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

Demo was very pretty, but the game play sucked.

Pretty much every kill screen is some bugger with wall hack/thermal imagery picking me off from a distance.

Boring.
 
orderoftheflame said:
Again, I hate to ask... Where do you base this information from? You talk like you have extensive knowledge of the ins and outs of professional development and that what you speak is certainty, but with what seems to be made up/guessed information... If you've got experience that shows that developers work otherwise, I'll happily retract my argument of this fact.

It's certainly cheaper after release to port an existing game to another platform than to develop from scratch... That's whole ethos behind porting any kind of software.

Before release working from the ground up most developers work on developing for different platforms side by side. They may favour one platform over another, but they're not finishing the game for one platform then starting work to convert it to another. Working the way you suggest would be an idiotic waste of time and money. I accept there are circumstances where it may be of benefit to work that way, but you're stating that apart from "RARELY" this is how games developers are working?

If a games been out on consoles for months, and then gets a PC version. I'd agree, that's likely a port.

Edit: Ah naff it don't bother actually. I cba with replying to fanboy rage anymore tbh. :p
Click to expand...

fanboy of what? what fanboy has a pc, 360, wii and ps3?
 
jonneymendoza said:
Not if developers make a game for all platforms i.e crysis 2
Click to expand...

I would just like to clarify my point. Saying that developers can't tailor the same game for different machines therefore using the maximum performance capable by each machine is nonsense. Most elements of a game are scalable and contructed of more than one generic layer. This is implemented in the original crysis by having menus to set the levels of graphics, textures etc manually. Therefore it is absurd to think that this could not be preconfigured to suite each machines capability whilst retaining the same game features across all platforms. It comes down to either accountants from the publisher squeezing development costs or lazy developers, the latter being most noticable in todays lack of customizable control options in many games. One size fits all attitude!
 
Just played the demo, looks amasing and runs well on my old 4870!

Gameplay is pretty lame to be honest, will wait until it drops to £20 on steam and just enjoy the single player.
 
i like the multiplayer i no so of you dont like it i guess its a case of differernt strokes for different folks!!!
 
mack d4ddy said:
I would just like to clarify my point. Saying that developers can't tailor the same game for different machines therefore using the maximum performance capable by each machine is nonsense. Most elements of a game are scalable and contructed of more than one generic layer. This is implemented in the original crysis by having menus to set the levels of graphics, textures etc manually. Therefore it is absurd to think that this could not be preconfigured to suite each machines capability whilst retaining the same game features across all platforms. It comes down to either accountants from the publisher squeezing development costs or lazy developers, the latter being most noticable in todays lack of customizable control options in many games. One size fits all attitude!
Click to expand...

thats really true, especially for the first game, since Crysis was customisable entirely, not just the 'preset' settings that Crytek gave us, but there were thousands of other commands that could alter things about the engine. I think best way to think about it is that the engine is a 'foundation' which is built on depending on the resources available in a specific system, CryEngine3 will be just as customisable as CryEngine2, because its basically just an upgraded version of CryEngine2.

also to those who keep whinging about 'ports' its not a flipping port, its a multi-platform game, there is a difference, this was designed specifically to run on both consoles and the PC, that was probably the main design requirement. also its stupid to bash Crytek for wanting to expand their market, they are afterall a company that wants to make money. another thing as well, what MP isn't generic at the end of the day, sure they might try to 'hide' it with this and that but at the end of the day they are more or less the same thing, just some better implimented than others...? see people raving about Homefront all the time, its almost a carbon copy to Modern Warfare II visually...! vehicles aren't new, drones aren't new, nothing is new but I seriously doubt its gonna get this level of bashing, bashing Crysis and Crytek has become the 'appropriate' thing to do online these days, and its just plain weird. :confused:
 
Christ almighty - its not like Crysis 2 is the first game that has been hacked? It's a beta on early code. DO you know for a fact that Crytek are planning on releasing it and not doing anything about anti-hacking?.....
Thought not....
 
PinkFloyd said:
Christ almighty - its not like Crysis 2 is the first game that has been hacked? It's a beta on early code. DO you know for a fact that Crytek are planning on releasing it and not doing anything about anti-hacking?.....
Thought not....
Click to expand...

Very ture, but im sure MM2 and Black Ops thought the same at first, now it seems they dont care!
 
P.Dhillon said:
Very ture, but im sure MM2 and Black Ops thought the same at first, now it seems they dont care!
Click to expand...

There's a massive difference between Crytek and those who develop call of duty games. People basing their impression of Crysis 2 on this multiplayer demo, and then having a rage fit over it, need re-assess themselves as supposed PC gamers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom