A tribute to the best looking game ever - Crysis

Discussion in 'Games, Gaming & Game-demos' started by TDurden, May 18, 2017.

  1. Nosein

    Nosein Guest

    Messages:
    269
    Likes Received:
    30
    GPU:
    GTX 580
    I think Bioware needs a lie down.
     
  2. The Janitor

    The Janitor Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,280
    Likes Received:
    92
    GPU:
    GTX 3080 Ti
    You always say the gameplay in Crysis is bad but I disagree. Because of the nanosuit, and because it was designed for mouse and keyboard it has some of the tightest controls in a FPS game.
    It allows you to do stuff like this:

    [​IMG]

    I can't think of many modern shooters that lets you pull of the things you can do in Crysis
     
  3. Nosein

    Nosein Guest

    Messages:
    269
    Likes Received:
    30
    GPU:
    GTX 580
    Whether people want to admit it or not, Crysis and Far Cry 1 paved the way for todays FPS games in the play your way aspect. Prey did nothing to push the industry forward or even make itself stand out as anything but a "spiritual successor", the sloppy seconds of gaming. Atleast Crysis is still being remembered 10 years on for whatever those reasons maybe, but in 10 years time, no ones going to remember Prey 2017.

    To lament Crysis 1 for gameplay only to then praise Prey 2017... Preys physics are poorly programmed for the play style it offers the player, stealth is luck, exploration is punished and often a waste of time, combat is atrocious...the list goes on.



    While people may call Crysis nothing but a tech demo, every game released by AAA devs since 2010 has been nothing but a tech demo and the entire industry has gone from not caring about gfx because "console gamers dont care about gfx" to 4K this, PS PRO that with Ubisoft and EA being the kings of tech demos with rinse and repeat gameplay. Crysis in 2007 had more innovation and interactivity than anything AAA of today.
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2017
  4. Damien_Azreal

    Damien_Azreal Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,509
    Likes Received:
    2,181
    GPU:
    Gigabyte OC 3070
    Why do you insist on bringing up PREY over and over again?

    And, it's not "factually" wrong. It's all a matter of opinion, and my opinion can be no more wrong then yours can be right.
    I had more fun with PREY then I even did with Crysis.
    And I enjoy Crysis (for the first six levels), but it's gunplay is lacking. And the suit feels... like a gimmick instead of a fully thought mechanic.

    So, I don't care what some random youtuber does in Crysis when they've practiced it over and over to make it look cool in a video.
    Yes, there were times I pulled off stuff in Crysis and thought "That was awesome"... but, they were very few and far between because of how the game is paced.


    And The Janitor, I'm all for you expressing your opinion. Disagree with me. :) It's great, that's what a discussion is for. And I'm always glad to discuss with people.
    But, Nosein, once you start presenting your opinion like fact... I'm pretty much done.
     

  5. Nosein

    Nosein Guest

    Messages:
    269
    Likes Received:
    30
    GPU:
    GTX 580
    You mentioned it in your post and made the initial comparison. I responded the way i did.
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2017
  6. Damien_Azreal

    Damien_Azreal Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,509
    Likes Received:
    2,181
    GPU:
    Gigabyte OC 3070
    After you edited your post to make your response valid.

    I questioned why you brought up PREY when your original post quoted The Janitor's post.
     
  7. Nosein

    Nosein Guest

    Messages:
    269
    Likes Received:
    30
    GPU:
    GTX 580
    Fair enough. "factually wrong" does come off a bit strong.

    I did wonder why that Crysis .gif was in my initial post. Quoted the wrong poster.
     
  8. KissSh0t

    KissSh0t Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    13,832
    Likes Received:
    7,591
    GPU:
    ASUS 3060 OC 12GB
    That is really cool.
     
  9. ramthegamer

    ramthegamer Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,441
    Likes Received:
    910
    GPU:
    Zotac Trinity 3080
    i can t think of crysis either than being a technical demo of what shooters can be. of what a sandbox fps game can be, it is a technical demo because no game has destructible environements crysis does, at least we have bf1 with similar physics if i may say
     
  10. Undying

    Undying Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    25,333
    Likes Received:
    12,743
    GPU:
    XFX RX6800XT 16GB
    You guys remember this tech demo trailer? It blown my mind back then.

     

  11. TR2N

    TR2N Master Guru

    Messages:
    693
    Likes Received:
    84
    GPU:
    AMD
    No question about it.

    Crysis is and was revolutionary.
    All bow to the master..

    Hehe
     
  12. TDurden

    TDurden Guest

    Messages:
    1,981
    Likes Received:
    3
    GPU:
    Sapphire R9 390 Nitro
    Three tech demo trailers I remember as good as this one:

    Half Life 2 - OMG dat physics and graphics. PC exclusive - delivered.
    Crysis - fantastic graphics. PC exclusive - delivered.
    Witcher 3 - incredible graphics. PC and consoles - shrug (y u no emoji).
     
    Last edited: May 29, 2017
  13. S.T.A.R.A.C.

    S.T.A.R.A.C. Master Guru

    Messages:
    874
    Likes Received:
    309
    GPU:
    HD 7970 3GB WindForce
    Far Cry 1 was revolutionary with big maps and less linearity, but Crysis no. Crysis is about graphics and physics, and that's evolution not revolution.

    Although before Far Cry 1 and Crytek there was GSC who experimented with big maps with their "Codename: Outbreak" FPS released in 2001. This later led to Stalker SoC which was supposed to be released in 2003, but then delayed till 2007.
    So Stalker SoC is not influenced by Far Cry 1. Who influenced who?

    Here is Stalker 1096 build from 2002:


    This is from mid 2004 before FC 1 release. It's basically the same like final version:
     
  14. The Janitor

    The Janitor Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,280
    Likes Received:
    92
    GPU:
    GTX 3080 Ti
    Well it was just an example. The point is that the controls are so good it allows you to do it.

    Like picking up a barrel, doing a powerjump and then in mid-air throwing the barrel at an enemy. That's easy in Crysis, but try doing that in Crysis 2. It's just way more clumbsy and less responsive.
    Crysis 3 was better in this regard though, it's like a mix of Crysis 1 & 2. But I still prefer the original and Warhead.
     
  15. ramthegamer

    ramthegamer Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,441
    Likes Received:
    910
    GPU:
    Zotac Trinity 3080
    haha thr sound of the rifle is the same as steyr aug in cs 1.1 lol
     

  16. TimmyP

    TimmyP Guest

    Messages:
    1,398
    Likes Received:
    250
    GPU:
    RTX 3070
    X-Isle demo came out in 2000 (still love that music)
     
  17. Damien_Azreal

    Damien_Azreal Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,509
    Likes Received:
    2,181
    GPU:
    Gigabyte OC 3070
    That... I would definitely debate.

    There have been games that I would consider revolutionary, games that made huge and lasting impressions.
    Doom, Quake... the first Half-Life.

    And, in terms of visual design... Doom 3 and Half-Life 2.
    When both D3 and HL2 were announced, the trailers and E3 events were incredible.
    From D3's lighting and shadows, bump mapped textures and beautiful animations... the game truly showed what could be possible.

    And HL2's ground breaking facial animation, gorgeous water... (for it's time) impressive use of physics and world building.

    Those are two games that truly moved the genre forward in their own ways.
    Crysis... to me, was not revolutionary. It felt like a normal advancement.
    Specially after Crytek floored everyone three years prior with Far Cry. After Far Cry, Crysis feels like just the next logical step.
    Yes, it's visually gorgeous... but, it just seems like what would come next from the studio that developed Far Cry.


    Even though HL2's E3 videos looked far more impressive then the final game (seriously... Trap Town looked so much better then what we got in Ravenholm)... it still made a much bigger impact on me. A stronger, lasting impression.
    Doom 3's 2003 E3 trailer... I still remember that. Without playing it, I can call it back up and remember that wow and surprise I felt while watching it.

    Crysis... I remember thinking it looked good, but past that... I can't remember anything about it's E3 trailer.
    It's not the popular opinion among PC gamers, but, to me... Crysis was not a revolution for FP games. It was a good (poorly paced) game with great graphics.
    But, that same year... I enjoyed the Orange Box (Episode Two and Portal) far more then I did Crysis. Both those two titles made much bigger, lasting impressions.
    I had to replay Crysis last week to be able to really call it back. And, no matter how creative I tried to get with the gameplay... I didn't enjoy it. It felt like I was trying too hard to make the game fun, instead of just enjoying it because it was fun.

    But... just me. To each his own.
    Some people love it, and great for them. Honestly. Just... doesn't do it for me.
     
  18. Undying

    Undying Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    25,333
    Likes Received:
    12,743
    GPU:
    XFX RX6800XT 16GB
    They didnt drop the dx10 in Warhead. If you are using enthusiast graphics settings game is dx10 api just as original.
     
  19. Vibe

    Vibe Master Guru

    Messages:
    277
    Likes Received:
    50
    GPU:
    1080 gtx
    I'd like to bring up those Crysis tech demo's, a lot of subtle things didn't actually make it to the game. It had some sparing use of volumetric clouds but they weren't used for the sky but rather fog. Notice the physics, especially the way the foliage moves, the demo shows it moving very smoothly and fluidly but in the game it's limited to very specific plants and is scripted, it moves quickly back. The trees sway too quickly as well and unlike the Frostbite 3 engine, there is no actual wind dynamics. The ambient map lighting was also used very sparingly, as someone shown the pics earlier, you can see the interior of the huts and whatnot have no such lighting.

    Water is definitely something C2 engine did well that people often overlook, unfortunately they dumbed it down in C2 and even C3 except in C3 they added caustic lighting reflections. Also theres an old C2 demo that displays it's amazing ability to do water by demoing a giant tital wave.
    The only ocean water I've ever seen that did it better was AC: Black Flag, the water looked unreal. GTA 5's ocean isn't too shabby either.

    I think everyone can agree that for 2007, Cryengine 2 and Crysis were a huge step forward and took a while for others to catch up. Basically it appears to me that some things like polygons, textures, physics and A.i. have not really evolved much at all, I mean we now have that new form of rendering ( I forget what it's called) that performs better than deferred, we have much better lighting techniques and so forth but the former stuff hasn't moved much at all if any.
     
  20. Damien_Azreal

    Damien_Azreal Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,509
    Likes Received:
    2,181
    GPU:
    Gigabyte OC 3070
    They dropped the restriction.
    You can play Warhead in DX9 on the Enthusiast setting.
    While Crysis locked out certain effects (god rays, POM and some other shader effects) to DX10 only, Warhead allows those effects in DX9.

    The only thing DX10 does in Warhead... is run worse then DX9.
     

Share This Page