@psx_warrior Yea it might have just looked good then when I had a shitty comp, if I turned it back to low now I might say the same thing, but I play a lot of DOS games so maybe not.

@berserker66666 Woa woa, don't take me as supporting EA on their F2P, I am totally against EA and their F2P model. I just mean not all F2P games are bad such as the World of (Tanks, Warplanes, and Battleships) given the last 2 are not released though I have confidence in them.

@MJ12-Conspiracy Agreed, the graphics look good, but I don't see much in it tbh, use the Real Virtuality engine and I would be seriously impressed, or something similar though I don't think there is anything that is.

@psx_warrior @DarkSaber2k lol I don't think graphics are an issue here, we all know the graphics quality for Crytek's games. That is not what impresses me though, now if they said ARMA sized map scale I would be seriously impressed, but I don't see that running too well on most PCs, the Crytek engine is really not all that demanding really, just the PhysX they use is what kills most imo. I could run the first Crysis on my old HP G60 about 50 fps with everything on low and it didn't look that bad. That is saying something buying a stock HP laptop lol.

@berserker66666 I am not a fan of "F2P is the future" but I don't see that as a reason to hate every F2P game, World of Tanks is certainly not a "Pay to Win" game along with a few others. Though I do agree with you on EA's F2P way and all of their F2P games, especially C&C, when I read about that I had to check the date to see if it was April 1st because that was the biggest load I have ever seen, I lost all respect I had sub consciously for EA after that as I had already lost all respect IK of before that. IDK about how well this game is and if they do live up to the no pay to win style, but it may be good, may be bad. From their choice of console style quality I am assuming the latter for now, but I cannot be sure.

@DarkSaber2k lol was just thinking how stupid that statement was, sure F2P games can be good and not all console games are bad, but given the choice I would always choose PC as they are always better unless it is a direct console port which is usually a half assed attempt by the devs to put it on PC and is not near as good as it could be since PC can do so much more than a console, but instead of console game quality they should have said AAA quality, makes more sense imo as you can have free games on both the console and the PC.

@ragnar320 @Unfallen_Satan Yea I am gonna miss SP, honestly I loved Generals and Zero Hours story, it was really interesting. I am super psyched for World of Battleships, even if it is not a full sim, I have been wanting more Battleship games, and you don' have to pay to win in WOT, really the only Win part of it is using gold rounds, and even then you can still easily kill enemy tanks, that is a high quality F2P game and I hope there are more. I just don't see it leading the way in the gaming industry.

@Falru There are plenty of games that do that, even if this is not a F2P game in Killing Floor, Tripwire advertises for RO2 all the time, it could make some good money, but IDK if it would cut it for the devs to make a profit and continue on.

@ragnar320 @Unfallen_Satan I agree with both points here, especially that C&C Generals 2 will most likely be ruined, I do see a lot of potential for F2P as shown with TF2, World of (Tanks, Battleships, and Warplanes even if the other 2 are not released yet), and a few others, but I don't believe it is the future. Yes it will gain a lot of popularity and I will be pleased as I do enjoy F2P games occasionally, but there needs to be a lot of cash going to the devs of these games and F2P will not cut it as standard retail will.

@diabolik_023 No kidding, not allowed to bring my xbox to college for the first semester so sadly I will not be able to play it unless I play my friends xbox, kinda ridiculous as Halo on the PC would be a huge hit.