Poll: Crysis vs Crysis 2

[bobajob]

On PC, the eye candy improved when Crytek got round to releasing the texture pack and DX11 patch; I imagine the xbox version of crysis 1 is still fun but a lot of the processor intensive destructible environment physics (throwing KPA grunts through wooden buildings to watch them splinter then topple realistically, or KPA bowling b4 tossing them a grenade, lol) was gimped in the second game, quite possibly some of the AI, too, and thus still sadly lacking on the 'box. And that shit makes a lot of difference in shooters, does it not? In the end, really, PC owners felt a bit cheated and console owners were like "meh". At least as far as I can tell. Still blown away by how good it looked though.

 

[Irridium]

Go with Crysis 1. Much more open and you're able to tackle things in far more different ways than 2.

The call is actually pretty hard to make.

Crysis 2 is like Call of Duty, only more open and with better pacing, story, aliens, powers, and graphics. It's worth playing, very much so, but it's still pretty linear.

Crysis 1 is very wide open and while it doesn't look amazing on consoles, its graphics are no real slouch and the fact that it still holds up with weaker graphics says a lot about the game. It plays quite well and is still really fun, especially since it's so open and you can approach everything in so many different ways.

Also remember that 2 has multiplayer and, on consoles, 1 doesn't. But 1 is cheaper.

My suggestion? Pick up 1. It's different.

Just want to say, Crysis 1 on console not having multiplayer is just fine, because its multiplayer sucked ASS.

 

[Irridium]

I haven't played either but I want to play both. I've played the Crysis 1 demo and it was fun, while Crysis 2 looks badass from the videos I've seen.

Speaking of which, this is a bit OT but I've heard bad things about the DRM in Warhead, even more so then other DRMS. Something like if you change a computer part the original game locks up or something. Does anyone have any input on this? I'm trying to figure out if I should get the complete pack or not.

Yeah, the game has limited installs and plenty of other crap thanks to *spit* SecuROM. Though they have released a tool that lets you get back installation's, it's all still a huge pain in the ass that should never have existed.

Fucking DRM...

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

The original Crysis is about 100,000 times more fun than the second one.

 

[UnderCoverGuest]

WHAAAAT?!?!!?

Well, I suppose it was fun while it lasted. Now if only the console gaming companies would decide to release Gears of War 2, Red Dead Redemption, and some Smackdown VS Raw games on PC, I'll consider it a fair trade.


Edit: Oh, and Crysis is much better than Crysis 2. Much. Better. Keep in mind however, Crysis is an 'exploration' style action shooter, where as Warhead is more of a linear action-shooter.

 

[Nazgual]

This.

Crysis 1 all the way.
Crysis 2 tried too hard to be a mix of Crysis and Call of Duty.
All of the originality and whatever made Crysis (the original) stand apart from the rest of the shooter crowd was gone.

2 was boring with the open levels stripped out. I don't even think Crysis 1 was even that spectacular apart from the large levels. Graphics don't mean shit if the game isn't fun.

 

[duchaked]

read the third comment and lost all motivation to even try

neither of the games really blew me away despite being pretty all right (they ain't bad, really). graphics aside, none of the smaller differences (or "gimped" stuff) really changed it that much for me on either the PC or consoles. guess the biggest factor that impacts gameplay preferences is simply the setting (jungle vs city)

 

[AJax_21]

Crysis 1 all the way.

Sure Crysis 2 is pretty fun but nowhere near as fun and open. Also Crysis realizes the fact that it's nothing more than an action game, unlike Crysis 2 where it's shoving conspiracy theories down your throat and assholes barking orders in the radio. It thinks that's the definition of "good storytelling". pssst Crysis 2, your story sucks.

 

[ResonanceGames]

Graphics don't mean shit if the game isn't fun.

Fortunately for us all, the first 2/3 of Crysis were incredibly open, well-designed and extremely fun. Disaster averted.

 

[Extragorey]

I literally cannot think of one minuscule thing that sets Crysis 2 above it's predecessor. It's clear to see where the developer's priorities were during development, and it shows - it is a consolized, linear, and frankly, dumbed down bastardization of a series that rewarded player choice and experimentation.

Sorry, but what's the difference between being dumbed down and being consolized?

But seriously, it's not hard to see what's new/improved. The whole alien DNA upgrade-finger-thingy (for lack of a better name) is quite cool, and I personally much preferred the campaign of Crysis 2 over the original. Much more cinematic and intense - which is what linear campaigns should be like.
Admittedly, Crysis 1 was slightly less linear - that is to say, each map was mapped on your radar as a big square - but you could only follow a linear path through most of it, so it sort of defeated the purpose. I did enjoy having optional objectives, though - not just being stealthy as opposed to a brute-force approach, but having the option to bypass/clear entire encampments.

Also, I prefer the suit modes in Crysis 2 - they seem to make more sense. In Crysis 1, you were constantly in armour mode unless you switched to strength or stealth or speed; in Crysis 2, you need to activate armour mode the same way as stealth. I think they should have changed the way that speed/strength is incorporated, but that's just being nit-picky I guess.

But the best thing about Crysis 2 that Crysis didn't have: stealth takedowns. How on earth they didn't get put in the original, I don't know. What's the point in even having a stealth mode if there's no advantages in getting close to an enemy unseen?
Stealth kills really make Crysis 2 awesome.

All that, and the graphics are better. Less feature-rich, sure (like bending foliage or smashing huts), but undeniably much better-looking. Ran beautifully on my beast of a PC.

Crysis 1 all the way.
Crysis 2 tried too hard to be a mix of Crysis and Call of Duty.
All of the originality and whatever made Crysis (the original) stand apart from the rest of the shooter crowd was gone.

Its only similarity to CoD (besides genre) is that it's scripted and cinematic a lot of the time. Which isn't something that CoD pioneered, so I don't follow your logic, sorry. Also, you talk about "whatever made Crysis (the original) stand apart from the rest of the shooter crowd" like you don't know what it was. So what was it that made it stand apart? Suit abilities? Crysis 2 has them, so what's your point?

I think the issue here - as it usually is - is that people inherently dislike sequels for being sequels; that every game should be completely original. That's unreasonable, to say the least - and I think that reasoning is so obviously flawed that I don't need to elaborate, so I won't.

Off-topic: Best character graphics I've ever seen in a game is Star Wars The Force Unleashed II - almost photorealistic. Any contesters?

 

[Bishop99999999]

Crysis 2 handled suit powers much more efficiently and effectively than Crysis 1. That being said, after stomping through the jungle for hours on end, I found the levels in Crysis 2, while lovely to look at and open-ended to compared to other games, to be too linear. I was really hoping for the kind of freedom Crysis 1 allowed applied to an urban environment, but I guess the technology or design just wasn't there yet. I think we're getting close, though.

 

[Zeh Don]

The original Crysis is better in every way, but that's not to say that Crysis 2 is a bad game - it's just not as good as the original.

Crysis' levels were a kind of 'smaller sandbox' design, where the levels themselves were linear yet large enough to promote some really intelligent gun play, thanks to the very competent level design and A.I. that knew how to handle itself. The suit wasn't just a glorified dot point; it made the game unique, and incredibly fun to play.
Visually, it's better than the second in every way. No question. Crysis 2 pulls off a lot of neat 'special effects' that mimic what the original was doing for real.

Crysis 2's level are sandbox corridors; the gun play is still as open as Crysis', but it's ultimately incredibly restricted because the levels are corridors rather than open fields. The promised verticality is entirely absent, and the level design and A.I. are a massive step backwards.
Visually, it's a terrific show case for what DX9.0 can do in the right hands. It's also very well optimised. The DX11 patch is the laughing stock of the industry - it made the graphics noticeably worse!

Overall, Crysis 2 isn't a real 'Crysis' game and really disappointed me. And it's an utter shame that yet another excellent FPS series was destroyed attempting to become Call of Duty. From the hand holding, scripted sequences, and terrible A.I., to the terrible multiplayer and pathetically told and written story, Crysis 2 disappoints in every way.

Having said that, it's not a bad game - it's just not as good as Crysis. I'd happily hand Crysis a 5 Star Rating. Crysis 2 is more a 4 Star Rating, though I'd be inclined to give it a 3 Star Rating because Cevat Yerli is an arrogant fuck who thought he'd made the best game ever, and ended up with a game that disappointed in Sales to such a degree that EA pulled funding for Crysis 3. He needs to be taken down a peg.

 

[Zhukov]

Crysis was dull with laughably bad writing.

Crysis 2 was generally competent, but in a very forgettable sort of way.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

I am a PC gamer, but I would suggest you get Crysis. It's a better game. Larger levels, more freedom, better visuals, better gameplay, and a better story. Everything about Crysis feels better. After Crysis, you may want to rent Crysis 2 before you purchase it. It's not nearly as good. I hope console gamers will get to play Crysis Warhead as well. It's an awesome game.

 

[Hazy]

I literally cannot think of one minuscule thing that sets Crysis 2 above it's predecessor. It's clear to see where the developer's priorities were during development, and it shows - it is a consolized, linear, and frankly, dumbed down bastardization of a series that rewarded player choice and experimentation.

Sorry, but what's the difference between being dumbed down and being consolized?

Spoiler

There is none!
DO HO HO

 

[NyteRaven]

WHAAAAT?!?!!?

Well, I suppose it was fun while it lasted. Now if only the console gaming companies would decide to release Gears of War 2, Red Dead Redemption, and some Smackdown VS Raw games on PC, I'll consider it a fair trade.


Edit: Oh, and Crysis is much better than Crysis 2. Much. Better. Keep in mind however, Crysis is an 'exploration' style action shooter, where as Warhead is more of a linear action-shooter.

Just a heads up, Gears of War 2 WAS in fact released on PC, with zero fanfare since it was, at the time, Vista only...

OT, I'd say get Crysis 1, Crysis 2 was good, just Crysis 1 was better... then again, I haven't seen what they did to it to get it to play on consoles, so it may actually work out that Crysis 2 is easier to play on XBox, I just don't know...

 

[Woodsey]

Crysis.

Unless, of course, you enjoy having your hand held through every area whilst the developers quite literally show you the design document for each set piece.

Whilst Crysis wasn't perfect, it had potential that the second game completely ignored, almost to the extent that I wonder if CryTek knew why people liked the first to begin with.

WHAAAAT?!?!!?

Well, I suppose it was fun while it lasted. Now if only the console gaming companies would decide to release Gears of War 2, Red Dead Redemption, and some Smackdown VS Raw games on PC, I'll consider it a fair trade.


Edit: Oh, and Crysis is much better than Crysis 2. Much. Better. Keep in mind however, Crysis is an 'exploration' style action shooter, where as Warhead is more of a linear action-shooter.

Just a heads up, Gears of War 2 WAS in fact released on PC, with zero fanfare since it was, at the time, Vista only...

Gears of War was, GoW 2 wasn't.

 

[NLS]

I haven't played either but I want to play both. I've played the Crysis 1 demo and it was fun, while Crysis 2 looks badass from the videos I've seen.

Speaking of which, this is a bit OT but I've heard bad things about the DRM in Warhead, even more so then other DRMS. Something like if you change a computer part the original game locks up or something. Does anyone have any input on this? I'm trying to figure out if I should get the complete pack or not.

You can install Warhead a maximum of 5 times before you need to contact EA, but they also released a tool that resets it for you when you uninstall it.