Revisiting Crysis, did it really deserve the hype? |
|
| BY Chris King May. 18th, 2008 | More on: |
Where to begin? You would think that a game that lets you be invisible would accommodate stealthy gameplay right? No. If you are not a sizeable distance away, lying belly down, absolutely still, every enemy within a mile will instantly zero in on your position. Forget hiding in those fancy bushes, they don’t work too well for hiding. You have to be invisible. By the way, you also can’t run more than 20 feet at a time invisible without having your suit run out of power. Oh, and it doesn’t matter if you’re a quarter mile away from a group of enemies, if you’re standing erect and all you can see is their silhouette, they will instantly see you and open fire, somehow knowing by only your silhouette that you are an enemy. They must have bionic eyes.
Forget trying to just run and gun the enemies either, with several of them scattered in all directions of the island, behind trees and in vehicles with .50 caliber machine guns, this results in a quick death. You are mostly forced to lots of slowly crawling past enemies in the jungle gameplay if you don’t want to die 20 times in a row, on NORMAL difficulty. It feels like you are sneaking around enemies for miles at some points for fear that if you actually use your gun, even if it has the silencer on, you will somehow alert every enemy for miles. It has a frustrating effect to say the least. Some of this frustration gets relieved by the time you start getting towards the middle of the game and you unlock long distance scopes for weapons.
So what about the amazing foliage? The gimmick that got everyone so interested in this game to begin with…is it as good as it looked in the videos and screenshots? Well, not really. Once you are in the game you quickly start to notice that the plants are still for the most part cleverly put together 2D foliage pieces that we’ve seen in games before. Sure, you can shoot down some trees, and you can sort of interact with some objects, but all feels too gimmicky and unnatural still. Not how I feel it was let on.
Ultimately, Crysis feels like Far Cry with pretty graphics. The claims from Crytek that it’s a totally different game from Far Cry were bogus, unless you’re only counting the storyline. I’m not sure how the game achieved the exceptionally high ratings and game of the year awards that it did to be honest. While the graphics are undeniably beautiful, amazing graphics, while always welcome, a good game they do not make. The AI is not as good as was touted by many reviewers, unless you consider bionic eagle vision, omniscience, and ridiculous weapon accuracy good AI traits. To say the least, Crysis is an exercise in frustration that you will only be obliged to continue enduring in order to see what the next visual treat is.
So for those out there still wondering if Crysis alone is worth the upgrade, especially now that video cards are more affordable than ever (8800 GT and 9600 GT can be had for less than $180), the answer is a resounding no. I’m waiting next to see what Age of Conan is going to bring to the table in terms of pushing graphics to the next level combined with gameplay, but I think the best choice at this time would be just to keep holding out now that we’re starting to see hints of what’s around the corner in terms of PC hardware.
[See also: Crysis gallery]
May 18th, 2008
at 2:50 pm
It’s been the same for me. Tried the demo with low/medium details but I won’t go beyond that until I build a new rig that could handle it with all the bells and whistles, plus some nice AA on top. Far Cry is pretty high on my ‘top FPS’s ever’ list, so I don’t expect much new from Crysis but more of the same, just in a prettier setting and the new suit abilities.
I found that the suit abilities could have lasted longer as well, but by the time I finally play the game there’s got to be some fix from the community that prolongs the suit powers. Heck, there probably is already.
May 18th, 2008
at 3:22 pm
Lol dude you suck. The fact the you had trouble on Normal is just sad. Crysis is most likely the best FPS out right now, and also probably the best FPS of all time (so far). I can stand pretty close to the enemies without them seeing me (uncloaked). You said “Oh, and it doesn’t matter if you’re a quarter mile away from a group of enemies, if you’re standing erect and all you can see is their silhouette, they will instantly see you and open fire, somehow knowing by only your silhouette that you are an enemy. They must have bionic eyes.” This is a load of crap. Not once has this happened to me. If you were to complain about slightly glitchy gameplay or the fact that vehicles blow up so easily i would agree with you. But you are just ranting on about random crap that doesn’t actually happen, or is very rare. I agree about not being able to go far cloaked which is extremely irritating, but dude stop bashing a game that is “all that.”
May 18th, 2008
at 4:01 pm
lol… man you really really suck, a mile away… a mile away… a mile away… how many times did you say that, it’s not a mile away if you know what you are doing you can stand right next to them without them noticing you, it’s not a metal gear game it’s a FPS i hardly use the invisibility cloak too and if i ever use it it’s for fun, i would suggest going to youtube and check how people play there, btw the bushes work quite well too… i think this game is way out of your league moreover it’s not that hard too. my guess you are not used to play FPS with keyboards + mouse.
May 18th, 2008
at 5:22 pm
wut kindi and jake said… but nice try on attempting to make a ridiculously good game look bad lmao. go play some cs and get good at fps games before complaining about a different game on “normal” >.<
May 18th, 2008
at 5:24 pm
I wanted to love Crysis… but I can’t…
The game is unplayable at “very high” settings on ANY computer…
I have a Dell XPS720 h2C…
Intel Core 2 Extreme @ 3.73Ghz (Quad Core)
2 nVidia 8800 GT w/ 512mb each
4 Gigs of Corsair Dominator RAM (Overclocked)
and an Ageia Physics Accellerator..
and at best I could never get above 25 fps…
Thats just unnacceptable. It’s beautiful, but unplayable.
Games like UT3 run at over 90 frames w/ max settings… and while Crysis looks better, it doesn’t look that much better.
My buddy has a comperable rig and his experience was worse… so… I just don’t see the sense in developing a game that can’t be played on anything…
May 18th, 2008
at 5:55 pm
Jake - I think to call Crysis the best FPS out right now is slighty far fetched. Really feel Chris has hit the nail on the head here, the game did seem to boast something it wasn’t. It looks impressive at times, but on closer inspection, it’s nothing ground breaking like it had promised to be. Because the game can become frustrating at sometimes, it makes it less fun to play.
kindi.boy - fanboy no? “my guess you are not used to play FPS with keyboards + mouse.” My guess is you don’t know what your talking about, it says in Chris’ profile that he is an aspiring game designer. Now I’ve made you look silly, lmao!
May 18th, 2008
at 6:47 pm
I completed the game for the first time by jus running & gunning on Normal,it was not untill my second playthrough that I came to kno that ur character can even go prone lol….wtf is he talking.
The only lvl where I died numerous times was the Tank level…where u hav to battle Tanks.
Though the later level in the game [after the aliens arrive] suck horse ballz,the first half is pretty solid.
May 18th, 2008
at 6:50 pm
The game got all the great reviews because of all the hype. Just like GTA IV. GTA IV is a good game but all the 10s it got are crazy. Nobody seems to take their reviews seriously anymore. One idiot gave Super Mario galaxy an 11 out of 10. Nutty. I just don’t pay attention to ratings anymore.
May 18th, 2008
at 7:26 pm
Crysis is best played w/ cheats. You can change a couple variables and have unlimited invisibility, speed, etc.. It’s much more fun like that. Then you really do feel like a super soldier.
& yea, unless youve got a really strong rig you dont get the right experience. it has to be maxed out (graphics & physics) to get to the WOW factor from my experience.
I played it on XP w/ a X800XT & Athlon 3500+ w/ the DirectX 10 hack & it was beautiful @ 1280×1024 but it also ran like 3fps at high graphics & physics lol. after i got my 3870×2 though and quad core @ 3GHz 8GB ram vista 64-bit on 50″ 1080p plasma i haven’t played anything that can touch it except World in Conflict which still has some of the most beautiful nukes ive seen.
BTW, Crysis is $19.99 at Circuit City today & this week. It’s at least worth $20 imo.
May 18th, 2008
at 11:46 pm
The only reason why It flopped was because hardly anyone has a monster PC to run it. It should do well when it’s finally released for the 360 and PS3, but saying that, there’s just way too first person games out there now….
May 19th, 2008
at 3:47 am
I don’t know, haven’t played the game yet, but I’m kinda hyped about it
May 19th, 2008
at 5:35 am
What a nonsensical article.
People complaining about the high specs required, should turn off anti-aliasing, it makes a big difference, and if you’re running at your monitor’s native resolution, then it will look fantastic.
I ran Crysis on a pretty spectacular rig from VoodooPC, and I could run it at 1360×768 resolution, with all the bells and whistles (apart from anti-aliasing, which to me didn’t make much difference). Proof is on my blog - http://garethcoker.blogspot.com/2007/12/crysis.html
Apart from a couple of places - the game ran solidly at 25-30 FPS - which admittedly is not silky smooth, but it’s good enough.
*Yes… I know the screenshots are low-res, but I can quite easily upload the uncompressed ones too.
I also agree that the game isn’t that hard. The game simply rewards you for using your suit powers and finding cover. The ending was a little disappointing. And the level where you have to fly should have been cut out, but apart from that it was a great experience. My favourite levels were Paradise Lost and Exodus.
The game might be hard, but it’s not impossible. It’s certainly not frustrating, that’s for sure, but that’s just my opinion. The game certainly isn’t as hard as the stupidly hard original Far Cry.
If you want a heavily scripted ride, go and play Half Life 2 (also excellent) or COD 4 (also excellent). The best story of last year by a mile was Bioshock.
Sure Crysis doesn’t have a great story, but the game offers more cinematic moments than Bioshock or COD4, and a lot of them can be created by yourself. I expect Crysis 2 to be slightly more closed in terms of level-design, and to have a tighter script. With the same technology, Crysis 2 could be a great game, that won’t be ahead of it’s time anymore.
All 4 of those games have their own merits. The best all-round package (for single-player!)in my opinion was Bioshock. Technical merit goes to Crysis by a country mile (and I enjoyed the game too). COD4 and HalfLife 2 are also highly original and wonderful games.
We should be grateful that there are so many good FPS’ out there.
May 19th, 2008
at 8:52 am
I have to say that I identify with the author (Chris).
I played the demo; I’ve seen the graphics; My new GPU can handle it just fine. It was all very impressive…
Until I got that familiar feeling that I’m playing Far Cry *again*.
And I got tired of shooting people in the head with a silenced gun, only to see them getting pissed and instantly running towards me, a long time ago. (Or is it that Koreans have REALLY thick skulls? Somehow I doubt that)
That’s not my idea of fun. The game creates the illusion that you can deal with a situation in multiple ways, but trying to be stealthy, subtle, or tactical, is just more frustrating, and not rewarding enough, so you end up running around and killing everyone using your suit’s super powers (I’m looking at YOU, regenerating health).
I can only guess that higher levels have more enemies who are even more bullet resistant when you’re ambushing them, so the demo was enough. For me, it’s a system benchmark - not a game.
May 19th, 2008
at 9:33 am
Dude, I experienced nothing like what you described. Playing on Normal difficulty, the cloak worked exactly as expected (they couldn’t see me) and you CAN run and gun through levels if you want. The AI was freaking good. I’ve played through to the end 3 times.
My modest specs are:
AMD 6000+ Dual core
2GB DDR2
GeForce 8800GTS
May 19th, 2008
at 2:46 pm
The ending did it for me. It just clicked down the rating I had given it in my head from 7/10 to 2/10.
May 20th, 2008
at 1:13 am
Crysis is not a bad game, I never meant to imply that by the article, but rather I was questioning if it REALLY was as good gameplay wise as the review scores it received. For those who can’t relate to how I experienced the game and say I suck at FPS please realize I have been playing FPS since the days of Wolfenstein 3D and I make it a habit of always beating a game on hard difficulty the first time through (COD4, Doom III, HL2 for example) because I know I won’t play through the single player a second time. I don’t think most people can say that. I started Crysis on hard too, but I felt the AI was a bit ridiculous for my tastes and normal seemed to be the only way to keep the frustration level to bearable.
August 24th, 2008
at 12:47 pm
I have to agree. Crysis looks great, but not *that* great. Something about it does make it seem like a crappy gimmick. I have to agree about the AI, I’m no professional player for Crysis, but I’m not slouch either. It seems most of the AI, in any game, has damn “bionic eagle vision”. It seems inevitable…
There are several things that I do like, however. The first is what the AI do when you’re not around. I once spied on a guy taking a piss in the ocean, from atop of a cliff. After he was done, he shook up, zipped up, and walked away. I was miles away too. I thought it was a nice touch. The fact that you can blow a car up in 2 hits while shooting the gastank is just awesome, and if done right, is a fantastic asset.
btw, I run the game at VH, so don’t tell me I don’t know what it looks like. :P
The system specs are still out of this world, I mean, 2 4870×2s to run the game on Very High and on a Hi-res display, with no AA, to achieve a max 60FPS is just stupid (The average was below that too!) Thank god I’m only at 1280×1024 or I’d be screwed.
The game looks great, but doesn’t look good enough to require THAT much power. The game needs some serious revision.