Crysis hands on preview (bit-tech)
- Thread starter LoadsaMoney
- Start date
jaykay said:Yer the review isnt that great. They are complaining about a AI when its on easyAlso they were playing on the first few missions, the good stuff comes when you fighting the aliens now i bet that will be hard.
Exactly, they played on a storyless level designed as a preview of the engine, with the difficulty on easy and they played it for over an hour. It can't have been THAT bad if they kept playing the tiny level with no story that was mega easy for over an hour
They say themselves they where playing an alpha patched to a beta on easy.
It's also one part of one level right at the beginning of the game, and if it was a show build they are know to be made easier than the final games so that people get a decent chance to see most of it in the short time the normally have to try it. So I don't think too much can be read into their experience with it tbh.
Not saying it's going to be the next big thing that will totally change gaming but if it turns out to be FC+ with a nice face lift I'll be happy.
Decent MP would be nice aswell.
It's also one part of one level right at the beginning of the game, and if it was a show build they are know to be made easier than the final games so that people get a decent chance to see most of it in the short time the normally have to try it. So I don't think too much can be read into their experience with it tbh.
Not saying it's going to be the next big thing that will totally change gaming but if it turns out to be FC+ with a nice face lift I'll be happy.
Decent MP would be nice aswell.
I have no doubt that I will love Crysis and really enjoy the game to the same level as I loved the first few levels of FC.
Each generation we see a game which surprises us all and in some ways raises the bar, be it on a graphical, audio, gameplay level etc.
This round, at the moment, seems that it will be won by BioShock - which from all the feedback and reviews I have read shows overwhelming praise.
I feel Crysis should have been released sooner than November. Crysis should have been the title to commence the coming 6 months of gaming release 'splurge'. Oh yes, I forgot, both HL2 EP2, TF2 and Portal will also be released before Crysis now, along with BioShock and COD 4.
I cannot remember any feedback from any Crysis previews showing the same level of enthusiasm and amazement as the ones coming from BioShock previews. I have read most of the articles out there, and they all seem to be very lacklustre except when commenting on the graphics.
I hope they change it around from the alpha to the beta and beyond stages, but in the same way as everyone keeps harping on about the optimisations they are doing which will 'magically' make the game run on anything but the best CPU/GPU combination - it's, simply, not going to happen. I believe what you see now in previews is pretty much indicative of the final release of the game. I see these excuses time and time again about it being a demo, being an alpha, being un-optimised etc.
Each generation we see a game which surprises us all and in some ways raises the bar, be it on a graphical, audio, gameplay level etc.
This round, at the moment, seems that it will be won by BioShock - which from all the feedback and reviews I have read shows overwhelming praise.
I feel Crysis should have been released sooner than November. Crysis should have been the title to commence the coming 6 months of gaming release 'splurge'. Oh yes, I forgot, both HL2 EP2, TF2 and Portal will also be released before Crysis now, along with BioShock and COD 4.
I cannot remember any feedback from any Crysis previews showing the same level of enthusiasm and amazement as the ones coming from BioShock previews. I have read most of the articles out there, and they all seem to be very lacklustre except when commenting on the graphics.
I hope they change it around from the alpha to the beta and beyond stages, but in the same way as everyone keeps harping on about the optimisations they are doing which will 'magically' make the game run on anything but the best CPU/GPU combination - it's, simply, not going to happen. I believe what you see now in previews is pretty much indicative of the final release of the game. I see these excuses time and time again about it being a demo, being an alpha, being un-optimised etc.
Last edited:
Most people never played FCs multiplayer, which was a shame as the assault mode was a good way to kill a few hours. In fact it was one of the first things I thought of when playing the QW:ET beta. Keep meaning to try it again as the change log for MP in the last patch was huge.
I think you guys are missing the real issue here, it wasn't a problem with how difficult the game was but rather the workings of the AI.
It has been a real concern ever since the game was first shown, the AI looks pretty stupid. They just don’t seem to know what to do regardless of setting. They just run around like headless chickens, which I find funny because the animal AI looks quite nice.
I always play my games on the hardest setting, because I typically find this offers the most realistic and enthralling experience, but I worry that in this case all it will do is give retarded troops amazing accuracy and damage.
It has been a real concern ever since the game was first shown, the AI looks pretty stupid. They just don’t seem to know what to do regardless of setting. They just run around like headless chickens, which I find funny because the animal AI looks quite nice.
I always play my games on the hardest setting, because I typically find this offers the most realistic and enthralling experience, but I worry that in this case all it will do is give retarded troops amazing accuracy and damage.
Lyon85 said:
Well lets face it thats pretty much all the harder settings did in the original farcry as well. For all the hype in farcry the ai got i found it to be amazingly stupid on most settings. Lost count of the amount of times id found enemies just stuck running against trees, only for me to whack them one with the knife.
Any game that advertises good ai is asking for trouble as it'll be scrutinised intensly and more often than not actually be rather crap.
mulpsmebeauty said:
When have you ever seen them do that?
If the AI is actually capable of doing those things there would be no concerns.
Gerard said:
Farcry's AI got hyped? I only remember negative coverage. Also, has Crytek actually "advertised good AI"? I don't remember them talking extensively about the sophistication of the AI.
You're right, Farcry's AI was that bad, and since Crytek announced they were working on another game I have been worried. To me it looks like they have real problems implementing AI into a seamless, open world.
FirebarUK said:
This pretty much sums up crysis for me as well.
For some reason I just can't see the attraction of the game.
(and something else I don't understand is when games come out that are sub par inthe graphics department a lot of people go on about how its the gameplay that matters, yet on crysis when reviewers are moaning about the AI/gameplay people chirp in and say 'but look at the graphics')
The worry I have with crysis is exactly the reality that came with far cry. Yes the game looked/looks stunning yet to play it was ok but nothing special.