"Crytek's head honcho and the creative director behind Far Cry, Crysis and Crysis 2, Cevat Yerli, doesn’t hesitate to explain why Crysis 2 feels so different when compared to the first game. The pacific paradise and the vast freedom Crysis offered is exchanged with traditional levels in a demolished city environment. I miss the pacific almost instinctively. The Nanosuit is trimmed. Only two modes remain while the other two are built into the controller.

The enemies are new. The game world is new. The main character is new. The nanosuit is new and the atmosphere of Crysis 2 is radically different with the one in Crysis. Extremely disappointing. I feel almost sad when Cevat then criticises his own game.

"Crysis was a big technical achievement but in terms of design and gameplay it had a lot of flaws which I refuse to forgive myself for. The ending was rushed and we shouldn’t have revealed the ice twist in beforehand."

I can absolutely agree with the latter. But it feels strange that Crysis had flaws so substantial that they had to abandon the open world sandbox for a linear action experience. Obviously it's a lot about priorities, their will to deliver a heavy and well-written story but also due to the consoles' inability to handle large scale forest environments and beaches such as those seen in Crysis.

I'm thrown into the fourth campaign level of Crysis 2 and a demolished New York is in front of me. For Xbox 360 Crysis 2 doesn't look as good as I expected. It's obvious that the console is getting old at this point. The gameplay feels tight, though. I'm running through a bombed park, jumping up a crashed subway train and suddenly encounter the first enemies.

The enemies from outer space are walking on two legs this time around. They look like "Transformers-rejects" (he probably means they look like a design rejected from Transformers, lol), with chromed deadlocks and they leak oil when you shoot them. I'm not impressed. To shoot angry North Koreans in the first game was a lot more satisfying. The weapons feels good, though, and after a couple of runs on the 360, I change over to PC. It's visually very nice, though the "catastrophic beauty" is not even close to as beautiful as the pacific in the predecessor. I'm playing the same level 6 times. The freedom of choice Crytek speaks of is minimal. The pace is good, though, and the weapons are solid. Overall I'm not impressed at all.

Instead it's the following multiplayer session that impresses me, from level design, game structure, controller and graphics. At this point the multiplayer looks better than the campaign. The people behind Timesplitters have combined Modern Warfare with Halo and the result is a fast, violent and balanced multiplayer component. The nanosuit works perfectly when facing opponents and the levels are cleverly designed to jump and sneak through a demolished New York.

Considering how much I love the first game I mourn the fact that Crytek left the pacific and aimed their level design towards traditional linearity. At the same time, the multiplayer feels incredibly good." Petter Hegevall.

It looks like he does not like Crysis2.

Hopefully this is just some random guy's blog 'cause I've never seen such a biased, uninformed article and overall horribly written article.

And on the other side of the fence: http://www.gamesas.com/forums/topic5456/

:)

wow exactly what i didnt wanna hear
that guy got to play on pc lucky mofo

LoL other Magazines saying that the 360 version looks awesome, but this guy?? LOL
Btw ive played the game on 360 and it looks awesome. Cant wait to play the campaign.

Hopefully this is just some random guy's blog 'cause I've never seen such a biased, uninformed article and overall horribly written article.

You mean you expect reviews to contain no opinion whatsoever? Good luck with that one. Reviews showcase impressions, and these are his.

Read this review and the one Shinanigans linked again and see if you can get a feel for the type players writing the reviews. The person that wrote this review prefers open type games as opposed to the linearity that COD et al is.

Once you've made that distinction you will understand why the current generation of true Crysis players are pissed of and think C2 is a kockup.

This review is the second last nail in the C2 coffin for me. I predict the last one will be in March when it actually comes out.

"The pace is good, though, and the weapons are solid. Overall I'm not impressed at all."
I didn't understand what this guy was talking about when he says stuff like this.

Hopefully this is just some random guy's blog 'cause I've never seen such a biased, uninformed article and overall horribly written article.

You mean you expect reviews to contain no opinion whatsoever? Good luck with that one. Reviews showcase impressions, and these are his.

I actually respected this previewers opinion more than the others, just because he has a great idea of what Crysis was about and he loved and played the title extensively...

Crysis 2 is not looking good for fans of the series, that seems to be pretty obvious by now. What we are fearing is a COD/HALO remake with a linear playground... thats exactly what this previewer says, and I feel inclined to believe it since, lets face it, the Multiplayer footage so far looks like CoD and the Singleplayer looks extremely linear, the graphics don't look as strikingly beautiful, and the story was almost completely torn apart and moved to NYC...

I'm only looking forward to Crysis 2 for the story at this point, the rest of what we have seen looks like such a disappointment and a sellout to the fans. And don't say don't create an opinion yet, we haven't seen all the game yet, the problem is that from the footage that we have seen looks controversial, and most people I have talked to that played the game and previewers, all say that the game feels like it completely abandoned the Crysis feel and is now a CoD/Console clone. The promotional videos for Crysis and Crysis Wars got my adrenaline pumping in a WANT NOW kind of way, but Crysis 2 gives me no such adrenaline, aside from the Wall Trailer, which is all story hinting anyway. I do not see myself spending a long time in the multiplayer if it continues to shove this "Nanosuit 2 improvements" down our throat and Call of Duty type gameplay. Maximum Health? Give me a break... Consoles have ruined a once great series and I will not forget that about Crytek. Go have your fun with Codename Kingdoms and CoD Clone #3421, Console kiddies, I think I will stick to PC exclusives from now on. Not getting any information on the PC version of this game has completely killed off my anticipation for it. Crytek sure seems eager to release a 360 "test" (beta), yet the PC'ers haven't even heard about modding or dedicated servers yet, which we should have heard of about 18 months ago and were standard in Far Cry and Crysis! Selling Far Cry completely to Ubisoft was the biggest mistake Crytek has ever made.

Not trying to sound pessimistic, but at this point im much more excited in waiting for Battlefield 3. :O

Do consoles have to ruin EVERY series? I knew Free Radical on the multiplayer and NYC was a bad idea... only good thing about this game is Richard Morgan on the story and of course, the engine and the modding that comes with it.

WOW TALON all true
exactly how i freakin feel

I'd have to agree in terms of the game feeling alot more linear, I've played the Central Station level, and despite the fact you can scale the area quite abit, the atmosphere that the first games had have dissapeared, and you always seem to end up going in a particular direction, taking a particular route, and so on. Nevertheless, the remaining aspects of the game do seem pretty good otherwise

Hopefully this is just some random guy's blog 'cause I've never seen such a biased, uninformed article and overall horribly written article.

You mean you expect reviews to contain no opinion whatsoever? Good luck with that one. Reviews showcase impressions, and these are his.
I've no problem with opinions, it's just when they're based on misinformation and are told in an obnoxious manner that I become annoyed.

Crysis is far and away the best FPS i've played in years (along side the STALKER series). I still play the SP to this day because of how it enables me to approach situations in a variety of ways, and then change it up on the fly without breaking the pace of the game. You know, maybe the balls to the wall approach isn't working out, no problem, I can disappear before the enemies eyes and take on a stealth approach. It's one of the few evolutionary shooters we've had in a while.

We've seen parts of two levels, and New York Stock Exchange one bears an undeniable resemblance to the Korean Village areas in the original. Only with more 'verticality'. Nothing we've seen has reminded me of Call of Duty level design, full of all-knowing cheap as hell AI. I don't know where you're getting the idea that it's a Call of Duty clone. Just the fact that the game still offers stealth gameplay proves it is not like Call of Duty at all.

Also, the levels do not need to be as large as 'Onslaught' to offer the player freedom in tactics and approach. Look back to when Crysis was originally revealed, the level they showed off...really wasn't that large, but it was designed in such a way that allowed for a variety of takes on the situation. And in the context of the City, you're obviously not going to have vast open fields or oceans. So, yeh, I guess you should stop looking forward to Crysis 2 if you planned on swimming across the ocean to bypass the entire level.

I think you guys are really overreacting when you say "ruin", as if Crysis 2 will be complete **** because the levels aren't as enormously vast as the original. That kind of black and white thinking is irrational.

And besides.... at least one level has to be big and open, cause i am positive wel take a trip to central park

Crysis 2 looking fun and awesome can't wait!

Crysis 2 looking fun and awesome can't wait!

I second that!

I loved Crysis 1 but freedom Crysis offered was only witch style you would chose.Will you play it like Splinter Cell or like Halo or something in between.Crysis 2 still has this I think.

As for jungle FarCry was dead on but Crysis not so.Dude in black suit whit red lights all over and it glow when using strength and speed it really blends nice with jungle lol.I think city is better surrounding for Crysis
But it's true that consoles ruin maximum potential of Crysis 2.Who knows what Crysis 2 would look like if it was PC exclusive.

Hopefully this is just some random guy's blog 'cause I've never seen such a biased, uninformed article and overall horribly written article.


Sorry, but he is the boss of the largest reviewing magazine/site in Sweden...

To be honest, i'll be playing crysis for the story, as it's been too long since a really good sci-fi esque game. The original crysis was very good gameplay wise, but the story was a bit, well, a little vacant at times.

In terms of games i'm really looking forward to in terms of being 'omg, this is truly amazing' is actually going to be battlefield 3 and guild wars 2. I know that DICE will provide the goods as they always have. Hell, bad company was a console only franchise in order to bring battlefield to the console, but they listened to the PC crowd and made sure we had bad company 2, and even added real support for the PC version. All in all, if they put this much effort into the PC version of a console series, i can't wait to see how battlefield 3 turns out.

Crysis 2 overall has gone downhill in expectations as time goes on, but it'll still be far more interesting that generic 'zomg modern warfare', even if not as much as it should have been.

To be honest, i'll be playing crysis for the story, as it's been too long since a really good sci-fi esque game. The original crysis was very good gameplay wise, but the story was a bit, well, a little vacant at times.

In terms of games i'm really looking forward to in terms of being 'omg, this is truly amazing' is actually going to be battlefield 3 and guild wars 2. I know that DICE will provide the goods as they always have. Hell, bad company was a console only franchise in order to bring battlefield to the console, but they listened to the PC crowd and made sure we had bad company 2, and even added real support for the PC version. All in all, if they put this much effort into the PC version of a console series, i can't wait to see how battlefield 3 turns out.

Crysis 2 overall has gone downhill in expectations as time goes on, but it'll still be far more interesting that generic 'zomg modern warfare', even if not as much as it should have been.

I Agree

Crytek is having major crysis > Crysis 2 can be a brand killer!
I feel what the author of the article is writing.

Well the situation is unfortunately quite obvious. Crytek was disappointed in Crysis sales. Crysis was far ahead of it times like let's say Total Annihilation 1. The possible audience was limited by both gamers skills and rigs. But simmilar to Total Annihilation Crysis very successfully built its brand identity (visually stunning, natural environments, sandbox, skill-base gaming)

So business-wise Crytek decided to get to the mainstream with casual FPS console gaming (low skill, movie-esq linear scenario gaming). The company also chosen to become similar with the C2 to such a commercially successful titles like COD and Halo so the audience can freely so to say step up into Nano Suite.
Choosing this path Crytek more or less (consciously) resigned from Crysis unique advantages and characteristics on the market: Natural environments, skill based gaming, real sandbox (rigged sandbox is an oxymoron).

Again business-wise many people would say that is great! Lets go with the market trends and broad audience.

I think quite opposite. This is a very bad idea. I think that possibly Crysis 2 can be so bad to the Crysis brand that there will be no Crysis 3!

Why? Because the original fandom and audience of Crysis is already disappointed and will not get the features that they liked in the original game. The boarder audience of consoles will see the game as nothing more as a COD or Haloesq clone. So the Crysis will lose its very own established place on the market (natural environments, sandbox play, skill based FPS) and will gain nothing!

In my opinion consolizing the FPS (low-skill causal play, no kneeling, no tactics, just fast cinematic shooting) is just a short term trend on the market that will go away as controllers and hardware will develop.

So losing its identity by just bad project decision on Crysis 2 might as well kill the Crysis brand.

P.S. hey don't bash me I got rigth to my own little opinion
P.S.2 I love Crysis brand that is why I care to write this...