Crysis Review

By Jim Rossignol Published 13 November, 2007

Muscular Action.

Version tested: PC

It was about two hours into Crysis when I began to realise just how good it might be. The first couple of hours had been fairly unremarkable - there were some predictable first-person cut-scenes, a linear intro level, some spooky goings-on, US military deployment, you know the sort of thing. I had watched the sun come up across the island and seen the kind of tropical Far-Cry-revisited scenes that we'd all been expecting. I had even barrelled through the first of the villages and used some of the suit-powers (which your buffed up future marine has at his disposal from the start) to kill off some enemies. But it wasn't until a little later that I sat back and actually looked at it.

Crysis is much more than a highly accomplished graphics engine, to be sure, but let me just get this across to you for a moment. Playing on a high-end PC (for Crysis runs best on a Quad Core beast with a DirectX 10 card) it was so good that I had almost failed to notice the sheer immensity of visual information it was delivering. The Crysis environments are so naturalistic, so close to realism, that you find yourself thinking: "of course, because that's how things are supposed to look." It takes a few moments to step back and really look. I was in a stretch of a forested valley. The sun was shining down on the rocks across the valley, reflecting light with that certain stony gleam that long-polished rocks have about them. Those same sunbeams were filtering through the trees and casting dappled shadows across the exquisitely detailed forest floor. This is that HDR stuff deployed as it was meant to be - with a slight haze that jungles have about them, with the yellow sun dropping beams of light through the waving branches overhead. The jungle was alive. Ahead of me vegetation flicked and moved: enemies approached.

'Crysis' Screenshot 1

This chap is with you through parts of the game. He stops for neither tea nor biscuits.

And that's pretty much where my eyebrows went up and I muttered mild obscenities: I was playing a game where (at least some) vegetation moved as people passed through it. The fronds of a palm tree bent and flicked well before I could see the soldier who approached along the path. In the firefight that followed I levelled a great swathe of greenery as the bullets flew and grenades detonated. Branches fell from trees and saplings collapsed into the undergrowth: it was my own little re-enactment of the minigun scene from Predator. But it got better - thanks to the capacity of the nano-suit to give me a temporary cloaking field - I stopped being Arnie [surely Bill Duke - Predator Ed] and became the Predator in the space of about ten seconds. I reached out and grabbed a soldier by the throat. I took a few moments to examine his horrified, dying face in all its incredible detail before hurling him backwards into the undergrowth.

'Crysis' Screenshot 2

Yeah, it really does look a bit special on those hyper-accelerated graphics cards of the future.

I just need to say something about Crysis's fiction and functions at this point. You're a super-soldier sent to a Pacific island to investigate dodgy business perpetrated by the apparently invigorated North Korean army. You're equipped with a suit of hi-tech armour that can be configured into various modes, and you rely on it for almost all situations. Even if you run out of ammo, the suit can get you past the enemies. The nanosuit has a constantly recharging reservoir of energy, which means that you can use any of the powers for a brief period before you'll need to rest up for a few seconds. The default is armour mode, which allows you to soak damage and also rapidly heals you. That's the the mode the suit will revert to if you decloak. Then there's strength mode, which reduces your defence but allows you to punch people to death, to punch Humvees to death (although I never managed that car-flip thing from the trailer), and to leap on top of buildings like a superhero. Speed seems to to be the least useful mode, allowing you to dash a short distance at a stupendous rate. Best of all though, is the cloak itself. This allows you to move a short distance invisibly, and allows you to effectively disappear from pursuing enemies for a few seconds, or to close in on them for sudden, close-quarters violence. It's not the first time we've seen this kind of thing - Halo 2 did it - but the implementation in Crysis is impossibly entertaining.

'Crysis' Screenshot 3

Fights happen a fair bit. Here's one happening right now.

Anyway, back to the wooded valley. As the first stage of the firefight subsided, I realised there was a second enemy patrol closing in. They were wading across the nearby river towards me. I crouched and killed a couple of them at range - headshots are a boon - but I was soon out of rifle ammo. I would need to scavenge more. Crysis' group AI kicked in and the soldiers fanned out through the jungle to try and surround me. I cloaked again and headed further into the jungle along the valley. I'd seen some snipers hiding in rock formations on the far side of the valley, and I wanted to get behind them rather than face the main patrol up-close. Using the strength-mode jump I bounced across the rocky waterfall at the far end of the river valley and then, after hiding to briefly recoup energy, I cloaked and closed in on the snipers. I finished them off with a couple of close-range shotgun blasts, before taking their weapons to attack the patrol on the far side of the valley. Unfortunately, because I hadn't taken the time to watch the valley a little more carefully, I was jumped by a second group. They hit me hard at close range. Killing one, I backed up and cloaked as I passed behind a rock, losing them for a moment. I lobbed a grenade into where I thought they'd go, before closing in to kill two more by the water's edge - grabbing the first by the throat, I threw him into his buddy, killing them both and sending the bodies sprawling across rocks and into the water.

I took a moment to watch their bodies bob and then gently float away in the current, pushing aside reed-like water plants as they went. Reflective mood past, I closed in on the final, retreating soldier. He splashed across the river, trying to get to cover. A few freshly scavenged rounds from my rifle saw him tumble and take his last splash. Serenity returned to the wooded valley and I spent a while staring at the light in the trees, before I bounced away up the hillside towards the next objective.

Crysis is filled with these kind of periodic zones of action. Some of them, such as the harbour level, are huge, and you'll find yourself juggling tasks, stealing vehicles to get about, while simultaneously gawping at the huge conflict that occasionally unfolds around you. I played through each of the major areas several times, on a range of difficulty levels. I had a totally different experience each time. Just by taking a slightly different route you'll end up in a fight you hadn't anticipated. Bump the game up to hard and suddenly you're thinking about whether enemy bullets are going to go through the fence you're about to dive behind, or whether you really can rely on grenades to put that machine-gun nest down. Gung-ho action is default on the easier settings, but as the enemy damage output increases with difficulty, you begin to be a little more cautious.

Playing around the with suit's powers, or simply trying to set up the sneakiest, most intricate assaults is awesomely satisfying. Rather like Half-Life 2's sudden expansion of interactive possibilities with the gravity gun, Crysis' suit turns most of the island into a violent playground. You'll find yourself playfully lobbing chickens at enemies one moment, and then savagely hunting them down like some half-invisible monster the next. Hearing your soldier buddy radio in and say "go quietly on this next objective" as you're halfway through the process of driving a Humvee through the roof of a tin shack (just to watch it collapse realistically) has a kind of perverse glory to it. Crysis is bombastic and bold, but caters just as much to stealth and surprise.

In fact the overall story of Crysis almost seems incidental against the backdrop of so many potentially awesome encounters. I'm sure some people will be disappointed by the eventual alien-powered denouement, or mystified or bored by turns as they discover what lies inside the mountain. I'm fairly confident that people will feel slightly uncomfortable with the screeching caricatures that constitute most of the Korean soldiers that you end up butchering, but at least the main sidekick characters aren't annoying. In fact, if I had to give a word to the overall single-player campaign, I would be patchy. There are great highs, such as landing on a ridge at night, under fire from artillery, but also occasional muddles where the pace just cannot maintain and you end up rooting about in sheds looking for ammo, or simply feeling a bit lost, in spite of the green arrow that urges you ever onward.

'Crysis' Screenshot 4

Go inside the hut and shoot the shelves. Honestly, its ace.

That said, the overall story is far more sprawling and complex than I had expected - with loads of variation in the challenges laid out for you and a bunch of stages of development beyond what I had expected. Even the strictly linear bits don't seem overly predictable, although the flying-squid shooting gallery stuff at the end is (as so many people had speculated) rather less interesting than fighting gangs of human enemies in the first two thirds of the game. The pace and sense of danger at the end of the game is nevertheless commendable - you do feel as if an unstoppable alien menace is stirring. It's almost a shame that they didn't make a little more of the frozen jungle environments that we had seen talked about so enthusiastically in the previews of this game.

There's also a gnawing sense that much of the larger world is lost to you. These huge geographies sometimes seem wasted, since you just end bombing through them, or simply stumbling onwards without finding secondary objectives to pursue. One particular night-time section had me running for ten minutes to get through it - being pursued by a helicopter that I didn't have the firepower (or, more accurately, the inclination) to deal with. Thanks to the ever-replenishing energy reserves of the suit I could basically run for cover and bodge it until I reached the next waypoint.

'Crysis' Screenshot 5

Here's that wooded valley I was talking about, minus angry Koreans.

Naturally there's multiplayer too, with all participants gifted with the hi-tech powers of the nanosuit. This comes in the form of standard deathmatch, and the rather less standard Powerstruggle mode. This mode provides a Battlefield-styled large scale combat in which two teams battling for control of a number of large military facilities. These provide power to central vehicle-production centres which will, eventually, allow either side to create a game-ending vehicle that can be used to destroy the opposing base. Nukes go off pretty much routinely. Crysis' multiplayer is extremely robust and provides a huge, open palette for organised teamwork to create some really interesting tactics - the versatility of the nanosuit sees to that. However, I can't see this multiplayer offering making too much of an impact on the general PC scene. It's too clinical to compete with the heavy-duty franchise-empowered design monsters like Enemy Territory, and too complex to appeal to the rest of PC gaming... (they'll be knee-deep in TF2).

'Crysis' Screenshot 6

The aliens aren't exactly rubbish, more... disappointing.

So Crysis is imperfect in a number of ways, but it's nevertheless a stupendously solid game for the PC. It's an FPS that exhibits some of the technological tricks we've been promised over the last few years while still offer a cogent, often thunderous, action-shooter experience. Its incredible looks are perhaps only let down by some of the art direction. It gives us a lavish world, but it's perhaps not applied imaginatively enough. The aliens are a worthy challenge at times, and provide a suitably pumped-up dramatic conclusion, but they never really surprise or inspire the kind of awe that they're presumably intended to. The level design might have been just a little tighter too. I found myself feeling like huge sections of the game had been wasted, and really I just wanted go back and play through the harbour again, or that wooded valley. Perhaps even more significantly, I wanted to see what the complex physics model and destructible scenery might be able to do in a more urban environment. The island wasn't quite enough for me. It needed a proper town, or at least some kind of island resort.

This is a game that feels supremely engineered, like a precision machine, or a German automobile. It makes Half-Life 2 seem old and frail, but by the same token it does nothing to diminish the imaginative achievements of that series. Crysis is impressive, but not imaginatively bold. Nor does it engage us like some other great shooters - such as BioShock - have done with their world and their personality. It's far better than Far Cry, and it's clearly going to create a rabid army of fans, many of whom I hope will plug themselves into the absurdly easy-to-us level editor and create us more single-player campaigns. Personally I'd like to see where this astounding world-forging technology will take us. And I can't wait to see what Crytek will do next.

9 / 10

If you're an FPS-eater of any calibre then you should probably buy Crysis. It's going to run on any machine that will run Half-Life 2, although without a tricked-out DirectX 10-supporting behemoth you're going to miss out on some of the atmospherics.

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Jim.

About Jim Rossignol

Read more articles from Jim by visiting the Jim Rossignol archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (150) Latest comment 4 months ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • ScottyXTUK #1 4 years ago

    This is the game I have upgraded for, I know I will love this. Demo runs very well for me on high settings, although I have spent a lot on upgrading lately.

    So many top games out at the mo tho.

    Edited by 1 at 13/11/07 @ 08:01

  • Fitzmogwai #2 4 years ago

    So better than / worse than (insert game of choice )

    /shoots self. Dies.



    On a more serious note, I'm just not excited about Crysis. I haven't had the inclination to download the demo, watch the videos, ooh and aah at the lush scenery. I think it's a combination of Vista / DX10 and memories of the Far Cry trigens.

    I think it'll be a budget purchase in a year's time for me... Sorry Crytek.
    Edited by 1 at 13/11/07 @ 08:12

  • davisorle #3 4 years ago

    The game demo looked more than sunning. It made me lve my c as well. Was worth the effort and money!. Well I an't wait to play this game and DO use the editor indeed! I'll spend muh time there thoughcause of work dont have muchbut little at a time will do the work.

    Crytek rulz... Great job guys. And thanks for the benchmark ;)

  • davisorle #4 4 years ago

    @WOPR

    "Will there be a Wii version?"

    lol! Man sorry to tell you that but wii cant even play Crysis on recorded video :p
    There is no way on earth they would even bother making a cheap version of this game for Wii. I bet you anything.It's really impossible and pointless.

  • TheDudesRug #5 4 years ago

    Looks like my children will be going hungry again.

  • Fitzmogwai #6 4 years ago

    Why haven't you already sent them to work? It makes paying for the upgrade cycle far easier. Put them into adverts. Or, if they're too ugly and foul-smelling even for commercials, put them up chimneys!

  • zozart #7 4 years ago

    Seems like a very fair review. The demo was ace but to be honest I'm more excited about the technology and what the modding community will do with it than anything else!

  • ProtoformX #8 4 years ago

    I like the little note at the end just confirming that the game will run on anything that runs Half-Life 2. This Christmas is really gearing up to be a fantastic one game-wise. My proiblem is because no-one will buy me games as presents I have to get the ones i want out of my own pocket. :-(

  • DB2k #9 4 years ago

    TBH after seeing the videos for Far Cry 2 I'm more excited about them. However since I'll never play either unless they come out on console, I'm not that arsed.

  • RedPanda #10 4 years ago

    Post deleted at 14:31:59 28-01-2012

  • neuroniky #11 4 years ago

    Crysis puzzles me. It is a game so much ahead of its time that, by not being portable to one of the current gen console and being so advanced technically (not to mention the fact that it requires Vista), its currently unplayable the way it is supposed to be played by 99% of the players out there. The remaining 1% will love it for sure, expecially since they probably upgraded their rig just to play it, but it's still puzzling how a company has concentrated all their efforts in a game and an engine that's so blatantly next gen oriented. And with the next gen still so far away, this engine may be too old when the next comes. It's so strange that a big company invests so much for a market so small (and I'm not thinking about the PC market in general, just of the small part of the PC market that is able to play it).
    Unless it scales very well on lower specced PCs, which seems quite impossible given the level of realism I've seen on the video.

    /NeuroNiky leaves the review with a ? floating above his head

  • Hamflank #12 4 years ago

    I have a feeling this game would've gotten a bold 6 if it wasn't for the graphics.

  • Caimbeul #13 4 years ago

    ooh sparkly.

  • Killerbee #14 4 years ago

    Sounds great. I loved Far Cry in spite of the cheesy story and voice acting, so this has been very much one to watch for me.

    This:

    If you're an FPS-eater of any calibre then you should probably buy Crysis. It's going to run on any machine that will run Half-Life 2, although without a tricked-out Direct X10-supporting behemoth you're going to miss out on some of the atmospherics.

    My ageing PC runs HL2 pretty well, but with games like Oblivion and Bioshock I feel I'm really pushing it too hard. So - is Crysis actually worth getting for humble single core P4, Geforce 6600GT owners like me or should I wait till the new year and try to scrape together enough cash to upgrade my PC first?

  • Kryon #15 4 years ago

    This is why I hate PC gaming, I have to spend so much cash upgrading the fricken thing :(
    Anyway, this game does look worth it I spose...

  • cyacomini #16 4 years ago

    mac version maybe?

  • Darren #17 4 years ago

    I found the demo a bit disappointing really and put me off buying the game somewhat. There's nothing wrong with as such, it plays well enough, looks amazing and has some impressive A.I. and physics, it just all feels a bit... well... Far Cry 2-ish, like I'd played it all before. OK so the full game may well be completely different but I'm not willing to spend £30 to find out, particularly as my setup isn't capable of really doing the game justice.

    Although I got the demo running on my system at high detail, the framerate wasn't too great and a game of this type needs to be played on maximum detail I feel. Turning the geometry down to even Medium causes objects and scenery to popup jarringly as you move around and High causes the framerate to drop. I think I'll wait until I've bought a new PC next spring/summer before I buy this game, by then it'll likely be less than £20, the hardware will be powerful to run it properly and it'll be worth getting just to see what all the fuss was about.

  • Mho7276501 #18 4 years ago

    can i just make clear that it DOESN'T require vista. That is just one of those myths that is really annoying as no-one in the know has ever said it does.

    In fact the demo ran better on XP.

  • OnlyMe #19 4 years ago

    If you have to spend money on better graphics to enjoy a game, then you know it's all about graphics, and not so much about the game. Is it that kind of game?

    No I haven't read the review, but so far nothing I've seen of the game has interested me at all.

  • Talha #20 4 years ago

    2007: The Year of Games Living Up to their Hype. I haven't played it, but I can feel the excitement in the review. I agree that the main potential lies with what the community (and Crytek themselves) can do with this tech.

    By the way, who will second Crytek's nomination as Developer of the Decade?

    Hey guys, will my 1.86 GHz Core 2 Duo rig with 2 GB RAM and an 8800 GTS run it? Given that my resolution will be limited to the paltry 1680x1050 of my LCD?

  • UncleLou #21 4 years ago

    Good review, pretty much as I expected. You say you felt some levels are a bit wasted, but isn't that part of the magic? You kow when you first play it that there's more to explore, and you can replay levels later - I usually never replay any games, but I spent more time in some levels in Far Cry than I did in other full games.

    Crysis puzzles me. It is a game so much ahead of its time that, by not being portable to one of the current gen console and being so advanced technically (not to mention the fact that it requires Vista)

    For the 100th time: It doesn't require Vista. :p

  • EraSerX #22 4 years ago

    I played the demo and wa a bit disappointed by the gameplay. The graphics are awesome on my DX10-PC, but I wasn't too impressed with the gameplay. Rather crappy vehicle controls and the AI was quite boring.
    Great tech-demo, rather boring game.. I had more fun playing Bioshock, TF2 or GoW on PC..
    Edited by 1 at 13/11/07 @ 08:53

  • UncleLou #23 4 years ago

    Oh, and shamelessley stolen from here:

    4. Play on Delta difficulty. Regardless of your skill level. It’s a fun game on Normal, but on Delta it’s truly extraordinary. It’s not about nerfing all the damage you do, they’ve actually done difficulty modes right. There’s no crosshair so you have to use iron sights aiming, enemies speak entirely in Korean so you can’t comprehend their tactics talk, there’s no grenade warning or enemy glow, the AI is more perceptive and dramatically more accurate, and health regen in Armour is slowed from a sprint to a crawl. Oh, and bullets kill you. They really, really kill you.

    So the game becomes entirely about engineering the situation, stalking your prey in Cloak mode, waiting for one man to stray far enough from the pack that you can abduct him and toss him quietly off a cliff. It actually requires less twitch skill than playing normally, because you simply can’t win uneven firefights. You’re forced to strategise around them, and the interestingness of your options goes up dramatically as a result.

    Going back to Normal afterwards is just embarrassing - the enemies are like comedy B-movie goons, the red glow on enemies who’ve shot you is like putting stabilisiers on a bicycle, and Armour mode might as well be called Invulnerability. Worst of all, it encourages just hanging back and taking pot-shots at long range, which completely misses the point of the game and all the really fun stuff.

    Plus, Craig tells me that in the game’s config files this is referred to as ‘Bauer’ mode. Are you really going to play on something other than Bauer Mode?

    It's all true.

  • Ignatius_Cheese #24 4 years ago

    Interactive benchmark software FTW quite obviously...

  • Cylinder #25 4 years ago

    My pre-order can't come soon enough. I've been replaying the demo in various ways for the last two weeks!

  • duncanf #26 4 years ago

    This makes HL2 look old and frail because it's pretty? The first couple of hours are unremarkable and predictable but it's all ok because when you really look at it it looks like something approaching reality? I'm so disappointed Eurogamer. I thought you were above all this graphical graphical cock-whipping.

  • Trane #27 4 years ago

    The demo is good fun and look nothing short of stunning on my rig, but does anyone else feel the game is just a little superficial?

    I am enjoying it but can't seem to wrap myself up in the action like I can with HL2 and many other shooters over the years. Maybe I'm being harsh and the game gets a bit meatier further in, I'll give it a chance a few months down the line I think, once I'm done with the glut of other games higher up on my wishlist.

  • Wobble #28 4 years ago

    gah, spoilers :(
    I didn't know it had anything to do with aliens.

    The scenario you're in sounds a lot like Forever Peace, great book (Available in the trilogy, Peace and War) and is the main reason I'm going to buy this now. Joe Haldeman ftw.

  • neuroniky #29 4 years ago

    @everybody: it doesn't require Vista per se, but IIRC it requires Vista to be played with all the effects turned on, and since this is a game that has to be played at high to highest graphical detail, I think Vista is pretty much a prerequisite to enjoy the full experience. Unless I'm missing something.

  • UncleLou #30 4 years ago

    I found the demo miles ahead of Half-Life 2 in the gameplay department (which I loved because of the art direction, mainly) - AI, level design and integration of physics (even the grenades feel, um, physical) make it a lot more fun to play for me than HL2 ever was - I am really not sure how you can say it's superficial, it probably has as much depth as an action-FPS can ever have.

    Try what I posted above and play the demo on Delta.

  • mcmonkeyplc #31 4 years ago

    My Children need WINE!

    I had a quick go on the demo and worked fine on medium. I'll have a play around....update my drivers to see if it can run any better.

    I have a DX10 card so it damn well better run!

  • FlamingCarrot #32 4 years ago

    I am fully kitted up for this so cover me in chocolate and feed me to the lesbians! Its a cracking month for games.

  • Xerx3s #33 4 years ago

    Did anyone mention Halo 1, 2 or 3 already?

  • Pac #34 4 years ago

    "In fact, if I had to give a word to the overall single-player campaign, I would be patchy."

    "it would be patchy" surely.

    Unless you are patchy.

  • Downside #35 4 years ago

    so let me get this right... spank £1000 on a new mobo, obese RAM , a quad-core processor and a £300 graphics card, then i can play a £30 game with a lovely jungle level. That's a £1030 investment for an hour of fun.

    Not an investment I'm going to make any day soon.

    Crytek are in a strange business, can sales of this game really make them any money? (Bearing in mind most of the PC "gamers" are going to download it from Piratebay and not pay them anything).

    /goes back to playing COD4 on the 360

  • drumbaby #36 4 years ago

    After spending all that money on the bits needed to play it it was going to get a 9, generic Euro fps or no.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #37 4 years ago

    So we have

    - Bioshock
    - Halo
    - Hl2:E2
    - Portal
    - TF2
    - COD4
    - Gears of War (if you, like me, didn't play through it last year)
    - and now Crysis

    all at 9 or 10 out of 10. Bloody hell, that's a lot of FPS games to get through!

    Surely this is turning into the finest year for games there ever was! All Western, too...

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #38 4 years ago

    Crytek are in a strange business, can sales of this game really make them any money?

    One word: bundling.

    Surely the only commercial thing that would justify such an undertaking is kickbacks from graphics card manufacturers.

  • Hypercube #39 4 years ago

    Maybe someone could explain this to me - do you have to have Vista to run DX10? Or can it be run on XP? I've got a card that will hopefully handle it...

  • afghan_jones #40 4 years ago

    Weird really, cause the graphics are obviously a selling point (if not THE selling point) but on PC, the graphics always depend to an extent on the user's rig, meaning that for 90% of gamers you might as well knock it down to a 7 or 8 as they wont get to see the full graphical whizzbangs that give the game its edge.

  • Dr_Dave #41 4 years ago

    "It's going to run on any machine that will run Half-Life 2, although without a tricked-out Direct X10-supporting behemoth you're going to miss out on some of the atmospherics."

    I find this hard to believe. My old laptop, with an ATI Radeon 9000 Mobility graphics card and half a Gb of memory played Half Life 2 perfectly acceptably, yet died on its arse when it came to Far Cry.

    Are you suggesting that Crysis scales back better than Far Cry did?

    Dave

  • LFace #42 4 years ago

    DX10 at the moment is Vista only.

    There are hacks in the pipeline to get it in xp but to my knowledge there is nothing substantial yet. Theres hacks for some games to enable stupidly high detail in xp that are usually reserved for DX10 in vista, but up to now thats all you have.

  • Darren #43 4 years ago

    @Hypercube - If you want to see the DX10 effects in Crysis then you'll need a DX10 graphics card and you'll need Vista. You can use a DX10-capable graphics card from XP but the game will only support DX9. Microsoft have chosen not to release DX10 for XP, presumably to "encourage" PC owners to upgrade.

  • Trane #44 4 years ago

    "I found the demo miles ahead of Half-Life 2 in the gameplay department (which I loved because of the art direction, mainly) - AI, level design and integration of physics (even the grenades feel, um, physical) make it a lot more fun to play for me than HL2 ever was - I am really not sure how you can say it's superficial, it probably has as much depth as an action-FPS can ever have."

    I don't mean superficial on every level, I just generally don't find it that involving - guess it's personal preference then. (1) Koreans shouting guyaka, and telling me when they reload just makes me chuckle, which I'm guessing isn't the intention.

    (1) - possibly a slight bent on the actual speech.

  • mkreku #45 4 years ago

    What's wrong with me? I thought the demo was rather lackluster and linear (imagine that!) and not at all as good as the Far Cry demo they once released. And I still pre-ordered this game after reading this review. What the hell good does a demo do when I still can't stop my brain from ordering games?!

  • Cylinder #46 4 years ago

    @Trane

    I wouldn't call it superficial. I've been playing on low to medium settings, 1280x1024, on my two year old PC (it still looks amazing though!) and it's the gameplay that draws me back to it, not the graphics.

    I think the multitude of options you have at your disposable in every situation gives it a huge amount of depth. The fact that I havn't tired of the demo level after playing it for two weeks almost constantly is testament to that!

    EDIT: Also, the explosions - [link url=http://www .youtube.com/watch?v=MTSzr8lTf9s
    ]http://www .youtube.com/watch?v=MTSzr8lTf9s
    [/link]

    I would actually describe Half-Life 2 as more superficial (even though it's my favourite FPS), because of its strictly linear design.

    @Downside

    Unless you really do favour graphics over gameplay, spending that much is quite pointless. Just checked the price of my PC online (although I only have Athlon64 3500+ and 7800GT):

    £363, for AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+, Asus A8N32 SLi Deluxe Motherboard, 256MB XFX 7900GT, 120GB Hard Drive, 2GB RAM, 500W PSU from Scan.co.uk.

    That's £363 without even checking around for the best deals on eBay and other stores.
    Edited by 1 at 13/11/07 @ 10:05

  • Xerx3s #47 4 years ago

    Crytek are in a strange business, can sales of this game really make them any money? (Bearing in mind most of the PC "gamers" are going to download it from Piratebay and not pay them anything).

    You are looking at the small picture. Look beyond crysis. This engine will beat most others in the years to come. EA Needs a new engine that doesn't look like the cheapo stuff that they have now. They already have a licence for the UE3 for this but there is not a doubt in my mind that we will see several games in the coming years from EA with this engine. By that time, everyone will be able to run this engine.

  • Nomgle #48 4 years ago

    Downside 13-Nov-07 09:42:26
    so let me get this right... spank £1000 on a new mobo, obese RAM , a quad-core processor and a £300 graphics card, then i can play a £30 game with a lovely jungle level. That's a £1030 investment for an hour of fun.

    Eh ?

    Why would anyone buy a seperate games PC to play Crysis ? The only investment you need to make, is on a £129 graphics card for your existing PC - a 512MB 8800GT is a fine choice at that price point.

    Your calculations are out by almost a factor of 10.

    Downside 13-Nov-07 09:42:26
    Not an investment I'm going to make any day soon.

    That's because you pulled the figures out of your ass.

    Downside 13-Nov-07 09:42:26
    Crytek are in a strange business, can sales of this game really make them any money? (Bearing in mind most of the PC "gamers" are going to download it from Piratebay and not pay them anything).

    Again, your viewpoint is skewed because you pulled the figures out of your ass.

    There's plenty of money to be made from PC gaming, now that the hardware is so cheap. Hell, at £129 it's cheaper than any of the three main consoles !

    Downside 13-Nov-07 09:42:26
    /goes back to playing COD4 on the 360

    How on earth did you afford to buy a 360, when you can't afford a video card for your PC ?

    DISCLAIMER : You obviously need some sort of semi-modern machine to actually plug the graphics card into. And you should have already taken advantage of the fact that 1GB RAM sticks can be had for £15 these days. If your PC is from the stoneage, then you are a sadist. That will be all.
    Edited by 2 at 13/11/07 @ 10:15

  • Xerx3s #49 4 years ago

    So we have
    [...]
    - Gears of War (if you, like me, didn't play through it last year)
    [...]
    all at 9 or 10 out of 10. Bloody hell, that's a lot of FPS games to get through!

    GoW isn't an FPS.

  • asphaltcowboy #50 4 years ago

    What is it with CryTek and making an awesome game where fighting humans in jungles is incredibly satisfying, only to ruin the second half/last third of the game by fighting crap monster or aliens or zombies that are in no way as fun as the first bit?! Seriously, WHAT THE F*CK ARE YOU DOING?

  • Trane #51 4 years ago

    "I wouldn't call it superficial. I've been playing on low to medium settings, 1280x1024, on my two year old PC (it still looks amazing though!) and it's the gameplay that draws me back to it, not the graphics.

    I think the multitude of options you have at your disposable in every situation gives it a huge amount of depth. The fact that I havn't tired of the demo level after playing it for two weeks almost constantly is testament to that!"

    You're right mate, the options availible to deal with each situation is definately a pulling point, I'm actually gonna go back to the demo a few times and try to get more out of it I think.

    "I would actually describe Half-Life 2 as more superficial (even though it's my favourite FPS), because of its strictly linear design."

    Oh it's very linear, but that's kinda why I love it. Every part of the jigsaw fits together nicely as you progress and there is a welcoming party (whether good or bad) for you at every turn. I'm not so much of the school of thought that free roaming > everything when it comes to FPS. I'm definately gonna pick this up with an open mind now, but it won't be for a few months yet (I'm a busy guy =( )

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #52 4 years ago

    GoW isn't an FPS.

    Pedant :p

  • UncleLou #53 4 years ago

    It's almost funny how people manage to keep up their unfounded preconceptions about the game being a graphics demo despite the review(s) - I wish that sort of silly "I don't own the system trolling" would stay firmly in the console camps - oh well, whatever makes you sleep better, I guess.

  • sharpfish #54 4 years ago

    Good review except for saying that Bioshock was more engaging?? Bioshock engaging? yeah if you think whacking cartoon enemies over and over again with a wrench is engaging.

    Crysis is on a different level to every other game... how can I be so sure? because I would gladly have payed the admission price just for the demo + editor alone which i've had more fun with than any full game this year.

    Anyway, good score.. should have been higher than Bioshock by a long chalk but the sys requirments will always get it marked down because people who have to play it choppy just won't feel as good about it - thank god for my fast system.

  • jlaakso #55 4 years ago

    That did not read like a nine.

    Looking forward to this, yes, but I'm afraid it's too much like Far Cry, and I've really been spoiled by shooters lately (Call Of Duty 4). Then again, I've missed those jungles of Far Cry. Just please don't make me crawl in endless sewers and bunkers again.

    And yeah, I'm thinking Crytek is in the engine business with this one. To think of the crappy one EA's Medal of Honor series is slogging by with currently.

  • NickyJD #56 4 years ago

    So as good as COD4 and Splinter cell Double agent, worse than Halo 3.

  • rudedudejude #57 4 years ago

    "It was about two hours into Crysis when I began to realise just how good it might be..."

    "Unfortunately after checking my bank account realised I had had to spent £1,700 to play this game at a level of detail and frame rate anywhere near decent..."

    "I was playing a game where (at least some) vegetation moved as people passed through it."

    The original Hitman Jungle levels did this, and very well it was done too.
    Edited by 1 at 13/11/07 @ 10:46

  • sharpfish #58 4 years ago

    Oh and yes, pretend the graphics are crap... the best graphics in the world wouldn't keep me coming back if it didn't feel fun to interact with. Crysis feels the MOST fun to interact with in any FPS i've played (And i've played a lot) Next closest is HalfLife2 EP2 and DeusEx/System Shock... after than most stuff pales (apart from Far Cry).

    So it's not just about the gfx, which in places are truly stunning, years ahead of their time compared to ever other cookie cutter/static/poorly lit FPS out there (COD4 is completely boxy and static and yet people are raving about it, and it's on rails like never before!).

    The interaction and the physics are far in advance of any other game, but it comes down to the player to realise/accept this and to immerse themselves fully. If you are jaded going in and think it's 'just about the gfx' (esp if you can't run it in DX10 on Very High with a decent speed) then you'll just see bad points (of which there are some, in my experience aliasing and pop up being two obvious graphical ones).

    The controls are slick, the way your thoughts transfer to the game is almost transparent and very instincitve, press of the middle mouse button and you select the suit mode you need as quick as you think about it, it's exhilarating, immersive and empowering and gives just the right amount of perceived 'freedom' to keep the game time very exciting and compulsive (regardless of game tasks and meta goals). I honestly can't think of any other FPS that feels that way, many are cinematic and 'awesome' and immerse you through narrative or visuals (HL2 EP2 for example) but you still feel like you are consuming a product.. a very good one but it's being consumed and you work through for the sake of it.

    In crysis you don't 'consume' it you live it, you want to be in there in that environment and the bigger your imagination and willingness to be 'in the game' the more you get out of it.

    I spent 4 hours straight one very late night in the sandbox on the multiplayer map that came with the demo, messing around with the realtime 'time of day' lighting, setting up tornados and wind zones and spawing all the hidden vehicles, the physics are astounding, the look of a 'virtual storm' has never been more perfect, and it's not just the look it's the 'feel' thanks to the whole dynamic nature of the engine, every single part is linked to the next, everything is 'for real' (on a simulated level) and this makes it far easier to suspend disbelief which is they key issue with crysis.

    If you take this game and compare it to another good fps and have the same level of disbelief/immersion in both then yeah, maybe it's just above average from a story/goals/gameplay perspective... but if you are the type of player who has waited for this level of immersion for a long long time then you will know straight away that the immersion and believability are through the roof on this title and thus the gameplay no matter how trivial or mundane or'normal' feels a hundred times more visceral and engaging, and that's why this game is a landmark title that only comes along once a decade.

    Frankly the fact they managed to get such good gameplay in AND the finest graphics the PC has ever seen is something to be applauded, most devs when the write a new engine barely manged to put any compelling gameplay in at all.

    @ above post > "By the way, who will second Crytek's nomination as Developer of the Decade? "

    I will. And I don't care who agrees because i've not seen any other company come close to what Crytek have tried to do with their engine, they show a passion for the technology and a drive/commitment to furthering the immersion factor far in excess of any other company. To write the game off as all 'graphics' and no gameplay is to do the entire industry a diservice and could ultimately serve to set us all back another ten years, back to cookie cutter fps design, 'safe' games, lowest common denominator system requirements...

    this game stands alone and yes it's true can only be full enjoyed by those with top systems (and even then it's pushing them) in a year or two as more people get even better/newer systems there will be more people understanding just how well this engine does stuff and how they shoudln't disregard it just because they can't get into the game due to low performance or unrealistic expectations.

    10/10 from me. If Bioshock could get that from many sites when it's a 7 at best then I can easily say this game deserves a ten. And yes games can get ten, it's a ten for 2007, maybe in 2009 it won't be but right now it's way ahead of the competition.


    Edited by 1 at 13/11/07 @ 10:48

  • aldo_14 #59 4 years ago



    Looking forward to this, yes, but I'm afraid it's too much like Far Cry, and I've really been spoiled by shooters lately (Call Of Duty 4). Then again, I've missed those jungles of Far Cry. Just please don't make me crawl in endless sewers and bunkers again.

    Based on the demo, I thought it was a lot like Far Cry - but the addition of the suit and especially the cloak made it a fair bit more interesting and tactical than that game.

  • UncleLou #60 4 years ago

    "Unfortunately after checking my bank account realised I had had to spent £1,700 to play this game at a level of detail and frame rate anywhere near decent..."

    Stop with the nonsense already. You can build a PC for 600-700 quid that will run Crysis perfectly fine, looking better than anything else out there.

  • Subquest #61 4 years ago

    If I were a console gamer, I wouldn't be factoring in the cost of my pc/mac that I use for internet/multimedia/work etc. when I'm working out the cost of my gaming hobby.

    Therefore, the cost of PC gaming is the difference between a regular PC and a gaming PC - ie. the graphics card. In my case this is a BFG 8800GTS 320MB, which cost me £180 - the cost of a Wii. PC games are loads cheaper too. The idea that PC gaming costs thousands is a flawed concept.

  • ZuluHero #62 4 years ago

    on my rig i could only play the demo on low - i guess extra oomf of a decent rig adds an extra three points eh?

    ;)

  • MoGamer2006 #63 4 years ago

    YES! Another FPS - just what we need right now!

  • MrWonderstuff #64 4 years ago

    It is a flawed concept if when you consider that the upgrade path in PCs does involved larger wodges of cash as motherboards/memory etc at some point all need an upgrade. It's no good getting a 8800GTX for a 3800x2 is it? Additionally dont underestimate the need for a processor which wont bottleneck the card.

    I've been a PC gamer for 15 years and this is first AAA FPS title I have decided not to buy knowing that my ageing 7800GS and 3800x2 will not cut it (the demo proved this - for those that want to know how it will run and look use the demo as a benchmark).

    Fortunately I bought a 360 a year ago which has served me well within its nice catalogue of games (a bumper christmas it will be).

    Anyhow I will be upgrading my PC to play stuff like Crysis in 'real-o-vision' but not yet...a year maybe...when Vista has settled and the hardware has tumbled in price.

  • Nallen #65 4 years ago

    What is with all this crying and lies about needing to spend £1000-1700 on a PC to play this game? Maybe if you don't own a PC and you want to play it on a 22" monitor with 16x FSAA on it you could spend that much, but in reality if you already own a PC you're probably talking a couple of hundered max.

    Infact I got my PC almost 10 months ago and it runs it fine and looks great.

  • UncleLou #66 4 years ago

    Conclusion from the Gamespot review, because I can't resist:

    If you put it all together, Crysis is just remarkable. This is a game that pushes the envelope in terms of both technology and gameplay and does so with aplomb. Crysis raises the expectations for every shooter to follow when it comes to graphics, interactivity, environments, immersiveness, AI, and gameplay. Quite simply, Crysis represents the first-person shooter at its finest, most evolved form.

  • sharpfish #67 4 years ago

    Hey uncle lou, I was just about to post that same quote :)

    Ah what the hell, it's that spot on I think it should be posted twice to ram it home to those that don't get it:

    "If you put it all together, Crysis is just remarkable. This is a game that pushes the envelope in terms of both technology and gameplay and does so with aplomb. Crysis raises the expectations for every shooter to follow when it comes to graphics, interactivity, environments, immersiveness, AI, and gameplay. Quite simply, Crysis represents the first-person shooter at its finest, most evolved form."

  • smurphs #68 4 years ago

    @Bloodkult

    strange, my laptop with mobility 9000 and 1gb runs far cry just fine, but doesn't run HL Ep 1 very well at all (haven't tried hl2 though). Doncha just love PC gaming?

  • Derblington #69 4 years ago

    There seems to be 3 people here desperate to prove this game is good...

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #70 4 years ago

    I've been playing Far Cry again of late.

    It's easy to forget just how good some of the early levels of that were. Even it was doing a lot of things that the HL2, Halo and COD games have never attempted. I can certainly believe this is good.

    And as for saying 2x3800 won't run it, my 2x2800 managed alright.

  • miiiguel #71 4 years ago

    So this is the game that ends all games....

    Not better than Halo though..., then again Halo is bigger than video-games, so not a fair comparision.

    Continuing on an off-topic streak: Last night I must have said "OH MY GOD!" about a million times while doing "Ghillie in the Mist" in CoD4, what a brilliant, brilliant level.
    But I must say that that kinda experience wouldn't have worked so perfectly on an office desk. It screams "Big Telly!"; "Surround Sound!"; "Treeeeee Six Teeeeee!"


    multiple-edits: even lousier english.
    Edited by 2 at 13/11/07 @ 12:03

  • Phattso #72 4 years ago

    Make that four, Derblington. I think the game is superb (yes, I've been a bad boy - but I couldn't wait another four days for my pre-order to arrive) and finally supplants Far Cry as my PC shooter of choice.

  • GitSomE_UK #73 4 years ago

    Well I think my PC could handle it BUT I want the full monty experience of DX10 as described in the review I'm a graphics slut and want to see every detail I can and for that reason I need to upgrade. I was like this with STALKER however, my PC just about ran this nicely.

    However, I just can't see what else is coming though down the PC games pipeline... I have all the consoles and I'm really happy with a lot of the games.

    Like someone else on here for the first time in nearly 15 years I'm looking seriously as to whether to bother upgrading my PC gaming machine. Even whether I should (and I never thought I'd say this) bother to continue PC gaming!

    All my day to day stuff is on a mac which suits me fine. Is it worth the cost of upgrading - and yes this will be just under a grand for a good machine that will last a few years.

    BTW I have a shuttle X with a P4 3.1, 2GB Ram and an AGP 512mb X1950 Pro

  • Ravenger #74 4 years ago

    I've just built a quad-core PC with a 640mb 8800GTS for around £700, and it plays the Crysis demo at 1280x1024 high detail at 30fps. It even plays the demo at very high detail (using the config tweak), at a playable frame rate. If I'd known the 8800GT was about to come out, I could have built it for £100 less, and got even better performance.

    No need to spend £1700.

  • dsmx #75 4 years ago

    I have a question for people who own this game does the method of getting vista settings in xp that worked in the demo work in the full game?

  • UncleLou #76 4 years ago

    There seems to be 3 people here desperate to prove this game is good...

    Don't be silly. People are happy that the game is getting good reviews. Strange that you pick on the people who were anticipating the game instead of those who post bullshit without even having read the review...

  • mkreku #77 4 years ago

    Hmm.. I have a quad core CPU, 4GB of 1066 MHz RAM.. but a lowly Ati Radeon X1950XTX 512MB GDDR4. I need to upgrade my GPU, but I don't know what to buy. I know the 8800GT is excellent value for money, but I would rather stick with ATI (for driver purposes). There's nothing for me to buy!

  • NickyJD #78 4 years ago

    1up gave it 8/10, that's the real score for this game, everyone else is just blinded by the graphics.

  • Mho7276501 #79 4 years ago

    @andyjack I can also play my pc games on my HDTV btw, its not too hard to achieve. And HDTVs aren't cheap btw! The decent ones arent any how.

    @nickyjd are you like some kind of retarded baboon? I got to ask man, every crysis thread on this site seem to punctuated by some of your slack-jawed-dumbass-no-idea comments.

    Edited by 1 at 13/11/07 @ 13:11

  • aldo_14 #80 4 years ago

    I know the 8800GT is excellent value for money, but I would rather stick with ATI (for driver purposes). There's nothing for me to buy!

    Aren't the ATI drivers distinctly shoddy at the moment? I know there's a big gap in Dx10 and a smaller (but still present) at Dx9 which has been atrributed to it. Annoyingly, I only bought a new PC with an 8800GTS in August, and now there's the GT out (which reputedly spanks it).

    *sigh*

    C'est la vie

  • Pac-man-ate-my-wife #81 4 years ago

    Got a quick question, will this set-up run it and, if so, how nicely?:

    CORE 2 DUO T7500 2.20GHz,800,4M
    Memory Dual-Channel 2048MB (2x1024) 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM 1
    NVIDIA® GeForce¿ Go 8600M GT with 256MB DDR2 dedicated graphic memory
    Vista

  • dsmx #82 4 years ago

    If you think that this is anything lower than a 9 out of 10 game you are blinded by halo vision

  • Verwandlung #83 4 years ago

    "It's going to run on any machine that will run Half-Life 2"

    half life 2 minimum System Configuration:

    1.2 GHz Processor
    256MB RAM
    DirectX 7 capable graphics card
    Windows 2000/XP/ME/98
    Mouse
    Keyboard
    Internet Connection

    Crysis minimum System Configuration:

    Intel Pentium 4 2.8 GHz (3.2 GHz for Vista), Intel Core 2.0 GHz (2.2 GHz for Vista), AMD Athlon 2800+ (3200+ for Vista) or better
    1GB (1.5GB on Windows Vista)
    NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT, ATI Radeon 9800 Pro (Radeon X800 Pro for Vista) or better
    VRAM: 256MB of Graphics Memory




    Edited by 1 at 13/11/07 @ 13:18

  • Lawlost #84 4 years ago

    Sadly one I will have to pass on. I have given up on PC gaming. I cannot afford the inevitable upgrade for a graphics card on an annual basis and then a full CPU replacement every 3 years. Also got bored of sitting down to play only to find that a patch was required, download upgrade. Upgrade sound drivers, upgrade graphics drivers.... rebooted 3 times. Sat for an hour and now cannot be arsed to play. Bought a 360 (still need to upgrade but at least it is quick)

  • Subquest #85 4 years ago

    People complaining about the costs, and how they are happy with their 360 etc. You know what - they're right. To play Crysis with high or very high detail it'll cost a quite a bit. An amount which to some people would be unreasonable. But a Ferrari costs more than a BMW, which costs more than a Ford. When I played the demo for the first time I was staggered. It looks so unbelievably realistic, more so than any game I've ever seen. Personally, I enjoy being able to experience these technological advances. I suppose it's why Visions Of The Future is my new favourite show on BBC4, and why I'm hoping they invent holodeck technology before I'm dead.

  • skillian #86 4 years ago

    It seems on EG that if the review is for anything other than a 360, the comments thread will be filled with declarations of what is wrong with that platform. Wii, PS3, PC - all are shouted down.

    It is annoying.

  • mkreku #87 4 years ago

    aldo_14: Aren't the ATI drivers distinctly shoddy at the moment?

    I don't know, really. They've been very good to me. I have been very brand independent (Geforce Ti4600 -> Radeon 9800 Pro -> Geforce 7800GS -> Radeon X1950XTX) so far, but the switch from the 7800 to the X1950 was due to horrible Nvidia drivers (especially when trying to show movies through the TV-out where it distorted the picture among other issues). That's the only premature upgrade I've ever made. Never had a problem with ATI or their drivers.

    I do want in on the DirectX10-train though and I might have to bite the bullet and switch to that 8800GT after all. Can't see anything that can compete with it in price/performance at the moment or the near future (although that might change with the 3850/3870). I just wish ATI would usher in their next generation of GPU's already. Nvidia are absolutely dominant right now, with ATI's complete 2X00 failure and all (the same core that the 3XX0 is based on).

  • skillian #88 4 years ago

    New ATIs will be here in January, though the 8800GT is definitely worth the money today. If the ATI can compete it will make this winter an awesome time to get a new graphics card.

  • Katsumoto #89 4 years ago

    Just to reiterate - My new pc cost me 700 quid. It runs Crysis fine on DX10. 700 Quid. Thats two ps3s, right?

    Now, factor in the fact that PC Games cost 20-25 quid new (sometimes less) (assuming you dont for some reason buy all your games from the high street, and even then theyre 10 quid cheaper), whereas console games will cost between 30-40. If, as so many of you bandy on about all the time, you're a "hardcore" gamer, you will make up the extra difference within about 20-25 games. This is ignoring any other arguments, such as the fact the PC has by far the largest back catalogue, the most flexibility in terms of controls, mods, graphics AND of course - pcs can do other stuff! woo! I'm using a PC right now to comment on eurogamer, I rule.

  • Daymare #90 4 years ago

    I have an Athlon 3000+, 1gig RAM and 7600GT. I can play it on medium in 1024* resolution. And since it looks Great like this, I can't imagine how it looks on maximum setting. Usualy games on medium settings look ugly, uglier then much older games on maximum, but not Crysis. Which means one is certain: it COuld be done for X360 & PS3 and still look good enough.

  • tridentz_83 #91 4 years ago

    Seriously, what is WRONG with you Crysis haters out there?? Have you even played it??

    Playing the demo (on low without the graphical bells and whistles), i suppose its safe to say that i've eschewed the fancy graphics, but the GAMEPLAY is all together out of this world. The freeform gameplay represents a wholly revolutionary pinnacle for gaming in general.

    I've played supposed AAA titles like HL EP2, COD4 and Bioshock too, and frankly, neither comes anywhere close to Crysis's greatness. Words can't describe how absolutely banal these linear games are compared to this game... Anyone else tired of linear, cookie cutter, trite FPS shooters need look no further.

  • rhinoxious #92 4 years ago

    Strong words,

    but I'd have to say that the 9/10 score doesn't quite back them up. You are entitled to your opinion of course, and I hope you're right but wouldn't it have got 10/10s all round if the gameplay was really that good?

  • BadBoyBonner #93 4 years ago

    Kotaku has some very funny videos showing some pretty ropey A.I. rountines

    Check them out

    http://kotaku.com/ga ming/crysis/

    p.s. it is the one called horrible A.I.
    Edited by 1 at 13/11/07 @ 14:07

  • tridentz_83 #94 4 years ago

    'Strong words,

    but I'd have to say that the 9/10 score doesn't quite back them up. You are entitled to your opinion of course, and I hope you're right but wouldn't it have got 10/10s all round if the gameplay was really that good?'

    @ rhinoxious

    Perhaps Gamespot's 95/100, PC Gamer's (US) 98/100, IGN's 9.4/10 good enough to convince you?

    But agreed, everyone's entitled to his opinion =)

    More to add, i'm really baffled at Bioshock's critical acclaim (where you kill the same enemies in the exact same fashion rinse repeat ad nauseam). Compare it to Crysis, the variety of play styles is just bewildering...i can safely bet that no 2 experiences are alike if you play the game twice. Please future game developers, do pick up a thing a thing or two from Crysis...

  • tridentz_83 #95 4 years ago

    On another note, i've got to mention that EG's scoring system is... questionable? A 10 for Halo 3?!?

    If Crysis had been out on the 360, it would have been a flat 10, no question about it. Maybe an 8 if it was on the PS3 =)

    I stand to be corrected.

  • foamy #96 4 years ago

    tridentz_83, you foo.

    Maybe cuz Bioshock and Halo 3 actually have some interesting background story.

  • Cylinder #97 4 years ago

    Katsumoto:
    "Now, factor in the fact that PC Games cost 20-25 quid new (sometimes less) (assuming you dont for some reason buy all your games from the high street, and even then theyre 10 quid cheaper), whereas console games will cost between 30-40. If, as so many of you bandy on about all the time, you're a "hardcore" gamer, you will make up the extra difference within about 20-25 games. This is ignoring any other arguments, such as the fact the PC has by far the largest back catalogue, the most flexibility in terms of controls, mods, graphics AND of course - pcs can do other stuff! woo!"

    He's right y'know. Sticking with PC games over the years has saved me a lot of cash. For example, I pre-ordered Crysis from CD-WOW! for £19.49.

  • BadBoyBonner #98 4 years ago

    Not sure if this was just for the demo as I do not own the game.

    but

    Faking the Funk - (**DX 10 Features in Windows XP**) - MUST SEE

    If you tweak the configuration files in \CVarGroups\ by copying and pasting the "very high" settings (1st paragraph) IN PLACE of the "high" settings (last paragraph) the game will load the highest possible settings even though the drop-down menus display "high."

    The difference between "high" settings and the tweaked settings is immense: shadows are deeper, more realistic; the leaves have better reflective properties, better textures; the colours are better; and the level of detail is simply stunning.

    With these settings I'm running the game between 15-25 FPS at 1440x900 and (wait for it) 8x AA, and it looks PERFECT. Best of all, this is in XP.

    So I'm happy. I have XP and I'm playing the game at settings higher than DX9 allows (strictly speaking).

    Give this a try if your rig can handle it.

    **Then someone went on to add


    This guy is telling the truth!

    I'm playing in XP from now on. I have motion blur, depth of field and the light beams on(DX10 exclusive supposedly) without having to put up with 10FPS because I have to have my shaders on very high.

    Until I get a GPU that can play Crysis maxed out I will just stick to XP and these custom settings.

    here is the link
    [link url=http://www.crysis-online.com/forum/index.php?topic=118 37.0
    ]http://ww w.crysis-online.com/forum/index...[/link]

    Edited by 1 at 13/11/07 @ 14:55

  • sharpfish #99 4 years ago

    "More to add, i'm really baffled at Bioshock's critical acclaim (where you kill the same enemies in the exact same fashion rinse repeat ad nauseam). Compare it to Crysis, the variety of play styles is just bewildering...i can safely bet that no 2 experiences are alike if you play the game twice. Please future game developers, do pick up a thing a thing or two from Crysis..."


    Quoted for truth on both counts (games).

    @ foamy, games are for playing dear boy not reading. Thats where Bioshock fails, it's all story and no fun. Me I'd rather read a book if that's all a game's got going for it.

    This surpasses Bioshock in every area except perhaps the story (which is more cliched in Crysis) but a 'decent' story doesn't make a good game (bioshock) when said game is packed with bugs and mediocre, chore like progression with absolutely no sense of discovery or freedom.

    We'll see 3 years from now which game is still being mentioned in people's best games lists... some players take longer than others to realise Bioshock was the most overated underwhelming game in a long while.

  • BadBoyBonner #100 4 years ago

    Sharpfish

    Must admit that by the end - Bioshock had changed from a thing of awe into style over content - great atmoshpere - but it seems to change very little from the first level to the last - which can be good if the combat is, but the combat wasn't good; in addition I guess I just got fed up of being in corridors - may Bioshock RIP as the last great corridor FPS.
    Edited by 1 at 13/11/07 @ 15:00

  • Apologie #101 4 years ago

    Please, somebody tell me how can a game like these get 9/10, and Halo 3 get 10/10... isn't that strange.
    These game is better in every department, yet, it's rated below.

    Edited by 1 at 13/11/07 @ 15:44

  • ruckus #102 4 years ago

    \o/ I killed the vegetation popup (debris on the beach etc.) by removing it completely.
    I might get this but with so much other stuff coming out maybe once it hits £18 from Amazon. I've still to get Stalker - so I'll get this once I've got that.
    I just hope you can edit the alien crap out like the monkeys/trigen/whatever from Far Cry.

  • Apologie #103 4 years ago

    bcolter

    don't you think that Crysis is a better game then Halo 3??? I have nothing against Halo, i mean, i don't like it but it's a pretty decent and competent game..., what i critisize is the ratings..., how come Crysis have 9/10 and games like Halo 10/10... just doesn't make sence.
    Edited by 2 at 13/11/07 @ 15:53

  • FlamingCarrot #104 4 years ago

    Loved Bioshock, loved Half Life Ep 2, loved STALKER. Halo 3 was a bit meh in single player but had its moments. Just looking forward to playing Crysis in full 8800GTX + 3.6 Intel dual core glory.

  • Waldo #105 4 years ago

    What's with all the naysayers? Sour grapes, perhaps?

  • skillian #106 4 years ago

    don't you think that Crysis is a better game then Halo 3?

    Apologie - I'm guessing neither you or bcolter have played the game, so what is the point in asking him that question? His answer wouldn't prove anything anyway, only was score Crysis might have received wher it reviewed by bcolter.

  • rhinoxious #107 4 years ago

    This is obviously a great game,

    but console gamings in such rude health at present, especially with traditionally big PC releases like Orange Box coming straight to console, that's it's bound to be a bit overlooked amongst the seemingly endless high profile and high quality console releases.

    My PC is capable of running crysis at high settings, but I'll be playing COD4 on Live, finishing Orange box on PC, getting Mario on Wii, and playing Mass Effect and A. Creed on 360 before I get round to this.

  • ph101 #108 4 years ago

    @people who think there is no money in developing this game
    - the developers with license the engine and make piles of cash on top of PC sales.

  • Apologie #109 4 years ago

    ph101

    yes, Crysis on top of beign a great game is a marketing tool for the producers to sell CryEngine2... they don't care if the game doesn't sell more copies then COD4 or HALO3... they don't need to.
    Edited by 2 at 13/11/07 @ 16:12

  • dryden555 #110 4 years ago

    i'm a harsh game critic but I'd give this game a 10. This game will never work on a console unless severe cuts are made to the enemy AI and much more. I wouldnt wait for a console version.
    Edited by 1 at 13/11/07 @ 16:22

  • BremXJones #111 4 years ago

    Not wanting to troll, but...
    "Halo 3 actually have some interesting background story."

    Love Halo 3, but - No - it really doesn't.

    KG

  • darc #112 4 years ago

    Wow, first page of this review just sounds incredible. I'm definitely going to download a demo tonight. Not so concerned about the graphics as the strategic implications of the nanosuit. If it were upgradable to introduce some RPG elements, this would be the game of my dreams!

    As for graphics, I bought an 8800GTS early enough to pay a premium for it, but I just don't want Vista right now. Damn Microsoft! I wish that alledged XP DX10 hack would surface.

    BadBoyBonner, with that config file fix you recommend, is Crysis actually making use of DX10 hardware under XP, or is it just emulating the additional effects in software, with a corresponding performance hit?

  • BadBoyBonner #113 4 years ago

    Here is a good thread explaining that it can be done without the config - but actually from the shortcut (even easier)

    [link url=http://fut uremark.yougamers.com/forum/showthread.php?s=68a097b4942a7c8 694a82db4af027905&t=66372&page=2
    ]http://fu turemark.yougamers.com/forum/sh...[/link]

    Here is a good article giving a blow by blow account of Dx9 v's Dx10 v's Dx9

    and lots of comparison images

    As a bonus - it also runs significantly faster through Xp with the slight config change as opposed to with Dx10 through Vista. (29 fps dx 9, 15 fps DX10 vista, 20 fps Dx9 Hack).

    i.e. the dx9 hacked version looks as good as the Dx10 version, doesn't require vista, and runs 33% faster on average.

    [link url=http://www.yougamers.com/news/13605_d x10_possible_in_windows_xp_for_crysis/
    ]http://ww w.yougamers.com/news/13605_dx10...[/link]
    Edited by 3 at 13/11/07 @ 18:02

  • Dynamize #114 4 years ago

    Oooh, nice that it's turned out to be much more than a pretty engine. Looking forward to a weekend of lurking around Korean men in the jungle.

  • deaner #115 4 years ago

    More fun to play than Halo 3.
    Better looking than Halo 3.
    More technically mature than Halo 3.

    9/10.

    There are some reviews money can't buy.

    For every other review - there's Microsoft.

  • Azazel #116 4 years ago

    There are books and even a film being talked about so just shut up

    EVEN a film?? Fuck. It must be good.

  • Apologie #117 4 years ago

    farticusmaximus

    No one is questioning Halo merit..., the only odd thing here is the inferior score they gave to Crysis... Crysis is revolutionary..., Halo is not even evolutionary and yet, they gave 09/10 to Crysis and 10/10 to Halo... i don't give much credit to reviewers anymore, video games jornalism is not reliable anymore, too much biased.

  • dryden555 #118 4 years ago

    In terms of single player gameplay, Crysis beats Halo 3 by miles. Halo cannot compete with the superior AI, truly gigantic levels and sandbox elements of Crysis.
    The reviewer mentions BioShock but the so-so gameplay of that game left many of us veteran gamers bored with everything BUT the story.

  • skillian #119 4 years ago

    People people, if you're gonna moan about 9s, moan about Portal :p

  • rudedudejude #120 4 years ago

    Microsoft payout ftw

  • PearOfAnguish #121 4 years ago

    "a far larger fanbase than Crysis ever will"

    And lots of people thought Hitler was a nice bloke.

  • BremXJones #122 4 years ago

    The story outside of Halo doesn't mean anything. It's not in the game. The story they tell in the game is cheerfully incoherent, from any narrative perspective.

    It's a really great game. BUT it's not Bioshock, y'know.

    KG

  • Katsumoto #123 4 years ago

    @fmaximus: They made a film of Super Mario. They made a film of Street Fighter.

    Your point? I also love how you accuse BremX of having an "irrational and unfounded fear of Halo due to it's MS connotations" despite how he in the same short comment said he loved it. Classic times.

    And we've already dismissed the "lalala you need to be a millionaire to buy it" argument, read the rest of the comments.

  • Scimarad #124 4 years ago

    I really enjoyed the demo but I have to cut the graphics down to medium to get a decent framerate. Shove it on the PS3/360, Crytek, and this time do it properly!

  • crozon #125 4 years ago

    i have a dream that crysis would out sell halo3............fat fucking chance, but heck we can hope

  • oxy4bf2 #126 4 years ago

    At least 1UP is consistent in their reviews. I love sites that are highly critical of new games and allot high scores to only the most exceptional games (a 1-10 rating system really shouldn't be used for video games, but they are for marketing). But when Crysis gets a 9 (still a great score) after Halo 3 receives a 10, I lost respect for Eurogamer. The "evolution" of Crysis from Farcry is ten-fold compared to that of Halo 3 from Halo 2. How can Bungie, with such a large dev team, get away with renaming Zanzibar and adding it 'content?' At least Crytek made an entirely new engine - and "The Forge" map editor for Halo 3 can't hold a candle to the Crygen2 map editor. I wouldn't even consider The Forge to be an "editor," but rather, a compendium of cheat codes wrapped up in shiny packaging.

    I don't understand why the reviewer's unrealistic expectations for Crysis are not being carried over into Halo 3. There is a point where AI becomes so intelligent that it is no longer fun because you are more worried about staying alive than, say, picking up a soldier, changing to "strength mode," then throwing them through a small house. On that note, almost nothing in the Halo 3 environment is affected by skirmishes other than vehicles/mounted turrets. And do people honestly enjoy those spy games where you have to tediously drag bodies away for fear that every enemy and their mothers are going to hunt you down the second they get suspicious of foul play?

    To sum it all up, I haven't played a game like Crysis that so frequently elicits from me expressions like "Oh Snap!" and "wha, wha, whaaaat!" since Goldeneye for the N64.

  • VMerken #127 4 years ago

    I'd like to expand on the following line in the review:

    "Speed seems to to be the least useful mode, allowing you to dash a short distance at a stupendous rate."

    Playing the demo, I thought that at first too, but the thing is that you immediately get a permanent speed boost when entering Speed Mode, which does not deplete the suit energy count. So as long as you don't execute a "hypersprint", you can move about twice as fast, the only penalty being that you're more vulnerable to enemy fire (since you're not in Armour Mode).

    Therefore, Speed Mode is very useful after a firefight, enabling you to get from one checkpoint to the next in half the time (or to search the perimeter in a hurry). Since there's no energy depletion, you can immediately switch to another mode and use it without efficiency loss if something unexpected happens.

    It's as good as all the other modes, but in a different way. Speed runners are undoubtedly going to abuse this mode to the max.
    Edited by 1 at 13/11/07 @ 22:32

  • Les #128 4 years ago

    "And I can't wait to see what Crytek will do next."

    As long as you don't have to play it... :p

  • Katsumoto #129 4 years ago

    Bear in mind, Eurogamer is not a singular entity. Jim Rossignol is a freelancer who sometimes writes for them, in addition to writing for many other publications. I doubt his freelance contracts specify "must write in reference to every other eurogamer review" - his review is his, not the mysterious "Eurogamer"'s opinion.

  • GitSomE_UK #130 4 years ago

    Why does Halo 3, COD4 whatever else always have to beat another game? All this Halo got 10 this got 9 another got whatever... so what?

    Does it really matter? It's FUN for fucks sake it's not a pissing contest enjoy all of the games for what they are... entertainment!

    This is the best games fest I can remember in all my time gaming where we have so many quality titles all released on some of the most powerful consoles ever made and depending on your finances the best PCs!

    Get a grip guys and just enjoy it as I reckon it'll be a while before we see this again.

  • asharkman #131 4 years ago

    When is this coming out on 360? I have a decent pc set up but i wanna play it at like full detail!!!

  • skillian #132 4 years ago

    ^ I see a flaw in your thinking.

  • darc #133 4 years ago

    bcolter: "I am suprised at the score, as it seems all gloss and no proper substance"

    Haven't played Crysis myself yet, but read paragraph 5 of this review ("Anyway, back to the wooded valley...";) That does not read like gloss and no substance to me. That reads like the kind of game I'd be willing to play at 640x480!

    BadBoyBonner: "Must admit that by the end - Bioshock had changed from a thing of awe into style over content - great atmoshpere - but it seems to change very little from the first level to the last - which can be good if the combat is, but the combat wasn't good"

    This is pretty much how Bioshock is going for me, too. And I'm not even halfway through yet. Sad bit of revisionism, since - as a serious System Shock fanatic - I was very hyped around the time of release.

  • Cylinder #134 4 years ago

    @STKD

    I have a Sound Blaster X-Fi and have had no problems with the sound in the demo on my 5.1 speakers. I was quite surprised by how much effort appears to have gone into the audio design actually. Reinstall drivers perhaps?

    I honestly can't believe there is little to no replay value. The demo level alone has kept me occupied since it was released! (And no, I haven’t tried any of the extra vehicles or weapons that came with the editor.)

    If you were expecting a deep, involving story you've obviously never played Far Cry! Fortunately, with such strong gameplay I don't think much plot is necessary - it doesn't detract from the fun after all!

  • polaris70 #135 4 years ago

    I think this game more than any other makes me want to buy an X360. There's no way I can pay for a Cray2 supercomputer to play it so I'll just wait until the port to consoles come around, knowing EA it will happen. This game is meant to be the saviour of PC gaming but for me it's had the opposite effect. If you a rich enjoy.

  • UncleLou #136 4 years ago

    Disagree with pretty much everything you say - Far Cry a tech demo? Far Cry was all about the gameplay - AI, open levels, etc. I've spent more time replaying a handful of Far Cry levels on various difficulty levels than I spent with other full games - and it's still pretty unique in that respect, as hardly anyother FPS game has repeated that open levels/AI concept.

    The AI in Crysis (judging by the demo) can be a bit ropey, yes, but then I am much more interested in what it does (namely navigate huge levels or level sections entirely freely, depending on player behaviour) - then in the odd situation where they look a bit stupid, which is bound to happen, considering the scope of the environements. Things like the suit and the Delta difficulty, not to mention a lack of loading times after dying, show what the game is made for: to experiment with situations and different playstyles.

    If the demo is anything to go by, the game is the exact opposite of a tech demo. Now there are certainly perfectly valid reasons not to like the game - you mention the story, fair enough, though that's not what I play this type of game for, there's definitely a lack of artstyle etc., but calling it a tech demo misses the point, or your definition of "tech demo" as a negative comment is radically different to mine.

    I guess Crysis will, like Far Cry, be a game that rewards players who like to experiment, and be a game that gives back more the more you put into it. That certainly isn't for everyone, and others might better be served with a game like Call of Duty 4, but once again, the term tech demo is, in my opinion, nonsense.

  • UncleLou #137 4 years ago

    That's all fair enough - to me, however, the term "tech demo" implies a lack of content/gameplay elements/substance, in favour of presenting lush graphics - and that's something entirely different than a game that has content you don't like.

    I am not a fan of footy games, but I wouldn't call PES a tech demo, if you catch my drift. :)

  • sharpfish #138 4 years ago

    bcolter > wow you finished far cry in ONE NIGHT? That must have been a looong night.

    Either:

    a. You are lying

    b. You did play through it in one night but rushed past every single bit of pleasure in the name of finishing by storming your way to goals with no stealth tatics (and probably on the easiest setting making the AI more dumb), thus in effect completely bypassing the gameplay that was so beautifully open for you.

    You've basically just made your opinion invalid with that comment as Uncle Lou said Far Cry and Crysis are about what you put into them, there is no way you put anything into them if you finished it in one night... it was one of the longest games i'd played (for an FPS) and had more replayability than any other FPS I can think of.

    But enough, you hate it... I hate bioshock so it shows we are all different so whatever but I recommend you try to 'savour' your games in future if you want to get the best out of them, rushing through is for games like Painkiller which are meant to be linear blast fests.
    Edited by 1 at 15/11/07 @ 02:04

  • Xerx3s #139 4 years ago

    Pedant :p

    /swings

  • Xerx3s #140 4 years ago

    It seems on EG that if the review is for anything other than a 360, the comments thread will be filled with declarations of what is wrong with that platform. Wii, PS3, PC - all are shouted down.

    It is annoying.

    Must be easy to have such a selective memory. I will refresh it with a random pick from this thread that completely filled the likes of halo:

    "More fun to play than Halo 3.
    Better looking than Halo 3.
    More technically mature than Halo 3.

    9/10.

    There are some reviews money can't buy.

    For every other review - there's Microsoft."

    The amount of abuse in this thread is tiny compared to the shit thrown in on other threads.

    It's funny that people seem to use the COD4 SP as benchmark to raise this above the norm. COD4 SP is average at best. Doing SP on veteran now and it is boring been there done that. The only reason to own COD4 is because it's MP is so fantastic.

    This thread makes baby jesus cry.

  • Lummox #141 4 years ago

    @STKD

    Oddly enough, I had the same problem with crackly sound with my 8800GTX/Audigy 2 combo. I managed to minimise it by changing the graphics settings in the Nvidia control panel for Crysis.exe to force no vertical sync. The problem's still noticeable in the cutscenes but doesn't affect the main game anymore (well, apart from the bit in the demo when the sound cut out completely). I've ordered the full game though and hopefully things should be better...
    Edited by 1 at 15/11/07 @ 12:40

  • BurningR #142 4 years ago

    Fantastic game, one of the best FPS I've ever played, and that's with most settings on low/medium. And my laplop crashes every 20 minutes because the GPU overheats, but I love that game regardless! Delta stealth is the way to go

  • Haloboy #143 4 years ago

    Does anyone know just what the hell is going on with the Gameplay preorders for Crysis? The game is released tomorrow and my order is still sat dead as a dodo! :(

  • UncleLou #144 4 years ago

    So now its up to me to make the most out of the game and not the developer to immerse me via story, character dev and game play?... Please! Imagine someone telling you your opinion of a movie is invalid because you didn't pause the screen at key moments and scrutinize the backgrounds and sets?

    Actually, there's a lot of truth in that. Stuff that expects more dedication (obviously not pausing a movie) often is a lot more rewarding in the end than something you can just let wash over you. Although games aren't the best example.

  • gnarl #145 4 years ago

    Now having played this, I actually think Farcry is better. This feels rough and doesn't concentrate on the fun areas as much as that did, and the powers feel very bolted on. Made me appreciate Bioshock. Pretty though.

  • wayn3h #146 4 years ago

    Just finished this game and it can be truly epic at times. For me this has got to be the GOTY. Easy.

  • archonsod #147 4 years ago

    "So this is the game that ends all games...."

    No, but give me a remake of Deus Ex with the Crysis engine and I don't think I'll ever need another FPS.

    It's hard to see anything beating this except the actual sequel to Far Cry itself. Wonderfully reactive enemy AI, lush wide open environments and the story, such as it is, is actually quite good.

    "Made me appreciate Bioshock."
    For me the big disappointment with Bioshock was the linear level construction and the confined spaces. While I can see why they were necessary in terms of the story, it just doesn't do it for me in the same way as Far Cry and now Crysis' wide open environments. Bioshock had a great story, but the gameplay itself lacked that 'cut loose and have fun' element.

  • pmac #148 4 years ago

    I have not got to the alien section yet but so far it's feeling very repetitive and the villages all start to look the same - there are some good moments and thankfully I am enjoying the game more than the demo (why do we have to play thru the demo again at the beginning of the game!! Could we not load a save?) But I feel I just stealth, headshot a few of the patrol, stealth again, move a bit, rinse and repeat - maybe I need to experiment a bit more?

    Anyway, I have stopped a few times and just looked at the scenery but I disagree with ppl saying the AI is great - they seem to not notice their buddy being shot in the head when they are creeping round the forest looking for you!!

    It must be said that I am enjoying the drama of CoD 4 more than Crysis so far - I was never a huge fan of the linear gameplay in CoD but some moments in it have blown me away - so far nothing in Crysis has done this :(

    And I do just keep thinking "Far Cry". The nano suit has not turned out to be as much fun as the demos made it look.

  • BurningR #149 4 years ago

    Well I have a hard time seeing how you can't experiment - on delta, of course, it's pretty intense, but try normal or hard once in a while, then you can play superhero! For me I had a great game moument when I jumped from roof top to roof top, while two tanks fired at me and made the buildings under me collaps while I jumped on, swicthing between speed and strength, firing at their gunner, then stealth when there wasn't any buildings left and placed C4 on the mofo's. good fun.

    I miss the mutants from Far Cry though, the aliens aren't creepy and brutal like they were.

  • jimmyjboGR #150 4 years ago

    Hi to all

    I hope you enjoyed Crysis.

    The best moments i ever had with a game comes from FarCry and now Crysis.

    Many people are upset because they cannot play it properly on full graphics...etc
    If you haven’t seen this game on a proper full PC then don’t complain and say is not good.

    Well, it is very simple.
    You need a next gen PC to play a next gen PC game and that comes with a price.
    I didn't see anyone complaining because they cannot play Bioshock on XBox1.

    Something that people don't know or maybe they don't want to know or hear.
    Next Gen for consoles has nothing to do with next Gen for PC. Totally different.
    Consoles of course cannot play a true PC next Gen game like Crysis and that is why they didn't release it for consoles. If it comes on consoles in the future, then it will be very very optimized and it won't be Crysis anymore.

    Pc is always at the front making the most powerful games because there are almost no restrictions and limits such as on consoles.
    On the other hand you have to accept that today Xbox360 and PS3 are 2 old PCs stuck in a plastic box with so many restrictions. The more restrictions you have as a developer, the more you are forced to develop corridor games like Bioshock..etc.

    The main difference between corridor design and massive open environment design like Crysis is that in corridor games the designer controls for you the action and your immersion almost every step you take with scripted triggers, but in open massive environments the logic is different and the player controls the action and immersion as much as possible. Its totally up to you and your choices.

    What consoles have now we almost had it on PC a few years ago starting from FarCry. I know many of you don't like what you hear but is only what the numbers say and pure logic if you know a few things about how games, graphics and technology work.

    The day that Crysis was released, the same day Xbox360 and PS3 stepped a generation back and now belong in the past of course if compared only with PC. It’s fair enough. All 3 are different machines.

    Please don't get me wrong. Of course there are stunning games coming out for consoles and i love them, but they will never have the power, gameplay, graphics, physics, lighting...etc of next Gen PC games like Crysis. Of course no reviewer or publisher/developer will tell you that officially because they'll loose millions and probably their job.

    If Bioshock, Halo3…etc are next Gen then Crysis is one Gen ahead of that, I’m sorry. That is why is unfair to rate it and review it like they did and put it in the same generation with the rest, when it is not. Yes it deserves 9/10 for a next next gen game. The rest got 9/10 and 10/10 for only next gen games. You see what i mean.

    Of course Crysis has a few problems here and there and many other issues too like every game, but please don't compare it with any console games out there because they belong in a totally different era.

    For the ones of you that are lucky and can play Crysis, try and not treat it like a usual FPS game and run and shoot. Just stay back take a moment and experiment with all the environment that surrounds you and find ways to take advantage of everything that is there for you. If you experiment and try things out, ohh you will be surprised and it really is very rewarding. I know many people that finished the game and didn't realise that you can chop a branch of a tree, pick it up and walk while you carry it as a camouflage and blend in the rest of the foliage. You see a truck approaching full of soldiers. Don't just stand up and start to shoot. Try shooting the tire, or throw a big chunk of a tree and block the way or whatever you want. Many things that you do have so many different results. You are ready to attack to a small base and there is a helicopter patrollying above you. Shoot a rocket to the helicopter at the right moment and it can explode to pieces and fall on the base rolling and destroying and killing half of the base...etc
    Just think out of the box and you will realise what next gen gameplay is all about.

    I totally advice people to play it and try it. It is an unbelievable stunning breathtaking experience. Is not about graphics at all, but it is about next gen gameplay and taking action in your hands for a change. If you are a big console fan and play this game it will ruin how current console games play and look forever...

    Thanks if you are still reading this.

    Have a nice day.
    Edited by 3 at 27/11/07 @ 12:09

  • Hypercube #151 4 years ago

    Bah, it's got a crappy ending :(

  • rommy667 #152 4 months ago

    Just bought this and warhead on steam for 5 :) a bit late to the party but better late than never eh........