If you saw the tech demos Crytek posted on youtube about a year ago you would have expected C2 to be a more open-world sandbox kind of game where you can enter every room in every building, access non scripted vantage points and snipe the hell out of a pack of aliens or topple a skyscraqer you loaded with c4 to block pursuing enemies whenever the situation required it.

Cevat about C2 becoming console available- "We're gonna have two teams working on it and when the time comes we're gonna look at the market and see which direction we'll go."

The problem with consoles is that they have very little memory, thus they can't handle open environments too well. that is why C2 is so directional; the console knows exacty what it needs to preload and what it can drop, and it doesen't need to save alterations made to the terrain. the only things that might have changed position or state on the map are maybe 2 cars, 3 windows and 12 other miscelaneous objects, data which, altogether, can be stored in less than a kilobyte and rerendered every time you make a pass at the chunk.

In contrast, that dynamic content that was promised may have taken up700 mb of gc, 3 gigs of your ram and an additional 5 gigs of your harddrive. no problem, right? a low end €500 laptop can handle that.

the xbox 360 has, uh, 500mb ram. now i don't own an xbox or a ps or a wii, but i suspect you can run all of your games without a hard drive.

so obviously, unarguably, PC gamers would have a significantly more immersive game if and only if the console factor was canceled out of the equation. But is was in the calculation because of 'the market.' so if we show crytek/ea that we are willing to invest in quality, maybe they turn out willing to give back to pc gamers.

just a thougt.

From what I understand, publishing a game on a console costs more, cause u have to pay the owner of the console for rights to distribute to that console or something, which is why usually PC games are $50 while consoles are $60, since it's obviously free to distribute on the PC.

Let's look at what EA has sold games for recently.
Crysis 2: All versions $60.
Dragon Age 2: All versions $60.

Comparitavely,
Portal 2: PC $50, consoles $60.

So we already ARE paying $10 more for games from EA, and yet look at the quality of them.
I was looking forward to DA2, and my expectations were let down.
I was REALLY looking forward to Crysis 2, and my expectations were destroyed.
I'm also looking forward to Portal 2, and it looks like it might fare better than the above games.

Don't give EA any ideas, we'll end up with the same hacked out **** for more money. A game only deserves more money if they put the effort in to deserve it in the first place.

I think PC game should be at top of the game with the new technology out. PS3 and XBOX 360 no contest to PC. Game should look way better in PC!!!
The Game developers are not utilizing the full potential technology of the PC so there for we get games like the console version. They should stop porting games from console to PC and than maybe pc games would look better or may be not, I don't know.
Game Developers should utilize the technology of the PC!!!
Cevat Yerli talked about it in Game Imformer.

Yes if the developers put in a good anticheat system a graphics setting that can push a pc's limits and just overall made it a quality game for the pc then yes i would pay extra money.

I would pay $ 70 USD no more .

No. PC games are $49.99. Nothing more, nothing less (if its a 'full game', for example, Portal 1 is NOT a full game).

Console games cost $59.99 due to licensing, as MS and Sony want money from each sale. On PC you dont have that, so there's no reason to charge $59.99, other than "I WANT MOAR MONEYS!!". As for paying more for a proper PC game... what the hell? No. If you're going to make a game, do it right. Crysis 1 is basically the pinacle of what a PC game is (from a technical standpoint), and it cost... $49.99. Other games for MP that are LEGENDARY (Call of Duty 4, the Battlefield series) are $49.99.

I dont and wont pay more for a game. So far i've survived getting new games for $59.99 by using gift cards that drop the total from MY wallet to under $49.99.

/edit

Ironically BF3 is $59.99 on the EA store, while Crysis 2 is on sale for $49.99.

Hey, I'm not saying it is right to make PC gamers pay more, because we PC folk have to buy video cards, mother boards, prossessers the whole ten yards it would make no sense to make us pay more! If anything make us pay less!!
But if it was Crysis... and it was like a hundred bucks.... I would seriously buy that dang thing... I'm sorry, but I love Crysis WAAAAAAAAY too much.
But I don't think Crytek could ever do that! Just look at us PC gamers!!! Crytek just has to cherish us! When console people dissed Crysis, and never knew what it was, and they just put it off as Halo being better. Who stuck with Crytek!! Us PC gamers! We made Crysis! If we did not support it like we did than they woulden't even have enough money to make a number two, or the rest of the trilogy. And we are more devoted to the game since we've been with them for a long time, and as for PS, and Xboxers all they did was play Crysis two, and say they where cool! I just hope Crytek realizes that we are trough in, and through out when it comes to Crysis; I hope they remember that when it comes to designing a third game, and they don't dis out and be jerks just like stupid Bungie, and Microsoft did with Halo.
coz that is what I like about Crytek... it seams like they care about us, and know who we are.
We are the Crysis foundation.... PC gamers!!!