Crysis Very Boring game?!

ST Dragon · Post by **ST Dragon** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 12:02 am

I tried Crysis for the 1st time, but after playing it for 1-2 levels I got so bored and couldn’t be bothered going through the rest of the game (even if I enabled God mode!)
I found the gameplay very lacking, the battles with the Koreans dull and and the story line very reparative & uninspired.

Seriously, does the game improve any more when the battles with the Aliens take place later on, or is it so boring all the way to the end and a waste of time?

A few years back I had tried Far Cry but similarly I got very bored and didn’t bother finishing it (I did play for a bit longer though, up to level 5-6)

Is it just me, or is Crytek just good for graphics showcases and nothing more?
Their games feel more like benchmarks and are full of bugs!

Ed Oscuro · Post by **Ed Oscuro** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 12:39 am

There is a thread for all your FPS related posts here, and I'm sure Crysis was mentioned at some point.

kengou · Post by **kengou** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 12:43 am

I think you just don't like open tactical FPSes. I love Far Cry and Crysis. Both games got exceedingly good reviews, with lots of praise going to the gameplay of each. They feel slow and maybe boring because you can't run and gun and even hope to survive unless you're really fast and really accurate (Crysis gives you a few more options for running-and-gunning, especially Warhead, but it's still difficult). Both games demand a more stealthy and careful approach, as well as lots of tactics. What I really love about both of Crytek's games is the open nature. They present you with an enemy base and some objectives, and you're free to do whatever you like to accomplish those objectives. You need to really interact with the AI to get through; they actively hunt you if they're alerted. They're not exactly intelligent, but they present a good challenge and you do need to "outsmart" them.

So, that's why I like Crytek's games. It all comes down to the tactical elements and open nature that really make the games stand out from the rest, in my opinion. You probably just don't like their type of games. To each their own.

Ed Oscuro · Post by **Ed Oscuro** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 12:48 am

Far Cry and Crysis are tactical FPSes? That's news to me.

I think the Delta Farce games are pushing it...tactical to me means something from the Tom Clancy series (pre-Vegas and GRAW, although GRAW is the more tacticool of the two by far)

Neon · Post by **Neon** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:31 am

I even hated Half Life 2

The good thing about FPS is multiplayer, not the single-player game. HL2 is only worth getting for the mods for me

MathU · Post by **MathU** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:53 am

I'm not a fan of Half-Life 2 either. I got the Orange Box when it came out and I had never played anything in it before. Everything but Team Fortress 2 has practically zero replay value. Portal dumbfounded me the most, as it's an extremely short, simple game. I would never purchase a game that short standalone (including replay value), and I would never rate it highly.

jpj · Post by **jpj** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:55 am

pc market has been stale for years, don't waste your time

Twiddle · Post by **Twiddle** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 2:29 am

jpj wrote:pc market has been stale for years, don't waste your time

clear sky is pretty cool tho

ST Dragon · Post by **ST Dragon** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 2:38 am

What about the upcoming Aliens Vs Predator 3 PC game?
If it turns out to be anywhere near as good as AVP2 was, then it will be one hell of an awesome game, utilizing modern graphics, physics and all.
Even though, I would have preferred if Monolith was working on this, rather than rebelion. AVP1 was not that great imo.

http://www.avpgalaxy.net/website.php?ma ... ction=avp3

Oh and Doom 4!
I wonder when that’ll come out

Twiddle wrote:
jpj wrote:pc market has been stale for years, don't waste your time
clear sky is pretty cool tho

STALKER was horrible!, is this any better?

BryanM · Post by **BryanM** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:18 am

Not so optimistic about the DOOM 4. Expecting more shovelware wrapped in pretty art.

Once long ago a coworker made fun of my computer because it wouldn't be able to play the FPSes that were the style of the time well. My response: "I've already played DOOM."

I guess waiting for Serious Sam 3 or Duke Nukem would be most pragmatic..

Any FPSes out there with random levels?

Twiddle · Post by **Twiddle** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:22 am

ST Dragon wrote:
Twiddle wrote:
jpj wrote:pc market has been stale for years, don't waste your time
clear sky is pretty cool tho
STALKER was horrible!, is this any better?

If you liked Doom 3 but hated STALKER I have nothing more to say to you

ST Dragon · Post by **ST Dragon** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:49 am

Yep! Stalker is one of the worse FPS I've ever tried if not the worse. I've had a lot more fun with Rise of the Triad, Wolfenstein 3D and some other obscure DOS FPS than Stalker. It was not even worth the download!

Don’t get me wrong with Stalker, I don’t like linear mindless shooting FPS, but what’s the point of receiving all those meaningless & boring objectives that slow down the pace and ruin everything? (Having to go out and kill some mutant boars?! WTF?!!)

ST Dragon · Post by **ST Dragon** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:52 am

BryanM wrote:Not so optimistic about the DOOM 4. Expecting more shovelware wrapped in pretty art.

Once long ago a coworker made fun of my computer because it wouldn't be able to play the FPSes that were the style of the time well. My response: "I've already played DOOM."

I guess waiting for Serious Sam 3 or Duke Nukem would be most pragmatic..

Any FPSes out there with random levels?

How long has Duke Nukem Forever been in development anyway? "Forever"? !

I vaguely remember that they've switched around a dozen of 3D engines.
I doubt that if and when this is released, anybody will care that much, as the hype will have worn of by then (If not all ready)

UnscathedFlyingObject · Wed Apr 15, 2009 4:16 am

Most FPS nowadays are boring. Too many military/war themed ones and not enough of games like Duke Nukem 3D, Heretic/Hexen, and Doom. Creative stuff.

Edit: id should do a sprite based FPS again. Nostalgic idiots like me would be all over it.

Edit2: Rise of the Triad was awesomo too.

The Coop · Post by **The Coop** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 4:43 am

I've yet to play through Crysis, or S.T.A.L.K.E.R.. The first one is a bit too much for my PC (I tried the demo, and it ran alright in some spots, and really... REALLY poorly in others), and the latter one basically vanished into thin air.

dcharlie · Post by **dcharlie** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 6:39 am

Far Cry and Crysis are tactical FPSes? That's news to me.

not tactical in the traditional sense of the old Rainbow 6 series, but yes, as long as you aren't playing on the easiest setting you can't just run around and head shot people (well, i guess if you are insanely good, you maybe can, but it's pretty much asking for trouble!) It's that aspect of Crysis that really makes the game what it is and i emphasise with how you feel because when i first started playing crysis i felt exactly the same, but after time you start seeing how the game world works and, well, i thought it was a pretty good game.

The Aliens part is , for me, where the game went down hill a bit. It's all graphically great, but the trying to get through situations vs. Koreans was where it was at it's best. There's so many ways you can approach the situations that it always feels fresh. and so many good situations where the various suit abilities add so much tactical variety that many peoples play throughs of the game are markedly different.

Obviously God mode reduces the game to a mindless romp through "OMG GRAPHIX!" land. The game isn't easy, and it does take time, but for me it was well worth the effort.

Elixir · Post by **Elixir** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 8:59 am

Crysis is no doubt the most overhyped game of the decade. I mostly have issues with the fact that the game costs $3000 to play properly, and that it's basically a tech demo which is already showing its age.

TF2 is pretty much the only FPS game that still interests me, but even then, classes need adjusting.

ST Dragon · Post by **ST Dragon** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 9:19 am

Elixir wrote: TF2 is pretty much the only FPS game that still interests me, but even then, classes need adjusting.

What's TF2?

PROMETHEUS · Post by **PROMETHEUS** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 10:21 am

The first half of Crysis isn't that great, but it gets pretty exciting in the second half or last third, I would say it's really good stuff. Overall I think the game is good but its gameplay is too simple. It manages to still be good because the environments and events can be well designed, creating an interesting and intense atmosphere at times, and also because there is a lot of variety in the gameplay in the latter parts (control a tank, a craft, zero gravity, against new small alien enemies, against new big alien machines...). The game is definitely too much of a pain to run well though, it won't even run perfectly on medium settings on a high end PC 1 year after it came out : that is NOT ok.

As for Half Life 2, I think it's one of the greatest solo games ever created. It is a true masterpiece, with a lot of great gameplay ideas and log and stunning environments and atmosphere.

dcharlie · Post by **dcharlie** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 10:21 am

Crysis is no doubt the most overhyped game of the decade.

well, each to their own. My take is that the graphics (still haven't seen anything that bests it yet IMO, but it's only a matter of time) detracts away from the game being very good in it's own right. It doesn't stand up well as a competitive shooter, but as a single player shooter it's different enough and interesting enough to set it apart.

I mostly have issues with the fact that the game costs $3000 to play properly, and that it's basically a tech demo which is already showing its age.

depends how you define "properly", it's running on machines way lower than $3000 and looking pretty good and at good frame rates at high resolutions. If you wanted to run everything on ultra and want 60fps at 1080P locked without any of the config tweaks then yeah, it's at least $3000 (if it's possible at all without config tweaking).

If you have it and it's running on a modest machine, have a look for the config tweaks. It really does make a world of difference.

it won't even run perfectly on medium settings on a high end PC 1 year after it came out : that is NOT ok.

that'll all depend on what the spec is, but you should also look at the tweaks. I have a fairly oldish PC (6600 quad, 6800GTS) and i'm getting very good results @ 1080p - though i've switched off AA completely as at 1080p i don't personally miss it as much -and very solid frame rates (with the exception of the ending which can sink down when everything is going down and parts of the ice levels).

As for Half Life 2, I think it's one of the greatest solo games ever created. It is a true masterpiece, with a lot of great gameplay ideas and log and stunning environments and atmosphere.

the feeling of claustraphobia that HL2 gives is amazing. The music is also amazing when it kicks in. HL2 ep 2 is also great, the ending was crazy.

PROMETHEUS · Post by **PROMETHEUS** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 11:40 am

dcharlie wrote:
it won't even run perfectly on medium settings on a high end PC 1 year after it came out : that is NOT ok.
that'll all depend on what the spec is, but you should also look at the tweaks. I have a fairly oldish PC (6600 quad, 6800GTS) and i'm getting very good results @ 1080p - though i've switched off AA completely as at 1080p i don't personally miss it as much -and very solid frame rates (with the exception of the ending which can sink down when everything is going down and parts of the ice levels).

E8600, 4GB high end memory, HD 3870X2... High end spec, more than one year after Crysis came out. And my framerate is between 40 and 60 at medium settings : not enough. That is NOT ok. And I do know the tweaks and stuff, I have a good knowledge of that, along with overclocking and everything, which shouldn't be needed to make a damn game run well.

dcharlie wrote:
As for Half Life 2, I think it's one of the greatest solo games ever created. It is a true masterpiece, with a lot of great gameplay ideas and log and stunning environments and atmosphere.
the feeling of claustraphobia that HL2 gives is amazing. The music is also amazing when it kicks in. HL2 ep 2 is also great, the ending was crazy.

Yeah, the outdoors scene are amazing also, and the general feeling of persecution by the official forces, and how you're feeling overwhelmed by uncontrolable forces and events... I thought episode 1 and 2 were amazing too. This game is a true work of art.

mortified_penguin · Post by **mortified_penguin** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:15 pm

S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl with the Oblivion Lost mod was hands down one of the best gaming experiences I've ever had. Spending the night hiding in the rafters of an old warehouse because A.) it's pitch black outside and I can't afford a suit with night vision, B.) there is 'something' running around down there and it sounds pissed, C.) I'm down to two Makarov clips and a few AK rounds, and D.) my vision is a little strained from all the vodka I had to drink to quell the radiation all amount to one of many hopeless situations you might find yourself in, and I love it. An open world mixed with heavy survival aspects is a winning combo for me. Plus I adore the novel and film the game is loosely based on.

To stay on topic though, I was pretty disappointed in Crysis at first but my rig isn't beastly enough to run it beyond medium and I do think it's the poster child for style over substance. However, I stuck with it and in the end I came away pretty satisfied. plus I think it's as tactical as you want it to be. I find playing it stealthy is much more rewarding then going in guns blazing. In the end it's personal preference of course, but to me, nothing beats an open world and weapon customization.

ST Dragon · Post by **ST Dragon** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:41 pm

My rig is an Intel C2D 6600 @ 2.4GHZ, 2GB DDR-2 800MHZ & GeForce 8800 GT 512MB (Core:600MHZ, Memory:900MHZ, Shader:1512MHZ), WinXP PRO SP-3. latest nvidia drivers 182.50 and can play Crysis at High Detail, 1024x768, No AA, DX9.0, around 45-60FPS

How well would it play using DX10 in Vista?

I also, noticed that the Very High Details are grey and not selectable in the graphics menu. Is that feature only available in DX10 & Win Vista or is a limitation of my GFX Card or Drivers?

dcharlie · Post by **dcharlie** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 2:45 pm

I also, noticed that the Very High Details are grey and not selectable in the graphics menu. Is that feature only available in DX10 & Win Vista or is a limitation of my GFX Card or Drivers?

DX10 is only available for vista (without ancient black arts and wizardry), though Vista and DX10 aren't sometimes what you want for faster frame rates.

Again, the config tweaks even for XP manage to unlock some DX10 like effects more efficiently than rendering them "as crysis intended"

The reality is , amazingly, that playing this under vista as is would probably see that frame rate drop. Memory becomes more of an issue under Vista and that 2 gig suddenly doesn't look so swell (though that is only part of the issue)

Get the tweak pack for now, that set up , especially with a GF8800 512mb, should be able to cruise through the game with it looking great at 1024x768.

B.) there is 'something' running around down there and it sounds pissed

haha , and it's this that made S.T.A.L.K.E.R. so great.

kengou · Post by **kengou** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:08 pm

Elixir wrote:Crysis is no doubt the most overhyped game of the decade. I mostly have issues with the fact that the game costs $3000 to play properly, and that it's basically a tech demo which is already showing its age.

TF2 is pretty much the only FPS game that still interests me, but even then, classes need adjusting.

That's just ridiculous. Just this year my roommate built a PC with enough power to run Crysis on high, for around $700. My $1500 gaming laptop from over two years ago, which was mid-range then, plays Crysis on high at 800x600 (which is perfectly playable and looks great), and on medium at 1024x768. And that's a laptop, which inherently costs a lot more than a comparable desktop.

If you're ever spending $3000 on a PC, you're doing it wrong. I'm just tired of this hyperbole.

ST Dragon · Post by **ST Dragon** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:40 pm

mortified_penguin wrote:B.) there is 'something' running around down there and it sounds pissed

Ha Ha!

But would it go away by it self? Didn't you have to go down eventually and shoot its head off or somehing?!

mortified_penguin · Post by **mortified_penguin** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:51 pm

Eventually yeah. That's what made it fun. Do you wait until daybreak and hope for a lucky shot or just make a run for it? Good times.

ST Dragon · Post by **ST Dragon** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 4:00 pm

No wait, couldn’t you persuade and bargain with it or give it some candy?

I guess all the creatures you encounter are not exactly very friendly...

Super Laydock · Post by **Super Laydock** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 10:16 pm

Wasn't Crysis notorious for it's extremely high system requirements?
Even up to the point that only the best of the best at the time (which should still be way above normal configs today) could play this in any decent way.

All this news surrounding it made me skip it already before even laying eyes on it.

captpain · Post by **captpain** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:55 am

I spent about $850 on my computer and it runs Crysis pretty damn well at near-Ultra settings at 1600x1200 (no AA, however).

shmups.system11.org

Crysis Very Boring game?!

Crysis Very Boring game?!

Re: Crysis Very Boring game?!