Crysis 2 is another console port, no DX11!!!!

WingZero30 said:
I play games at 1024x768 resolutions. (Mind my res:p as I will be upgrading to a full HD 24" monitor in near future)

-For once it is too blurry even though I am on hardcore settings:p.
- I generally couldn't tell who the enemy was as their costume looks so similar.
- Graphics definitely seemed console based as the original crysis had sharper/ thicker/rich/realistic graphics.
-Basically when playing, nothing seemed clear as everything seemed to be so blurry/foggy and it seemd as if you were operating in another dimension. Quite different from CS Source. :(
Click to expand...

Sort your resolution out lol Any game at that res is going to look like blurry crap
 
WingZero30 said:
I agree. Keyboard+mouse for FPS. Pad is ideal for 3rd person action/adventure/platform/shooter and driving/fighting games etc:).
Click to expand...

I still use a mouse and keyboard for racing games, the only time i ever used a pad was for Resident Evil 4, now that was the worst port i've ever come across.
 
Don't see the problem with having pad support? Can't believe people are getting to the point of picking faults with the game because it has extra support for some things.

It's nice to have the pad option so you can sit back on the Sofa and play it on your tv from your HTPC with better graphics than a 360/PS3 and get PC levels of graphics. The original also had full native 360 pad support....
 
This game keeps getting better and better. People are getting used to the playstyle which means tactics and skill are becoming more visible. It flows well, the weapons are powerful enough, the movement is fluid, ledge jumping rocks, stealth is fun, stealth kills are awesome, the graphics still look lush for me (even at 16x10 22" screen and running on an unlocked athlon x3 with a 768mb gtx460), it doesnt have to burn your hardware up in order to look good.. Considering the console limitations and the fact this is a demo which who knows what removed or changed then I think theyve done something great. Its super CoD basically and theres nothing wrong with that. We dont need huge innovations and leaps in gameplay for every release. Aslong as the muliplayer is fun (and lasts) and the singleplayer has the potential to be even better than I cant see how its a bad thing.
 
PinkFloyd said:
Don't see the problem with having pad support? Can't believe people are getting to the point of picking faults with the game because it has extra support for some things.

It's nice to have the pad option so you can sit back on the Sofa and play it on your tv from your HTPC with better graphics than a 360/PS3 and get PC levels of graphics. The original also had full native 360 pad support....
Click to expand...

There's a difference between supporting the 360 pad like the original (and choice is a good thing, there's no problem with that), and having aim-assist - which the original didn't.
 
RedStarRiot said:
Lies! give us examples of consoles innovation over pc?
Click to expand...

Mmmk

Most recent innovation would be the rather promising child of eden:


If that doesn't count as an innovation then there's a few more to pick from:

Flower:


Heavy Rain (especially the 'Move' patched version:


Little Big Planet for it's 'Play, Create, Share' mechanic, Valkyria Chronicles was an interesting evolution of the tactical RPG genre. Demon's Souls multiplayer component was unlike anything i've ever seen before where you could invade other people's single player games to kill them, go into another persons world to help them or ask for help from someone in another world. Alan Wake was an advancement in game narrative in my eyes and then there's games like Uncharted that are taking the use of motion capture acting in a game to new levels.


Obviously people may not be into these games, all i'm arguing is that a lack of innovation has nothing to do with consoles as in my eyes, that's where the majority of innovation is happening. There are far more significant reasons why the market is changing in these ways than 'ZOMG CONSOLES!', but this post will fall on deaf ears and i'll be berated for being a 'console derp' any time now...

On topic, the game isn't anywhere near as bad as many here seem to be making it out to be. I can't help but wonder if people are writing it off simply because it lacks DX11. For what it looks like it's pretty well optimised and the gameplay is better than Call of Duty (not that that's difficult), in fact it's arguably one of the better arcade FPS' i've played in a while. Will be holding off to see how well the singleplayer is reviewed before i even consider investing though...
 
Last edited:
Streeteh said:
Mmmk

Most recent innovation would be the rather promising child of eden:


If that doesn't count as an innovation then there's a few more to pick from:

Flower:


Heavy Rain (especially the 'Move' patched version:


Little Big Planet for it's 'Play, Create, Share' mechanic, Valkyria Chronicles was an interesting evolution of the tactical RPG genre. Demon's Souls multiplayer component was unlike anything i've ever seen before where you could invade other people's single player games to kill them, go into another persons world to help them or ask for help from someone in another world. Alan Wake was an advancement in game narrative in my eyes and then there's games like Uncharted that are taking the use of motion capture acting in a game to new levels.


Obviously people may not be into these games, all i'm arguing is that a lack of innovation has nothing to do with consoles as in my eyes, that's where the majority of innovation is happening. There are far more significant reasons why the market is changing in these ways than 'ZOMG CONSOLES!', but this post will fall on deaf ears and i'll be berated for being a 'console derp' any time now...
Click to expand...


console derp :D
 
sorry but FFS have some of you read what is being posted, not buying the game because it says DX9 and not DX11, what the **** is up with that? who cares that it could actually be a decent game, not getting it because its not DX11, what a lame excuse! know Im going to get flamed for this but don't give a damn, because nothing ever seems to be good enough? DX9 is totally fine, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it, big deal its an older version, but at the end of the day, if the game is good and looks good why do you care? though we would have all learned from Crysis I that DX10 made absolutely no difference to the way the game looked or performed, infact it did the opposite and made it perform worse! I for one say Kudos to Crytek for actually trying to make a presentable and working game, thats not just a technical showpiece that isn't accessable to 90% of people because its too demanding to run, so far the Crysis II demo is running on my 'ancient' (at least in forum terms) 4870X2 totally fine, 1080P without much trouble, the game looks great (sorry but it just does) and most importantly barring the absolutely terrible dedicated servers that so many people 'worship' for some hilarious reason (usually find them sodding awful!) there has been no problems for me as of this moment. can we not just chill the **** out and be happy that Crysis II is finally here, and this time they are doing it better (it'll actually work FFS!) and focusing more on storytelling and more action-based multiplayer...? :confused:

also big freaking deal if it plays like a console FPS, how is that really a bad thing, why do people want fifty different controls for games anyways? the best shooters in recent memory for me have all been console shooters, sorry but thats the honest truth, even Modern Warfare II was a good game (curse me all you want, doesn't change anything) since it did everything its supposed to do well, not brilliantly but well. don't understand what is with all the hate towards MW2 anyways, what exactly did it do badly? it had a good single-player campaign, simple but addictive multiplayer, brilliant soundtrack, decent visuals, decent characters (soap is epic!). gonna make a statement that will likely get me basically shot at on this forum, but meh! whatever. after playing both games start to finish, anyone who prefers something like Portal for example over Modern Warfare II is totally mental. :D
 
Gashman said:
also big freaking deal if it plays like a console FPS, how is that really a bad thing, why do people want fifty different controls for games anyways? the best shooters in recent memory for me have all been console shooters
Click to expand...

Invalidates your entire post
 
All the people saying how pathetic it is to not buy a game because it doesn't support new technologies, are you going to be happy with 360 and PS3 level graphics for the next 5 years?
 
Gashman said:
even Modern Warfare II was a good game .....anyone who prefers something like Portal for example over Modern Warfare II is totally mental.
Click to expand...

1691244-not_sure_if_troll_super.jpg
 
yeah sure, call me a troll all you want but it doesn't change the fact that this is a really pointless thread, big deal it doesn't have DX11, get over it? and big deal a lot of console shooters are good, how about instead of just saying the same crap over and over, how about elaborate on how they are so dreadful? also you can't call me a troll for crying out loud for having an opinion, what makes your opinion so high and mighty anyways? because you don't like console games? doesn't change the fact that debating this is pointless because you've made up your minds, nothing will ever be good enough, nothing Crytek could have done would ever have been upto scratch for most people on here and thats just sad. no wonder people are moving away from the PC gaming market, since nothing they do is ever enough in PC gamers eyes. :p

Edit: and what made Portal so freaking awesome and Modern Warfare II so bad, because I've played both and enjoyed Modern Warfare II far far far more than Portal. also Steam, which so many people hold so highly, on a podium of achievement is terrible! reinstalled Dawn of War II for the first time in ages the other day, Steam spent around twenty minutes messing around updating something or other, stopped working altogether twice, went into the game and signed into Games for Windows Live, no problems at all...! so to summarise, the infallible Steam caused me around a million times the problems that the horrible, awful, terrible Games for Windows Live did, now thats a rolleye moment if there ever was one...
 
Last edited:
Gashman said:
yeah sure, call me a troll all you want but it doesn't change the fact that this is a really pointless thread, big deal it doesn't have DX11, get over it? and big deal a lot of console shooters are good, how about instead of just saying the same crap over and over, how about elaborate on how they are so dreadful? also you can't call me a troll for crying out loud for having an opinion, what makes your opinion so high and mighty anyways? because you don't like console games? doesn't change the fact that debating this is pointless because you've made up your minds, nothing will ever be good enough, nothing Crytek could have done would ever have been upto scratch for most people on here and thats just sad. no wonder people are moving away from the PC gaming market, since nothing they do is ever enough in PC gamers eyes. :p
Click to expand...

I couldn't care less what impact DX11 has visually. The fact that it has been left out though, when PC games should be embracing new tech, along with all the other factors that point towards it being a straight port (press start, aim assist, 55 FoV, clunky console feel etc.), as well as a cash in on the CoD structure success, makes me not want to support it or the developers at all.

The fact that you go on to say that you think the best shooters have been on consoles and prefer to play with a 360 pad, just shows you have your bar set comparatively low to the rest of us, along with the fact that you're obviously used to and happy with the tripe that is sold on consoles - whilst we aren't.
 
Deific said:
I couldn't care less what impact DX11 has visually. The fact that it has been left out though, when PC games should be embracing new tech, along with all the other factors that point towards it being a straight port (press start, aim assist, 55 FoV, clunky console feel etc.), as well as a cash in on the CoD structure success, makes me not want to support it or the developers at all.

The fact that you go on to say that you think the best shooters have been on consoles and prefer to play with a 360 pad, just shows you have your bar set comparatively low to the rest of us, along with the fact that you're obviously used to and happy with the tripe that is sold on consoles - whilst we aren't.
Click to expand...

no hold on a second, I prefer to play some games with the 360 pad, those that are cross-platform usually since the pad layout is usually straightforward and not too complicated, so I can get on and enjoy the gaming experience, Gears of War on PC is perfect example, it just feels right with 360 pad and terrible using anything other than that. also I do use my PC for quite a bit of gaming, Supreme Commander (which is a technical game), X3: Terran Conflict (another PC-style technical game), don't get me wrong a lot of console games are terrible and not really to my liking, but quite a few of them are actually decent if you give them the time of day. Gears of War for example is better than most PC games I have personally played, gameplay is solid, graphics are great (for consoles), story is solid, characters are solid, weapon-set is solid, theres nothing it doesn't do well yet so many people will slate it simply because its a console game, which is just stupid. Alan Wake is another great console game, gonna slate that because its on a console?

also come on, you can't dislike a game because it says 'Press Start' instead of 'Press Enter' or what not, its the same thing, also can't hate it for Aim Assist, since its not really noticable or anything and your not being forced to use it! I get plenty of kills using my 'terrible' 360 pad and no Aim Assist so it obviously doesn't make that much of a difference. also to be honest there is nothing wrong with the FOV, whats wrong with it if you think there is? simple thing is, 99% of the complains about Crysis II so far have been quite frankly petty to say the least and rather pointless, its obvious they are trying to expand their market which is far enough, they are afterall a profit making organisation so not doing that would be stupid but overall its not so bad, don't get me wrong its nothing spectacular or revolutionary but its certainly not the horrible pariah most people are making it out to be. :)
 
What??? 55fov? That's gonna be an instant no for me on the u27 as I couldn't play half life without turning it up

more I read more I don't want
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom