wut
I mean…yeah…:3
I noticed a very handsome bald guy on your friends list.
Probably from Spain.
you mean CTID? yea, he’s pretty damn spanish
There were so many things wrong with Bulletstorm besides linearity, but to me, that is in itself a flaw, when taken to the ridiculous extent it was in Bulletstorm, but in general I’m okay with linearity when combined with good gameplay and the rest of it, but it never ads anything for me. I said this about twenty times in the bulletstorm thread.
Its fairly obvious we have massively different views on what is good in video games, making this all very pointless, but I will note I never said Crysis 2 was bad, I just said it was no where near as good as Crysis.
Bulletstorm was abysmal though, I will say that.
My point in itself wasn’t to bring in Bulletstorm to this conversation. Moreover that you overemphasized in that thread that you appeared to think that nonlinearity will ALWAYS make a game better which is not true.
oh hello thar
As a rule, good implementation is always necessary for something to improve a game. Thats just implied.
But my point was that Crysis’s initial implimentation of open gameplay wasn’t all that good. It seems everyone who praises it does so simply because it’s there.
^this
No… I praise it first and foremost because every time I play it I have more fun than I do in any other video game out there. Then once I start thinking about why, one of the main reasons is Crysis 1’s implementation of huge open areas and allowing the player to carefully plan out his method of attack if he so desires. If it wasn’t well implemented I highly doubt it’d be the first thing to come to mind when I try to think of reasons why Crysis 1 is one of my favorite games of all time.
Needless to say this is all purely my opinion, but to say as a fact that its implementation wasn’t all that good isn’t accurate. That might be your opinion but mine is the complete opposite. I can understand why you dislike Crysis 1 for its openness; It really leaves a lot of freedom to the player and some players might not find a way to take advantage of that freedom and make it enjoyable, but I was able to do just that.
I personally found it to be well executed.
I liked both Crysis 1 and Crysis 2, each of them for different features. Both of them have bad sides (fucking VTOL level anyone? -.-), but still they’re decent games. Arguing which one is better is just plain stupid. It’s like comparing apple pie to a hot dog.
The fact Crysis 1 was a sandbox game doesn’t obligate Crytek to make its sequel sandbox too. We’ve had already enough of jungle type games from Crytek. I think it’s good they’re trying different environment. You know, it’d be boring if Crysis 2 was too similar to its prequel.
PS.: Movies are so fucking linear. Only one, always the same, boring ending. Why the fuck people keep going to cinemas? ffs ppl
I don’t get what you guys are bitching about the VTOL level for. Sure it was slow, sure IT WASN’T INVERTED CONTROLS WHILE FLYING, but I beat it on my first try on Delta lol, it’s not tough.
Our very life is linear, plus there is no Load magic, or at least a Pause button… and yet it’s not boring, hehe 
On a sidenote, I wonder where the next Crysis game will be set. Some say it’s time for outer space.
Alien homeworld?
^^ would actually be cool. Unless they’re going with their alien style they’ve got in C1 and 2, in which case it’d probably look just like either Cybertron or the big underwater city from the Abyss. Actually that sounds even better.
You make it sound like I can’t comprehend “openness” and therefore can’t enjoy it. I don’t enjoy BAD openness is what I said. Rushed openness. Linking together two small levels with a football field of terrain and scribbling on the heightmap openness.
Even when I do make my way around every nook and cranny of a realistic, bland, samey environment, I get no satisfaction from actually taking out the enemies in the game. Their vocalizations are ridiculous, and the “revolutionary” clusterfuck of an AI just makes me feel like I’m killing robots instead of other beings who want to kill me. There’s a certain “feel” to enemies games just have to have to be fun. You could have something like Half life’s HECU’s or Halo’s Elites where you can FEEL their hatred towards you making killing them even more satisfying. Crysis KPA’s don’t seem to be able to choose between hate and fear, and even mix them together resulting in the most hilarious shit like “DIE LIKA DAWG…AAAAAAAA…HES DEAD…WHARR IZ HEEEE-BAZTUD…HIZ HEER SUMWHEUH”
Part of me (the biggest part actually) not feeling Crysis 1 is my inability to take the enemy seriously when they insist on being so damn funny. I don’t mean “Evil Dead intentionally ironic” funny. I mean “The Room bad accident” funny. I would not have a problem with the “bad openness” if the enemies felt better.
PS: I hated the vtol level on my first play through and then semi enjoyed it the second one. Ironically, I wish that level was more open. It was kinda weird for a whole game to boast having huge open environments and then put you in a jet propelled osprey just to be forced down a tube. It was one of the levels that would have actually BENEFITED the lack of any path. The whole invisible ceiling thing broke it for me too.
ON TOPIC: I want a Crysis 2 coop mod. Or a Crysis 2 deathmatch mod that’s actually a Crysis 2 multiplayer and not COD with nanosuits. Customizing weapons in game and huge vehicle based maps and all that shit.
Don’t put words in my mouth. All I said was that the type of openness in Crysis 1 doesn’t appeal to you, and again, you’re saying that it’s “bad openness” as a fact when something like that is clearly an opinion, since there are others like me who disagree with that statement.
Crysis 1 never felt like a “linear” game to me. The maps were huge, there were few areas where I felt constrained and like I could only go forward. The map barriers were natural, like mountains and water as far as the eye can see.
EDIT: Oh yeah, topic… a Crysis 3 in an alien homeworld could be fun, but after Crysis 2 I can’t say that I trust Crytek’s ability to deliver an exciting alien world. I’m afraid of it turning into Halo with a nanosuit. Although I would love for the aliens from Crysis 1 to return, they were much more fun than the ones in Crysis 2 IMHO…
Again, you seem to think I think crysis is linear.
Imo, I don’t really think the levels of Crysis 1 were just littered with stuff, there was quite a bit of attention to detail in there and a lot more hand placement than just copy-paste.
I could understand that the level design wouldn’t appeal to you much because the things that populate it aside from the vegetation are very generic items that only seem to serve the purpose of being in there to make it look “littered”. Lets be honest, looking at barrel’s and brick walls and houses made out of shacks doesn’t really serve for great scenery.
I wouldn’t go as far to say that Crysis 1’s openness was bad openness though, as I’m quite sure more reviewers would have criticized those aspects of it for being bad. Maybe you had a problem with it’s implementation, but again, that’s your opinion - as is everyone else’s statements here.
Imo, I love both of them. I like Crysis 1 for how you could experiment with it’s open-endedness and the tactical options available to you, and I like Crysis 2 because it’s a more refined Crysis 1. Sure, it isn’t as open, but it took the cool elements of Crysis 1 such as stealth, or being strong, and expands on it in cinematic ways, as well as the improved storytelling. I actually find myself semi-interested in the story, the execution reminds me a bit of FEAR.
I hate Crysis 2’s multiplayer though, and I wish it had an editor. I was so hyped up for it 
I wouldn’t mind an alien homeworld type thing like the alien ship of Crysis just more colorful and with a better sense of direction.
Also, doesn’t the beta have a map editor?