Although i played Crysis back days ago (with lowest settings because my laptop has not so great GPU), i still like it compared to modern days game. The graphics is so great even made me speechless what EA can do back then, the physics and has large view distance is so great especially when you see the sun rise after you land.
Although it’s semi open world it’s still amaze me because how big the map is, i remembered the last mission The Last Man Standing is taken above carrier ship i guess… The ship feels so huge & have lots of room.
Overall 10/10The first time I played Crisis, I was already in awe because of that brilliant sunrise opening scene. As I’m creeping through the jungle towards the next objective, I hear loud running water and decide to see what it is.
They put in an absolutely stunning waterfall off to the side, complete with rainbows and ferns growing up around the base. One of those few memorable, special times when a game had the right art direction, graphics tech, and hit at just the right moment for me to all culminate in a real feeling of wonder and joy.
I tend to be very cynical about games being able to do that to me anymore, and it is much rarer with how commonplace high-definition but artistically uninspired assets have gotten. But it still happens now and then, the last time being Elden Ring which did have impressive art and design, and did “wow” me several times.
I just discovered a game called Vintage Story which seems to have some pretty good looking landscapes despite being originally based on a Minecraft-like visual style.
Crysis is in my top 3 all time!
The graphics are one thing, but why I love it so much is because it’s the only game where you start and end as what you are supposed to be, a super soldier!
There is no stupid power up’s, no modding your suit, no upgrades nothing you are fully powered from the start and that’s how it’s supposed to be.
The game is just brilliant and the story compelling. A+
That’s pretty much just any FPS from before 2010ish, with a few exceptions where it wasn’t purely an FPS and made sense for the games design such as bioshock and deus ex.
Halo was very much like this. The overshield and cloaking power ups were so sparingly used in the early games. Did you enjoy Halo as well?
I don’t think a lot of people outside of Xbox console players played Halo.
It became a great pc series but later I believe. The pc releases were very delayed.
Maybe I remember my 5h of Crysis 3 wrong but I remember suit upgrades, no?
There are upgrades etc in Crysis 2 & 3, but not in Crysis & Crysis Warhead. Those were pretty different, unaffected by the need to run on consoles since they were PC only. The gameplay was way more open too.
Yea 2/3 added the upgrades stuff which is why I liked it less. Others like that stuff, but then it just became another generic FPS to me
It’s been awhile, but the first one seemed like it had the best direction gameplay wise. Going off of far off memory at least.
Sadly the first game hasn’t aged well. I tried to play it not too long ago, and it feels like an old Unreal game.
Maybe I’ll try it again after my HL2 game. I might not have been in the right frame of mind before.
Having just finished all 3 on my pc…
Dafuq you smokin, Bruh…
I will say though, 1 is the cluniest of them, for sure.
I didn’t play the first one when it came out. So i don’t have any nostalgia for it.
…well, up until the mountain.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again.
Technology peaked with crysis for games and avatar for movies.
Fear not, technology can “peak” multiple times. The same was said about Star Wars - it just takes someone with a vision, determination, and the budget to make it happen.
[Edit] didn’t realize I’d have to clarify: THE ORIGINAL Star Wars.
… terrible example as a lot of fans would claim the originals were the best ones and it’s been all downhill from there, especially since the prequels are now seen in a positive light cause how bad the sequels have been.
Come on, I am obviously referring to the original trilogy which was famously innovative. No one is fawning over the CGI in the prequels (especially in retrospect), why would you think I meant them??
I’m not a fan of the series but I still geek out about the production of A New Hope. It was groundbreaking work by some serious visionaries, look at any film before it and it’s obvious what a huge jump they made.
Now I feel the need to clarify further that I mean THE ORIGINAL special effects. NOT any of the rereleases with “updated” CGI.
Slight question/nitpick over the prequels’ CGI; is the opening space battle [over Coruscant] of Revenge of the Sith somehow not up to par with its contemporaries? That sequence still holds up in terms of visual spectacle that takes advantage of its medium (3d rendering in this case vs practical effects) to do specific shots and set pieces.
Or am I just ignorant of how much the original trilogy pushed things?
The original film used tons of technology and techniques that had never been tried before. It was a truly innovative film for special effects.
No shade to the prequels, their graphics just weren’t a huge leap. Not to say they’re bad or that there was no innovation! If I remember correctly, Jar Jar was a pretty big deal for the industry.
The reaction to Phantom Menace might have been “Wow that looked great!” but for A New Hope it was “HOW THE HELL DID THEY DO THAT???”
I’m confused. How did the originals peak multiple times? They were all made a few years from each other so imo they all represent one data point.
Do you mean special effects peaked after that? Cause a lot of people don’t like CGI and some would say movie effects actually peaked at terminator 2.
The point would be valid if movies in the 90s looked terrible and then movies now look objectively better than Star Wars (which many would argue that they don’t cause it’s all CGI)
When Star Wars was released, people said technology had peaked because it was such a huge jump in quality. Similar things were said about Avatar for the same reason. Both films are notable for inventing new technology to fulfill the vision.
I’m just saying (and I mean it encouragingly!) there will come a time when Avatar looks dated. We’ll be marveling at things we can hardly fathom today
But that’s because the quality was as good as it’s ever been so far.
The example I’m saying is that it peaked, as in it got noticeably better, and then noticeably worse for at least a decade.
It’s not the same example.
With all due respect, I feel like you’re only thinking of Marvel films if you think CGI has become noticeably worse since Avatar. I’m very confident you’ve watched movies with fully CG characters in scenes and didn’t notice they weren’t real - something not possible a decade earlier
Which is why I put “peak” in quotes. They’re more like spikes in capability. The techniques developed for Avatar (virtual cinematography for one) are widely used today, they’re just not the focus like in a movie about giant blue humanoids on an alien planet.
The next major innovation will become the standard and we’ll think the same thing. “Man, nothing has blown me away like [movie that invented something]”
You did say that something can peak multiple times, so your original comment sounded like you were implying that Star Wars peaked multiple times, hence the response.
I suppose so but I did specifically say technology can peak multiple times, not a franchise
It really did. I’ve never been so utterly amazed as I was when I loaded the first Far Cry and the first Crysis. Nothing else has come close.
