Crysis vs Crysis Warhead vs Crysis 2 (PC)

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar

Crysis vs Crysis Warhead vs Crysis 2 (PC)

  • Crysis

    Votes: 46 39.3%

  • Crysis Warhead

    Votes: 17 14.5%

  • Crysis 2 (DX11)

    Votes: 35 29.9%

  • I like all equally

    Votes: 12 10.3%

  • I dislike all three

    Votes: 7 6.0%
  • Total voters
    117
PCgamer81

PCgamer81

Distinguished
Oct 14, 2011
1,830
0
19,810
Crysis vs Crysis Warhead vs Crysis 2

The poll choices are in regards to which of these games is best overall.

I believe the original Crysis is best overall, but barely. I feel it has better graphics than Warhead and Crysis 2.

I believe Crysis Warhead has the best gameplay, but comes in second due to less impressive visuals and the fact it's too short.

I believe Crysis 2, even with the DX11/high-res texture pack, is a visual dissapointment. If it was called something other than Crysis, I would say it's a beautiful and excellent game. But when viewed in the magnificent light of the first two games, it falls short.

I would like to hear your opinion.
 
for overall game-play crysis 2 wins hands down. the single player is ok if limited but the multi-player is as good as any current game apart from bf3.
the multi-player on the first 2 were pretty poor to be honest. although some did like it.
the single player on 1 and warhead were poor to adequate but both very shallow. i loved the open world aspect of 1 but it was to open and ended up a bit of a mishmash. warhead tightened up the single player but its story let the game down as its character development was lacking...

you may not agree but thats the beauty of gaming. not every 1 likes the same thing..
 
I think Crysis is the best game. Crysis 2's new way of using suit powers is pretty cool, but also a little bit limiting at times. I do think overall that was a good change, but the game itself was boring IMO.

Original Crysis ftw.

Warhead was good, but not quite as fun as the original.
 
I prefer the original over Warhead or Crysis 2.

I agree with HEXiT in that not everybody isn't going to like the same thing.

I like games that let me set my own pace and choose a combat style, and I think the first game gives you the most flexibility in that approach. I think the story was "good." It didn't suck me in like FEAR or Metro2033, but it was certainly more interesting to me than anything from the BF or COD camp. It was good enough to keep me glued to the computer through most of my first play-through.

Crysis 2, when judged by itself and not compared against the original, is still a great looking, fun game......but, IMO, they totally ruined the mechanics that made the first one so good. Totally dumbed it down with the gutted suit functionality and lack of movement options. It feels sloppy, laggy, and not at all like CRYSIS. The fact that they also dismissed most of the characters established in the first games really disappointed me and kind of detached me from the storyline as well.

I really wish 2 would have been more of an extension of the original, and not a complete abandonment of it. Ah well...I guess that's the direction they felt they needed to go - - I realize some people like that style of game-play more.

I feel this way about the MP side as well. Count me in as one of the guys who loved Crysis Wars. Huge maps with tons of different vehicles and weapons. It was a lot of fun while it was active, and required a lot of skill to do well in. I think it was a good mix of the fast, twitchy Counter-Strike style of gameplay with the more realistic weapon handling of a game like BF.
 


I agree with you wholeheartedly.

I feel the reason Crytek abandoned the original gameplay formula was to make it appeal more to console players, who are accustomed to a different presentation and gameplay style of shooter.
 


See I agree with Hexit too. I also LIKED the changes to the suit functions in Crysis 2. I felt like by having 1 button-1press shortcuts to the functions, I was a more diverse on-the-fly player even though I had less suit abilities to activate.

I think that the multiplayer is quite good because it actually feels pretty balanced across various kit setups. That is saying a lot for a game that has invisibility and heat vision as baseline abilities.

Ultimately Crysis 1 would be my choice IF you could set independent 1press button shortcuts to each of the suit functions without dicking around with macros. Overall though I think Crysis 2 developed the franchise well. I liked the story in single player far better, and it was far better composed in almost every regard story-wise. None of the games really challenge me as a player aside from rare occasions and even then only with difficulty maxed. However, I felt like more of a badass in Crysis 2 and my gameplay felt like it would be far more entertaining to watch than my gameplay from Crysis 1 or Warhead. Overall I just really thought Crysis 2 got a bum rap because it is part of a series that purists are too nostalgic over. Crysis 1 taken on the merits of gameplay and storyline isn't even a great game. It's good at best in those regards.
 



Funny you mention railroad tracks, that is exactly how I was going to describe both Warhead and Crysis 2...rail shooter.
 
Crysis 1 & Warhead
-Very poorly optimized, near impossible to run at Extreme
-IMO, better overall single player - open jungle warfare stealthing was very fitting for the concept

Crysis 2
-Optimized better
-More linear, generic single player
 
I haven't played Crysis 2, but I like Warhead's story better. IMO, Crysis 1 was kinda lame in the beginning(till you figured out the nanosuit fully), very good in the middle, and boring towards the end(I felt like it was like a soap opera, they were just dragging it on and on).
 


Actually Warhead was a fair bit easier on the GPU than original, but at this time they aren't the most demanding games.

Crysis 2 was optimized unless you try using DX11. Nvidia paid to have tesselation set to "*** you AMD" levels, by making the most detailed concrete blocks ever. I'm not joking about that, either.
 
I definitely felt that the original Crysis was overall the best game out of the games listed above in my opinion.

Crysis not only has stellar graphics but the gameplay was superb. You had the suit to control while navigating a semi-open world environment. Other positives were the guns (type and bullet physics), vehicle control, and even the story. I personally liked the alien twist although I enjoyed killing the human AI more.

Warhead was like a decent expansion in to me. More of a good thing. Just an added bonus to the original crysis even though the original wasn't need if I remember correctly.

Crysis 2. Well, yeah, its crysis 2. Not to auto-bash this game or anything but its nothing like the original in respect to what was so good about the original. Of course you have the obvious negatives to list first, Graphics. Second the gameplay. For the most part to me the nano suit felt unnaturally to easy to use. Save game check point system was lame. Linear corridor style feel. Overall I was pleased that I waited for crysis 2 to hit the bargain bin and I will be sure to do the same with crysis 3 unless they turn it around.
 


I often hear a lot of people say that Crysis 2 is gorgeous, and for some reason I really don't see it. I play it in DX11 with the High-Res pack and maxed out in Ultra, and to me the game reminds me of something last-gen. I mean, I'm sure the problem is with me - I'm just not seeing it right, I guess. But it looks...I have a hard time explaining how I see it. Do you know what Crysis looks like on Xbox 360/PS3? EA just released Crysis for download a few months ago on console. Anyway, that is what Crysis 2 looks like to me. I guess the best word would be "choppy". Or maybe that's a bad description - it just looks very video gameish and polygonal (as opposed to Crysis, which looked very clear). Where as Crysis (and even Crysis Warhead) reminds me of real life when I play it, Crysis 2 reminds me that I'm in a video game. I am not so much talking about object quality, or even texture quality, but rather an overall look and feel to the graphics engine that just doesn't seem as clear.

It just doesn't seem as clear - sorry I can't word it any better.
 
I agree pcgamer81, I think the textures are muddier and 3d objects have less physics to them. In the Original Crysis I remember tires being blown out, trees being torn down, and heck even throwing explosive cans into the enemy and shooting them mid throw during gun fights. Those were some intense fun arse battles.
 


Actually before you had a born-again moment, you made a rash of posts about how YOU thought Crysis 2 looked gorgeous. lol

Personally I think it's a good looking game. I like the look of the first Crysis better but I don't find it graphically superior. To me they are both about equal in appearance. Crysis 2 has some nice vistas that challenge the original when you happen to find a good spot and have the graphics cranked w/ dx11 and hi-res texture packs.
 
Crysis 2 has impressive effects and lighting. The dx11 overlay is fairly impressive on the effects side but it will.never get rid of the cartoonish feel sometimes because it is essentially the same game as console.
The tesselation, hbao and other effects are what is impressive.
 
Crysis is the best, followed by Warhead, followed a distant third by Crysis 2.

Yes, 2 was good technically and the gameplay is well honed. But I just can't stand - or understand - all this post apocalyptic nonsense. Just how many games have been infested by this wretched theme? Precisely what is the attraction? The only game where it ever worked in my opinion, is half life.

Crysis - like Far Cry - won hearts and minds because it was beautiful. It had a feel-good aspect about it because it made you gasp at its loveliness. Far Cry 2 fell because it was too depressing. Crysis 2 is the same imho. And it's why I can't bear to make it past the first stages of Fallout, despite loving Oblivion.

Games these days seem obsessed with being downers. The world is depressing enough as it is. We need stuff that fires the imagination and lifts the spirits, please.
 


You're right.

However, I believe I only bragged on Crysis 2 for like the first day I had it. And it's not because I had a change of heart - it's because after I got Crysis 2, I made the mistake of going back and playing Crysis 1 again.

Crysis 2 is an excellent shooter, and that includes graphics - when judged by shooter standards. Just not when judged against Crysis/Warhead standards. When compared against those two games, in my opinion it falls short.

You have a good memory.
 
Optimally (for me at least) they will release a more open-world game but retain the suit functions from Crysis 2. For me, that will probably make for the most fun game experience if Crysis 3 comes to be. Something about the clunkiness of the suit in Crysis and Warhead that, I hate to say it but it almost ruins the gameplay for me a bit. Just feels like you're being held back a bit from your own personal potential as far as on the fly changes go.

Then again, I also grew up playing games when FPS's were much faster paced than they typically are now, so that probably contributes to some of my frustration with the slower style of Crysis's suit functionality.

For lack of a better way to describe it, the suit functions feel more natural to me in Crysis 2 and I feel like I can use the suit more the way that I actually would want to if such a thing existed. I wouldn't want to be dicking around in submenus or doing button double taps lol.
 
I thought the middle-mouse suit switching in the first game was perfect. Once you get good at it you can do it without even thinking....almost like a reflex.

Crysis was instantly responsive to movement control. It was like driving a human sports car.....yeah, it may have taken a little practice to get used to shifting gears, but once you got it down you could do stuff that isn't even possible in Crysis 2.

That's why it's so hard for me to play Crysis2....they turned the character into a slug. There is no "speed" mode, which is one of the most tactical of all the suit options you had available in the first game. You press "jump" and there is that awful delay (thanks to their idea to "integrate" the power mode by during button-press duration). And the biggest sin was removing advanced movement controls like lean and prone. Any FPS that really wants to make stealth part of the gameplay should have these movement characteristics.
 
Prone had to go for Crysis 2 because they were trying to build a legit multiplayer aspect of the game. Couldn't have had prone position in a game that already had stealth, or there would have been non-stop camping beyond anything you see in a call of duty game.

Really hated the middle mouse system. Utilizing the extra button push was fine but the arbitrary mouse movement afterward... lol thank god they didn't try to turn Crysis 1 into a multiplayer game, and Wars was to be frank a flop. That control setup is just way too clunky. Could have had such a better experience if they'd just made all of the suit functions hotkeyable without that even more horrendous double tap crap lol.


On an unrelated note, Stringjam: you recommended Shift 2 to me back when I was looking to get back into racing games. Enjoyed it a lot, and ended up grabbing Dirt 2 and Dirt 3 which are both an absolute blast. I'm sure you've played them both, but if not, they are really good with wheel+pedals if you set the wheel light. Lots of high degree whips.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom