Top
290°

Crysis is 9 years old and still looks really beautiful

In November 13th, Electronic Arts released Crytek’s masterpiece, Crysis. Powered by CryEngine 2, Crysis featured unparalleled visuals and environmental interactivity. Players could bend the grass, cut down tress and destroy a lot of buildings. And even to this date, Crysis looks surprisingly great.

Read Full Story >>
dsogaming.com
The story is too old to be commented.
GoldPunch-TR397d ago (Edited 397d ago )

We are very thanksful to Yerli brothers for a great visual.

TheOptimist397d ago

According to you and the other haters, but there is a reason, the user score of the game is 8.0, higher than many other games.

oasdada397d ago

To be real honest.. i assembled a top of the line rig for this game and i can say that the game was beautiful and visually amazing but the gameplay did fall short.. imo the First far cry was a better over all game

TheOptimist397d ago

I liked the gameplay, better than COD at least at that time. I mean we had all these powers and destructible environments, gave the game a dynamic feeling, rather than that the linear corridor based static structure of many other FPS games of the time

andrewsquall397d ago

@oasdada Exactly and I have yet to play an amazing fun game like Far Cry by Crytek since.

sullynathan397d ago (Edited 397d ago )

No one is a hater, we just recognize that Crysis sucks and Crytek hasn't made a game as decent as the first far cry. FEAR is a linear corridor fps that is far better than Crysis, same for Prey.
@oasdada I agree. The first far cry is far better than Crysis. It actually had level design and decent difficulty.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 397d ago
Errorist76397d ago

Game was one of the most open shooters I can remember.. innovative and fun..minus the Alien ship maybe.

sullynathan397d ago

I'm not seeing the innovation here, except maybe graphics. Far Cry was made by Crytek 3 years earlier with the exact same format, Crytek just made Crysis because they sold the Far Cry license to Ubisoft.

BongSmack397d ago

Right? So annoying when people act like their opinion is fact.

Deep-throat397d ago

Crysis's interactivity > Uncharted series.
Crysis graphics > Uncharted 4

trouble_bubble397d ago (Edited 397d ago )

Omg, who in the sam hell still cares about this one hit wonder? It's 2016, everywhere but your basement.

TheOptimist397d ago (Edited 397d ago )

Agreed. While both are a tad bit overrated critically, I would anyday pick up Crysis for it's more dynamic environments and better gameplay experience, graphics are just a bonus addition. Plus the alien storyline is cooler.
@trouble_bubble
People care about good games years after they are released. There is a reason games like- Half Life, Legnd of Zelda, Mario, Crash Bandicoot, WOW, LOL, Halo are considered legends, though I wouldn't put anything in the last 6-7 years in such stature apart from Witcher 3.

trouble_bubble397d ago

Crysis doesn't fall under the same category as the games you listed TheOptimist. It really, really doesn't.

Uncharted is off topic, alien shooters are a dime a dozen, Prophet is so lame no one noticed he died, Witcher is over rated. That about cover it?

TheOptimist397d ago

Hahahahaha
@Trouble_Bubble
If Witcher 3 is overrated, the Uncharted is probably the most overrated game ever. There is a specific reason as to why Witcher 3 has high user scores as well as Critic score. If you don't like it, you are one of the fe. It has also won the most GOTY awards, many nominations for other awards. But yeah you don't like it and hence you call it overrated, the user score and critic score suggest otherwise.

As for Crysis, I know it is not anywhere near those games, but sure is better than any uncharted game

sullynathan397d ago (Edited 397d ago )

Uncharted 4 looks better than Crysis. I really don't care about being able to pick up a chicken and throwing it at dumb AI when the open world is barren and boring.

@The optimist Halo is overrated and gets praised for being a good console shooter even though there are far better shooters than it. Surprisingly, the first Halo gets unwanted praise because of its time of release even though many of its sequels are far better games.
Crysis shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as a Half-Life or Legend of Zelda. Same for Witcher 3. Crysis is just flat out worse than the Uncharted games.

TheOptimist397d ago

Uncharted 4 looks worse than Crysis 3, the water and foliage specially look pretty bad in Uncharted 4. One area that Uncharted 4 is good at is the facial animations, which is probably industry leading for a game, and yeah the reflections are good, for an otherwise not as such good looking game.

@Sullynathan
I don't know much about Halo, never found interest in it, but people talk about it and hence I mentioned it, but then again, I have never liked the bigger console exclusives, recently got the GOW4 with my GTX 1070 and didn't understand why it got all the praise, same was the case with Rise of Tomb Raider, and many other AAA games including Uncharted 4.

As for Crysis, I did say that it is not even n the same class as all these games, but I sure as heck prefer it to Uncharted, simply because the gameplay is much more diverse. As for Crysis being downright worse than Uncharted, it's not so for me. I could care less about story and cinematic experience if gameplay is downright boring.

As for Witcher 3, I know that you don't like it, so no point in arguing with you. It is one of the best games ever made according to many people, and there are bound to be people who don't like it

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 397d ago
BongSmack397d ago

sooo much better than the second and third in the series.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 397d ago
leahcim397d ago

I really love this saga, 1 was beautifull 2 was and amazing ride 3 was fun..
I hope we could see Crysis 4 in the near future!

UltraNova397d ago

Yeah we really need a game that will make nVidia's Titan cry like a little girl...

RonsonPL397d ago (Edited 397d ago )

Don't. Just don't. This might hurt console players feelings.
They think PS4/Xone generation is truly nextgen.

Yeah. The canyon between PS4 games and this. Such a huge change in just 4 years newer hardware. Must be the power of the high-end CPU that sits inside AMD's APU. Or because of so many gFLOPs.
OMFG, this industry went shit :(
9 year old game looks comparable to what we currently have. In my days, Dreamcast games looked nothing like 286 16MHz games, and Gran Turismo 3 on PS2 didn't look comparable to Lotus on Amiga 500.
But from what people say, I can't complain about offensively crappy CPU in PS4/Xone/XoneS/PS4pro/(and most likely Scorpio as well) because things are fine. Everything is fine and I should enjoy "next-gen" games. So yeah, let's enjoy the games, at nextgenny 30fps on nextgenny 4K TVs which have lower motion resolution than a russian CRT TV from 1980.

And if that wasn't bad enough, big companies are retarded enough to think that noone would be interested in PC gaming, so there are no games like Crysis (designed for most powerful PCs, so people with cards 5x faster than consoles could enjoy new quality of visuals while owners of the weaker PCs could use something called options menu). Without even one game to show what Titan X Pascal is truly capable of, we have 1060 cards sold as 1080 at ridiculous prices, and high end cards went up to 1500$ and are called "Titan" because Nvidia doesn't give a fuck about PC gaming, and thinks noone would be intrested in good GPUs since there is not a single game which isn't gimped down due to the fact that it was designed with PS4/Xone in mind.
So, instead of Crysis-like game for PC in 2016 we have broken ports.
Instead of having normal prices, we have 5x higher, so instead of healthy PC gaming market we have a niche.
Well. Fuck this.

Miss_Vixen397d ago (Edited 397d ago )

"There is not a single game which isn't gimped down due to the fact that it was designed with PS4/Xone in mind."

There is though. Star Citizen comes to mind :)
At the end of the day we're all gamers at heart, there's no need to spout such hatred to fellow gamers just because of their platform preference.

RonsonPL397d ago (Edited 397d ago )

Whaa??
Who??
Where?
What hatred towards fellow gamers? All I wrote about is the industry which gives us "nextgen" consoles in 2013 with CPU so crappy, that PC users had similar in 2006.
All I wrote about consoles gamers is that they might be shocked.
Byt that I meant that they are gullible enough to not only not realize how nasty Sony and MS went with PS4/Xone, but also actively attack and offend people who have the courage to tell the truth - PS4 CPU is total crap and additional block of 4 cores, lots of RAM, fartillion of GLOPS and "the mighty cloud" won't change that.

And Star Citizen doesn't look great and personally I think it's more of a scam than a truly great AAA PC game which will deliver what was promised. I don't expect a fail of No Man's Sky scale, but it's been so many years and this game doesn't look much better compared to what consoles can achieve.
If Valve, or CryTek, or DICE was focused on high-end PCs like they used to over a decade ago, you'd easily see what I mean.

Nathan_Hale53397d ago

@RonsonPl, you were bitching about the CPU, and Star Citizen uses tons of resources that only a PC will be able to do. A good CPU is basically required for the game as it is very physics heavy. Also all the objects have hundreds of thousands of polygons and high quality textures to push any PC. It isn't a scam and if you think that, it is a rather expensive one in the fact of time and money. Plenty of promises are already shown and are in game. Play it.

spicelicka397d ago

Well you're not wrong, but it has nothing to do with console players though. It's the corporations that make the decisions, the gamers just buy what's best value for their money and most convenient.

I mainly game on consoles but I had nothing to do with the PC industry problems. If I can buy an Xbox one for $300 and play all the biggest games conveniently, I have no desire to invest in a gaming PC. The most popular games on PC are hardly graphically intensive (CS:GO, minecraft, LoL), I can run those on my my basic laptop. For a $600 I can get a great rig, but what do I play on it? The same games I play on Xbox for $300 cheaper, with a resolution and frame rate bump? There's no denying that the games will look better but not nearly better enough to justify the purchase for me.

Now if there were more games like Crysis, then I'd be a lot more inclined to invest. That game looked unbelievable, the only other game I can think of now is Star Citizen. It looks unbelievable, but it's ONE game. I will need to spend even more than $600 to run that game at it's best, and I just can't justify that.

RonsonPL397d ago (Edited 397d ago )

Exactly.

1999-2003: 120fps=no problem on 100% of monitors, unlike in 2016, where it's just small fraction of monitors used by gamers worldwide, for most hardcore enthusiasts who are forced to pay 5-10x more than they should.

Force feedback wheel support in every game with cars = sure

3D: sure
Technology utilized as soon as possible: sure. 4.1, 5.1 etc. sound,

level of inconvenience, bugs fighing etc. - no worse than it is on current generation of consoles, especially with games being released in beta stage so often

- plenty of stuff that required a PC. Back then, there were no smartphones or laptops to do certain task. What once was a graphics station in big tower type of case, now can be done by a cheap tablet, laptop or even smartphone.

- CPU and GPU progress wasn't slowed down because the chip manufacturing process wasn't focused on gaming, but rather for maximum power saving feauters and the lowest energy draw.

and so on.

Industry took most of awesomeness out of PC gaming, and the biggest issue is that in normal times we had games to proove that shelling out money for a high-end graphics card was worth it. Now we don't even have PC ports. We have "something". Totally "zero effort" strategy :/
Not even as little as to sit and write a proper assets data streaming for PC with System RAM + GPU RAM architecture. Not even that. What could work on 8GB RAM requires 10 or 12GB. What should be OK with 2GB of GPU RAM, requires 4 or even more.
Then it gets even worse...
No games designed for PC CPUs faster than what 2007 PC could do (Xone/PS4 level).
No games designed for 16GB of RAM, and that it's almost 3x as much as PS4 has.
No games designed with SSDs in mind
No games designed for high-end GPUs and in just half a year from now, we'll have HBM 2 cards, which have 4x better bandwidth than PS4pro and 3x better than memory that will be used in Scorpio.
Not even games designed for "mouse control + 120Hz refresh". Not anymore. Who played Painkiller or Serious Sam (or Unreal Tournament, Tribes or Q3A, knows how awesome those games were and while this particular topic had witnessed a big improvement recently, twitch shooters designed for 120Hz+mouse gaming are nowhere near the position they once had. You cannot just port the game focused on one platform, to the other platform, and expect to be equally good. That's why console players didn't receive a port of Battlefield 2, but rather got a different game, with the same name, but completely re-imagined, so it's better on consoles.

N4G doesn't allow for longer comments.
I pasted the rest here: https://justpaste.it/10fz1

hiredhelp397d ago

Someone who speaks up you Sir should be CEO For us PC Gamers i mean real pc vets not someone just bought pc year or 2 ago whis not been around.

brich233397d ago

Yea man, fuck this " finds a bridge and jumps"

sullynathan397d ago

no one actually wants Crysis like games in 2016 because they're shitty games that put graphics in front of gameplay. Its why the Crysis series is mediocre at best.

TheOptimist396d ago

Right and Uncharted's gameplay is industry leading, right?

sullynathan396d ago

It is and it's far better than Crysis

trouble_bubble395d ago

Uncharted just got nominated for GOTY at the VG awards and will continue the nominations and wins as the year wraps up. Why? Because people LIKE it, objectively and subjectively. Fans and critics alike. Same bottom line you give for being such a Crysis and Witcher fan. So you can stop with the hipster facade. All three games are commercial.

BongSmack397d ago

Daggerfall. Left 4 Dead, Warcraft: Orcs and Humans, Diablo, Wolfenstein 3D. Just a few games that haven't been gimped down. Not a single game. Please.

TheOptimist396d ago

I totally agree with you. Now we have less and less games that are made with a sense of art and more and more games that are just cash grabbers. But we can't always blame the industry as well. I mean during 2006-2012, piracy was a bit of a concern, and hence developers didn't want to spend much making a PC exclusive game. And that's why games were dumbed down for the PC. I mean Crysis 1 was so awesome, but they turned it into a console shooter by 2 and 3. Same was the case with many games, that made the cross. Battlefield, does not feel anything different from BF3 or 4, only graphics have been bettered, that too not by much.

I think that is the reason why Star Citizen went the crowdfunding path, so that they had a secure funding for the project.

RonsonPL396d ago (Edited 396d ago )

I think the whole blah-blah-blah about piracy is bullshit in most part, if not whole.
You cannot just take the number "10 000 pirated" and make it "10 000 sales lost". That's total bullshit, and then, when you see publishers spending 50 millions $ on marketing but being too greedy to agree on spending 100$ on a proper PC option menu, then you start (or should start) to really doubt the crap the public is being fed with.
CDPRed prooved it, many games proved it, when you have a good product, piracy is not a problem. Just like demos. There are no demos anymore. Publishers will tell you that it's for your own good, cause... it costs money.
Sounds like a great argument, right?
Yeah, not really.
They just know that unfinished, bugged, badly ported "game" demo would scare away people who'd otherwise be potential victims of unfair marketing schemes. Seriously people, where there is BIG money, you should read/listen to what you're being told, just like you do with politicians. BE. VERY. SCEPTIC. And think. Most importantly - think. Question the arguments they come up with, check the facts.
Cinematic 24fps is not bettter for gaming because it makes the experience more "movie like". Demos aren't bad for gamers, and piracy is NOT the reason PC gaming got so shitty nowadays.
Microsoft actively ruins PC gaming on purpose, while their PR guys go out and tell you that they're not only not ruining it, but want to help it. They want you to buy their console, because then you give them money for the console, for every game you buy (license fees) and for online multiplayer, whereas on PC you "just" bought Windows and then, OH NO! you might stop giving them more money.
Just look at Witcher 3 and what happened to PC version, just because they got a deal with MS and MS demanded that W3 on Xone doesn't look much worse. Just look what they are doing with their Windows Store (this is like a trojan horse for PC gaming, I don't even want to think about possibility that MS succeeds with this crap, destroying many of great features of PC gaming, not to mention the closed market and high prices (most games on PC in my country cost 140-180PLN. Forza Horizon 3 costs... 270.)
Intel, AMD and Nvidia doesn't ruin PC gaming on purspose though.
Their actions result from one and only fact: They don't give a fuck.
(It would've been true even if there was no rhyme, and there is one so... ;) )

@sullynathan1
Crysis 1 gameplay was below really good, but was not mediocre, and cover system based crap, which is major part of Uncharted 4, is NOT a good example of good gameplay, despite my love/respect for Naughty Dog.
30fps over 60fps is a anti-gamer choice, no matter what idiots like Digital Foundry's "experts" tell you otherwise, gullibly repeating what they had been told, instead of thinking for themselves.
Uncharted 4 is a really poor choice. Its gameplay isn't bad only because the game was done by very, very skilled and talented team of Naughty Dog and it doesn't have ONLY crappy cover system gameplay.
BTW. Crysis Warhead and Crysis 2's gameplay were both good and at some parts, very good. But just to be clear, I talked about Crysis as an example in terms of PC version and graphics, not as a whole game. There's nothing that forbids creating superb game with awesome gameplay and jaw dropping visuals.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 395d ago
andrewsquall397d ago

But plays 9 times more meh than 9 years ago.

Show all comments (43)