General Discussion

View unanswered posts | View active topics


Post a new topicPost a reply
Previous topic | Next topic 

User avatar   Uber Modder Uber ModderMember since: 28.01.2009, 20:54Posts: 2050Location: Under Ruan's bed. Likes: 0
 

 Post Topic: Re: Far Cry 1 Vs Crysis Vs Crysis 2
PostPosted 27.03.2012, 17:25 
Please learn the difference between independent, and subsidiary companies. DICE et al are the later. Crytek is the former. Crytek is independent. Ryse, Warface, Homefront 2, potentially TS4, and a few other games are published by other companies that aren't EA (Which is over half of their [announced/released] projects).

And this doesn't include projects like GFACE, that are completely their own.

CRYDEV Y U NO RESEARCH UR ARGUMENTS PROPERLY

*cough* Sorry, don't know what came over me there.


CryDev's professional troll.


Image

User avatar   Experienced Modder Experienced ModderMember since: 01.07.2011, 21:28Posts: 436 Likes: 0
 

 Post Topic: Re: Far Cry 1 Vs Crysis Vs Crysis 2
PostPosted 27.03.2012, 19:20 
Quote by Squiggers:
Please learn the difference between independent, and subsidiary companies. DICE et al are the later. Crytek is the former. Crytek is independent. Ryse, Warface, Homefront 2, potentially TS4, and a few other games are published by other companies that aren't EA (Which is over half of their [announced/released] projects).

And this doesn't include projects like GFACE, that are completely their own.

CRYDEV Y U NO RESEARCH UR ARGUMENTS PROPERLY

*cough* Sorry, don't know what came over me there.

I think people are making the argument that Crytek are becoming more and more like DICE. DICE was once its own company then EA got the tentacles in and absorbed them into the blob.
User avatar   Skilled Modder Skilled ModderMember since: 17.08.2011, 16:25Posts: 746Location: Genova, Italy Likes: 3
 

 Post Topic: Re: Far Cry 1 Vs Crysis Vs Crysis 2
PostPosted 27.03.2012, 20:55 
I agree with Thomy. :)


Image
User avatar   Uber Modder Uber ModderMember since: 28.01.2009, 20:54Posts: 2050Location: Under Ruan's bed. Likes: 0
 

 Post Topic: Re: Far Cry 1 Vs Crysis Vs Crysis 2
PostPosted 27.03.2012, 21:15 
Quote by ClockworkOnion:
Quote by Squiggers:
Please learn the difference between independent, and subsidiary companies. DICE et al are the later. Crytek is the former. Crytek is independent. Ryse, Warface, Homefront 2, potentially TS4, and a few other games are published by other companies that aren't EA (Which is over half of their [announced/released] projects).

And this doesn't include projects like GFACE, that are completely their own.

CRYDEV Y U NO RESEARCH UR ARGUMENTS PROPERLY

*cough* Sorry, don't know what came over me there.

I think people are making the argument that Crytek are becoming more and more like DICE. DICE was once its own company then EA got the tentacles in and absorbed them into the blob.


I might have agreed, but its a bit of a flawed argument as the most current titles in development are all for other publishers, such as THQ or Microsoft, so EA doesn't have their greasy mitts involved.


CryDev's professional troll.


Image
User avatar   Hardcore Modder Hardcore ModderMember since: 28.10.2007, 15:25Posts: 844Location: Denmark Likes: 1
 

 Post Topic: Re: Far Cry 1 Vs Crysis Vs Crysis 2
PostPosted 28.03.2012, 00:22 
I do believe that Crytek as an independent entity is fully to blame for Crysis 2 yes.
User avatar   Skilled Modder Skilled ModderMember since: 15.12.2007, 19:42Posts: 640 Likes: 0
 

 Post Topic: Re: Far Cry 1 Vs Crysis Vs Crysis 2
PostPosted 28.03.2012, 05:50 
I would have been okay with C2 if they advertised the way it was from the start.

I was actually really looking forward to sizeable city levels where you could climb the buildings and discern your own routes, and make informed tactical decisions - and even some of the early footage was created to "emulate" this > if you remember, one of the first gameplay videos had the player falling off a gigantic building onto glass plating, suggesting that the player could survive extensive heights thanks to the new nanosuit, and he could use that height to better survey the city. And then I played the same part and the first thing i noticed was that same spot, reduced in height by about 40 stories.

And then the whole "bringing the crysis gameplay to consoles" when it was only a shadow of Crysis's actual gameplay in terms of the types of things the player could accomplish once acquainted with the nanosuit.

One thing that really pissed me off perhaps, were the critics of the original nanosuit. There were tons of people who complained about the nanosuit and not understanding it. That, along with adapting it for a controller forced a change to a more "passive" suit. But I loved the original Crysis because the nanosuit was something to learn, it was a new game mechanic that the more you learned, the more neat things you could do with it. (If you've played Crysis extensively or watch NanosuitNinja's vids on youtube, you probably know what I mean) C2 I felt very limited with my capabilities outside of what crytek wanted to be blatantly obvious to us. And the focus on story I was not a fan of.

I think John Carmack had a pretty good idea when it comes to stories in FPS games:
Story in a game is like a story in a porn movie. It's expected to be there, but it's not that important.

I'm not saying they shouldn't improve the story, but even with the improvements, I could still find a ton of other games that have much better stories > that wasn't why the first was so critically acclaimed - it was because of the gameplay itself, and how much control the player actually had. It's no Half-Life in its story delivery either - the voice acting in particular is rather flat and out of place at times, though to be fair this is the best job Crytek has ever done at directing VA, especially when you look back at Far Cry and its laughable delivery for the main character especially. And in regards to the story, I'm a bit confused by how the nanosuit became such a technical marvel when the koreans had essentially the same tech in C1? If someone could help me out on this?

Don't get me wrong I still like it quite a bit, some of the things you can do make it pretty fun at times, I just don't feel it was a step in the right direction as to what the series "could be". Crysis 1 was a game I was waiting a long time for, and despite my high-expectations for it, I was not at all disappointed. In fact, it had MORE to it than I imagined it would. And I enjoyed it enough to play it on a crappy single core computer before I got a new one. C2, on the other hand, was completely the opposite of what I hoped it would be, but instead it felt like a typical fps with some extra chances for tactical gameplay, and the nanosuit felt more like "Halo armor with more options", rather then "nanosuit 2.0" to me.

I'm just glad it supports modding and custom maps though, that's something that is extremely rare these days.
User avatar   Database Support Database SupportMember since: 30.09.2008, 02:17Posts: 5323Location: The Land of Sinnamon Likes: 112
 

 Post Topic: Re: Far Cry 1 Vs Crysis Vs Crysis 2
PostPosted 29.03.2012, 00:33 
Quote by ClockworkOnion:
Quote by Squiggers:
Please learn the difference between independent, and subsidiary companies. DICE et al are the later. Crytek is the former. Crytek is independent. Ryse, Warface, Homefront 2, potentially TS4, and a few other games are published by other companies that aren't EA (Which is over half of their [announced/released] projects).

And this doesn't include projects like GFACE, that are completely their own.

CRYDEV Y U NO RESEARCH UR ARGUMENTS PROPERLY

*cough* Sorry, don't know what came over me there.

I think people are making the argument that Crytek are becoming more and more like DICE. DICE was once its own company then EA got the tentacles in and absorbed them into the blob.

That's pretty much it.


Image


Last edited by RayFan9876 on 15.93.2014, 05:29, edited 58 times in total.
User avatar   Uber Modder Uber ModderMember since: 28.01.2009, 20:54Posts: 2050Location: Under Ruan's bed. Likes: 0
 

 Post Topic: Re: Far Cry 1 Vs Crysis Vs Crysis 2
PostPosted 29.03.2012, 02:50 
Quote by RayFan9876:
Quote by ClockworkOnion:
Quote by Squiggers:
Please learn the difference between independent, and subsidiary companies. DICE et al are the later. Crytek is the former. Crytek is independent. Ryse, Warface, Homefront 2, potentially TS4, and a few other games are published by other companies that aren't EA (Which is over half of their [announced/released] projects).

And this doesn't include projects like GFACE, that are completely their own.

CRYDEV Y U NO RESEARCH UR ARGUMENTS PROPERLY

*cough* Sorry, don't know what came over me there.

I think people are making the argument that Crytek are becoming more and more like DICE. DICE was once its own company then EA got the tentacles in and absorbed them into the blob.

That's pretty much it.


See my response. :) Best to take that discussion into another thread now perhaps, as its starting to derail this thread a bit.

In regards to the plot, I personally believe that Plot & gameplay have to match well together - i'm a sucker for well done SP games like the Darkness 1 for example. Mind you, the current complaint that is common is its one or the other with release titles. With Crysis 2, was more of a focus on the solid gameplay, but I don't think it was detrimental. The statis pod was unfortunately used when Vegas also used the same plot device, which I don't think helped matters. Some odd design choices like the alien changes - which, if it had been fully explained in game, might have been got away with - also got people irritated.

Me, I liked it for the feel of the gameplay, and most of the setting/plot.


CryDev's professional troll.


Image
User avatar   Uber Modder Uber ModderMember since: 18.10.2011, 02:04Posts: 1515Location: Tulsa, OK Likes: 19
 

 Post Topic: Re: Far Cry 1 Vs Crysis Vs Crysis 2
PostPosted 29.03.2012, 04:03 
Quote by Squiggers:
Quote by RayFan9876:
Quote by Squiggers:
Please learn the difference between independent, and subsidiary companies. DICE et al are the later. Crytek is the former. Crytek is independent. Ryse, Warface, Homefront 2, potentially TS4, and a few other games are published by other companies that aren't EA (Which is over half of their [announced/released] projects).

And this doesn't include projects like GFACE, that are completely their own.

CRYDEV Y U NO RESEARCH UR ARGUMENTS PROPERLY

*cough* Sorry, don't know what came over me there.

I think people are making the argument that Crytek are becoming more and more like DICE. DICE was once its own company then EA got the tentacles in and absorbed them into the blob.

That's pretty much it.


Quote:
See my response. :) Best to take that discussion into another thread now perhaps, as its starting to derail this thread a bit.

In regards to the plot, I personally believe that Plot & gameplay have to match well together - i'm a sucker for well done SP games like the Darkness 1 for example. Mind you, the current complaint that is common is its one or the other with release titles. With Crysis 2, was more of a focus on the solid gameplay, but I don't think it was detrimental. The statis pod was unfortunately used when Vegas also used the same plot device, which I don't think helped matters. Some odd design choices like the alien changes - which, if it had been fully explained in game, might have been got away with - also got people irritated.

Me, I liked it for the feel of the gameplay, and most of the setting/plot.


Im going to get back to this thread discussion in a second, but let me mention one last thing. I think that Crytek and Dice are both amazing dev's, I just think that EA kind of sucked a little bit of the life out of BF3 and Crysis 2. Nonetheless, both BF3 and Crysis 2, still delivered eventually. BF3 delivered incredible graphics from the get go, and they are releasing a dlc that will have the gigantic maps pc gamers want. Also, crysis 2 kept some of the freedom, and upgraded the pc version to DX11, and gave the pc version insanely good graphics, and the capability to mod and create levels/games. So, I think they both have shown that they are both amazing devs, and are trying to still reach the pc community. Luckily, Crytek isn't owned by EA.

Also about the games, my favorite game would probably be Crysis Warhead or Crysis 2. I like the nanosuit in crysis better, but i like the feel and especially aiming better in crysis 2. I think that Crysis 2 has the potential to be the best crytek game, it wouldn't be too hard to make the levels much more open, all it would be is just adding streets and buildings, and street detail like phone booths. All crysis 2 needs is more freedom to become a masterpiece.


"The DAY AFTER" set in an open world Chicago and NY
Image

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... DOjN0mAfGQ
  Uber Modder Uber ModderMember since: 18.01.2010, 23:11Posts: 1730 Likes: 1
 

 Post Topic: Re: Far Cry 1 Vs Crysis Vs Crysis 2
PostPosted 29.03.2012, 04:53 
Quote by Cleric:
I would have been okay with C2 if they advertised the way it was from the start.

I was actually really looking forward to sizeable city levels where you could climb the buildings and discern your own routes, and make informed tactical decisions - and even some of the early footage was created to "emulate" this > if you remember, one of the first gameplay videos had the player falling off a gigantic building onto glass plating, suggesting that the player could survive extensive heights thanks to the new nanosuit, and he could use that height to better survey the city. And then I played the same part and the first thing i noticed was that same spot, reduced in height by about 40 stories.

And then the whole "bringing the crysis gameplay to consoles" when it was only a shadow of Crysis's actual gameplay in terms of the types of things the player could accomplish once acquainted with the nanosuit.

One thing that really pissed me off perhaps, were the critics of the original nanosuit. There were tons of people who complained about the nanosuit and not understanding it. That, along with adapting it for a controller forced a change to a more "passive" suit. But I loved the original Crysis because the nanosuit was something to learn, it was a new game mechanic that the more you learned, the more neat things you could do with it. (If you've played Crysis extensively or watch NanosuitNinja's vids on youtube, you probably know what I mean) C2 I felt very limited with my capabilities outside of what crytek wanted to be blatantly obvious to us. And the focus on story I was not a fan of.

I think John Carmack had a pretty good idea when it comes to stories in FPS games:
Story in a game is like a story in a porn movie. It's expected to be there, but it's not that important.

I'm not saying they shouldn't improve the story, but even with the improvements, I could still find a ton of other games that have much better stories > that wasn't why the first was so critically acclaimed - it was because of the gameplay itself, and how much control the player actually had. It's no Half-Life in its story delivery either - the voice acting in particular is rather flat and out of place at times, though to be fair this is the best job Crytek has ever done at directing VA, especially when you look back at Far Cry and its laughable delivery for the main character especially. And in regards to the story, I'm a bit confused by how the nanosuit became such a technical marvel when the koreans had essentially the same tech in C1? If someone could help me out on this?

Don't get me wrong I still like it quite a bit, some of the things you can do make it pretty fun at times, I just don't feel it was a step in the right direction as to what the series "could be". Crysis 1 was a game I was waiting a long time for, and despite my high-expectations for it, I was not at all disappointed. In fact, it had MORE to it than I imagined it would. And I enjoyed it enough to play it on a crappy single core computer before I got a new one. C2, on the other hand, was completely the opposite of what I hoped it would be, but instead it felt like a typical fps with some extra chances for tactical gameplay, and the nanosuit felt more like "Halo armor with more options", rather then "nanosuit 2.0" to me.

I'm just glad it supports modding and custom maps though, that's something that is extremely rare these days.


just agree with all that.

@TheMagnumman357

Crysis2 have a potential (and more than a potential, after a Crysis1 and Crysis Wars ), but it was totaly wasted.
User avatar   Hardcore Modder Hardcore ModderMember since: 28.10.2007, 15:25Posts: 844Location: Denmark Likes: 1
 

 Post Topic: Re: Far Cry 1 Vs Crysis Vs Crysis 2
PostPosted 29.03.2012, 06:02 
What Crysis 2 really needs is to finish the damn story. If you leave on a cliffhanger either you pick up exactly where you left off or you don't do it at all IMHO. Comic doesn't count.

After that we can take a look at properly implementing the half baked features that don't bloody work, and ditch the ridiculous handholding mentality that means every level is like 50% cutscene if not more, in addition to the actual cutscenes.

Seriously let's take a look at this, first you have the live action news intro, that's like one and a half minutes. Not counting load times then you have the submarine level that is basically a five and a half minute cutscene. I know you can move around, but only in the same capacity as a cameraman on a dolly track can move around. After this you have the CG intro with Prophet being awesome, that's another 3 minutes. Then there's another 2 minute cutscene where bad things happen, and while you do get control from here you're basically back on the dolly track until you get outside, which takes about 2-3 minutes more.

All in all, from the time you press "new game" until you actually get to the game part of the ************* game will easily take you 15 minutes, if not more, worth of cutscenes.
And even once you gain control, don't get too attached to it because they like to yank it away from you at random times.
  Uber Modder Uber ModderMember since: 18.01.2010, 23:11Posts: 1730 Likes: 1
 

 Post Topic: Re: Far Cry 1 Vs Crysis Vs Crysis 2
PostPosted 29.03.2012, 06:52 
ahah, indeed, the unskippable cutscences is really one of the worseness Crysis2 idea. No speaking of the so awesome "Interactive cutscenes" ( press 15times "forward key" when the game ask you to.. etc ) who offer the best gameplay experience ever :meow:.

Of course i was ironic about that : )
User avatar   Hardcore Modder Hardcore ModderMember since: 28.10.2007, 15:25Posts: 844Location: Denmark Likes: 1
 

 Post Topic: Re: Far Cry 1 Vs Crysis Vs Crysis 2
PostPosted 29.03.2012, 07:00 
The worst part is when it brings up that "press F to look" prompt in the middle of a firefight so that I CANT SHOOT.

FFS
User avatar   Skilled Modder Skilled ModderMember since: 15.12.2007, 19:42Posts: 640 Likes: 0
 

 Post Topic: Re: Far Cry 1 Vs Crysis Vs Crysis 2
PostPosted 29.03.2012, 07:47 
Just the notion of "press f to look" at all makes me sick.


When you have to give players a BUTTON to look at a sequence, something is seriously wrong in your game. The player should be attracted to the sequence by audio cues, in game dialogue or it should be impossible to miss given the layout of the current area. Good scripted sequences make the player feel like they are happening, not that they are being TOLD to LOOK.

Im okay with having cutscenes from a first person viewpoint, like HL kinda > except when the game becomes a cutscene there's a problem.
User avatar   Skilled Modder Skilled ModderMember since: 17.08.2011, 16:25Posts: 746Location: Genova, Italy Likes: 3
 

 Post Topic: Re: Far Cry 1 Vs Crysis Vs Crysis 2
PostPosted 29.03.2012, 17:41 
The ''press X to look'' is just a simple addition to the game, as you can clearly follow the sequence by yourself but that button make it feel like a cutscene, you don't want to press it.. you don't press it and you can follow the action with your mouse, nothing much changes but an automatic trackview is better.

I love that button, I love cutscenes, I love story.

Think of all the best action games in the last years.. Gears of War, Metal Gear Solid, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Mass Effect, Dead Space, Alan Wake, Heavy Rain, also Alone in the Dark after all.. playing them is like watching a never-ending cutscene, a movie.
Gears of War got the ''press Y to look'' button, Metal Gear is full of cutscenes, Deus Ex got a great plot, Mass Effect got an interesting dialogue system (= interactive cutscene) and let's not mention the other three games, it would be an insult to your intelligence.
Crap, even Battlefield3 got a damn storyline after all, though it kind of sucks.

They're masterpieces, storyline is essential, cutscenes are important, Crysis2 is good.
If you take storyline, cutscenes and such out of the game, what's left then.. a TechDemo, like Crysis (not saying it's a bad game though, I already said i love all of the three).


Image