CGI-Quality said:
trasharmdsister12 said:
I think the philosophy behind the game design was also something much more in line with the expectations of PC gamers back then. I'm not saying it's better or worse than other expectations, just different. A lot of PC games back in the day were designed around interactivity, even if it was eventually "pointless". And Crysis really ran with providing interactivity. And a lot of fun with interactive games is figuring out what you can and can't do. For example, Halo 3 came out the same year and it's also one of my favourite shooters (and games) of all time. Can you interact with much? No. But the core shooting, driving, and fighting the AI are done immensely well and that fit with the expectations of console gamers.
But can I pick up a chicken and launch it in strength mode at an enemy that then falls into a wooden barn that gets knocked over, crushing another enemy? Nope. And that was the beauty of Crysis and why I played it so much. The AI was very good as well for being able to coordinate in such a vast and dynamically changing environment so experimentation and replay was encouraged.
|
Or shooting a tree and watching it collapse, hitting other obstacles and reacting as it went down. Knocking an entire house over with a grenade or driving into it (or throwing an enemy at it). It was such a well crafted, fun experience that I feel was missed with the port.
Another reason I want to see F.E.A.R. get another shot, but that's another topic altogether. 
|
That is the big thing that made Crysis great. People when they think of graphics only consider how high res it looks compared to the previous version. To me the love for graphics started with Red Faction in 2001. Could spend hours destroying the whole place lol. Games like Crysis evolved that to the next level. Can't wait to see what else they can do in a remaster with the environment when you throw in ray tracing and high res textures.
Essay Pro