1UP's CRYSIS Review (8/10)

B

Borys

Banned
By Shawn Elliott.

http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=3164321&sec=REVIEWS

What was to be proof positive that Crytek's range encompasses more than Far Cry's merc in the wilderness becomes history repeating itself. Dumb monster apes and indoor drudgery dragged down the finale of the developer's last FPS. In Crysis, it's dull aliens and a direct reversal of design logic. The wintry jungle is just a white hallway that we escort another nanosuited soldier through. Now and then, flying things land to attack with tentacles -- no huts to hide in (would aliens strip shingles from the roof to shoot inside?), no shattering cover, and no three-way mix-ups with wandering Koreans. The order to protect our partner, I suspect, is a tension-inducing device there to distract us from the unfinished framework of a big plan that fizzled but couldn't be cut.

Afterward, we sit in a truck turret. Although they're there, we're unable to take another vehicle (doors don't open) or to switch seats. Before this, we've both fired while driving and flipped back and forth between driving and firing. What this means -- and what makes this stretch seem as though a different studio developed it -- is that Crysis teaches us to fish and then drops us in bone-dry desert.

And on it goes. Stints in motorized air-defense systems...that don't move. Low altitude flight in a leaden VTOL, where defeating drones dissolves invisible barriers no one intends to notice, allowing us to fly forward, fight off another three drones, dissolve another invisible barrier, fly forward....

Fast forward through scraps of miserable story and melodramatic dialogue, along with a "boss battle" inherited from the coin-op class of '88 (see: Contra), and the ordeal is done -- beautiful throughout, mostly amazing, but vegetative by the end.
Click to expand...

LOLZCRYSIS.jpg


8 / 10
 
Damn...I was ready to jump to conclusions but after seeing Shawn's name I stepped back and actually reread the review. He's the one that usually talks nonstop about Crysis and praises the hell out of it on every podcast so there must be something that definitely kept it from getting a higher review. That being said, an 8 is still a good score, but relatively low compared to the average score that this game has been getting.
 
dr3upmushroom said:
Wow, got to read this one. I always thought Shawn had a massive hard on for Crysis.
Click to expand...
me too, but that impression ( i think) was mainly from the first half / demo, so i hope he talks about it a lot on 97.5: The Brodeo
 
They didn't take a point off for it costing you over a "G" on a machine able to play this at it's screenshots and video quality? Anyways, I agree with this score from 1up, for once.
 
What? The guys who did Far Cry are awesome at doing great graphics and not so much at creating good gameplay experience?
 
Hehe Shawn totally pulled a fast one on us. Sounding all positive about how playing past the demo level changed his opinion of the game totally. Well looks like the latter parts of the game are escort missions, corridor shooting sprees, on-rails sections and a crappy boss fight to top it all off. Oh well, if the demo level is anything to go by I'll still have plenty of fun replaying the jungle portions with regular soldiers to fight.
 
Mistouze said:
What? The guys who did Far Cry are awesome at doing great graphics and not so much at creating good gameplay experience?
Click to expand...

They are great at both, they just tend to fumble the concept halfway through.
 
Mistouze said:
What? The guys who did Far Cry are awesome at doing great graphics and not so much at creating good gameplay experience?
Click to expand...
He gave it an 8 and praised the openness of the gameplay... What are you trying to get at?
 
J-Rzez said:
They didn't take a point off for it costing you over a "G" on a machine able to play this at it's screenshots and video quality? Anyways, I agree with this score from 1up, for once.
Click to expand...
Why would anyone do that? It's a game review, not a platform review.
 
There's no site that I disagree with their review scores as much as with 1up. I just don't pay attention any more, and only download the 1upshow if there's exclusive footage.
 
The biggest reason for getting the game anyway is all the great custom maps and mods that will spawn from it. As long as the core mechanics of the main part of the game are great (and they seem to be, with ok AI and all the destructability) buyers will be rewarded with all the extra content ready to break free.

Still a shame that Crytek kind of fell into the same trap as with Far Cry though, although not as bad apparently, but I expected it as soon as I saw Crysis had monsters...

Hope Far Cry 2 doesn't have monsters or anything similar... I'm perfectly fine with wide open soldier/mercenary on soldier/mercanary gameplay for the whole game... I guess Crytek felt that that would be boring.
 
bcn-ron said:
Why would anyone do that? It's a game review, not a platform review.
Click to expand...
Because it's a perfectly valid complaint.
Crysis requires the gamer to go far above and beyond the hardware needed to play anything else on higher settings. In fact, many rigs that can barely run Crysis on medium can run everything else on maximum settings. Therefore, it's not a platform issue, it's a game issue.
 
Very interesting to know about the pacing of the ending.

That kind of ending tends to suit me down to the ground, I just guess the reviewer wasn't captivated by the intended acceleration of the story to follow that through.
Which is it's own kettle of fish, I guess.

I never minded the type of ending to Far Cry, though I hated the mutagens.

As Crysis essentially sounds like Far Cry with new clothes, I'll definitely purchase it*



*In two years or so :(
 
"along with a "boss battle" inherited from the coin-op class of '88 (see: Contra)"

Fucking awesome. If there is one thing modern games severely lack, its awesome boss fights in the same vein as Contra. This makes Crysis a Must buy; fuck 1up.

It seems as if their opinion of the quality of Crysis is arbitrarily dictated by the fact that the entire game isn't "OMGWTF OPEN ENDED AWESOMENESS."
 
cprime85 said:
It seems as if their opinion of the quality of Crysis is arbitrarily dictated by the fact that the entire game isn't "OMGWTF OPEN ENDED AWESOMENESS."
Click to expand...
Which I view as a good thing, because how can the story reach a climax for every player in an open ended world?
 
J-Rzez said:
They didn't take a point off for it costing you over a "G" on a machine able to play this at it's screenshots and video quality? Anyways, I agree with this score from 1up, for once.
Click to expand...
Kind of reminds me of a score for a certain game that should be lower because it cost more than $30.

Nice review... still, I don't think I can play this game unless I take Vista off of my computer. Even then, I'd probably be able to run it on medium.
 
Kabouter said:
Because it's a perfectly valid complaint.
Crysis requires the gamer to go far above and beyond the hardware needed to play anything else on higher settings. In fact, many rigs that can barely run Crysis on medium can run everything else on maximum settings. Therefore, it's not a platform issue, it's a game issue.
Click to expand...

I disagree. While I fully believe that the specs required to run this adequately should be disclosed in a review it should not effect the score.
The score should reflect the game, the audience should be made aware of how it plays and be based on that. Not on any extrinsic cost.
Otherwise multiplatform games on the 360 and the PS3 that are identical should be scored differently (albeit ever so slightly).
 
From now on, put the damn score in the thread without stupid spoilers or whatever, or don't make the thread.
 
The thing you should ask yourself after reading this review is "Is it a typical 1UP/IGN/GAMESPOT 8.0 or is Shawn Elliot attempting to give us a more objective take on the game?"
 
You wouldn't give a set of speakers a lower score for costing £500, so long as they performed as well as you'd expect. I don't think Crysis should lose points for pushing tech that a lot of people don't have.
 
sp0rsk said:
From now on, put the damn score in the thread without stupid spoilers or whatever, or don't make the thread.
Click to expand...

What about confining single review scores to the respective game's official thread?
 
medrew said:
I disagree. While I fully believe that the specs required to run this adequately should be disclosed in a review it should not effect the score.
The score should reflect the game, the audience should be made aware of how it plays and be based on that. Not on any extrinsic cost.
Otherwise multiplatform games on the 360 and the PS3 that are identical should be scored differently (albeit ever so slightly).
Click to expand...
Taking the performance into consideration IS reflecting the game correctly. A review is consumer advice. Now explain to me how a game isn't worth scoring lower when it doesn't run well on most PC's, even though they do perform well in every single other game.

TheGreatDave said:
You wouldn't give a set of speakers a lower score for costing £500, so long as they performed as well as you'd expect. I don't think Crysis should lose points for pushing tech that a lot of people don't have.
Click to expand...

Yes...you would.
If a 50e set of speakers performs amazingly, it should get a far higher score than one that costs twenty times as much and performs the same. Value should always be a consideration for reviews.
 
I think the mixed review was predictable from the 1-up show comments. I loved Far Cry so I disagree with the review's comments about that game, but the description of the ending of Crysis makes me worry.

I don't have a graphics card fast enough to play Crysis so I'm not too cut up. I expect the game will eventually be packed in with graphics cards (just like Far Cry was) so I expect I'll pick it up then when I upgrade my system.
 
Sir Fragula said:
What about confining single review scores to the respective game's official thread?
Click to expand...


Reviews are separate from the official thread.

Do you really want people shitting up official threads with review whining?
 
Kabouter said:
Yes...you would.
If a 50e set of speakers performs amazingly, it should get a far higher score than one that costs twenty times as much and performs the same. Value should always be a consideration for reviews.
Click to expand...

Sure, if the cheaper ones perform as well. The fact is, the game requires a premium to play, but the graphics are good enough that it's worthy of the investment. And a year from now, it'll probably be much more affordable to play anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Secret Level IGN Review: 5/10
Review  2 3
137
13K
Luc2010 replied
Yakuza show IGN review: 4/10
2
76
7K
rubik's dude replied
Infinity Nikki Review - IGN (9/10) > Stellar blade: IGN 7/10
NSFW  2 3
123
9K
tTHANOSs replied
Lunar Remastered Collection | Review Thread
Opinion Review 
37
2K
Dev1lXYZ replied
Avowed | Review Thread
Analysis Review  28 29 30 31 32
2K
86K
GymWolf replied
Top Bottom