Bit-Tech: Crysis 2 Review

BT: Drawing a line through that to find the average, we’re forced to admit that Crysis 2 is an entertaining and exciting shooter – though also a stupid one. We had fun playing it and that’s provoked us to round the score up from the six we would have otherwise given it, but we don’t expect Crysis 2 to supply the longevity that the original game did.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
ultimate-remag2825d ago

It’s clear that, in terms of graphics and performance, Crytek has had some issues balancing Crysis 2 atop of the Xbox 360’s six year-old hardware – and the key word there is definitely balancing. There are places where Crysis 2 looks nothing short of phenomenal. There are others where it verges on unacceptable.

flankhim2825d ago ShowReplies(1)
ElDorado2825d ago (Edited 2825d ago )

People are gonna be mad at me for saying this, but I'm honest about it. I think Killzone 2(not KZ3) looks better then Crysis 2 on consoles. I own both Xbox 360 en PS3 and I know on the PC Crysis 2 will be a monster, especially when DX11 arrives. I think when you focus on one platform, you'll get the best out of it. Killzone is exclusively developed for the PS3 and I don't think a multiplatform title will look as good as a exclusive such as Uncharted, Killzone or God of War. Do you people think the graphics look better, because of the different worlds. I mean Killzone has a rotten world, while Crysis is in the city. I enjoyed playing Alan Wake, Metro 2033 and I will enjoy playing Crysis 2. But as far as graphics on consoles go, I think people are overrating Crysis 2

Baka-akaB2825d ago

well i also think that , within the confine of consoles , KZ2 and 3 looks better .

Except Crysis is stronger on the technical side , while KZ use multiple ttricks in combination with some impressive tech .

In short , better raw power and tech : crysis
Better art direction : KZ2-3 and a few games like U2.

kikizoo2825d ago

hell no..

better raw power and tech :
best ps3 exclusives >>>> crysis.

Art direction : subjective.

the_kutaragi_baka2825d ago (Edited 2825d ago )

Crysis 2 should stay on PC. What's the point if there's a big difference between the consoles and PC version?

negative2825d ago

What's the point???? So people without high end PCs can enjoy a very similar experience.

The only difference is great graphics (console) vs insane graphics (pc). That's not enough to deny console owners a great game. Especially when those insane graphics are not important to most true gamers.

Baka-akaB2825d ago

that's an incredibly stupid statement .

The point is for people who dont own pc .
IF they dont care that the game is inferior , why should you care for their sake ?

gorebago2825d ago

I loved the shit out of the half life 2 original xbox port knowing a better looking version existed on the pc. Who cares.

For example, some guys like dating fat girls because of who they are and not what they look like.

Fyi, I don't date fat girls but you get the point.

retrofly2825d ago

Also means exceedingly higher profits for the game, which should hopefully mean better and bigger games in the future.

Nolando2825d ago

i like GT reviews, and what they said is that clearly the PC version is the best looking version. but the consoles dont look bad at all. honestly at this point in time. All games (especially blockbusters such as halo, BF, KZ etc) look GREAT today. so i dont see what the point is in fussing over it. I am planning on getting crysis 2 when i get my GTX 570 and OC it, but still ive only played the demo on the xbox and it looks fantastic even on the xbox. People are just too harsh and pick on the things today.

gorebago2825d ago

I remember thinkimg super mario world was gorgeous. We're so spoiled and shallow these days without remembering how far the medium has come in such a short time.

jimbone792824d ago

@ Gore
Thank you man, to be honest after all this time on this site I thought I was the only one left that felt that way.

gorebago2824d ago

No problem buddy. Life is too short to get hung up on the pointless distractions. Alas I find myself here alot - ironic.

kikizoo2825d ago

PC geek are overating differences all the time to justify the $$$ they are spending.

on A (good) tv set, your couch 2 meters or more in front of the tv, when you are really playing (unlike dumb screenshots), there is no real differences (and most of the real graphic beasts are console's exclusives)

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2824d ago
dkgshiz2825d ago

I would give it a 7.5 so far. The MP is really the only thing I care about in FPS games. Sadly the MP is garbage in this game so its just a rental for me so far.

rajman2825d ago (Edited 2825d ago )

I gave it 7.5 aswell, the campaign though. Thought it was pretty short as I finished it in 5 hours 45 minutes, and to be honest it didnt amaze me. Alot of glitches and some seriously dumb AI, the amount of times enemies would run right past me (and only respond when I shot them) was ridiculous.

Louis_Guzman2825d ago

Agreed, the gameplay is crap.

Andyyy912825d ago

@rajman Liesssssss, the campaign is 10-12 hours long, You must be AMAZING! Try playing games on harder difficulties, Prove you completed the game in that amount of time

2825d ago
rajman2825d ago

I played it on Normal difficulty, nothing wrong with that, and you want proof? Im currently uploading the whole campaign on Youtube, when its completed you will see Im not lying about it being under 6 hours. Heres the link:
Have you even played it to say its 10-12 hours? Or did you just hear the typical boasting from developers?

Baka-akaB2825d ago

it's still easily longer than the last 10 fps released .

Show all comments (24)