Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Crysis 3

JDR13

Arcane
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Messages
3,930
Location
The Swamp
The original Crysis and Crysis: Warhead were phenomenal shooters for their time. They're still better than most shooters being made now imo.

Crysis 2 was a huge disappointment to me especially in the level design.

I still haven't played Crysis 3 yet, but I plan on running through the whole series in the near future.
 

DemonKing

Arcane
Joined
Dec 5, 2003
Messages
5,958
I actually liked Crysis 2 better than the original - maybe because it gave me a FEAR vibe and didn't break my PC.

Warhead was pretty good. FC3 pretty forgettable.

Original Far Cry of course tops them all...
 

Mynon

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck
Joined
Apr 28, 2017
Messages
1,138
I still haven't played Crysis 3 yet, but I plan on running through the whole series in the near future.
It's pretty gud, with more of a stealth focus and a bit of Turok-like feel (what with a badass bow and a return to jungle environs).
 
Joined
Mar 18, 2009
Messages
7,308
The original Crysis and Crysis: Warhead were phenomenal shooters for their time.

They were very pretty and at least offered a lot more fun gameplay opportunities than ultra linear COD-likes that were all the rage back then if I remember correctly. But they weren't phenomenal for their time in anything except the technical side.
Crysis 2 was disappointment even in that, especially physics.
 
Last edited:

Decado

Old time handsome face wrecker
Patron
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
2,544
Location
San Diego
Codex 2014
The original Crysis and Crysis: Warhead were phenomenal shooters for their time. They're still better than most shooters being made now imo.

Crysis is still one of the best shooters ever made. I haven't run it on my new GTX 10000 million or whatever, I should install it an give it a whirl. It probably still looks fucking awesome.

Edit: Crysis will be 10 years old in November, holy shit.
 

Master

Arbiter
Joined
Oct 19, 2016
Messages
1,160
Crysis looks realistic but somehow isnt very pretty. Far Cry looks cartoony but its prettier.
 

JDR13

Arcane
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Messages
3,930
Location
The Swamp
The original Crysis and Crysis: Warhead were phenomenal shooters for their time.

They were very pretty and at least offered a lot more fun gameplay opportunities than ultra linear COD-likes that were all the rage back then if I remember correctly. But they weren't phenomenal for their time in anything except the technical side.
Crysis 2 was disappointment even in that, especially physics.

We're all welcome to an opinion. There aren't many pure shooters that offer the openess and freedom that Crysis and Warhead gave us. The primary reason Crysis 2 sucked by comparison is because they removed that freedom.

Not only that, but they did it without cramming those games full of retarded collectibles and mini-games like most of the more recent shooters.
 

Master

Arbiter
Joined
Oct 19, 2016
Messages
1,160
What good were the open levels when the AI didnt know how to lie down when somebody shoots at them. They just stand in the middle of the fucking road and wait for me to aim down my iron sights. Fuck this game.

:edgy:
 

Master

Arbiter
Joined
Oct 19, 2016
Messages
1,160
Except Crysis was a followup itself to Far Cry and it sucked in every way except that you could ride a tank.
 

sullynathan

Arcane
Joined
Dec 22, 2015
Messages
6,473
Location
Not Europe
I'm one of those that believes crysis (including the first game) sucks ass but crysis 3 is actually good (on the hardest difficulty) and a direct improvement over crysis 2 (just average cod clone with powers).

Surprisingly, the codexers that were in this thread at release had a short enough attention span that didn't allow them to beat a >6 hours long game.

The bow is op and one shots every enemy that isn't a really large alien or turret but the lack of aiming reticle minimized how much I used it, which I'm assuming was the reason it's turned off on the higher difficulties. Almost All guns in the game are great though, they hit very hard especially the expanded alien weaponry that drops from killing certain aliens was a better reward than nanosuit points from crysis 2.

In general the suit is just a bit more balanced because now you can't just easily unlock every single ability a bit over half way through the game because you killed a lot of aliens. You now have reason to stick with specific abilities because they'll upgrade when you use them enough and the suit points aren't as easy to come by.

Hacking is too effective because the turrets and the mobile aliens just have no defense against it, the only reason why you wouldn't want to hack is if you don't want to interrupt the shooting.

Sprinting no longer consumes energy so you won't run out of energy for running for 7 seconds.

The world is expanded just enough that you'll have far more alternate roots and secondary objectives than crysis 2. Plus there are vehicle sections now which were dumb as hell in hindsight because of how fragile the vehicles are.

The AI is less offensive than 1 & 2. They're outright more aware and less glitched than crysis 2. Crysis 2 AI used to stare you in the face and move for 2 - 3 seconds before attacking, they got stuck in places regularly and were more docile. That isn't the case here.

Overall it's been better than it's predecessors.
 
Last edited:

DalekFlay

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
14,118
Location
New Vegas
They were very pretty and at least offered a lot more fun gameplay opportunities than ultra linear COD-likes that were all the rage back then if I remember correctly. But they weren't phenomenal for their time in anything except the technical side

It's funny how polarized Crysis opinion is. I think it's one of the best shooters of all time, and many others do too, but then you have people who think it's pretty but lame or boring or whatever. I think it comes down to how you like to play. I sneaked through the forest with my cloak on and took guys out stealth game style, and it was soooooo good at that kind of gameplay.
 

SniperHF

Arcane
Joined
Aug 22, 2014
Messages
1,110
Crysis 3's multiplayer was surprisingly fun, almost arena shooter like. Single player was shit though.

It's funny how polarized Crysis opinion is. I think it's one of the best shooters of all time, and many others do too, but then you have people who think it's pretty but lame or boring or whatever. I think it comes down to how you like to play. I sneaked through the forest with my cloak on and took guys out stealth game style, and it was soooooo good at that kind of gameplay.

I think this is good, if when you fail you allow it and try to recover when you get discovered instead of reload. That's what creates insane situations you've gotta get yourself out of.
 
Joined
Mar 18, 2009
Messages
7,308
It's funny how polarized Crysis opinion is. I think it's one of the best shooters of all time, and many others do too, but then you have people who think it's pretty but lame or boring or whatever. I think it comes down to how you like to play. I sneaked through the forest with my cloak on and took guys out stealth game style, and it was soooooo good at that kind of gameplay.

Yeah that's how I played it too. It is enjoyable, sure, but not great. I'm certainly not one of the "it's not a game but tech demo" people. It still has some of best physics among shooters, even if they are prone to glitching out. Waiting for suit energy to recharge after every stealth shot can get old though. I sure wouldn't mind getting a high budget shooter like that today, what comes out now makes Crysis look like masterpiee. Though last time I reinstalled it I was getting some really weird yellow texture bug, which led me to cancel that playthrough.
 

AW8

Arcane
Joined
Mar 1, 2013
Messages
1,852
Location
North of Poland
Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire
I've loved Crysis since it came out (well, the first half anyway, the game declines hard with the alien part) and I naively thought that this was how future shooters would be: Huge maps, destructible environments, fast gameplay and amazing graphics.

Then Crysis 2 came out and dashed all those dreams, having you jog through corridors in a static world filled with cinematics and QTE's. Even the graphical side was botched with graphics settings only patched in half a year after release.

Now as a Call of Duty with superpowers, it was still entertaining. But compared to the rush of sneaking through the jungle and going "Predator" on unsuspecting North Koreans... it and its sequel was nothing.
 

DalekFlay

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
14,118
Location
New Vegas
I've loved Crysis since it came out (well, the first half anyway, the game declines hard with the alien part) and I naively thought that this was how future shooters would be: Huge maps, destructible environments, fast gameplay and amazing graphics.

Then Crysis 2 came out and dashed all those dreams, having you jog through corridors in a static world filled with cinematics and QTE's. Even the graphical side was botched with graphics settings only patched in half a year after release.

Crysis 2 even ran at like 20fps a lot of the time on the Xbox 360 anyway, despite the closing off of levels. It's hilarious (in a depressing way).

Edit: Citation needed eh? Here:

 
Last edited:

schru

Arcane
Joined
Feb 27, 2015
Messages
1,131
Far Cry was Crytek's only really good game. The AI was decent, the guns felt nice, the level design and encounters were pretty decent, and importantly the combat had some edge because of how easily you could die. The B action-thriller theme fit the game pretty well too and it wasn't cringe-inducing unlike the cinematic Hollywood style of Crysis. The latter's suit powers felt rather unwieldy and gimmicky, or at least the game didn't last long enough for me to become fluent with it. Aside of a few locations where it was possible to have some fun using explosives to demolish outposts and bases, nothing felt very advanced in a way that would match the pretensions that it was a major technological step, graphics aside of course. The combat wasn't too trivial, but most encounters just lacked interest and perhaps it was too easy to get through them without resorting to the suit powers.
 

JDR13

Arcane
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Messages
3,930
Location
The Swamp
Crysis and Crysis Warhead were both pretty good. By comparison, Crysis 2 was shit.

Never played Crysis 3. Is it actually worth it?
 

Child of Malkav

Erudite
Joined
Feb 11, 2018
Messages
2,453
Location
Romania
Crysis and Crysis Warhead were both pretty good. By comparison, Crysis 2 was shit.

Never played Crysis 3. Is it actually worth it?
Crysis 2 and 3 have an emphasis on stealth. If you like that playstyle it's worth a playthrough. In 3 they add a bow, maps are big, a few are sandbox-y. Nothing spectacular. Some might say functional. I would say fun.
I still prefer Crysis 2 though. Longer than 3 and you can actually ghost the game if you play very stealthy and in a particular way. That's my preference anyway.
 

DalekFlay

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
14,118
Location
New Vegas
Yeah I played 2 and 3 very stealthy and they were entertaining. It's just hard not to see the downgrade from the original in so many ways.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom