[quote]
Who said it would only be for the PC?

I don't see why we couldn't atleast drive around some humvees, and maybe hang glider across the buildings if we wanted to. I think that would be pretty sick. Tanks and stuff would be hard to do though without a really large map, and the consoles don't have enough RAM to support large maps. Heck, the map Mesa takes up 1100MB of Ram, and the Windows OS takes another 1000MB, which totals around 2GB of RAM. The consoles only have 512MB for the entire system, which is why large maps are impossible to do.[/quote]

The fact that it wouldn't work on the console is WHY I say it would only be for the PC. Extra man-hours and money into something that would estrange more people than it would convince. The console crowd would certainly be pissed if PC got extra features at initial release, and for good reason. Spending more money to make less is usually not considered smart business. During the E3 interviews, Crytek strongly hinted at DLC for C2, so maybe PC will get exclusive map packs.

And to answer the humvee question: Do you really want to drive a hummer half a block? There won't be room for vehicles to work on small maps. Why ruin the gameplay to force a useless mechanic?

Thanks Cry-Lee, we're all gonna have to svck it and see aren't we... I know you cannot comment or release information early ahead of schedule but i hang my hopes on the dedicated server kits for PC users, anyone with a console playing C2-MP will have the servers you provide for them plus i hope some dedicated kits run by those with PC's also focusing on the console (6vs6 stock) but for PC users exclusively besides the higher-resolutions and extra eye-candy we wouldn't mind the ability to unlock the MP side of things and install dedicated kits which may allow custom content, maps etc, thats to say... not to lock the PC multiplayer experience to 6 vs 6, cheers

[quote]Vehicles are a must.. I don't know about you, but the vehicles don't take anything away from my nano suit, it gets used non stop all game long.[/quote]

From Crysis1, i think some ways Vehicles vs Nanosuit could've been balanced better were:

- Louder engines/noise dampening so that cloak couldn't be heard.
- Strength punch to actually do anything to LTV's, let alone tanks. Being able to stop a TAC tank from aiming correct by punching it, etc.
- Strength mode the ability to execute semi-scripted events to enable things like punching the bonnet of a car and flipping it over head.
- Armour mode to almost (not always) kill you, dependant on weight/speed of a vehicle impact, bounce off the vehicle, etc.

Dunno what kinda servers you played on, but on vanilla servers, the suit was completely redundant against Tanks and VTOL's. If you had enough cash, you could speed in with some C4 on a tank, but that's about the only option.

I agree, Shinanigans, suits were nearly useless against way too many vehicles, especially on stock servers where you didn't start with heavy weapons. VTOL and Helicopter in particular overpower a suit like no other.

In general, I just think that taking away vehicles can't really hurt a game that in theory is supposed to be about a Nanosuit. Vehicles require a different scale of map, a different sort of location, and massive rebalancing of the entire system to work well. In a city, vehicles are nearly useless, being confined to roads, with tons of places to get ambushed from. I fully expect if vehicles were implemented, just to shut up the whining, the same people would just end up complaining about the fact that "My tank gets taken down too easy by 4 or 5 guys with rocket launchers stepping up to the window to fire"

Guess what, thats urban warfare. Vehicles svck. You use them to get somewhere and provide cover while the guys on the ground kick in the door and clear the building. You can't shoot the heavy weapons for fear of collateral damage and friendly fire. Large vehicles turn into very expensive rocket magnets.

Last but not least, tactical air assets don't need to be playable in an infantry game. They're support at most, not primary weapons.

it sounds like crysis 2 multiplayer will be all about the nanosuit. that's cool seeing as how the suit would crush any tank out there. still vehicles would be fun...

let them pushg the game back another two years and all will be fine

[quote]So essentially, you expect Crytek to develop tons of extra maps that cater exclusively to the PC players even though they would offend the console players (who pay more for their copy) by doing so?[/quote]

Licensing fees for publishing a game on a console is what that extra 10 bucks is about, and thats about it, crytek doesn't see that money basically.
so your reasoning behind why the PC version NEEDS to be just like the console is; the consoles has limitations, if the PC version didn't constrain itself to these limitations the console players would be angry, feeling screwed. how would you feel if they decided they are making it for the Wii, and all the versions will need to meet these constraints, lest the Wii crowd get upset. you'd feel screwed right? This is basically what is happening to the PC crowd in certain aspects, some things they are taking out I could care less about, other things I feel more strongly about. I know talking about it here won't change anything, but also I don't see why anyone needs to sugar coat this for what it is.

Licensing fees for publishing a game on a console is what that extra 10 bucks is about, and thats about it, crytek doesn't see that money basically.
so your reasoning behind why the PC version NEEDS to be just like the console is; the consoles has limitations, if the PC version didn't constrain itself to these limitations the console players would be angry, feeling screwed. how would you feel if they decided they are making it for the Wii, and all the versions will need to meet these constraints, lest the Wii crowd get upset. you'd feel screwed right? This is basically what is happening to the PC crowd in certain aspects, some things they are taking out I could care less about, other things I feel more strongly about. I know talking about it here won't change anything, but also I don't see why anyone needs to sugar coat this for what it is.[/quote]



very good points. i think that people should get what they pay for. of course a 250$ xbox won't have the capabilities of an 1500$ pc, so it only makes sense that the Pc gets some more "perks"

Ok. But the PC DOES get perks. We can crank the graphics all the way up. It would be a crap business decision to spend LOTS of extra money to sell a handful more copies to a third of the potential market. Man hours=money spent, money that has to be made back in retail. Man hours dedicated to making a fraction of the potential market happy without adding any value for what DOES constitute the majority of the market is a bad business decision.

If DLC is available, Im sure the PC people will get an edge, if Sandbox is released, I have a hunch the PC people will get the benefits. And you chose to spend $1500 on your PC to get better graphics than someone else. You did NOT pay Crytek $1500 to give you a handy j.

Sure it does get perks, it also gets limitations on things that used to be in previous versions(I'm not talking about vehicles) I don't think anyone expects to have our grievances change their design decisions but that doesn't mean we must refrain from letting our opinions be known.
While people may spend x amount on a PC for better graphics they might also be buying it because they don't want the player limit set in their games at 12 (or whatever example you'd like to use) due to hardware limitations. I understand the reasoning behind said decision, but I think the framework already exists to accommodate something like a player limit increase, so it's more of an issue of making sure the PC release mirrors the console release. I don't think the man hours involved would be too large as to cut away from their precious profit margins, but obviously we have no way of proving that one way or the other. I think it's almost safe to say the framework is there for a larger player limit but a software cap is in place, but once again there is no way of proving that.

Draug, I honestly like you, you don't pull numbers out of thin air, just like I try to keep to safe generalizations and opinion. I agree, a software player cap would be kind of silly, but from all the spots in the E3 interviews where the developers weren't allowed to answer, the best I could take away from their not technically an answer bits was that they don't intend to screw the modding community, which I assume would include the ability to run your server however you want. They just don't intend to make a whole lot of stuff for the initial release that would be PC-limited. They won't limit the mod community, just the actual original content. I trust Crytek not to spend 3 years on a halfbaked sellout that would leave them with nothing but an engine nobody would want to be associated with.

So if all you want is different player numbers and maps, I would personally consider it a safe assumption that it will be possible to make this happen. I would guess at worst the drastically modded out servers would also be Experience-gain disabled, for obvious reasons.

Why don`t the ps3 gets a beta!

"Join mycrisis for exclusive beta".....where is it?
Even people that joined in the early days are not giving a chance.

Now that its eggbox only i am really loosing interrest in the game.

Also the lack of info on the sandbox editor.(all platforms)
Are they working on it?

OFF TOPIC... The multy player looks good and fast pased...i got 10 of those allready in my colletion. The fact that they dont want to release whit MW and MOH is a sign of weakness. 24 of march 2011 cmon...Other games will have the advantage in dev. by then.

[quote]Why don`t the ps3 gets a beta!

"Join mycrisis for exclusive beta".....where is it?
Even people that joined in the early days are not giving a chance.

Now that its eggbox only i am really loosing interrest in the game.

Also the lack of info on the sandbox editor.(all platforms)
Are they working on it?

OFF TOPIC... The multy player looks good and fast pased...i got 10 of those allready in my colletion. The fact that they dont want to release whit MW and MOH is a sign of weakness. 24 of march 2011 cmon...Other games will have the advantage in dev. by then.[/quote]

A beta for other platforms has not been ruled out yet, but there has been no announcement regarding a Sandbox 3.

They did HINT at Sandbox 3 though. They can't officially say anything yet, but they dropped hints that they aren't likely to screw the mod crowd.

I agree that people should stop bashing Crytek. But some of us are just hurt that Crysis 2 has been simplified becasue of the consoles. But I think the consoles have benefitted Crysis 2 in a way

People on pc`s download the games for free (most of them)
And for a game dev. that worked 5 years on a game its easy...

PC means less $... Not a lot of people can pay 1500$ for a computer( like me )
Not 2 mention the upgrades every 2 years just to keep it running.

I~m not 'bashing' crytec....why did they start this topic?

[quote]People on pc`s download the games for free (most of them)
And for a game dev. that worked 5 years on a game its easy...

PC means less $... Not a lot of people can pay 1500$ for a computer( like me )
Not 2 mention the upgrades every 2 years just to keep it running.

I~m not 'bashing' crytec....why did they start this topic?[/quote]

If MOST people stole MOST games then there wouldn't even be a market, but turns out people do buy games, and thats why they are still making it on PC games as opposed to just writing it off, which would be the wise thing to do if they really did only sell 1 copy for evey 100 pirated (which, by the way, let's not also engage in the fantasy that someone pirating a game means a lost sale.)
A lot of people (like you) engage in fantasies where you need to spend 1500 on a new computer every 2 years to play games on a PC which is in fact not the case, also you pay 10 bucks less a game so there is already an offset of a PC's cost. Sure you CAN spend 1500 bucks but you could spend about half of that and get a decent gaming rig.
Then again, I don't live in the Netherlands so maybe pricing for things is a bit different. I'm sure it is in one way or another

Calling all PC gamers pirates = hilarious, like piracy doesn't exist on other systems. the ps3 could make this claim of no piracy for some time but now it's even easier to hack than a 360. I think the decision has more to do with appealing to a larger demographic and less to do with 'everyone on PC is a pirate.' If PC gaming miraculously died today then all of the hardcoe PC gamer pirates are just going to become 360 pirates, or whatever flavor they chose.

Sorry, no edit
The problem is when game devs on PC deliver a crappy product that no one wants or buys, they chalk it up to piracy. If it fails on console, its chalked up to marketing and competing products stealing their thunder.
You'll notice there are PC devs that deliver great products and they never seem to have any issues or complaints with piracy.
Or you can be like Stardock and deliver a crap product, and instead of chalking up lost profits to piracy you actually chalk it up to a lousy product... how novel

Keep defending that piracy is good...
And 750$ is still a lot of $ for a DECENT (that means upgrading in 2 years) platform.
In my message i wrote "most of them" and you turn it in "Calling ALL...."
I know deticated gamers will buy the original version and that`s what keeping it alive imo.

It`s your fantasie world atm thinking piracy is a good thing.

Who said piracy was good? I believe it was more along the lines of less people pirate than some people try to claim. My money in my gaming PC is buying me several things though, that a console isn't providing. I can upgrade, expand, and generally do tons of things with my PC a console can not do. I get better graphics than any console, and I can map the keys the way I want to. If pirates pulled off half of what they're given credit for, you would hear of considerably more court cases revolving around it. While stealing someone's hard work isn't something I condone, at the same time, if it was as much of an epidemic as people say, then there would be special proprietary hardware to run games, or no PC game developers left.

And for the record, console gamers have no choice on when to upgrade. PC gamers do. And if you actually think your console graphics looks like my PC, I want whatever you smoked.

Expanding to consoles is just a reasonable marketing decision, since it just gives you a specific set of minimum system requirements to work with on the lowest system. It gives you a considerably larger market at a slight increase in cost. That said, complaining about a good developer doing it seems slightly counterproductive to continuing to receive titles from that developer.

is this the console vs pc topic? wtf

If i could buy a top pc i would.....

Im not here to claim that consoles are better.....there not...

Every copy thats made on pc is a loss in $...so any smart dev. will choose a platform that genarate the most $ so that they can keep making games in the future...simpel

[quote]Who said piracy was good? I believe it was more along the lines of less people pirate than some people try to claim. My money in my gaming PC is buying me several things though, that a console isn't providing. I can upgrade, expand, and generally do tons of things with my PC a console can not do. I get better graphics than any console, and I can map the keys the way I want to. If pirates pulled off half of what they're given credit for, you would hear of considerably more court cases revolving around it. While stealing someone's hard work isn't something I condone, at the same time, if it was as much of an epidemic as people say, then there would be special proprietary hardware to run games, or no PC game developers left.

And for the record, console gamers have no choice on when to upgrade. PC gamers do. And if you actually think your console graphics looks like my PC, I want whatever you smoked.

Expanding to consoles is just a reasonable marketing decision, since it just gives you a specific set of minimum system requirements to work with on the lowest system. It gives you a considerably larger market at a slight increase in cost. That said, complaining about a good developer doing it seems slightly counterproductive to continuing to receive titles from that developer.[/quote]

+1

[quote]Every copy thats made on pc is a loss in $...so any smart dev. will choose a platform that genarate the most $ so that they can keep making games in the future...simpel[/quote]

You're right, if that reasoning was sound, that would indeed be the case. but but the very case you try to make you prove yourself wrong, because people are still around developing for PC, not because they wanna please a bunch of thieves, but because there is money to be made.

[quote]is this the console vs pc topic? wtf

If i could buy a top pc i would.....

Im not here to claim that consoles are better.....there not...

Every copy thats made on pc is a loss in $...so any smart dev. will choose a platform that genarate the most $ so that they can keep making games in the future...simpel[/quote]

Do your math. Blizzard makes $2,000,000,000 USD a year off of World of Warcraft alone.

But MW2 makes the most money? Press would like to lie to you on that one. MW2 is a midget compared to the WoW giant.

Funny thing, PC market at least has the advantage of not being held back by cheap hardware. The developers that want to be on the cutting edge HAVE to be on PC... and the cutting edge makes money, or it wouldn't exist. Frankly, I'm kinda offended some idiot that rationalizes his laziness or shallow pockets wants to pop off about pirates to feel good about his mediocre gaming experience.

That last one, since I forgot to quote, is directed to yoz.