My open letter to Crytek

I figured I'll do my bit for the PC gaming community by telling Crytek what we expect in general. Check this link to read the letter:

LINK

So what do you guys think?

Is Crysis 3 going to be better than Crysis 2? Is there anything in the letter you agree or disagree with?

PS - This should have been in the PC Gaming forum. I added it to the Off Topic forum by mistake. Someone kindly move it to the right place. Thanks!

57 Comments
57 Comments
  • 57 results
  • 1
  • 2
Posted by PatchRowcester

I figured I'll do my bit for the PC gaming community by telling Crytek what we expect in general. Check this link to read the letter:

LINK

So what do you guys think?

Is Crysis 3 going to be better than Crysis 2? Is there anything in the letter you agree or disagree with?

PS - This should have been in the PC Gaming forum. I added it to the Off Topic forum by mistake. Someone kindly move it to the right place. Thanks!

Posted by Seedofpower

I get the feeling that money drives their motivations now and not the fans. They would probably love to listen to you but EA has other plans.

Posted by Jace

While I agree with the sentiment of the article, I think it's basically futile.

Crytek is no longer the company that made Farcry/Crysis, at least not in direction. While their goal has always been to make a game that sells, they also found time to sprinkle innovation into their games.

That time has passed. Look at BF3//MoH/Crysis 2/ Farcry 2/etc. There is a theme: Repackage a working formula with slightly different angles, and milk it until it stops selling.

Farcry 3 is going down the same path with its multiplayer, but the single player looks at least interesting enough story-wise to make up for the tired shooting. Crysis, sadly, has gone from being a pseudo-sanbox shooter with multiples paths and strategies to take out varied enemies, to being a run and gun urban combat game where you fight an endless horde of copy-paste robot aliens.

TL;DR- Here's to MP3 and GRFS to hold me over until FPS gets interesting again. And Mount and Blade: Napoleonic Wars is a great breath of fresh air, if you need one.

Posted by PatchRowcester

@Seedofpower said:

I get the feeling that money drives their motivations now and not the fans. They would probably love to listen to you but EA has other plans.

I am sure, but if we were to make our opinions clear from the beginning, then perhaps there will be a change? I'll give it a shot to see if anything good comes out of this :)

Posted by mikmanner

Make this letter less aggressive, are you really not going to buy this game unless it scores 95/100? I don't believe you haha, you're obviously passionate about the series. Also suggesting that a developer 'sit this one out' because of a past mistake, you have to realise that development is collaborative effort, most things are never the result of one persons idea, especially within a large team. I'm also curious, the DX11 thing, did you think The DX11 features of C2 made a big difference? For me it didn't really add anything to the overal aesthetic (apart from a lower frame rate haha)

Posted by PatchRowcester

@mikmanner said:

Make this letter less aggressive, are you really not going to buy this game unless it scores 95/100? I don't believe you haha, you're obviously passionate about the series. Also suggesting that a developer 'sit this one out' because of a past mistake, you have to realise that development is collaborative effort, most things are never the result of one persons idea, especially within a large team. I'm also curious, the DX11 thing, did you think The DX11 features of C2 made a big difference? For me it didn't really add anything to the overal aesthetic (apart from a lower frame rate haha)

Thanks for the input. I will make the changes you suggested.

Posted by drGiggless

I refuse to click your link out of principle.

Posted by PatchRowcester

@Jace said:

While I agree with the sentiment of the article, I think it's basically futile.

Crytek is no longer the company that made Farcry/Crysis, at least not in direction. While their goal has always been to make a game that sells, they also found time to sprinkle innovation into their games.

That time has passed. Look at BF3//MoH/Crysis 2/ Farcry 2/etc. There is a theme: Repackage a working formula with slightly different angles, and milk it until it stops selling.

Farcry 3 is going down the same path with its multiplayer, but the single player looks at least interesting enough story-wise to make up for the tired shooting. Crysis, sadly, has gone from being a pseudo-sanbox shooter with multiples paths and strategies to take out varied enemies, to being a run and gun urban combat game where you fight an endless horde of copy-paste robot aliens.

TL;DR- Here's to MP3 and GRFS to hold me over until FPS gets interesting again. And Mount and Blade: Napoleonic Wars is a great breath of fresh air, if you need one.

Indeed. Crytek has shifted their focus since Crysis, but I know that it is possible to make an amazing game for all platforms if due attention is given to each.

Yes, there has been a lot of rehash of the same formula. Call of Duty has been doing that for 5 games now.

I was so disappointed when I learned that Crytek were not going to develop Far Cry 2. Once I started seeing the previews, I thought it may not be so bad after all. And then I played the game :(

Lets hope Far Cry 3 is not going to be like that.

I do have hopes for Max Payne 3 but...you never know.

Posted by PatchRowcester

@mikmanner said:

Make this letter less aggressive, are you really not going to buy this game unless it scores 95/100? I don't believe you haha, you're obviously passionate about the series. Also suggesting that a developer 'sit this one out' because of a past mistake, you have to realise that development is collaborative effort, most things are never the result of one persons idea, especially within a large team. I'm also curious, the DX11 thing, did you think The DX11 features of C2 made a big difference? For me it didn't really add anything to the overal aesthetic (apart from a lower frame rate haha)

Alright, I made the changes.

Well, I never played Crysis 2 without the DX11 patch. I did not buy the game at launch after seeing the mixed reviews.

How much lower were the frame rates? Also, what GPU did you use?

Posted by Jace

@PatchRowcester: Rockstar is the only developer left that I haven't lost respect for over the recent years. They always completely deliver. I have 110% trust that MP3 will be no different. And boy, does GTA V looks sweet.

Posted by PatchRowcester

@drGiggless said:

I refuse to click your link out of principle.

Not a problem. Thanks for telling me.

Posted by PatchRowcester

@Jace said:

@PatchRowcester: Rockstar is the only developer left that I haven't lost respect for over the recent years. They always completely deliver. I have 110% trust that MP3 will be no different. And boy, does GTA V looks sweet.

I sincerely wish you are right! I loved the first two games. I was disappointed to know that they don't have quick save like they did in the first two, but well...what do you do? Its the age of consoles now..

Edited by kidman

You want to EA-produced game to ditch Origin? You know it's kinda impossible now, right?

also: I'd suggest making blog posts like that here, instead of having people click on an external link

Edited by Agrammon

While I completely agree, they will never actually read it and even if they did, I'm doubtful they'd listen to it. Oh and

@kidman said:

also: I'd suggest making blog posts like that here, instead of having people click on an external link

Posted by AiurFlux

I doubt that they'd read it in the first place and even if they did read it they probably wouldn't change anything. It's easier to cut/paste the code from the 360 to the PC then patch it later on with a texture pack all the while not optimizing the controls, settings, or options. Although I will say that I expect them to have the DX11 texture pack available earlier on since it's still on CryEngine 3 so most of the assets should be there already, but it'll still have the three limited graphics settings. The game won't be a sandboxy experience since it'll be set in New York again, and what does that mean, well it means corridors or in this case streets. Slightly less claustrophobic but the same idea. The game will still have Origin, which is a shitty service that forced me to have it installed to a small 320GB Caviar Blue along with BF3 to prevent their spyware from collecting usage data without my permission. It won't work on Steam, which is by far a better optimized service and I don't even give a fuck if Valve collects my usage data. They've earned my trust unlike EA. Finally the multiplayer will be another CoD ripoff clone lacking any originality because it's easier to plagiarize an old tired formula than think up anything yourself.

In the past year we've seen amazing developers make amazing games for the PC, Eidos Montreal and CDProjektRED being the primary examples. Crytek will not be on that list anytime soon.

And yes I am from the future.

Posted by SuperSambo

Are you autistic?

Posted by PatchRowcester

@kidman said:

You want to EA-produced game to ditch Origin? You know it's kinda impossible now, right?

also: I'd suggest making blog posts like that here, instead of having people click on an external link

I apologize. The reason I make a blog is because its easier for me to post pictures and videos, and share link with other people.

I will make it a point to post text here from next time onwards.

Edited by mordukai

You seem to forget that there's EA in the picture and they are the ones forking over the money for the game so they have a big say in what goes on. You can write all the letters you want but at the end of the day what really gets their attention is money. Don't buy the games if you're that unhappy about them. Getting frustrated and mad about this is really a moot point. Enjoy the old games, accept that Crytek is not the company it used to be and move on. That's what I did with Bioware. The faster you come to terms with it the better you'll feel.

Edited by whyareyoucrouchingspock

I wont be buying Crysis 3. Crytek said alot of PR stuff about Crysis 2. It's as if Crysis 2 has 0 resources put into it in regard to the pc until post launch. Non reactive vegetation. Low quility FMV's. More linear levels. A lack of lean and prone. Absalutely no graphics options. If I recall correctly as well it even the menu said something along the lines of "adjust tv screen". Crysis went from a demonstration of what pc's can do to showing everything that wrong. Practically all of the gaming media ignored the problems.

Edited by JasonR86

I thought Crysis 2 was really good. It seemed like a tighter, more focused version of Crysis 1. In terms of the letter...

1) This seems fair for the PC build.

2) I never noticed respawning enemies in Crysis 2. But, if there were, then there shouldn't have been.

3) No invisible walls is easier said then done. Crysis 1 had versions of invisible walls they were just more transparent (the ocean and mountains you couldn't climb). If you're playing the game right this shouldn't even be an issue.

4) I guess they could add quick save but I don't think it is necessary. It's not like the two previous games were excessively hard.

5) This is dumb. Crysis 2 was certainly not a Call of Duty clone. This sounds like a childish remark that is far from fair to what Crysis 2 was actually like.

6) Putting the game on Steam is fair as well. But that isn't up to Crytek.

7) I don't see a problem with day one DLC. This might not be up to Crytek either.

8) This is also a dumb request. Every developer and publisher is going to worry about piracy. If they don't they will be prime targets. This person sounds really childish here as well. More importantly, this really isn't up to Crytek

9) I don't see how Crysis 2 'ignored' PC players. This sounds childish as well.

10) This seems fair.

11) 'No multiplayer' may not be up to Crytek. Further, if I remember right the multiplayer in Crysis 2 wasn't even made by Crytek. So the singleplayer wouldn't have changed if this option wasn't there. Multiplayer doesn't even necessarily impact single-player. These are usually two different teams even if it is all being done under one development house.

12) I guess this is reasonable but I don't see why this is such a huge deal.

So the list has just a few reasonable requests, a few odd but seemingly reasonable requests, and several childish, idiotic requests that make the other requests carry less weight as a result.

Edited by whyareyoucrouchingspock

If you think Crysis 2 was good on the pc, then I feel are not much of a pc gamer. I'm pretty sure anyone who has any real interest in pc gaming (not the couple of posts below) will just rip your post apart. It's nonsense, so I wont waste my time.

Posted by Spoonman671
@JasonR86: You've summed up all my thoughts and saved me the trouble of typing them up myself.  You get a gold star!
Posted by JasonR86

@Spoonman671 said:

@JasonR86: You've summed up all my thoughts and saved me the trouble of typing them up myself. You get a gold star!

Fucking yes!

Posted by UlquioKani

Pretty much everything he (@JasonR86 ) said

Online
Posted by Guided_By_Tigers

Tell them we need Timesplitters 4

Posted by Giantstalker

@Unknown_Pleasures said:

Tell them we need Timesplitters 4

A PC version of a TimeSplitters game would be a godsend.

Posted by AhmadMetallic
@Jace said:

While I agree with the sentiment of the article, I think it's basically futile.

Crytek is no longer the company that made Farcry/Crysis, at least not in direction. While their goal has always been to make a game that sells, they also found time to sprinkle innovation into their games.

That time has passed. Look at BF3//MoH/Crysis 2/ Farcry 2/etc. There is a theme: Repackage a working formula with slightly different angles, and milk it until it stops selling.

Farcry 3 is going down the same path with its multiplayer, but the single player looks at least interesting enough story-wise to make up for the tired shooting. Crysis, sadly, has gone from being a pseudo-sanbox shooter with multiples paths and strategies to take out varied enemies, to being a run and gun urban combat game where you fight an endless horde of copy-paste robot aliens.

TL;DR- Here's to MP3 and GRFS to hold me over until FPS gets interesting again. And Mount and Blade: Napoleonic Wars is a great breath of fresh air, if you need one.

This post rocks!
Posted by Jack268

You can tell from the trailer already it's using the terrible nanosuit from 2 as well as having the "Hold V to powerful melee" shit with the uppercut, with no room for any form of creative playing.

The game will be a turd just like C2.

Posted by whyareyoucrouchingspock

@Jack268 said:

You can tell from the trailer already it's using the terrible nanosuit from 2 as well as having the "Hold V to powerful melee" shit with the uppercut, with no room for any form of creative playing.

The game will be a turd just like C2.

I agree. Looks like it's re-uses assets. Rushed Dragon Age 2 type game.

Posted by PatchRowcester

@JasonR86 said:

I thought Crysis 2 was really good. It seemed like a tighter, more focused version of Crysis 1. In terms of the letter...

1) This seems fair for the PC build.

2) I never noticed respawning enemies in Crysis 2. But, if there were, then there shouldn't have been.

3) No invisible walls is easier said then done. Crysis 1 had versions of invisible walls they were just more transparent (the ocean and mountains you couldn't climb). If you're playing the game right this shouldn't even be an issue. -

Playing the game, right? What does that mean? Playing exactly the way they intended for you? Which is what ever game does, but the amount of freedom you get, will vary. If you watched the video I posted, you will notice that I wasn't trying to break the game in anyway.

4) I guess they could add quick save but I don't think it is necessary. It's not like the two previous games were excessively hard.

Nothing is necessary. Its just about giving options to the players. That's all.

5) This is dumb. Crysis 2 was certainly not a Call of Duty clone. This sounds like a childish remark that is far from fair to what Crysis 2 was actually like.

It was a Call of Duty clone in many ways. This choreographed sandbox experience they talked about is a fancy word for linear CoD like experience. This is an opinion shared by many. Here is a twitter exchange with Jeff Green. I am not saying this validates everything. Its an opinion, and I am not the only one who feels that way.

http://i46.tinypic.com/xpyp3a.png

6) Putting the game on Steam is fair as well. But that isn't up to Crytek.

I could still state my opinion.

7) I don't see a problem with day one DLC. This might not be up to Crytek either.

You don't. I do.

8) This is also a dumb request. Every developer and publisher is going to worry about piracy. If they don't they will be prime targets. This person sounds really childish here as well. More importantly, this really isn't up to Crytek

No every developer. CD Projekt doesn't. It may not be up to Crytek, but I could still very well state my opinion.

9) I don't see how Crysis 2 'ignored' PC players. This sounds childish as well.

You are too pre occupied in finding faults. They did ignore PC to a large extent. How else can you explain the things they did? Console like interface, checkpoint saves (I do admit this has become a norm, but when the first game had save anywhere, stripping this away felt like they were more concerned about the consoles than the PC), no DX11 support, only preset graphics options, can't load a previous checkpoint without quitting to the menu...

10) This seems fair.

11) 'No multiplayer' may not be up to Crytek. Further, if I remember right the multiplayer in Crysis 2 wasn't even made by Crytek. So the singleplayer wouldn't have changed if this option wasn't there. Multiplayer doesn't even necessarily impact single-player. These are usually two different teams even if it is all being done under one development house.

12) I guess this is reasonable but I don't see why this is such a huge deal.

You don't see this as a huge deal. Fair enough, but do you want me to change my opinion just because you feel differently?

So the list has just a few reasonable requests, a few odd but seemingly reasonable requests, and several childish, idiotic requests that make the other requests carry less weight as a result.

Calling my opinions idiotic is extremely arrogant. Don't you think you are being childish? You may disagree, which is fine, but, name calling...I don't see any reason for that.

I have put my responses, feel free to agree/disagree.

Posted by JasonR86

@PatchRowcester:

*Regarding all the times when you say 'I'm going to state my opinion'. Well, that's all well and good but if Crytek can't do anything about it then why send them a letter asking them to?

3) So I watched the video and though you weren't inherently trying to break the game, when I played it, I never experienced any invisible walls. Yes, it does lead you down a path. So did Crysis 1. Crysis 1 was more open world then Crysis 2 but it was still a linear, go to place to place game.

5) We're going to have to agree to disagree dude.

8) Still going to have to agree to disagree.

9) I'm not saying you're childish I'm saying this request is childish. Though I agree the UI wasn't good for PC players and the lack of graphics options is unfortunate they didn't 'ignore' PC players. If they had, there wouldn't have been a PC version of Crysis 2. Now demanding for improvement isn't a bad idea. It's the wording and the underlying feeling behind it. It reads as if you are an exception as a PC player, deserving of more than other players, and demanding of something that you don't inherently deserve because of your 'PC gamer' status. Now I don't know your exactly meaning behind the specific words you chose. But this bullet-point reads really poorly.

So, again, I'm not calling you childish. I don't know you and have no idea what your like. But many of your points sound childish. These requests portray this sense of exceptionalism and of assumptions of the intentions and capabilities of Crytek and EA that may or may not be fair. It reeks of over-simplification and of an apparent belief that PC players are deserving of more due to something they believe they just inherently have but have not earned. But most importantly it sounds petty and attacking. If your intention is truly for Crytek to do something different with the next game then going on the offensive and attacking them with every point is probably not the way to do this. You'll just be ignored.

Posted by BraveToaster

CoD clone? Wow.

Game companies don't care about open letters. Especially open letters from people with little to no knowledge of game development.

Posted by MikkaQ

@drGiggless said:

I refuse to click your link out of principle.

Yeah, post the blog here instead of fishing for hits.

Posted by PatchRowcester

@MikkaQ said:

@drGiggless said:

I refuse to click your link out of principle.

Yeah, post the blog here instead of fishing for hits.

Fishing for hits...why would you assume that?

Hits are like medals that websites like Gamespot handed out to members. They don't mean anything. The reason I did not post here was because I use Windows Writer to publish my posts, and there is an excellent editor for blogger.

I should have posted the text here, and I have said previously that I will do that next time.

Posted by PatchRowcester

@BraveToaster said:

CoD clone? Wow.

Game companies don't care about open letters. Especially open letters from people with little to no knowledge of game development.

As opposed to other companies who care a lot about what someone on the internet has to say? I know my opinion means nothing to anyone, but I'll still have it anyway :)

I think its wrong to assume that I know nothing about game development. I developed games, and created levels using level editors, so I am not as out of touch as you may think. Like I said, that is an opinion which many have shared. I posted a twitter exchange in an earlier post. Not that I need validation for this, but there are other people who felt this way.

Also, I don't know anything about gourmet cooking either, but I have opinion about what I like and what I don't like.

Just saying.

Posted by MikkaQ

@PatchRowcester said:

@MikkaQ said:

@drGiggless said:

I refuse to click your link out of principle.

Yeah, post the blog here instead of fishing for hits.

Fishing for hits...why would you assume that?

Hits are like medals that websites like Gamespot handed out to members. They don't mean anything. The reason I did not post here was because I use Windows Writer to publish my posts, and there is an excellent editor for blogger.

I should have posted the text here, and I have said previously that I will do that next time.

I assume that because that's the intention of lots of people on the internet, call me a cynic, but it's true.

Anyway we have a really nice WSIWYG editor here, so formatting is a snap. Guess you'll find out next time hah.

Posted by PatchRowcester

@JasonR86 said:

@PatchRowcester:

*Regarding all the times when you say 'I'm going to state my opinion'. Well, that's all well and good but if Crytek can't do anything about it then why send them a letter asking them to?

3) So I watched the video and though you weren't inherently trying to break the game, when I played it, I never experienced any invisible walls. Yes, it does lead you down a path. So did Crysis 1. Crysis 1 was more open world then Crysis 2 but it was still a linear, go to place to place game.

5) We're going to have to agree to disagree dude.

8) Still going to have to agree to disagree.

9) I'm not saying you're childish I'm saying this request is childish. Though I agree the UI wasn't good for PC players and the lack of graphics options is unfortunate they didn't 'ignore' PC players. If they had, there wouldn't have been a PC version of Crysis 2. Now demanding for improvement isn't a bad idea. It's the wording and the underlying feeling behind it. It reads as if you are an exception as a PC player, deserving of more than other players, and demanding of something that you don't inherently deserve because of your 'PC gamer' status. Now I don't know your exactly meaning behind the specific words you chose. But this bullet-point reads really poorly.

So, again, I'm not calling you childish. I don't know you and have no idea what your like. But many of your points sound childish. These requests portray this sense of exceptionalism and of assumptions of the intentions and capabilities of Crytek and EA that may or may not be fair. It reeks of over-simplification and of an apparent belief that PC players are deserving of more due to something they believe they just inherently have but have not earned. But most importantly it sounds petty and attacking. If your intention is truly for Crytek to do something different with the next game then going on the offensive and attacking them with every point is probably not the way to do this. You'll just be ignored.

5) This is fine. Its a matter of opinion. Having played the game, I felt they were trying to incorporate CoD as much as possible. You may have felt differently.

8) I think the people who buy their games will benefit a lot if they stopped worrying about pirates. The customer shouldn't have to jump through hoops just to get the game working. I agree that so far, they haven't done anything like UbiSoft, but who know what they will do in the future?

9) Sure. I did feel that they completely ignored their core audience, the very audience Cevat Yerli was talking about when he announced Crysis 2 on more than one occasion. It doesn't bother me at all that the game is released on multiple platforms. The fact that they could have made simple changes which would have made the game better for the PC is what makes me believe they ignored the core audience. I consider myself to be the part of their code audience, at least as far as the first game is concerned.

What do you mean PC players are not deserving, and they have to earn something? We are paying for the game, just like everyone else. So why not give due attention to the platform?

Again, I fail to see why this is childish. It maybe something you disagree with, sure, but not sure why it is childish.

I mean, it may very well be looked at by a non gamer as childish, I mean I could be doing so many other things with my time, instead I am debating the merits of a game with people online and sending messages to game companies.

But if I were to be within the gamer bubble, I still don't see why this is childish. Anyway, it is your opinion.

Posted by PatchRowcester

@MikkaQ said:

@PatchRowcester said:

@MikkaQ said:

@drGiggless said:

I refuse to click your link out of principle.

Yeah, post the blog here instead of fishing for hits.

Fishing for hits...why would you assume that?

Hits are like medals that websites like Gamespot handed out to members. They don't mean anything. The reason I did not post here was because I use Windows Writer to publish my posts, and there is an excellent editor for blogger.

I should have posted the text here, and I have said previously that I will do that next time.

I assume that because that's the intention of lots of people on the internet, call me a cynic, but it's true.

Anyway we have a really nice WSIWYG editor here, so formatting is a snap. Guess you'll find out next time hah.

The editor is fine for text. When I try to include images and videos in the places I want to include, it makes my life so much harder.

Yes, for text, it is fine and functional.

Posted by BraveToaster

@PatchRowcester said:

@BraveToaster said:

CoD clone? Wow.

Game companies don't care about open letters. Especially open letters from people with little to no knowledge of game development.

As opposed to other companies who care a lot about what someone on the internet has to say? I know my opinion means nothing to anyone, but I'll still have it anyway :)

I think its wrong to assume that I know nothing about game development. I developed games, and created levels using level editors, so I am not as out of touch as you may think. Like I said, that is an opinion which many have shared. I posted a twitter exchange in an earlier post. Not that I need validation for this, but there are other people who felt this way.

Also, I don't know anything about gourmet cooking either, but I have opinion about what I like and what I don't like.

Just saying.

I never said you couldn't have an opinion. You're making assumptions when you think its wrong to make assumptions.

Edited by JasonR86

@PatchRowcester:

The fact that you are debating it isn't really the point exactly. That doesn't make it childish. Maybe 'childish' isn't the right word. I'm having a hard time thinking of the word to be honest. It's kind of like...well, it's more like the whole idea that some people who play games are deserving of the world whenever they buy a game. But they aren't. The product is what it is. You and everyone else bought it willingly knowing what it was and wasn't.

I think it's one thing to want the most out of the products you buy and those who make those products. But I think video game consumers go beyond that. There's this idea that video games need to be everything and when it doesn't meet the expectations of consumers consumers decide the solution is to complain until they get what they want. It's like Mass Effect 3. Don't like the ending? Complain until you get the developer to change it. The shitty part is that this 'complain until you get what you want' works way more then it should.

Developers are charged with making the best products they can with what they have. Publishers are charged with selling the products as well as they can. Consumers are charged with determining whether or not that product is worth buying. That really should be the end of it. But video game consumers can't let it end there.

Posted by Phatmac

I find it funny that people think that they can boss around a business like EA. They aren't running a charity and their real intent is to make money. Crytek is a part of EA so there is little that they can do to ever go back to their old ways.

Posted by whyareyoucrouchingspock

@Phatmac said:

I find it funny that people think that they can boss around a business like EA. They aren't running a charity and their real intent is to make money. Crytek is a part of EA so there is little that they can do to ever go back to their old ways.

Seems like a polite request than "bossing".

If people voted with money, they could dictate whatever the fuck they liked. Sadly, gamers have no back bone. They will buy any shit advertised enough. Console gamers mostly.

Posted by Jace

@BraveToaster said:

@PatchRowcester said:

@BraveToaster said:

CoD clone? Wow.

Game companies don't care about open letters. Especially open letters from people with little to no knowledge of game development.

As opposed to other companies who care a lot about what someone on the internet has to say? I know my opinion means nothing to anyone, but I'll still have it anyway :)

I think its wrong to assume that I know nothing about game development. I developed games, and created levels using level editors, so I am not as out of touch as you may think. Like I said, that is an opinion which many have shared. I posted a twitter exchange in an earlier post. Not that I need validation for this, but there are other people who felt this way.

Also, I don't know anything about gourmet cooking either, but I have opinion about what I like and what I don't like.

Just saying.

I never said you couldn't have an opinion. You're making assumptions when you think its wrong to make assumptions.

Toaster, he isn't saying "Crysis has become an exact COD clone." That isn't the point. What he's saying is that the series as a whole is evolving more and more to be another modern day urban shooter (e.g. cod.) Where Crysis 1 was an innovative shooter that was focused on trying to provide a sandbox feel (even if it was sort of artificial), in Crysis 2/3 they aren't even attempting a new approach. It has become a more linear shooter now set in an urban environment. This just happens to be around the same time every other big fps went down the same route, 5 of these titles being published by EA (moh 1/2, crysis 2/3, bf3.)

The question is, how many fucking times are we going to rehash "Run in this city and shoot that guy/terrorist/alien/robot" within a linear fps and still want more the following year?

If you want to argue that, I'd love to hear it.

The point is, innovation has taken more of a side-seat to making money than it did in the past. Innovation isn't so difficult, but reusing selling concepts and packaging them differently is easier.

"But Jace, you don't develop games, so how can you know about the difficulty innovation?"

Here: Make a game based on the unreal engine for the 3 major platforms. It can be played in 3rd/1st person and it revolves around The Avengers and has a huge pvp multiplayer aspect.

Tell me that wouldn't sell. See? Not so hard.

Edited by ZeForgotten
@Jace said:

@BraveToaster said:

@PatchRowcester said:

@BraveToaster said:

CoD clone? Wow.

Game companies don't care about open letters. Especially open letters from people with little to no knowledge of game development.

As opposed to other companies who care a lot about what someone on the internet has to say? I know my opinion means nothing to anyone, but I'll still have it anyway :)

I think its wrong to assume that I know nothing about game development. I developed games, and created levels using level editors, so I am not as out of touch as you may think. Like I said, that is an opinion which many have shared. I posted a twitter exchange in an earlier post. Not that I need validation for this, but there are other people who felt this way.

Also, I don't know anything about gourmet cooking either, but I have opinion about what I like and what I don't like.

Just saying.

I never said you couldn't have an opinion. You're making assumptions when you think its wrong to make assumptions.

Toaster, he isn't saying "Crysis has become an exact COD clone." That isn't the point. What he's saying is that the series as a whole is evolving more and more to be another modern day urban shooter (e.g. cod.) Where Crysis 1 was an innovative shooter that was focused on trying to provide a sandbox feel (even if it was sort of artificial), in Crysis 2/3 they aren't even attempting a new approach. It has become a more linear shooter now set in an urban environment. This just happens to be around the same time every other big fps went down the same route, 5 of these titles being published by EA (moh 1/2, crysis 2/3, bf3.)

The question is, how many fucking times are we going to rehash "Run in this city and shoot that guy/terrorist/alien/robot" within a linear fps and still want more the following year?

If you want to argue that, I'd love to hear it.

The point is, innovation has taken more of a side-seat to making money than it did in the past. Innovation isn't so difficult, but reusing selling concepts and packaging them differently is easier.

"But Jace, you don't develop games, so how can you know about the difficulty innovation?"

Here: Make a game based on the unreal engine for the 3 major platforms. It can be played in 3rd/1st person and it revolves around The Avengers and has a huge pvp multiplayer aspect.

Tell me that wouldn't sell. See? Not so hard.

So Marvel: Ultimate Alliance 3, but with PVP? 
And of course the change in perspective obviously
Online
Posted by JasonR86

@Jace said:

@BraveToaster said:

@PatchRowcester said:

@BraveToaster said:

CoD clone? Wow.

Game companies don't care about open letters. Especially open letters from people with little to no knowledge of game development.

As opposed to other companies who care a lot about what someone on the internet has to say? I know my opinion means nothing to anyone, but I'll still have it anyway :)

I think its wrong to assume that I know nothing about game development. I developed games, and created levels using level editors, so I am not as out of touch as you may think. Like I said, that is an opinion which many have shared. I posted a twitter exchange in an earlier post. Not that I need validation for this, but there are other people who felt this way.

Also, I don't know anything about gourmet cooking either, but I have opinion about what I like and what I don't like.

Just saying.

I never said you couldn't have an opinion. You're making assumptions when you think its wrong to make assumptions.

Toaster, he isn't saying "Crysis has become an exact COD clone." That isn't the point. What he's saying is that the series as a whole is evolving more and more to be another modern day urban shooter (e.g. cod.) Where Crysis 1 was an innovative shooter that was focused on trying to provide a sandbox feel (even if it was sort of artificial), in Crysis 2/3 they aren't even attempting a new approach. It has become a more linear shooter now set in an urban environment. This just happens to be around the same time every other big fps went down the same route, 5 of these titles being published by EA (moh 1/2, crysis 2/3, bf3.)

The question is, how many fucking times are we going to rehash "Run in this city and shoot that guy/terrorist/alien/robot" within a linear fps and still want more the following year?

If you want to argue that, I'd love to hear it.

The point is, innovation has taken more of a side-seat to making money than it did in the past. Innovation isn't so difficult, but reusing selling concepts and packaging them differently is easier.

"But Jace, you don't develop games, so how can you know about the difficulty innovation?"

Here: Make a game based on the unreal engine for the 3 major platforms. It can be played in 3rd/1st person and it revolves around The Avengers and has a huge pvp multiplayer aspect.

Tell me that wouldn't sell. See? Not so hard.

I think people are mis-remembering what Crysis 1 was like. It was more of an open experience then Crysis 2 but the basic concept was still the same. You still had to run to a specified objective and shot dudes. There were some secondary objectives but, really, the goals were as linear as any other FPS game.

Posted by Jace

@JasonR86: I remember Crysis 1 just fine. I remember walking into the first encampment of guys and thinking "You know, I could just break the radar and walk past this whole thing, nah, fuck that noise, I'ma go blow that boat up."

Nothing remotely like that exists in Crysis 2. Also, your point is sort of irrelevant. You will always have to run to a place and shoot guys, but it's those bits in between that matter. If I'm playing a "point A to point B" game, but it appears as though I'm not, then good on the devs for masking it as best they can. Too bad they don't try anymore.

Posted by JasonR86

@Jace said:

@JasonR86: I remember Crysis 1 just fine. I remember walking into the first encampment of guys and thinking "You know, I could just break the radar and walk past this whole thing, nah, fuck that noise, I'ma go blow that boat up."

Nothing remotely like that exists in Crysis 2. Also, your point is sort of irrelevant. You will always have to run to a place and shoot guys, but it's those bits in between that matter. If I'm playing a "point A to point B" game, but it appears as though I'm not, then good on the devs for masking it as best they can. Too bad they don't try anymore.

I remember going through vast chunks of Crysis 2 not killing anyone when I could have killed everyone. I remember seeing several possible solutions to combat puzzles. I got the same thing out of Crysis 1 but just in a larger environment. So I don't get the apparent admiration to the 'openness' of Crysis 1 versus Crysis 2. Crysis 2, to me, gave the player very similar combat puzzles that were found in Crysis 1. Only, in 2, the environments were smaller.

Posted by JackOhara

@JasonR86 said:

@Jace said:

@BraveToaster said:

@PatchRowcester said:

@BraveToaster said:

CoD clone? Wow.

Game companies don't care about open letters. Especially open letters from people with little to no knowledge of game development.

As opposed to other companies who care a lot about what someone on the internet has to say? I know my opinion means nothing to anyone, but I'll still have it anyway :)

I think its wrong to assume that I know nothing about game development. I developed games, and created levels using level editors, so I am not as out of touch as you may think. Like I said, that is an opinion which many have shared. I posted a twitter exchange in an earlier post. Not that I need validation for this, but there are other people who felt this way.

Also, I don't know anything about gourmet cooking either, but I have opinion about what I like and what I don't like.

Just saying.

I never said you couldn't have an opinion. You're making assumptions when you think its wrong to make assumptions.

Toaster, he isn't saying "Crysis has become an exact COD clone." That isn't the point. What he's saying is that the series as a whole is evolving more and more to be another modern day urban shooter (e.g. cod.) Where Crysis 1 was an innovative shooter that was focused on trying to provide a sandbox feel (even if it was sort of artificial), in Crysis 2/3 they aren't even attempting a new approach. It has become a more linear shooter now set in an urban environment. This just happens to be around the same time every other big fps went down the same route, 5 of these titles being published by EA (moh 1/2, crysis 2/3, bf3.)

The question is, how many fucking times are we going to rehash "Run in this city and shoot that guy/terrorist/alien/robot" within a linear fps and still want more the following year?

If you want to argue that, I'd love to hear it.

The point is, innovation has taken more of a side-seat to making money than it did in the past. Innovation isn't so difficult, but reusing selling concepts and packaging them differently is easier.

"But Jace, you don't develop games, so how can you know about the difficulty innovation?"

Here: Make a game based on the unreal engine for the 3 major platforms. It can be played in 3rd/1st person and it revolves around The Avengers and has a huge pvp multiplayer aspect.

Tell me that wouldn't sell. See? Not so hard.

I think people are mis-remembering what Crysis 1 was like. It was more of an open experience then Crysis 2 but the basic concept was still the same. You still had to run to a specified objective and shot dudes. There were some secondary objectives but, really, the goals were as linear as any other FPS game.

While it is true that Crysis 1 was linear, in the sense that you went from point A to point B, it is also true that for Crysis 2 many options that were available for tackling your objectives were removed. Many of the less obvious mechanics and abilities you had that were actually interesting were stripped down into contrived forms of the original. I think a lot of that came with the territory of making it a console focused game (simplifying things for a controller) and making it accessible for people who didn't really want to spend time getting to know the intricacies of what they could do with the suit. Check out http://youtube.com/nanosuitninja for an illustration of what I mean. This is what I think a lot of people are trying to say when they say Crysis 2 is more linear. The feeling isn't helped by the fact that the funnel from point A to point B is much tigher (city streets vs. jungle).

Posted by Beaudacious

What ever helps you sleep at night duder.

Crysis 3: Call of Halo - Battlefield Edition!!!!!!

Coming to a Store near you!

Posted by RedRavN

I consider myself a PC gamer and I thought crysis 2 was a great game. I've played and owned farcry, crysis and crysis 2 so I have a basis for comparison. Some people find the restrictiveness in crysis 2 a problem and while I can definately understand that I myself disagree. I think the linearity and less sanboxy level design ramp up the tension and make for a nice cinematic experience. I think crysis 2 captures that aspect while still allowing for multiple paths and tactical play. I think if crysis 3 can retain this while also incorporating some large open world levels it should be the best of both worlds.

I do not feel like crytek abandoned their PC roots because we got a fairly solid port and a robust graphical update. Truth be told, I think crysis 2 on ultra dx11 with high resolution textures looks incredible and better than the first game. I'm interested to see if they are going to have exclusive PC graphical options at launch this time with crysis 3.

  • 57 results
  • 1
  • 2