Crysis news/info thread

Alan00000

Newbie
Joined
Dec 15, 2006
Messages
668
Reaction score
0
More CES videos of crysis keep coming , and is by far the best one yet i think.
Check it out!

www.incrysis.com
07012416jf.jpg
 
Thats my back ground now btw. Its just a perfect screenshot.
 
As good as the graphics actually are, some of these more recent screenshots look almost like cutscenes, or just renders. Anyone else feel the same?
 
That is an ingame screenshot just at an advertisement angle.
 
Graphics mean next to nothing if the gameplay is shit. That's all I have to say.
 
I hope you're right. It looks purty.

Hi Malfy. Its been a long time. Get on aim sometime :) Hit you up with a vent.

If you check out the CES videos you can tell the GFX are exactly like that ss.
 
That screenshot is boring as all hell.
 
Meh. The same thing is said about gameplay in every single thread about Crysis. Nobody cares anymore and it just incites flamewars =/
 
Graphics look great as always but the screen just smacks of lame. Sorry. :/
 
Everything that i'm seeing says Far Cry 2, and i Far Cry was shit in the first place so why should i care anymore?

I think they've really gone overboard hyping this.
 
Yeah it looks pretty, but i've played Deus Ex and i doubt Crysis will be anywhere near as good as that.
 
Graphics look great as always but the screen just smacks of lame. Sorry. :/

That's what I was thinking....I have no hope for this game, people will buy it for the graphix, much like doom3, then cry in the corner when they realized they just bought another game that reminded them of Goatse at every turn.
 
That's what I was thinking....I have no hope for this game, people will buy it for the graphix, much like doom3, then cry in the corner when they realized they just bought another game that reminded them of Goatse at every turn.

I don't think that many people will think of Goatse when they are seeing some beautifully rendered tropical scenery.

I'd recommend you take a rorscharch test.
 
People that are saying this game is just graphics at this point are just delusional. Simple as that.

If you cant see why this game will be INSANELY fun then you really need to keep your head in check.
 
Of all the people to say to someone "Keep your head in check" it's Asuka. Irony to the max.
 
Of all the people to say to someone "Keep your head in check" it's Asuka. Irony to the max.
I bet if someone did a Pacman with Crysis engine asuka would go "OMG GOTY GOTYGOTY!!!1" :LOL:
 
Well, isn't Crysis going to be like, the first DX10 title? That alone should warrant it a decent amount of hype. People want to see what the engine is capable of.

I'm looking forward to playing around with the game's physics and interactions with objects. No games I've played have really allowed me to flip an enemy's jeep realistically by blowing out their tires. No games I've played have shown me fully destructible buildings.

Yes, graphics and little things like that should grant it a fair bit of hype. A smart story would certainly be nice, but all of the other achievements are good enough at this point.


For the record, I'm not dumb and I do in fact appreciate great storytelling and unique gameplay, but when a game can immerse me in its environment as much as Crysis can, that's got to say something positive about it.
 
For the record, I'm not dumb and I do in fact appreciate great storytelling and unique gameplay, but when a game can immerse me in its environment as much as Crysis can, that's got to say something positive about it.
Very well said.

If anyone has even bothered to watch any of the interview videos, they say that they have worked on the gameplay more than any other aspect of the game, including the graphics. I seriously cant see why people are already so convinced that the gameplay is going to suck. Play it first, then make your decision. That goes for me as well. I might get it and be thoroughly disappointed, but saying that the game is 100% shit at this point is just ignorant. Unless you just don't like FPS games.
 
Yeah it looks pretty, but i've played Deus Ex and i doubt Crysis will be anywhere near as good as that.

it will be as good as that if you have 2GB of memory + 8800GTX /R600

and Vista OS
 
Well, isn't Crysis going to be like, the first DX10 title? That alone should warrant it a decent amount of hype. People want to see what the engine is capable of.

I'm looking forward to playing around with the game's physics and interactions with objects. No games I've played have really allowed me to flip an enemy's jeep realistically by blowing out their tires. No games I've played have shown me fully destructible buildings.

Yes, graphics and little things like that should grant it a fair bit of hype. A smart story would certainly be nice, but all of the other achievements are good enough at this point.


For the record, I'm not dumb and I do in fact appreciate great storytelling and unique gameplay, but when a game can immerse me in its environment as much as Crysis can, that's got to say something positive about it.

Pretty much summed up what i meant in a smarter format.


Very well said.

If anyone has even bothered to watch any of the interview videos, they say that they have worked on the gameplay more than any other aspect of the game, including the graphics. I seriously cant see why people are already so convinced that the gameplay is going to suck. Play it first, then make your decision. That goes for me as well. I might get it and be thoroughly disappointed, but saying that the game is 100% shit at this point is just ignorant. Unless you just don't like FPS games.

Thats what i like to hear.

At least some people can understand what Crysis can bring to the table.
 
Compared to Far Cry, what is the expected amount of sandbox-ish-ness? Is that a word? I liked Far Cry better than D3 and HL2 at the time simply for that reason and no other. I'm not saying it fits the complete definition of sand box, but I digress.

If Crysis shares that aspect I'll get it. Otherwise I'm not so sure. I'm not getting Vista so I don't even know if it's an option. Regardless I don't care about the graphics. They could use orginal Far Cry graphics for all I care.
 
I found funny that if this where a console game everyone would hav sayd is prerendered and fake
 
Compared to Far Cry, what is the expected amount of sandbox-ish-ness? Is that a word? I liked Far Cry better than D3 and HL2 at the time simply for that reason and no other. I'm not saying it fits the complete definition of sand box, but I digress.

If Crysis shares that aspect I'll get it. Otherwise I'm not so sure. I'm not getting Vista so I don't even know if it's an option. Regardless I don't care about the graphics. They could use orginal Far Cry graphics for all I care.

It's supposed to be more sandbox-ish, with weapon mods and suit powers, plus even bigger maps and really destructible environments. If you liked Far Cry despite its awful story and stuff (like me) then Crysis should be even better. And it's coming out on XP.
 
It's supposed to be more sandbox-ish, with weapon mods and suit powers, plus even bigger maps and really destructible environments. If you liked Far Cry despite its awful story and stuff (like me) then Crysis should be even better. And it's coming out on XP.

Good to know, thanks. I honestly haven't been keeping up with it. Maybe it's time to start. By the way is Vista required, or simply a way to get the maximum out of the game with DX10?
 
Vista is not required to play. Vista is required to use DX10, to get the best visual experience.
 
"Gameplay > Graphics"

O, more clich?s please! Stop ondervalueing graphics, just like you couldn't say "motherboard > CPU" (your PC wouldn't do a damn thing without either) games that try to bring a convincing world wouldn't work without the graphics. Graphics ARE very important to a game, graphics is the thing that needs to convince you this is a real world you're walking around in.

And the graphics do add a lot of value to Crysis, just take a look at the combat visuals. Good combat visuals make combat a whole lot more fun and Crysis definitely has the best combat visuals up to date. The bullet impacts, the explosions, the environmental destruction add a lot to the 'feel' of combat. Shooting and blowing shit up looks fun in this game. Many games, including HL2 (and I'm a huge HL fan), can't really get the feel of combat right. Although with HL this varies, the explosions are very good but many guns feel kind of lackluster.

However, Halo also had great combat (best yet I think) but they didn't really succeed making it a good game overall. Hopefully Crytek can implement the great combat into a good overall game.

The story doesn't look that horrible, a frozen tropic seems like an original and interesting setting to place a game in. Although I must say I like the premise of fighting the Korean, human, soldiers a lot more than fighting aliens.

Don't like the whole 'nanosuit' thing, looks cheesy.
 
But you can easily create a convincing world without fancy graphics or special effects. To say that they are paramount to the immersiveness of a setting is going a bit far - they actually arent all that necessary.
 
Gears of War had some of the best graphics i've ever seen, but i wouldn't call Gears of War particularly immersive. Most of the time, the environment feel like any other game with slightly better conceptual design.

And the people who think Crysis looks like it will have great gameplay and are having a go at those who don't, there is a reason why alot of people aren't convinced that great graphics equals great gameplay. Take Doom 3 for example. It was easily the best looking game ever when it was released back in 2004, but goddamn was it such an average game.

I'm just saying, if anything its more beneficial to be sceptical about a game before its release, because if it turns out to be a bad game then you're not surprised and you're glad you didn't waste your money on it. But its even better if it turns out to be a great game that takes you by surprise with its quality.

There is a ridiculous amount of hype surrounding Crysis simply because of how pretty it looks, yet there is very little to suggest that this game will be anything another than a polished version of Far Cry except some Nano-suit powers and some fancy physics which may or may not add to the gameplay.
 
I don't think anybody here is saying that graphics are making the gameplay in Crysis. Most people are saying that it's adding to the immersiveness.

Face it, watching a good CG move (such as Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within for example), is far more immersive than watching good cartoon (for lack of a better comparison). While both are generally computer generated, one is much more easy on the eyes to believe it's actual reality.

I believe that is the point most people are trying to make. Crysis is aiming to make photo realistic effects, adding to the immersiveness. While you could say the cartoon is, for an easy comparison, FarCry. Sure the characters look like humans, but it's just not as convincing. I'm by no means saying "OMFG Crysis is teh RL." Crysis is just another step twards photorealism and complete environmental interaction. That is why people are so excited about it. It looks good, and is more visualy believable than any other game to date.

People that are talking about gameplay at this point can only be talking about immersion, the nanosuit or the story. I can't really see any reason for anybody to say that immersion is stupid, so I suspect that people who are saying that the "gameplay" will suck are really saying that the story is stupid. The story has little to do with gameplay. The other half of those people don't like the idea of the nano suit. That's really the only valid reason for not liking the "gameplay" at this point. Some people might or might not like it, it's all preference. Even at this point it's hard to judge.
 
Back
Top