When Crysis was originally released back in November 2007, the PCs capable of running it perfectly had not been invented yet. Even so, journalists and gamers alike were blown away by its realistic visuals, which can easily be understood when you see the game today. Indeed, even 7 years later, Crytek's title in its vanilla state (meaning its original version without mods) is still impressive, and it's a lot smoother too (though framerate isn't capable of holiding a steady 60 fps yet when fully maxed out). Check out our two videos inside, the first ever 1080p/60fps Crysis footage on Gamersyde.
All comments (43)
Crysis 2 was meh, 3 was forgettable and boring.
Shame series took so many hits after Warhead since Crysis is the only FPS franchise that utilizes freedom to give you weapon customization anytime depending on situation and mood, just fantastic, alongside the badass nanosuit abilities.
It would be great to have Crysis/Warhead remade in Cryengine 2 to make it look like Crysis 3 graphics and even put it on next gen consoles, 1080p/30fps at that.
Only now consoles like the XO and PS4 are finally able to produce these graphics.
7 YEARS later.
This is why PC gamers are always moaning about the consoles holding PC gaming back, because they very clearly are. It's not debatable. Crysis 2 and 3 were also crippled by their multi-platform nature. They had no large highly dense forest areas, and good physics, because the consoles couldn't handle it.
Even if a PC game is released that a high-end PC can't run smoothly on it's maxed out graphical settings (like Crysis when it was released), i'm ok with that, because it future proofs the game to a certain extent, and i like coming back to a game in the future and experiencing it again on it's highest settings.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSZhRG-Szm4#t=57s
Only now consoles like the XO and PS4 are finally able to produce these graphics.
7 YEARS later.
This is why PC gamers are always moaning about the consoles holding PC gaming back, because they very clearly are. It's not debatable. Crysis 2 and 3 were also crippled by their multi-platform nature. They had no large highly dense forest areas, and good physics, because the consoles couldn't handle it.
Even if a PC game is released that a high-end PC can't run smoothly on it's maxed out graphical settings (like Crysis when it was released), i'm ok with that, because it future proofs the game to a certain extent, and i like coming back to a game in the future and experiencing it again on it's highest settings.
They added way better nanosuit functions in the sequals, but that definitely wasent enough.
Crysis 3 has a MP expansion map were its in a island of some sort, has that Crysis 1 vibe. So that map plus its engine can give you an idea how Crysis 1 with that engine would look like if they ever remade it on PS4/X1/PC again.
I would definitely buy Crysis/Warhead remake in Cryengine 2 with Crysis 3 nanosuit functions and controls.
http://www.crytek.com/news/crytek-announces-the-ar...
optimised ? does that mean dumbed down ?
there is so much detail in everything , even the small details
There's a workaround for the 24 fps problem, alt+enter as many times as necessary for the game to get that the TV is 60 hz.
They added way better nanosuit functions in the sequals, but that definitely wasent enough.
Consoles don't just cripple PC graphics, but innovation and gameplay too.
Consoles don't just cripple PC graphics, but innovation and gameplay too.
Yes old gen didnt have graphics power to run Crysis as it should and not to mention the sequals they had to downgrade its linearity alot, but new gen should be able to.
Also, its up to developers to make innovation and gameplay unique, has nothing to do with consoles.