[Image] Screenshot & Movie Thread
- Thread starter Xendance
- Start date
[url]http://www.gametrailers.com/video/be-the-crysis-2/708600[/URL]
so not going to buy this. it just shouts "oh hey, i was dumbed down for consoles and my graphics are worse than those of my predecessor and dx9 only due to console limitations and cryteks' laziness"
so not going to buy this. it just shouts "oh hey, i was dumbed down for consoles and my graphics are worse than those of my predecessor and dx9 only due to console limitations and cryteks' laziness"
Not to mention that blatantly reusing the same NiN track that made the 300 movie trailer so great just reeks of creative bankruptcy.
![[-project.rattus-]](/data/avatars/s/0/161.jpg?1568638684){kind=avatar}
On a sidenote, how can anything made by Crytek be "dumbed down"? Their games are pretty graphics demos with very bland gameplay anyway...
I had lots of fun with Crysis because of all the options you have to solving the objectives(aside from some linear points), and the graphics were a showcase of what the PC could do. That's why this is just stupid. I mean seriously, DX9 only? 12 Players max in MP? Crysis had DX10 and 32(or was it even 64, idk) players. I'm not saying that the game might not be fun or still pretty in the end on PC, but I'm not buying this out of principle because it's a perfect negative example.
Hm, the "different approaches" were not that different in reality, as it no matter how you approached an objective, it turned into a firefight quite quickly. Not that it wasn't fun, just not very deep. And I don't think the gameplay in the next iteration will be "dumbed down" from where it is now, as it's already a pretty straight forward and easy game, even on "elite" difficulty.
Concerning graphics: Farcry and Crysis were screenshot generators, and both games were capable of runnin gjaw dropping graphics. But only a tiny fraction of gamers actually got to enjoy those, as they needed quite a hefty machine to run. Thus, both games were not really as successful as they could've been, as many gamers were scared away by the hardware hunger.
I for one wlecome if they manage to pull it off to produce a gorgeous looking game that actually runs decently on contemporary "standard" PCs rather than highest end ones. But that can hardly be described as "dumbin down". I'd rather say "sxaled down" and actually like that.
I start to believe that you simply oppose whatever people are saying. Nowadays any standard PC should be able to run Crysis on high settings. How is it positive when a game, whos' main selling point were it's leading graphics is now getting scaled back to fit on console while not advancing anything? I'd rather have to buy a new gfx card every 3-4 years for progress than have another 10 years of ps3/xbox360 generation graphics.
I think it will be DX10 for PC users.
But yes I agree, Crysis 2 does not look as good as Crysis 1. The maps do look smaller. It looks much more actiony with a lot of cinematic scenes that pull you out of the action.
As for the person above, Crysis was extremely good for a normal FPS game. Open maps, fun to use weapons, nice scopes, different playing styles with great graphics - not much else you can ask for in an FPS game.
Also, you could sneak around check points, go in shooting, or silently pick off one enemy at a time. Many maps had multiple areas/ways to approach an objective.
The gameplay was more tactical than that Ghost Recon Future Soldier crap from the looks of it to.
Screen shot thread:
On my two year old $900 PC.
Last edited:
Eh.... It is based on Cry Engine 2, thus it simply can't be less than it.
If you ask me, the realtime global illumination thing with realtime light bounces is awesome, as is the procedural deformation of 3d models.
No it's cryengine 3, which was built with consoles in mind first. Even if it has the same graphical quality as Crysis 1 in the end, it's still not a step forward like it should be.
You completely miss the point. Besides I doubt that it will run any better than Crysis 1. Or maybe a bit because of the city environment but even if that was the case it wouldn't have nothing to do with optimization.
I really do think that is why they switched to a city. Seems odd they would throw away the jungle environment. No games have made a more convincing jungle than Crysis, yet many make cities.
Back to screen shots...
Another nice touch about GRAW is that the world models for dropped weapons stay in the same state as their 1st person model/animations.
Two people where trying to reload with a M45 and a Glock18C. Both where killed as they where reloading. So the world 3D model still shows the slides locked back.
In this pic notice how one of the magazines still has bullets left in it:
A lot of small details they did right in these games.
Awesome? [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJ8Hl1_yrYQ&feature=related]YouTube - Gmod Nuke Test[/URL]
Which game do you think has the best nukes? I think CoD4s was quite good
Which game do you think has the best nukes? I think CoD4s was quite good
ArmA II's nukes are pretty cool.
Small tactical nukes with ca 2-3km of explosive diameter.