***** The Crysis 2 Thread *****

gazzab said:
Sorry, everyone's entitled to their opinion but this statement is just ridiculous. I don't what what game you're playing but it isn't Crysis 2. Whether or not it's as good-looking as Crysis/Warhead is debatable (it certainly looks a lot 'smoother' if you know what I mean) but it's still one of the best looking games available.

I can't comment on whether the gameplay's worse as I haven't played DNF, but personally I loved every minute of it after the slower first levels. It's a far cry from a 'corridor' shooter and actually affords you a lot of the freedom of the first game in much the same way.

The overstatements on this thread are hilarious.
Click to expand...

Excuse me but wtf sir.

It certainly is NOT one of the best looking game available. While playing through I noted more faded/blocky textures compared to any other Crysis game and the weapon feel and movement gave me the feeling I was playing a shooter designed around a console instead of PC, the direct opposite to the previous 2 games.

By comparison I'm finding less blocky textures in DNF and enjoying the gameplay more as it feels like a PC shooter even if the plot is mindless entertainment that serious story.
 
Khaaan! said:
Excuse me but wtf sir.

It certainly is NOT one of the best looking game available. While playing through I noted more faded/blocky textures compared to any other Crysis game and the weapon feel and movement gave me the feeling I was playing a shooter designed around a console instead of PC, the direct opposite to the previous 2 games.

By comparison I'm finding less blocky textures in DNF and enjoying the gameplay more as it feels like a PC shooter even if the plot is mindless entertainment that serious story.
Click to expand...

No way, as much as crysis 2 is no way near the original on max settings DNF looks really horrible in places and crysis 2 beats it hands down really.
 
There were a few dud textures and they cut some corners with reflections and whatnot, but none of these things stuck out in the overall presentation of the game which was awesome by any standard... I don't understand how anyone can call it a bad looking game (which Duke Nukem clearly is as has been pointed out in every single review and screenshot, whereas Crysis 2 was universally praised for its graphics)

I'm not saying critics are always right or aren't biased, or that Crysis 2 shouldn't have been better looking on PC, I'm just saying that a lot of people's opinion stems solely from their expectations not being met and not from the reality of the game itself
 
Gerard said:
http://www.mycrysis.com/dx11#

Hi res texture pack and a dx11 pack. If you listen REALLY closely, you can hear raven fapping :D

Doesnt seem to be available yet though.
Click to expand...

ooooo, that is some pretty graphics! Will make it better looking than the original this will :).

I suppose they can finally do this now and make the pc version look 10x better now the console folk are bored of it.
 
Last edited:
Gerard said:
Wonder how many will be angsting when it proves very hard for pc's to handle. :p
Click to expand...

Probably plenty but they are just being stupid, there was too much of that when original Crysis came out. I would rather a game was so impressive that no current PC can max it than it being scaled back so everyone can play it.

I mean the fact that this game was DX9 only to begin with was total bull****, look at the stats (http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/) pretty much everyone has atleast a DX10 card so any game released now that is DX9 only is a lazy console port ("press start" anyone?).

Edit: My god I sound just like Raven...but its a good point, any "AAA" PC game that is DX9 only should be ringing alarm bells.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom