Crysis 2 or battlefield 3 ?

Eldd

Distinguished
Sep 6, 2008
710
0
19,060
30
It depends; Crysis 2 has a background story, which kind of continues from Crysis, so if you're into storylines, Cysis is the way to go (which would mean you'd have to find about Crysis, or play it). There is no continuation of any storyline in Battlefield 3, but it's got a good single player campaign and awesome multiplayer, as it is already being reported.

Also make sure you have a PC good enough to allow you to play either of the two games, they need good resources.
 
G

Guest

Guest
You'll be wasting your money playing Battlefield 3. The beta (Battlelog) sucks. Now EA is going browser base gaming on this one which I think what makes this game so bad besides the huge battlefield maps (you end up running most of the time & won't see real action). I don't recommend Crysis 2 either though I never really played the game.

If you wan't a good FPS, go with Medal of Honor 2010.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaz7r2r_Fik

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWhvO7FeHFU&feature=relmfu
 

Stringjam

Distinguished
Jun 23, 2011
434
0
18,810
19
Crysis 2 multiplayer just isn't much fun. Very disappointed, since I love(d) Crysis Wars so much.

I am, however, having a ball in Battlefield 3 multiplayer in the Caspian Border beta map.

It's an open Beta, so go download it and give it a try.....it isn't a finished product, but at least you'll know if you like the vibe.
 

medal of honor2010 was horrible. you cant judge BF3 by a beta only released to test out the servers for DICE. BF3 will be a fine purchase as well as crysis2. if you want a story as eldd said, the crysis series has a driven storyline, instead of just battle situations as an excuse to put you in a firefight
 

HEXiT

Champion
Herald
for map size alone bf3... for 64 players bf3 for a long lasting multiplayer experiance, bf3... no ORIGIN CRYSIS2 for the win...

its bad enough they put drm on the games but now they want to collect info 2...
its only the paying customers who are gonna have a hard time of it. the pirates will bypass origin and have the game out on there scene b4 its even released in europe...
its the legit guy thats getting hurt.. he should be treat with a little more respect.
 
G

Guest

Guest
In choosing a game really depends on what kind of gameplay you like. If you like run & gun type of game then go with COD games. If you like tactical games then go with ARMA or Battlefield games. If you like instant action with a tactical blend then go with Black Hawk Down or Medal of Honor.

I happened to play both the alpha & the beta version of Battlefield 3 & I'm for sure can say that it sucks. I can also say with absolute certainty that about 75% of those gamers that pre-ordered the game cancelled their pre-order after playing the beta version. There's no way hardcore PC gamers will embrace the Battlelog. The browser based game may be OK in EA's Tiger Woods PGA Tour 2012 but if you talk of FPS, there's no way PC gamers will accept it. It would be like playing Arcade V3. The game looks so cheap.

What you saw in some of the game trailers of Battlefield 3 posted by EA is no way the same as the game they're going to release next month. There's no way for them to fix the game in a month's time so expect a total failure of the Battlefield 3 release next month. You'll be wasting your money if you buy Battlefield 3.
 

Are you forgetting the fact that DICE has said that the beta is a very early build and the final product will be as advertised.... Don't judge something by a beta. They have already "fixed" all the issues with the beta you speak of as we have a version that is said to be upwards of 5 months old. The only reason they are having this open beta is to test their server system before going full online. Go do some research to back that opinion.
 
G

Guest

Guest
It's now impossible to change what's set. And that is... the Battlelog. You have to deal with it & the non-game.exe (browser base game). They can tweak the game to run it smoothly maybe but what's laid now is what we're going to see in the finish product. October 25 is the release date.

No real PC gamer will play this game.
 

What? So now you are speculating about battlelog? Yeah it sucks but before you were talking about graphics too. What about the people that want the game for single player? I happen to love a good campaign and will most likely go through it multiple times... Does that make me not a true PC gamer? I guess not then. I just like gaming on my PC but since I want to get bf3 I guess im a non real PC gamer..... Sigh I wished I was as hardcore as you
 

rocky41

Distinguished
Jul 21, 2010
719
0
19,060
32
Who ever says dont get battlefield 3 just based on the bugs in beta ,no need to listen to them. They should know that it is just a beta it means in testing stage and not a demo. So they should understand the real difference between demo and beta.

Crysis 2 has good story line but seems to broken in pieces. The really gets started in the middle and from there on it was really fun. The multiplayer is not as good as it should have been. The graphics are good but not as good as the previous two crysis games were.

On the other hand from the videos and previews of battlefield 3 i am really impressed with the game. They have very good co-op, singleplayer and not to forget the very impressive multiplayer. So getting battlefield 3 will be the ideal choice to get. the unlocks in battlefield 3 will keep you busy for 100 of hours and the battlefield 3 community have really good players to player with. So if you have a choice to get the best multiplayer game of this year so getting back to medal of honor just for multiplayer which wont be as good as BF3 is not so good choice. medal of honor dont have good single player campaign and it was really boring to play it.

Just few more days for BF3 to release so wait and enjoy you christmas in a blast this year.

And to add this is the real PC game to dont to listen to others that dislike the game just because of the battlelog and not on the basis of the games features.
 

rocky41

Distinguished
Jul 21, 2010
719
0
19,060
32
You will promote MOH that i came to knew from your profile pic itself and do not forget the same team has developed battlefield 3 so it is their full effort and by the way MOH can be run even on low graphics setting where as battlefield 3 is only going to be released on DirectX 10 and 11. It is going to a monster game and please don't recommend a old game to OP as he can get a better game then MOH.
 

13thmonkey

Titan
Moderator
its not a browser based game period.

It has a browser front end for choosing servers and tracking stats.

The exe it runs is bf3.exe, thats a not a browser.

the retail version will allow setting changes etc. prior to log in, the only difference is that bf3.exe is not running whilst you don't need it to run, in fact with every game a new instance of bf3.exe is started, that actually sounds better to my mind.

I enjoyed the Beta, and BFBC2 and BF2, its a shame its not on steam, but its not a deal breaker for me.

 

you need a better video card with MoH? how so? it is a console port? if peoples video cards dont work on MoH then they need to update their 10 yr old computer. and what is with this video comparison? one guy is wanting to kill guys, the other is just showcasing an rpg on a building and running around. is this supposed to make me want to play MoH?
fanboy beware
 

Eldd

Distinguished
Sep 6, 2008
710
0
19,060
30
First of all, MoH multiplayer gameplay looks more like a polished Counter Strike 1.6, minus the rush, minus... oh well. You get my drift. Battlefield looks a little more anchored into immediate reality. At the end of the day I am so happy I am not into multiplayer, so I can actually enjoy single player campaigns on all sides (Call of Duty and Battlefield series).
 
G

Guest

Guest
The browser based BF3 truly sucks. There's lots of gamer already petitioning EA on this. I'm sure it will be heard on deaf ears.

http://forum.ea.com/eaforum/posts/list/7484854.page

Anyway, I don't really like to argue of what's best for the gamer who started this thread. All I can say is, if you like to play a game where you spawn in a wide area far from the action & spend most of your time running shooting on walls only to get shot as you're about to see an enemy (as in the video below) then go & get BF3. That's all I can say. Have a good day folks!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8YSI5XKBvk&feature=related

Goodluck with your browser based BF3 game...
 

+1 here. to totally negate a games value by the server system and not the actual gameplay mechanics itself is totally ludicrous
 

Eldd

Distinguished
Sep 6, 2008
710
0
19,060
30


To be honest now, in the Battlefield video, the player posting the video brings up the "who's online" window and we can see only 3 players on that huge map, so obviously he runs like a headless chicken with nothing to shoot at but walls (which collapse beautifully). The real problem is if there aren't enough players that will play such huge maps when the game is finally released, cause they will RUN like mad around, with nothing to shoot at indeed. That is something EA, DICE and the rest of the brass should take into account at one point (or not).

I am still going to get that game, but no multiplayer for me, thank you very much, I am not THAT impressed with it anyways.
 
G

Guest

Guest


Hey, that's interesting. The guy said he's looking for a good multiplayer game. So this BF3 game is not for him then?

Also, I only play on multiplayer game only by the way so this game is also not for me. :D
 

envymert

Distinguished
Feb 26, 2011
391
0
18,790
4


Love how this guy says BF3 sucks, which I also played alpha and beta, both of which were fine for me. I am buying the game on multiple platforms. Battlelog is not as bad as everyone makes it out to be. And as Flint stated, the build on release is mature, they are testing back end server strength due to 2143 having such a HUGE boom at the beginning servers were down the first 3 days and they are trying to avoid that to capitalize on people coming over from CoD.

Also take this moron's arguments with a grain of salt they all change and he is comparing everything to his "GEM" Medal of Honor which happens to be the BIGGEST flop in recent years when it comes to multiplayer games. That game is garbage and thats why it has been sold for 10-19.99 for the past 11 months. . . . a month after release.
 

Similar threads


ASK THE COMMUNITY