Crysis: Good or overrated?

Playing through Crysis 1, console port.

Seems pretty fun. You're basically Predator, what with the cloaking and jungle setting. Nice, open maps, cover everywhere, many ways to kill. Almost a murderer's sandbox.

Best fps ever? Not even close, imo.. F.E.A.R., Halo, System Shock, and even Doom (ESPECIALLY DOOM) were more fun overall.

Sure, a sandbox shooter is a nice novelty, but I'd rather play a linear arena shooter like Vanquish (Not an fps, I know, but that's my preferred style)..

It is a good game, but Crysis is more known for what the cryengine was capable of when the first game debuted.

"Can it run Crysis?" and so forth, which was justified, as that engine even now can produce some gorgeous results.

It's a solid game, though I'm generally not an FPS guy.

PC nerds like to say it looks like garbage compared to the PC.

Which is a "no shit". You're supposed to compare it to AAA games on the system, where it looks quite nice imo.

I have it for PC and yes it does look better on PC, but that really doesn't matter to me. The reason I tend to favor the PC versions of games is for the mods. Games like Morrowind or Skyrim get about a million times better with mods.

I actually just installed Crysis a few weeks ago, but I haven't gotten too far in it yet.

For me the best FPS I have ever played is Clive Barker's Undying. It's..just awesome, the atmosphere, the story, everything.

Another great but unknown FPS is called "Breakdown" and it's only on xbox.

Modding can be addicting, for certain. I must have spent about 100 hours on mods back on Freedom Force, and plan on getting Captains Edition for FTL.

That said, when PC gamers give top lists, and really mean to say "These are all just "ok", until you load them up with fifty differentm mods", for every single game on the list it's kind of an eyebrow raiser.. As if dev's just suck at what they do, and the modding community really makes or breaks a game.

Sure, moddings awesome and all, but it tends to make games into drastically different experiences from their original.intent..

Actually that is up to you in terms of how different you make it. For example in Morrowind you don't normally regenerate magicka, you need to either rest or drink a potion. I installed a mod that made the magic regeneration work like it does in Oblivion..where the "willpower" stat determines how quickly it recharges. This didn't drastically alter the game or really make it any easier, it just changed a tedious aspect of the game.

There are of course mods that do completely change the way a game is played, but like I said it just depends on which ones you want to have.

But seriously Clive Barkers Undying for PC is great and I've never used mods for it I don't even think there are any, but the game is way better then Clive Barker's Jericho.

Originally posted by cdtm
Modding can be addicting, for certain. I must have spent about 100 hours on mods back on Freedom Force, and plan on getting Captains Edition for FTL.

That said, when PC gamers give top lists, and really mean to say "These are all just "ok", until you load them up with fifty differentm mods", for every single game on the list it's kind of an eyebrow raiser.. As if dev's just suck at what they do, and the modding community really makes or breaks a game.

Sure, moddings awesome and all, but it tends to make games into drastically different experiences from their original.intent..

The "original intent" argument only really works, imo, if the game can't be objectively improved by mods.

Look at Skyrim, for example. A lot of the issues that come with Bethesda games were fixed by modders. And we're not talking about things like graphics or cosmetic changes. I mean things like giving crafting features that should have been in the base game. Actual patches that fix instabilities (which are legion in many Bethesda games), and so on and so forth.

Sure, there's the "make all dragons giant Randy Savages" mods, but they don't detract from things like fixing that awful UI.

Crysis is a fantastic game.

It's a linear shooter that opens up. It's not a sandbox because you always have a location you need to go too and it's generally straight. However, you can get there in hundreds of different ways and that's one of the reasons why it was reviewed so well. It bogs down near the end when the aliens come into play but at least it changed the game up.

Prior to that, the game is brilliant. The only slight issue with gameplay is that some people might not like the slow paced, sneaking through jungle to headshot a guy with a silenced AR type of experience. Personally, I loved it and I wish other games followed suit. It's a pretty unique game as well.

And the graphics are ****ing stellar. It's batshit crazy that the game still looks ****ing fantastic today and it came out 9 years ago.....pretty nuts.

I personally believe some people will not like it while others will think it's one of the best games they have played (I do) because it's a different type of FPS. It's not like Half-Life, FEAR, Halo, CoD or Bioshock.

I looked up crysis and found this video on it.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGTwbaYXkvA please dont tell me th AI is really like this

Meh, it's comparable to most shooters.

Crysis is cool and a little overrated.