casualcolors :
The fanboys are strong in this thread. The thing that I never really understood is how people suggest that Crysis 2 somehow butchered the Crysis storyline. The story was already incredibly weak (Warhead was the only compelling aspect of Ling Shan imo). The characters were cool, but I never had the sense that they were abandoned since I was never particularly attached to Nomad, Psycho or Prophet in the first place. They're all awesome, but I thought Alcatraz was way more visceral. Alcatraz has more in common with the user, since the nanosuit is foreign to him. It was also a clever way to re-introduce Prophet since you had to have that feeling that his character was destined to die ever since halfway through the first game.
All of that said, it seems like they've set up a scenario where you could get Nomad, Psycho and Prophet (through Alcatraz) in the next Crysis game.
The suits making people go nuts and crap was alluded to in the very first Crysis game. Prophet comes back from the island having violent hallucinations and delusions and it is all laid out for you.
The weakest point in Crysis 2 was the ending. Compared to the first two games though, it's a well developed end. The ending to Crysis 1 and Warhead weren't good at all. They were horribly abrupt (and particularly the bosses were pathetic).
All of that said, I think Warhead was the prettiest of the three games. Crysis 2 was actually the most fleshed out story element. Crysis 1 is the weakest of the series but it gets a lot of love for being the innovator.
All of that said, it seems like they've set up a scenario where you could get Nomad, Psycho and Prophet (through Alcatraz) in the next Crysis game.
The suits making people go nuts and crap was alluded to in the very first Crysis game. Prophet comes back from the island having violent hallucinations and delusions and it is all laid out for you.
The weakest point in Crysis 2 was the ending. Compared to the first two games though, it's a well developed end. The ending to Crysis 1 and Warhead weren't good at all. They were horribly abrupt (and particularly the bosses were pathetic).
All of that said, I think Warhead was the prettiest of the three games. Crysis 2 was actually the most fleshed out story element. Crysis 1 is the weakest of the series but it gets a lot of love for being the innovator.
+1
Yeah, as bad as I hate to do it (seeing how I really love Crysis) I have to agree. Crysis is not that good story wise. Anytime a developer releases a comic book between games to fill in the blanks and set the stage for the upcoming game, well, let's just say that's a little flaky.
I can understand Nomad being killed off. He had the personality of Mr. Spock on Quaaludes.
I do kind of miss Psycho ("I'm british, you muppet!").
I also agree that Warhead looks the best, but only when compared to vanilla Crysis. As I stated before, I think Crysis has better graphics (but only when running Real Lifesis and the Natural Mod). The rocks still look terrible in Warhead, but the snow and cave levels were jaw dropping - I don't think I've ever seen anything that amazing.
I do have to disagree with Crysis being the weakest. I liked Crysis better than Warhead, but only because it was longer, and has a lot more mods (that's a big deal with me).
I will say this, I am running Crysis 2 in DX11 with the High-Res textures, and also using the MaLDo texture pack and blackfire mod. The game is a real crusher running it that way. That is how Crysis 2 is meant to be. And while I agree that among the vanilla versions, Warhead looks the best, a heavily modded Crysis 2 puts them all to shame, IMO.