Gaming Crysis 2 PC Review

You can? Weird!

 

Well, it was only a matter of time, but someone has upped a texture replacement (from C1) pack on a certain site I can not mention. I am sure it will show up everywhere soon.

Amazing that the textures in C2 are just ripped straight out of C1, and halved.

 

Could you at least give us a filename to search?

I've seen the download for a "CRYSIS 2 TEXTURE FIX!!.txt" on another forum but that is just a half-assed suggestion for fixing corrupted textures.

 

It is titled "Crysis 2 HiRes Textures Pack" on the site in question.

 

Downloading now. If this works, expect much rep coming your way!

 

Finished it two hours ago, will have to sleep on it (or even just replay it) and then post about the campaign properly.

 

This makes no sense. You're saying more demanding software never demands better hardware. It's just a case of optimization? By that logic, every game should be able to run on a pocket calculator, but they can't and so they're just poorly optimized, piece of crap attempts at coding.

Anyway, that's what graphic options are for. Oh, wait. Crysis 2 hardly has any. lol.

It never actually happened, but what's your point? The game looks fantastic, even by today's standards which is a remarkable feat. That was my original point exactly so I don't know what you're trying to say.

Besides, Crysis 2 looking worse, having far fewer features, running better fps than Crysis or Warhead doesn't necessarily mean it's optimized much better.

There's a reason Crysis 2 is set in a large City and it isn't the story.

As for the gameplay, to each their own! I liked both games.

 

Greetings!

Another settings configurator:
http://cell-systems.net/note/crysis-2-autoexec-cfg-maker-online/

 

****, may have to install Crysis again after watching that. The contrast between 1 and 2 is quite shocking. I wouldn't even have cared if they had just left the PC version intact, with anything new added to it. Instead they decided to cut it down for PC as well? Makes no sense. From the fact that both games have many of the same textures, you would imagine it would have been easier for Crytek to do it that way, rather than bother to halve all the textures and put them in.

I also enjoyed both games. C2 feels no different to C1 when fighting humans, except C1 was a lot more open and free form. Granted, fighting the aliens is leagues better in C2, but everything else is better in C1.

 

Greetings!

Kind of:
http://forums.bit-tech.net/showthread.php?p=2631632#post2631632

 

Thanks for not reading my post and deciding what I said.

And so, by your rationale, if a game doesn't run well on modern hardware of the time, it's just because it's pushing the boundaries? No possibility, of being poorly coded?

If there was nothing wrong with it, why did they have to patch it to improve performance? Twice.

I thought it was obvious, but I'll spell it out for you.

My point is, news of the performance issues with the game were so widespread, even retail outlets were pre-warning customers.

As did I. I didn't say I didn't like the game, I said it was good (once patched) but not great.

 

Crysis 2 definitely has more detailed physics, but crysis 1 had more variation in what could be affected by physics. Saying that I did notice a tree falling down in one of the later levels, just the one though.

I actually liked the Aliens in C1, especially when you got the gause gun and could use it to meduim range snipe them whilst avoiding their fire. I don't get what people were complaining about, they gave a nice variation to the game. the ones in C2 seem much more like standard fps enemies.

 

What do you mean by "Crysis 2 has more detailed physics" ?!

You did watch the physics and explosions comparison video above?

 

There are in betweens. I don't think I rushed to the opposite side of the spectrum. There are cases of bad performance in relation to graphics (eg. GTA IV) due to optimization. I accept that. I just don't think Crysis is all that bad for what you get out of it fps and visuals wise. I didn't say or mean there was nothing wrong with the optimization. Obviously it has some issues, but I wouldn't call it a piece of crap for 2007

12 fps was a bit of an exaggeration. If you meant it literally then I agree, that's ridiculous. So to reword my original post... I'd like to have seen Crysis 2 expanding on what Crysis 1 did instead of diminish on it.

Except in Crysis 2 you have to deal with this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnH5BfZ6io4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaPAm31bISw

Agreed on the aliens, although I wish they kept the blue/ice theme instead of "red eyes, so evil, they're the baddies."

 

Had a quick look through, had company downstairs so I couldn't watch the whole thing. I seem to remember more smoke and sparks coming from the explosions in 2, but I much preferred the actual explosions in 1.

I think the better perfomance in 2 comes from much better multi threading and the lack of parralax occlusion.

 

Surely you mean the better performance comes from the apparent almost lack of physics and destructible objects?

 

I remember turning the parallax mapping and ambient occlusion off giving the most performance increase on my system, unless it was a physics heavy level like the Icy benchmark, but that was because pretty much the whole thing was being calculated on one thread, Crysis 2 on my system still uses less than 50% of the CPU even though it's multi threaded so there is defintely room for more.

I don't remember so much glass debris in the first, or as many sparks coming from the explosion, can't seem to remember being able to shoot crates apart either.

 

Some of the best clues in that video were the C1 buildings getting destroyed, the C1 trees not just falling over but being sliced, the C1 boxes flying when having grenades thrown under them, the empty giant cable roll in C1 rolling around after an explosion hitting it. When you compare the physics in that video it's like C2 should have come out when C1 did and vice versa.

 

Yeah I see what you mean, pretty much what I said about the variation in post 92. Didn't see what happened to the C2 tree trunk, was too far away, just noticed it falling in the background after I shot something in it's direction.

 

You mean the explosions are prettier ... I'd disagree. I think. From what I saw the explosions in C1 were much better. I might agree there were extra sparks but then sparks are eye candy, not physics.

Added: to confirm that I wasn't talking bollocks I went back and watched it again, there really is no comparison! lol

Just wait for the 1st explosion from C1 ... says it all