exciting new stuff they need to compete against. Yeah, people will pay attention to the game because of its name, but are they going to choose it over the above stuff when all they see is a pretty standard run and gun game?
I mean, who can compete with the scripted set pieces of a COD game? And they're gonna let you fly a Mi-24 on top of it all... Or have you seen the full list of configuration options for Firefight in Reach?
These are the exciting new stuff they need to compete against. Yeah, people will pay attention to the game because of its name, but are they going to choose it over the above stuff when all they see is a pretty standard run and gun game?
(((interference)))
Veteran
I never said it'll be a multiplayer hit, am expecting it to perform more like UC2, which people bought mainly for the singleplayer and graphics.
Most gamers only play a couple of MP shooters regularly, Halo, COD or BF (and possibly KZ2 on PS3).
I expect it to perform just fine even if the MP is throwaway.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
One nice advantage (also a disadvantage) Crysis 2 will have being on console is that if they tune the performance correctly, you won't hear all the cries of outrage at not being able to run Ultra High settings (meant for near future hardware) and then constant cries of inept developers and poorly coded game. 
I think my main interest in the console version right now is to see just how much advanced tech they can squeeze into the consoles while still managing playable framerates.
Which brings to mind if they try to cram too much advanced tech such that it slows the game down, we'll probably hear those inept programmers accusations again.
I'll be getting it on PC myself.
Regards,
SB
I think my main interest in the console version right now is to see just how much advanced tech they can squeeze into the consoles while still managing playable framerates.
Which brings to mind if they try to cram too much advanced tech such that it slows the game down, we'll probably hear those inept programmers accusations again.
I'll be getting it on PC myself.
Regards,
SB
For hardcore gamers absolutely, but how many of the 10 million people who bought MW2 on consoles are hardcore gamers? I'm not saying Crysis 2 will not sell, just don't expect blockbuster numbers.
how many of 1 million people who bought crysis are a hc gamers?
I'll just add that Crysis went platinum roughly 2-3months after release with 1 million sales by end of January 2008. From EAs investor call 31 Jan.
You mean pretty standard run and gun games like Halo and COD I assume becouse that what they are in the end. Now I dont know how much they have kept from previous Crysis games gameplay but if it is over 50% with similar variation then that will be enoiugh to deliver a game with gameplay well above the generic line.
Last edited by a moderator:
Same here.
green.pixel
Veteran
CoD-like games are the evolutionary dead-end of FPSs. Instead of pushing the genre forward, all they do every year since MOHAA and CoD1 is changing skin on top of a modified Q3 engine. Evolutionary step was adding levelling system with MW1. Eveything else is rinse, repeat and running it to the ground. Kotick wants teh moniez of course.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-fi-ct-activision-20100613,0,7383922,full.story
What also amazes me is that how many people want games to have "movie-like atmosphere" aka script-fest train rides. And they still continue to buy them like junkies every year. Basically, they are the.McDodnalds of the indsutry. Well, I guess you can't expect more from the mainstream Lady Gaga/Britney Spears lovers. 6 million $ Activision E3 party to feature Lady GAGA!.
Last edited by a moderator:
Silent_Buddha
Legend
If the controls are perfect and the balance is good why change it just for the sake of changing it? At that point you can invest more time in set pieces, design, storytelling, graphics, etc... As well tweaks here and there.
There's a ton of failed FPSes that tried different things just to do things differently, but neglected the important things.
For myself the nanosuit in Crysis was a non-factor. The only thing I used it for was occasionally stealth and occasionaly str. to steady sniper aim. Neither of which is revolutionary. The only new gameplay mechanic that Crysis brought that others had not done before was being able to change it on the fly. Something I pretty much never did.
Regards,
SB
CoD-like games are the evolutionary dead-end of FPSs. Instead of pushing the genre forward, all they do every year since MOHAA and CoD1 is changing skin on top of a modified Q3 engine. Evolutionary step was adding levelling system with MW1. Eveything else is rinse, repeat and running it to the ground. Kotick wants teh moniez of course.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-fi-ct-activision-20100613,0,7383922,full.story
What also amazes me is that how many people want games to have "movie-like atmosphere" aka script-fest train rides. And they still continue to buy them like junkies every year. Basically, they are the.McDodnalds of the indsutry. Well, I guess you can't expect more from the mainstream Lady Gaga/Britney Spears lovers. 6 million $ Activision E3 party to feature Lady GAGA!.
would you prefer old school quake/serious sam scenario where you get locked in the room with lots of enemies spawn and just rush you screming KILLLLL?
.No, I think that both Halo and COD games are significantly better in at least one aspect. In the case of COD it's epic set pieces using scripted sequences; they seem to be far more immersive then whatever I've seen from Crysis (granted, I haven't played the first game). Sure it's the same again and again, and on rails - but it's immersive, exhilarating, fun and a lot of people buy COD games for this reason.
And in the case of Halo, there's a far more complex and creative sandbox for player driven gameplay; just compare the weapons, vehicles, enemy types, and in Reach the armor abilities, all combined in large scale battles with lots of enemies.
And Gears is simply more badass and over the top. You can't really beat a chainsaw bayonet...
I could go on with a few more titles but my point should be clear by now. These AAA shooter franchises all have at least one or more unique attributes to elevate them above the rest. I don't see any such outstanding aspect in Crysis 2, which is why I don't feel interested enough to buy it. I might go too far to extrapolate it to the general audience but still, it's hard to list reasons for choosing this game over the already established shooters.
Apart from, yeah, being something new, but that's not necessarily enough to beat something we know to be good...
I would say a significant amount of them. Why would a casual player be interested in Crysis?
from what i have seen most of ppl i know use it as a benchmarking tool .
Why not? it suposed to be a good game right? I dotn see anything in crysis what would suggest its only for hc gamers.
.Why not? it suposed to be a good game right? I dotn see anything in crysis what would suggest its only for hc gamers.
On PS3 the big name titles we have for this year are CoD Black Ops, MoH Reboot, and Crysis 2. So Crysis 2 might be good for players looking for something other then "same old".
I'm a lot more interested in it now after seeing that demo walkthrough on gametrailers. There seems to be nice degree of choice in how the player can play. Stealth or a more direct approach. Objects that can be interacted with, and plenty of weapons to pick up. Although it would be nice if you could actually keep them.
Set pieces a nice and all, but if a game is nothing but a long string of those then it becomes rather shallow. It prefer to have some freedom.
I'm a lot more interested in it now after seeing that demo walkthrough on gametrailers. There seems to be nice degree of choice in how the player can play. Stealth or a more direct approach. Objects that can be interacted with, and plenty of weapons to pick up. Although it would be nice if you could actually keep them.
Set pieces a nice and all, but if a game is nothing but a long string of those then it becomes rather shallow. It prefer to have some freedom.
True but then again the people who loved Crysis mostly bought for the lack of scripted sequences and set pieces. The best thing about Crysis was that there was so many different ways to approach each level without artificial limits. Might not be as popular of an approach but it's one I hope they keep for Crysis 2.
Similar threads
