User Reviews (71 - 81 of 130)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

Could have been great, instead...clumsy version of old Far Cry game!!

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 6 / 21
Date: November 20, 2007
Author: Amazon User

If you played Far Cry, then you know what this game is about and what you were expecting. The graphics are fantastic but the game play is on a lower level when compared to Far Cry.

PROS -
Basically, you are getting more Far Cry! LONG OVER DUE!!!
Excellent graphics.
New weapons.
Nano Suit - give you super human abilities.

CONS -
Linear game play with too many scripted events.(In other words, you cannot venture around and find alternate attack routes as much as you did in Far Cry and as soon as the game hits a save point, you know action is about to happen. It takes away all the surprise!)

BUGGY. This game crashes a lot. You can review different gaming forums and read the horror stories. Pretty pathetic for the excellent team of people behind CRYSIS to have released this clunker piece of manure out before it was well tested! I cannot play for more than 20 minutes without crashing out. (Yes I am updated and even running the latest NVIDIA beta drivers designed to resolve CRYSIS problems!)

This is kind of just like Far Cry all over again.
Another scientific experiment gone wrong.
Another batch of aliens invades the earth.
The worst part is, you spend the entire 2nd half of the game fighting aliens. UGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!

Also, the AI was crappy. I found the enemy to be VERY stupid and not very aggressive. In Far Cry the soldiers would come after me, flank me, attack hard. I almost could fall asleep at times waiting for the soldiers to do something!!!!

This could have been the game we were waiting for. Instead, it is a clumsy, half finished, unpolished remake of a great game!

After the Hype and the wait, its just plain Boring!!

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 6 / 22
Date: November 22, 2007
Author: Amazon User

Man, what a disappointment. I, like so many of us die hard PC shooter addicts loved Far Cry and was waiting for this release. Heck, I pre-orderd this from Amazon in the Summer!!! And boy, what a let down.

The first part I felt like I was replaying Far Cry, maybe an updated version, but the same basic island setting, similar weapons, vehicles, etc. Then I got into the tank battle part, and this was highly derivative of the hover tanks in Quake 4. I kept spacing out and thinking I was in Quake 4.

But then, I got to the middle part, where you're inside this mountain, and it was blatant RIPOFF of Prey. The whole thing. Floating in this 3 dimensional space, no gravity, similar type gameplay, and hugely pointless. There was no story. It was just a pain to get through, cuz nothing really happened. You shoot these things. Then nothing.

Then I got to the ice planet part, and this was somewhat interesting, for the first 3 minutes. Then it too, became boring and repetitive. Hugely so. The flying blue things are totally annoying. The weapons are simply lousy, even the alien weapon is basically useless (it overheats in like 4 seconds and doesn't actually kill anything that quickly)

All in all, what a huge letdown. The Crytek guys spent lots of time on the detailed environment that they became famous for with Far Cry. And the first part was similar. The nanosuit was somewhat novel, but it too ends up being useless because it runs out of power every few seconds.

This is not what I had hoped for. I made it through the game, but I'm not sure I'll go back for another run through. Just too boring and repetitive.

Waste of money and promises not put into game!

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 4 / 13
Date: December 05, 2007
Author: Amazon User

So I get hyped for months over this game and was dazzled by the beautiful trailers and gameplay videos that blew me away. Only to have them not in the game, or set at absurd levels that make it unplayable.

I hyped this game and thought it was the greatest game of the year, BS! Pretty and fun for the first half and then they forgot that they needed to end it and rushed it to the stores. More BS.

You go from a cool jungle fighting sequence, to some moronic ship floating sequence to an IMPOSSIBLE VTOL flying sequence, which I gave up on as the controls are impossible and whoever thought that up should be hung.

There is no EASY, for the casual gamer such as myself. The game borders on insanity and you go from a jungle special forces guy, to a pilot and other nonsense.

The game was rushed, because that is the state of gaming nowadays, greedy morons that could care less about quality, just rush it to the shelves.

So I wasted 50 bucks, and will not finish this game or buy anything from these aholes again.

To give you an idea, I put the cheat codes in and I still got killed. The VTOL level is impossible and that was the end.

Call of Duty 4 was fun, and makes up for it somehow, but they had those stupid phantom grenades again, so I am stuck waiting for a true PC game to come along. Thank you xbox tools for ruining gaming forever.

Good but not Great

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 2 / 4
Date: November 27, 2007
Author: Amazon User

The game that sold a million video cards, its a good game, good eye candy
Pros
Great engine
Nano suit makes for creative gameplay
Smooth visually good experience
AI is great

Cons
Graphics are over rated (leaves and fish who cares?)
Short, game is over
Some really boring missions, unadaptive script
Bosses tough but boring
NO SUPPORT FROM EA for Multiplayer

Not to repeat what others said, the graphics should not be more important than playing the game. As another person mentioned you play to be involved in the game not marvel at the leaves and turtles, I could not wait for a few of the missions to end (flight, zero-g). Once you get over the great look it turns out to be another shooter, weapons are good, nano suit keeps it fresh as it gives you many gameplay options, super sprint drop grenade, maximum armor, invisibility, customize weapons is nice too, etc.

Multiplayer ( HA !)
I have 3 tickets open with EA support because even though I have had the game since it came out I am unable to play multiplayer, and EAs point of view on this is clearly that we have your money and you have a problem. I have played a variety of online games and none of them have given me this much difficulty as Crysis, nor the complete lack of help from EA, this cost them 1 star here, 30 useless generic response from them, like plug in your computer, turn the power on, duh

Crysis: has promise, then justs gets tedious

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 2 / 4
Date: December 29, 2007
Author: Amazon User

The game starts out fun, the usual fighting, tank battle, sniper kind of mix. Challenging FPS, then it goes alien. While graphically cool, it completely loses touch in the CORE (interesting that the core of the CD sucks). After you finally get out of the CORE, its fun again for a sequence, until you have to fly the VTOL. What a piece of junk. Unfortunately, the game is weaved through with tedious boring frustrating sequences (example, flying a VTOL in windy weather battling aliens who fly faster, turn better...). I finally gave up deciding that a game this frustrating wasn't worth playing. Oh one other thing, you better have a VERY fast CPU and at least a GEForce 8800 NVIDA card to play this game or you'll have LOTS of skipping and stop action (not the kind of stopping you want). I would pass on this game which not rotten at the CORE, but certainly is wormy.

Dont believe the hype

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 2 / 5
Date: December 14, 2007
Author: Amazon User

Sure, this game has all the tech to make it one of the best looking games on the market. The problem is no computer can run it. The graphics are just not optimized as well as they could be. My comp can run games like Call of Duty 4 smooth and the difference in appearance is amazing.
Gameplay is fun for the first 2/3 of the game and the ability to put attachments on weapons is a cool feature. The storyline however drags on and like most fps, is very weak.

Sure this game may be a breakthrough in technology, however its just not that fun to play. Graphics does not equal good gameplay

Glitch

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 1 / 1
Date: December 04, 2007
Author: Amazon User

This may not help anyone when pertaining to the game, but i have had the same objective problem where i complete the objective and cant figure out how to make it go away and move on. Oh and then there was the tank that somehow got launched into the air when the tank attack comes at the Korean held town. Made it easy for me to kill him though since his underbelly was exposed i just shot a missile straight in there, but still weird. Tanks don't usually fly and flip.

Fantastic, but a serious system hog!!

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 1 / 1
Date: December 19, 2007
Author: Amazon User

I have a custom-built computer:
Intel Q6600 Quad 2.40GhZ overclocked to 2.8
4GB ram
EVGA 8800GTX Factory overclocked video card
Soundblaster X-Fi Xtreme Gamer Fatal1ty Platinum sound card
Vista Home Premium

First off, I have an extremely powerful system. I had heard lots of reviews saying this thing would eat any CPU/GPU for breakfast. Yeah right. not MY system. I was wrong. The max I can run this game (full settings) is at 1024x768, not my preferred 1680x1050. At the maxed everything, it takes over a second to respond to input (move the mouse right, 1 second later, the guy looks right). The only thing that I can think of that would be able to handle it is another 8800GTX in SLI. Gah I don't want to get another $700 video card!!!

Now, even though I can't run it at FULL settings, I did not say anywhere that this looks mediocre on lower settings. It is AMAZING, even on lower resolutions.

The game itself is amazing, much better than halo in terms of interactivity and storyline. The physics alone blow any other game (sans Unreal 3 running on an ageia physx card) out of the water, and the AI is excellent.

Get it if you can run it.

Technological Marvell

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 1 / 1
Date: December 22, 2007
Author: Amazon User

Crysis is an obvious successor to Far Cry once you see the initial game play. However, the nano suite, amazing graphics, destructible environments, zero G, and ice world are quite unique. Overall, I found the game to be really fun. I did upgrade my video card (WinXP): originally I had an AMD939 4400x2 and X1900XT/256MB. The game played fine at 1280x800, 2X AA, and MED until I got to the ice level. Then I had to drop to 1024x768 0x AA, and MED to even hit 10-20fps. I installed an 8800GT/512MB and went to 1280x1024 2x AA, HIGH and the game ran smooth as silk (even maintaining over 30fps on the ice level). The one HUGH item the game lacks is the ability to REALLY go where you want (sandbox). I really wanted to just take a helicopter and fly around the island or go hike over mountains but couldn't. The upcoming Mercenaries game should give me what I am looking for. Anyhow, Crysis is still worth a try, at least try the demo if you are unsure and make a decision...

Fun on a medium-high system, decent FPS with some overclocking

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 1 / 1
Date: December 24, 2007
Author: Amazon User

After having played this game for a couple of weeks, I am very happy with it. After finishing the game, going back and playing some levels is a lot of fun. The graphics are breath-taking, as is the realism of physical objects.

The game is very demanding on the system. I have a nVidia 680i MB, Q6600 CPU, 2 Gigs of RAM, and an eVGA 8800 GTX card. I run the system slightly overclocked (no extra cooling). The FSB runs at 299 (instead of stock 267) using nTune. I also OC the graphics card: Core 625 instead of 575, Memory at 2020 instead of 1800 and Shader clock at 1575 instead of 1350. It runs very stable at these settings. I use Vista 32-bit.

I run at 1920x1200 - no AA. All settings at Very High, except for Shadows(Medium) and Shader(High). I prefer the shadows at medium as they are accurate and sharp. I also prefer the shader at High (Very High creates motion blur effect, which is cool, but the framerates drop, and
I could not tell any visual difference.)

I get about 19-32 FPS, mostly around 24-27. From the Task Manager, I change the process priority to High (instead of Normal). I also notice that typically one of the CPU cores runs close to 100% while other cores run low. Sometimes all cores seem to participate, but mostly the load is on one. I have a dual boot system with Vista 64-bit, and on that the cores seem to be loaded in a more balanced way by Crysis, none maxing out. However, I did not find the framerate to be any higher on the 64-bit instance. So I am sticking to Vista 32-bit for now.

When the Crysis patch comes out I expect the cores will be loaded in a balanced way on the 32-bit system as well. Maybe the framerate will also go up by about 5 or so. I did play around with the process Affinity (you can select which cores you want it to run on). When I pick the two middle ones, sometimes it balances nicely between the two (roughly 70-30). So I am not sure why when all four cores are chosen, it loads only one primarily). Maybe it has to do with where it is in a level and what is going on on the screen at that time.

I can tell a LOT OF WORK has gone into making this game. After finishing it, replaying missions makes you explore more and try different things, which is a blast. As time passes in a level that starts at dawn time, and the sun comes out, the scenery is simply amazing.

This game gets a 10/10 from me.

Review Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next 

Actions