Would you prefer Crysis with less prevalent Stealth/Invisibility?
I don't think you should be any more visible in the most literal sense of the word, but I think it should be designed in such a way that you can't just walk past two-thirds of the game's encounters. I mean, there are times in Crysis 2 where you can practically unzip your nanosuit and wave your dick around in front of the soldiers and none of them will notice.
Now visualize that.
I love stealthing and feeling like a bad ass by way of sneaking up on dudes and taking them out. I mean, it's there as a choice, right? Just don't use stealth if it doesn't appeal to you.
Stealth as a choice is great - true. I just don't find the reliance on actual invisibility especially appealing. I don't like invisibility in multiplayer, that's one thing for sure.
The multiplayer probably suffers because of these mechanics, I can't be sure having only played a handful of rounds on it, but it would be akin to ripping the heart out of the game to lose the stealth in the single player.
And anyway, as has been said, it's there as a choice. You can go balls-out crazy on every fucker if you so choose and you'll have just as much success.
Crysis's strength lies in its ability to successfully translate the Predator movies into a video game. It does that by giving you invisibility and well rounded stealth mechanics. I really enjoyed the constant retelling of Ten Little Indians in both Crysis and Crysis 2, picking off guards and enemy soldiers one at a time and having the rest freak the fuck out. It turns you into the slasher in a slasher movie, and it's an incredible achievement when you consider how many games have gone for that brass ring and how few have succeeded.
So no, don't get rid of stealth. People who do Power/Speed runs are fun to watch, but for my personal enjoyment I prefer stealth.
I don't think you should be any more visible in the most literal sense of the word, but I think it should be designed in such a way that you can't just walk past two-thirds of the game's encounters.
Yep, this is exactly what I think. It makes it pretty boring since that's a choice. I mean, giving the player choice is great, but just not that choice, 'cause it makes it far less challenging than having to fight them all, which is what I want to do, in my own way. Furthermore, Crytek needs to make the A.I. in Crysis so much better, at least as good as the Replica Soldiers from F.E.A.R. 'cause they are quite literally some of the worst I've ever seen.
remove the suit and the game becomes generic.
I'm not questioning the suit. I love the über-human mobility and survivabilty of it. However, I do question the full-blown invisibility. It seems like a crutch for AI-shortcomings in singleplayer, and is downright disruptive in multiplayer. I think it's the main reason why Crysis didn't manage to capture a sizeable chunk of the online multiplayer audience.
I'd rather have a MGS4-style adaptive camo system. Stand still, sync-up your suits camo with your surroundings - be semi-invisible. I think it'd be more interesting for both singleplayer and especially multiplayer.
A more realistic *invisibility* system could be extremely interesting, where-in the suit can only camouflage itself from one onlooker when on the move. Two modes of active camo. Active/adaptive versus one onlooker, even when on the move, and MGS4-style, to maximize camouflage when hiding/lurking in the environments.
The whole *completely invisible* for reals shtick gets old fast, especially in multiplayer.
This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.
Comment and Save
Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.