Crysis vs Crysis Warhead vs Crysis 2 (PC)

Page 17 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

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



You can call it self-aggrandizing, but to me it's just a simple description of the age-group that the game is developed for. Sure, there is no hard line, but there are generalities that can't be ignored.

There's nothing wrong with developing for adults. There are stories, themes, mechanics, and pacing that the average young gamer simply doesn't like, so, at least in my opinion, there is definitely validity to describing a game as "adult" or "mature."

I have no problem with games designed for young players (kiddies)......hell, I play them and love them as well. I enjoy them for what they are, and I don't expect the things I look for in a game aimed at older players.


I probably came off a bit harsh in my original post, but I was so utterly disappointed that CryTek took the lazy / boring way out with the bow and arrow aiming system. For a company that started out with such high gunplay mechanics standards, I just can't believe they didn't use real bow aiming mechanisms......it would have been so much better!!
 


I don't think that you can safely say this with any certainty, and I would bet that you'd be shocked how many 30 year old men there are actively playing these games like Halo or COD or whatever usually ends up as being coined as more simplistic or inferior in some way. I think that you might be better off suggesting that there are games for different mindsets, but I don't think age actually factors into it as much as you're presuming it does.

And perspective of course is important as well. To you, the guy playing Halo has a childish mindset. To the majority of adults in the world who do not play video games at all, Metro 2033 and Witcher 2 are equally childish.
 


So are you saying all video games are "childish" just because they're are video games... hmm, okay...

Do you view films and books in the same way? Do you think all films and books are "childish" even if they have an adult theme and adult content?
 


I think video games are childish because they are games . That isn't insulting as a concept to me, since I define any part of my adult personality with video games despite my enjoyment of them.

If you don't intellectually differentiate between books and games then that's fine, but I do. If you want to know what it would take for that line to be blurred in my eyes, I suppose there would need to be a game that delivers poignant mature commentary in a universally appreciable way. As it stands now, even the most "mature" games (Witcher 2 or Metro for instance) are ultimately about shooting and slashing mutants and ne'er-do-wells as the only means to an end, which is very much sophomoric to me if I'm suddenly being asked to hold it up to the same standard that I hold books and my judgement of them.

Anything that requires the nurturing of my inner child to not only enjoy but even entertain is childish, even if it is of high quality. You could say the same for books. People who don't have much of their inner child remaining tend to have as little interest in video games as they do in Alice in Wonderland.
 
Films and games are totally different.

I sit back to watch a film and enjoy the presentation i am shown.
Games involve you as a person to do what you think is right.
Childish or not, it is the art and story in a game that makes a game what it is.

Rayman would not be child looking if it did not choose that art theme and instead go with the frostbite 2 engine...

Don't get me wrong, I think trying to draw the comparison between film and books and games is so irresponsibly abstract that I wouldn't even bother to broach it, but since I was pressed for an answer I gave the best that I could.
 
Going back to Stringjam's old man rant:

I totally agree - many games have been dumbed down to free-look/movement arcade pop-up shooters. I do enjoy a challenge in the gameplay itself. Metal Gear Solid 3 was one of my favorites because of the in-depth camo and health systems. They're a far cry from the simple cover/cloak mechanism or regenerating health so common in today's games. Also choosing between a motion sensor, sonar, and thermal goggles was fun. Nothing was done for you - I liked it.

I also remember reading a review of Red Steel 2, and the reviewer liking the fact that before reloading you had to flick the Wiimote to the side to eject the spent cartridges. The reviewer also said a mini-game where the player had to insert every bullet into the chamber correctly would make for some intense and more-immersive gunplay. I'd play a game like that.

And I love the thought of an enemy sneaking up behind me and slitting my throat while reloading or in cover. That was one reason I loved the original Halo so much. The first time I met a Zealot, I freaked out because he killed me in one hit so many times, even though I emptied my assault rifle every time. Also, in the original Crysis, when you get to the graveyard and realize there's KPA in cloaked nanosuits, I legitimately got scared for the first time. Love those moments.

Regarding this most recent debate:

Entertainment is as entertainment does. There's nothing inherently mature about it. Nothing productive gets done, it's what we do when we want a break. Nothing wrong with music, games, books, art, movies, sports - some are childish, some aren't. I don't agree that all video games can be grouped under childish, but I agree that most are made without any real challenge (not difficulty) to the typical adult.
 



Yes! That was one of the best moments of the whole game! That's the kind of AI behavior that I wish we could get more of. I remember flanking back to the side of one of the trees during that fight and cloaking......I turned to look around and saw the blurry cloaked movement of one of the nano-snipers only a couple of feet away from me - almost jumped out of my chair.

I would love to play an entire game with AI utilizing that kind of sneaky, scary behavior. They have the tech.....they've had it for a long time, but for some reason they don't think we want it(?) I don't understand......it seems like developers believe that all we really want is a whole bunch of dumb soldiers to mow down, but I would rather face 2 or 3 really smart enemy NPC's than a horde of idiots.
 


Okay, it seems you have taken to that question wrongly, and if I'm honest, it seems to have gone straight over your head. Why you are trying to make this personal by trying to question my intellect I don't know. I feel the term you used earlier "self-aggrandizing" sums up your post perfectly.

My question is literally just that, a question, not my opinion.
 


I'd agree with this.
 


I took your question as presumptuously rhetorical, since it would fit the position that you adopted on the subject. If it's a literal question then I don't see the issue, since I was good enough to answer it genuinely despite assuming that it was not genuine in nature. Though, that seems to have itself gone over your head.
 
"What this entails is that our future, all the new games that we're working on, as well new projects, new platforms and technologies, are designed around free-to-play and online..."


Suck. Do we really need any more online military MP's?

This is the last thing I ever wanted to hear straight from CryTek. :pfff:
 
It is good. Best part is no camping. You have to play a LOT to earn enough for upgrades, but the default weapons work fine. Also it's pretty and free.

[flash=1024,600]http://www.youtube.com/v/Ns3vTIxrp50?version=3&hl=en_US[/flash]
 
Time for more screenshots. Custom ToD I've been working on....playing through the first level at evening / night could make for fresh change.

customtod1.jpg


customtod2.jpg


customtod3.jpg



Lighting in CryEngine2 still amazes me. I think CryEngine3 beats it, but I don't think anything in 2007 was even close to it.
 



I'll tell you what surprised the freeking heck out of me in the lighting department, Two Worlds 2... I know that sounds crazy but the lighting was one of the best I've experienced.
 

Yeah the outdoor scenes are great, but what amazes me more is the foliage and grass! The open fields are amazing to me. I mean, can we get that in some Battlefield or Crysis, or at least Skyrim? Grass looks so patchy and flat in most games.
 



I think the main reason why most games don't give you a realistic sense of grass is that high grass density is a huge FPS killer.

That's why you see them use so much ground texture resembling grass, interspersed with sparse actual grass objects.


I experimented a lot with grass density when I was messing with making a map in CryEngine2. It is really hard to get a decent compromise of grass density, draw distance, and decent FPS.

In these two shots I have 100% grass density on the floor....as dense as I could disperse the grass objects - - also long draw distance and no use of sprites. It looks awesome, but you never see it like this in a game because it kills the framerate.......all that waving grass.

highgrass1.jpg



highgrass2.jpg
 
Stringjam, those pics are amazing. MAN that field looks good. I bet an HD 7970 could still tear it up with that amount of grass... Just have to wait a few more years when that level of power becomes affordable.

Well, not you guys. You buncha Crossfirin', Eyefinityin', SLIin', Surroundin', top-of-the-line buyin', mod-lovin', n00b-pwnin', no-scopin', kill-streakin', Bulldozer-hatin', console-sneerin', hardcore, hard-fightin', hard-fartin', sons-of-a-rich-man, PC gamers!