Crysis 2: Limited Edition

I must say..I'm shocked how good this game really is. The graphics are stunningly beautiful, the game is great.. the story is good..but it fails in allot of places. ITs a fun all around game. If this came out called something like "invasion earth" It would be getting 5 stars.. but because it's called 'crysis 2' it's bound to get a low rating.. why? Well let me explain :)

When crysis first came out it raised the benchmark of pc fps's. A benchmark which still stands to this day. It has a great story, a fun game play, original, etc IT also needed an AMAZING pc just to run it at medium (at the time) let alone very high, Which catered for the pc geeks out there (which I am one of ;)) Even most pc today can't run crysis 1 on Very high and keep the fps above 45. Then when crysis warhead came out (Which was pretty much a large add-on pack tbh) People started asking "OMG... When is crysis 2 coming out and can you imagine how amazing it's going to be! The graphics will be photorealistic and the etc etc" ... That's why this game is rated so low.. NOTHING can live up to YEARS of geeky pc's fans exspections. ALL the amazing games/movies have suffered from this in the past. A good E.g. is the Matrix. The matrix was an amazing trilogy.. but because it has a good 4-5 years in-between the first and second one.. PPl were left for too long to imagine how much BETTER it was going to be than the first. Ofc.. it wasn't going to be. How can it live up to such high expectations.

Pc fans also have a rep for slagging off anything that comes out on pc AND consoles. You will hear them/us acting victimised "LOOK AT THIS RUBBISH PORT!!" or the good old "MY pc can't run this! 1 star from me" The simple fact is this is a bloody good fps, I'll admit the graphics aren't the best out their but I'd say it's in the top 10. I think the makers decided to make it look REALLY good but also allow the average pc gamers to be able to run it. I have a high end system and get around 45-50 on very high in crysis, but on crysis 2 I get an easy 60fps Average and tbh..there is hardly any difference. The game does run allot smoother and is less buggy.

Like I say, don't listen to the reviewers (apart from me ;) lol. If you liked crysis 1 for the game play.. trust me you'll love crysis 2. If your only interested in the graphics.. get metro 2033 and be bored for the next few months until you can afford crysis 2.

P.s .. Notice how the ps3/360 fans love the game? Mainly because most have never played crysis and didn't spend years and years dreaming about how good it was going to be. Hope this review helped in some way :)

lol is all i can say crysis 1 still sets a benchmark today and crysis 2 dosent even challenge they have ported from console to make more money but are also going to lose a lot of pc gamers.

Crysis 1 was brilliant. From the huge open world allowing multiple routes therefore allowing various options when approaching the objectives to the incredible visuals. Crysis 2 still looks excellent but there is a lack of options which the PC definitely should have from graphical options to simply being able to save when you want. It feels very linear in comparison and it has a console feel to it in the way the game holds your hand and patronizes you throughout the game by telling you what to do most of the time. I still enjoyed it but Crysis 1 is superior. Releasing the game on multiplatforms was good for business but bad for the overall quality of the game. If this had been released only on PC you can guarantee it would been a classic like the original.

So 5 years on consoles get their benchmark game. Where as PC gamers get another poorly planned console port. Muddy textures up close, a Directx 9 release as opposed to Crysis 5 years ago being Directx 10, a lack of physx, no prone stance, laser sights considered a scope option? A lack of free roaming maps replaced with penned in environments and an unhealthy desire to playout the COD style "cinematic" gameplay. After you've played enough uninspired FPS games no matter how they try to dazzle you with explosions and destruction it's a half hearted attempt at making a game exciting when gameplay should be the key concern not a CGI orgy.

Can't help but feel we've been dealt a bad hand. Crysis 2 (should be named 3) is a money making ploy for the console market. Impressive they've optomised this for consoles but PC gamers suffer badly. A Directx 11 patch is coming out for PC gamers however this should have been on release, again prooving a rushed release of this game.

A suit that tells you what to do and an enemy AI that's been hit with the stupid train adds even more to this melancholy experience. There are some benefits, but they're few and far between, kicking cars, armour mode HUD surround and such like. But suit mods and being hand held with tutorials throughout the game and a linear map are treating us like we're children and making the game too easy.

All in all i'm not impressed, let the console kids consider this to be an FPS revolution, we've played the real Crysis 5 years ago, this is just a money making re-hash. The Directx patch might show a bit of promise, but all in all Crytek should've stuck to cater to the PC community.

Luckily battlefield 3 have confirmed it's being built from the ground up for PC, sorry Crytek but looks like you've sold out.

There has been a lot of negative and in some cases hateful comments about this game all over the Internet. I was nearly swayed from buying the game because of it. So Im really glad I wasnt because it is in fact one of the best FPS shooters released for a while. Now it isnt as good as the first Crysis and this is quite obviously because of the limitations of the console port but it still doesnt mean its bad. The game play isnt as free form and the level design is quite linear. The story jerks a little at first because of the lack of continuity from the end of the first game but no one seemed to complain that much when Half Life 2 continued the story ten years on. Once the story starts to unfold its really rather good and has a great climactic twist. The combat is solid and really enjoyable while the AI stays sane which has a few bugs.
I dont blame Crytek for trying to produce a game that runs on a wide range of hardware. The first game suffered from bad sales initially because of the system requirements. They have learned from that and optimised the engine for Warhead and then some more for this.
So it isnt a technical land mark. It hasnt raised the bar but it hasnt lowered it either. Lets leave the benchmarks to 3DMark and play the game instead.

BTW. WHY CANT I USE PUNCTUATION PLAY.COM!!!?!