Crysis: 98% PC Gamer, 9.4 IGN, 9.5 GS!

http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/931665.asp

I am very curious to see what GameSpot and IGN (9.4)give it. It's going to be an interesting week...:D

everyone knows that crysis will be a great game, i mean there are sooo many videos before the beta that you could've reviewed the game before you play it.

Old news :PBegemott

What he said.

Ok...so it's old news. Great! My curiosity is more so with the other reviews coming this week. I wonder how consistent otherreviews will be for this game since it is SOOOOO highly anticipated.

[QUOTE="Begemott"]Old news :PJP_Russell

What he said.

Crysis = Highly Anticipated = Good

Halo 3 = Highly hyped = Bad

PC Gamer is useless. They gave freaking Hellgate: London an 8.9.

Regardless, I'm sure everyone will rate this game highly.

This is so NEW!!!!

I had no idea!

Definitely don't trust PCG's opinion right now. Lol, HGL - 89%, what a joke. Nevertheless, I'm definitely hoping Crysis lives up to the hype.kutty12000

I disagree with this, HGL is a great game, mabey not 89% but at least 80%.

The AI is excellent (some of the best I have seen) as is the movie like feel to the gunfights is too. Its a tough game too. If you liked far cry you will like crysis a lot.

Oh yeah and it is really open ended and there's a lot of just straight FPS action.

I disagree with this, HGL is a great game, mabey not 89% but at least 80%.thanatose

I'd agree with that, Hellgate London is definitely an 8.0. But a review is subjective anyway.

But I agree a PC gamer review means nothing. I despise the magazine so badly, and overrating games is one of the reasons. Hellgate: London is a good example because they promised a positive review to be the first ones to review it. They also gave Sword of the New World an editors choice (which it reviewed 15% higher than even the second highest rating, and the game recieved generally negative reviews) the gave Privateer 2 an extremely high rating (11 years ago) when it was obviously not that good (and I'm a diehard privateer fan). I'm sure there are more but I don't always bother paying attention to their reviews.

Please differentiate between PCG UK and US

PCG UK is not useless

Crysis will get an 8.5 or below here. The game is to hyped, it will never live up to the Hermits vision of pure FPS utopia. The only good that could come of this is maybe the Hermits will leave for awhile. Khansoul

What are you smoking? Crysis is going to get 9.5 here, no more, no less.

[QUOTE="kutty12000"]Definitely don't trust PCG's opinion right now. Lol, HGL - 89%, what a joke. Nevertheless, I'm definitely hoping Crysis lives up to the hype.thanatose

I disagree with this, HGL is a great game, mabey not 89% but at least 80%.

[QUOTE="Khansoul"]Crysis will get an 8.5 or below here. The game is to hyped, it will never live up to the Hermits vision of pure FPS utopia. The only good that could come of this is maybe the Hermits will leave for awhile. Hydras808

What are you smoking? Crysis is going to get 9.5 here, no more, no less.

how do you know? i noticed someone else asking if crysis can get a 10

gee people, you havent eaven played it yet

I think Hellgate should rightly be given 7/10 and Crysis 8/10 - Its nice, and has a good story, but feels like a reskinned Farcry to me with some bits of halo blantantly used (the recharging shields).Erandel

There'snowayCrysisisgettinganythinglessthan9.0,noway.I'mabout90%sureit'sgonnaget9.5.

JustlookatJasonOcampospreviewatOntheSpot,he'sdroolingalloverit.Theonlynegativething they will mention is the system requierments and therefore it will get 9.5

Andduderechargingsheilds/healthisthedefactostandardofFPSgamestoday,soIcan'tseehowthatisrippingofHalo.

PC Gamer is useless. They gave freaking Hellgate: London an 8.9.

Regardless, I'm sure everyone will rate this game highly.

BeErBOnG29

wtf? You would give this game even more? Hellgate doesn't deserve even 9/10. It deserves no more no less than 8,x

I'm pretty sure he meant 8.9 was too high...

It's hard to trust a magazine. More often then not, I think they give rave reviews about highly anticipated games simply to sell subscriptions and issues. Still, I would give Hellgate at least an 8. And, since everyone is so comfortable grading games on arbitrary criteria like system requirements, I'd bump Hellgates score up to 8.5 because they don't charge for online play. That's a nice feature, even if people want to throw tantrums about how you have the option to subscribe.

As for Crysis, I'm not sure a 98% is realistic, unless the gameplay is flawless. So far, from what I've played in the demo, the gameplay deserves at least a 9.5 on GameSpot's scalesimply because of how much more fun it is then Halo 3. Thow in the best graphics on any game to date, and you've got a recipe for a perfect 10. However, as we've come to the conclusion that GS will rate games on arbitary crap like system requirements, it won't get higher then 9.5.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, knocking the score down on Crysis for needing a powerful computer to play at it's full potential is like rating a musician's album lower because it requires good speaks to hear the quality. Just because not everyone has a really, really good stereo system, doesn't mean the music on the CD isn't as good...

Please differentiate between PCG UK and US

PCG UK is not useless

kyrieee

Overly sensitive, but accurate. I didn't realize PC Gamer was a British Magazine first, so it's not fair to judge it on the american version.

But I think most if not all people here knew I was talking about the american version.

I usually don't really pay attention to reviews, they seldomly impact my decisions. The only reviewer I would immediatly take up on his word is Yathzee from ZeroPunctuation. :)ShotGunBunny

That man tells the truth!

I usually don't really pay attention to reviews, they seldomly impact my decisions. The only reviewer I would immediatly take up on his word is Yathzee from ZeroPunctuation. :)ShotGunBunny

I have to agree with you here as Yahtzee gives an honest and unbiased opinion on the games he reviews while also giving an entertaining review lol.

[QUOTE="ShotGunBunny"]I usually don't really pay attention to reviews, they seldomly impact my decisions. The only reviewer I would immediatly take up on his word is Yathzee from ZeroPunctuation. :)shaneras

That man tells the truth!

Indeed. I laughed when he reviewed most of the games, he had up to 90% same opinion as me :)

[QUOTE="kyrieee"]

Please differentiate between PCG UK and US

PCG UK is not useless

Cobra_nVidia

Overly sensitive, but accurate. I didn't realize PC Gamer was a British Magazine first, so it's not fair to judge it on the american version.

But I think most if not all people here knew I was talking about the american version.

Yes I think they understood you were :) I just wanted to point out there's a Brittish one as well becasue everyone might not now and it has a good rep too

Reviews are OPINION, thus argueing over what a game "deserves" is absolutely ridiculous. Obviously, games DO differ in actual quality, blah, blah, blah, but i think you get my point.

And also, I'm getting tired of people saying that one shooter is too much like another. Do you realize how difficult it is to truly innovate in this genre? It's hard to make one game where you run around shooting soldiers/aliens/mutants/what-have-you play that differently than the other.

All we can really hope for is high quality shooting, story, etc. which Crysis looks to have in spades. This game is about as original as any other FPS coming out lately or soon. Hell, if the game is as open as it sounds, with a lot of real choices and consequences, this could be a game to really push the genre forward.

Any game demo that has me playing it over and over....

I've put more time into the Crysis demo then many full length games....

98% sounds right....

PC Gamer is useless. They gave freaking Hellgate: London an 8.9.

BeErBOnG29

You're dead right about their bias re: Hellgate: London, and it calls into question their integrity re: any game they review. You and I both know that PCG needed to give Hellgate an "editor's choice." The fact that the game got the lowest possible score that still receives the award (89%) shows the dillema faced by the mag - that the game wasn't worthy but yet they had to give it the award.

The problem is deeper than simply the general hype around Hellgate, however. It's $$$, too. PCG got the "world exclusive review" - putting them in bed with the publisher both in terms of getting their hands on the game pre-release and because a lousy review wouldn't move magazines the way a "editor's choice" would. Plus, if PCG pans a game it has secured a "world exclusive review," how many publishers do you think are going to give the magazine that privilege to in the future?

Secondly, PCG has dedicated whole issues to HG:L in the past several months, giving them an interest in the game's ultimate score because that score reflects on PCG's ability to identify hot games to preview. See, Doom 3.

Finally, PCG has this fanboy fetish for defending the PC as a platform against this constant dread of being overrun by consoles. So, when a PC exclusive title comes out, the magazine tends to go overboard as a way to show that the PC platform (on which the magazine's entire survival depends) is still alive and kicking.

So the ball is in PCG's court to show that their judgment isn't impaired by their close ties to the publishers that advertise in their magazine and agree to give it exclusive previews and reviews. Until then, I'll be getting my reviews from a source that isn't afraid to call a spade a spade, or a Lair a Lair.

[QUOTE="Hydras808"]

[QUOTE="Khansoul"]Crysis will get an 8.5 or below here. The game is to hyped, it will never live up to the Hermits vision of pure FPS utopia. The only good that could come of this is maybe the Hermits will leave for awhile. hatefull

What are you smoking? Crysis is going to get 9.5 here, no more, no less.

how do you know? i noticed someone else asking if crysis can get a 10

gee people, you havent eaven played it yet

based on the demo and Jason Ocampo's response to this game. It's probably going to be a 9,5. This game isn't scoring less than a 9,0 and for the people who think this game is badly optimized. A 6600GT (which isn't even supported) can run crysis just fine, you guys need to be able to sacrifice visuals for gameplay.

Just because you can't play it maxed out, doesn't mean it's bad optimized.

[QUOTE="hatefull"][QUOTE="Hydras808"]

[QUOTE="Khansoul"]Crysis will get an 8.5 or below here. The game is to hyped, it will never live up to the Hermits vision of pure FPS utopia. The only good that could come of this is maybe the Hermits will leave for awhile. _Pedro_

What are you smoking? Crysis is going to get 9.5 here, no more, no less.

how do you know? i noticed someone else asking if crysis can get a 10

gee people, you havent eaven played it yet

based on the demo and Jason Ocampo's response to this game. It's probably going to be a 9,5. This game isn't scoring less than a 9,0 and for the people who think this game is badly optimized. A 6600GT (which isn't even supported) can run crysis just fine, you guys need to be able to sacrifice visuals for gameplay.

Just because you can't play it maxed out, doesn't mean it's bad optimized.

Well said. I don't really understand what people want. I mean, everyone knows the game can look absolutely amazing on a high-end machine, but why does everyone (unfairly) expect the game to look and run equally as well on a low-end machine? It takes powerful hardware to drive a game that looks better then most of the cutscenes in other games. No matter how much time Crytek spends on optimization, it's not going to look its best unless you've got a machine that can handle cutting-edge graphics.

Put it this way, if I can run the demo at 1650x1050, with everything on "Very High" (tweaked DX9- not the total DX10 experience) and get 25-30 FPS solid, it's very well optimized. This is with the rig in my signiture (sans SLI, second card is on the way!).

[QUOTE="_Pedro_"][QUOTE="hatefull"][QUOTE="Hydras808"]

[QUOTE="Khansoul"]Crysis will get an 8.5 or below here. The game is to hyped, it will never live up to the Hermits vision of pure FPS utopia. The only good that could come of this is maybe the Hermits will leave for awhile. SentientGames

What are you smoking? Crysis is going to get 9.5 here, no more, no less.

how do you know? i noticed someone else asking if crysis can get a 10

gee people, you havent eaven played it yet

based on the demo and Jason Ocampo's response to this game. It's probably going to be a 9,5. This game isn't scoring less than a 9,0 and for the people who think this game is badly optimized. A 6600GT (which isn't even supported) can run crysis just fine, you guys need to be able to sacrifice visuals for gameplay.

Just because you can't play it maxed out, doesn't mean it's bad optimized.

Well said. I don't really understand what people want. I mean, everyone knows the game can look absolutely amazing on a high-end machine, but why does everyone (unfairly) expect the game to look and run equally as well on a low-end machine? It takes powerful hardware to drive a game that looks better then most of the cutscenes in other games. No matter how much time Crytek spends on optimization, it's not going to look its best unless you've got a machine that can handle cutting-edge graphics.

Put it this way, if I can run the demo at 1650x1050, with everything on "Very High" (tweaked DX9- not the total DX10 experience) and get 25-30 FPS solid, it's very well optimized. This is with the rig in my signiture (sans SLI, second card is on the way!).

They marketed this game as "amazingly looking", and most of people expect the game to look
like those screenshots all over the net. What they don't know is that those screenshots were taken
using insane video cards and even than game ran at 15fps.

The other day I was playing demo on my 8800GTS 640MB and 3.2 C2D CPU. I had
to put pretty much everything on medium and turn off AA to squeeze out 30fps.

My brother came into room and said "So this is the Crysis I've been hearing about? does not look anything like those
screen shots on net". Honestly, I think game is fun and all, but I like HL2's graphics more and even
Cod4 looks better.

And also, I'm getting tired of people saying that one shooter is too much like another. Do you realize how difficult it is to truly innovate in this genre? It's hard to make one game where you run around shooting soldiers/aliens/mutants/what-have-you play that differently than the other.BloodPhantom

Actually, it's not hard. NOLF did it and then did it again - by that I mean NOLF was an innovation, and NOLF2 was just as innovative (not merely a minor upgrade from the original game). Even though NOLF2 got a 90% average from critics, which I think is underrating it, IT DIDN'T SELL. And with games costing pretty solidly into the millions, few companies will take that risk with shooters (though many other genres innovate a bit more, for whatever reason)

They marketed this game as "amazingly looking", and most of people expect the game to look
like those screenshots all over the net. What they don't know is that those screenshots were taken
using insane video cards and even than game ran at 15fps.

The other day I was playing demo on my 8800GTS 640MB and 3.2 C2D CPU. I had
to put pretty much everything on medium and turn off AA to squeeze out 30fps.

My brother came into room and said "So this is the Crysis I've been hearing about? does not look anything like those
screen shots on net". Honestly, I think game is fun and all, but I like HL2's graphics more and even
Cod4 looks better. Creative

Well, to be honest, the game is amazing looking. This is coming from a guy who was about to cancel his pre-order after playing the multiplayer beta.Whether or not your hardware can drive the game to look as good as it can is irrelevant. Like I said, if you buy a new CD by the best musician around and listen to it on a poor stereo system, it's not going to sound very good, but that doesn't mean that the music on the CD isn't very good.

The fact that your 8800GTS and 3.2 Core2Duo combowas having a hard time on Medium settings baffles me. Either you don't have the latest drivers, your computer is inundated with mallware, you have less then two gigabytes of RAM, or you're running it on Vista (most likely a combination of all of the above). I've personally tested the game out with an EVGA 8800GTS 640mb card with everything on High (no AA) and got a solid 25 FPS, so why you aren't getting anything above 30 FPS on Medium is strange to me. But you never know what might be causing the performance issue. Just don't blame Crytek that your rig isn't up to snuff.

Half-Life 2's graphics remain to be awesome for a nearly four-year old game, but I have to disagree on CoD4. It's pretty decent, but it can't stand up to Crysis IMO.