Pages: 1 2

 

2008-08-27 07:19:09
Flecco
iPod is broken.
+1,048|6924|NT, like Mick Dundee

Bradt3hleader wrote:

DeathUnlimited wrote:

Bradt3hleader wrote:


As body armor advances so does the ammo type to try and defeat it. There will never be a perfect body armor since somebody will always find a bullet weight/type to defeat it.

I think it shouldn't take more then 4 hits to the torso on heavy armor to kill somebody.
And in crysis it takes like 10.
Hence my point that it's really annoying when you only have 30-40 round and you have to hit the guy 10 times. Because the guy has time to hide unless you're point blank.

Bang-Bang-Bang "Oh I'm getting shot at" Bang Bang Bang "Well I guess I'll start heading to cover, but I'm lazy" Bang-Bang-Bang "Ok almost there...done"  *regenerates health*
Let me introduce to you a concept you may not have heard about before.

It's called a headshot. Those of us good at fps use them. In general they provide instant 1-2 hit kills in many games.
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
2008-08-27 11:27:36
Defiance
Member
+438|6930

Bradt3hleader wrote:

DeathUnlimited wrote:

Bradt3hleader wrote:

As body armor advances so does the ammo type to try and defeat it. There will never be a perfect body armor since somebody will always find a bullet weight/type to defeat it.

I think it shouldn't take more then 4 hits to the torso on heavy armor to kill somebody.
And in crysis it takes like 10.
Hence my point that it's really annoying when you only have 30-40 round and you have to hit the guy 10 times. Because the guy has time to hide unless you're point blank.

Bang-Bang-Bang "Oh I'm getting shot at" Bang Bang Bang "Well I guess I'll start heading to cover, but I'm lazy" Bang-Bang-Bang "Ok almost there...done"  *regenerates health*
No, not really. Placing 10 shots on these guys isn't that bad, they have silly-bad AI, but 4 shots would be ridiculous. That in a burst wouldn't take more then a second to drop someone, and that doesn't make sense for "heavy armor."
2008-08-27 15:25:18
specialistx2324
hahahahahhaa
+244|6948|arica harbour
in my book crysis is an awsome game but i rarely saw people buy crysis at my local computer store. even some top of the line computers struggled to run the game at peak performance. that translates to low sales.
2008-08-27 23:08:06
bob9f6
Member
+11|6247|A sea above the map of Tassie
If your after realism in regard to how many shots to kill a korean. Fuck off and play a game without aliens. All games are different so adapt, or play on easier settings.

Still love SP and MP, Propaganda ruined MP though. Whilst crysis wasn't that optimised, i think it was just future proof. Anyway, warhead is ment to be more optimised with lower system requirements so yay for us, and $ for crytek.
2008-08-27 23:17:18
Defiance
Member
+438|6930

specialistx2324 wrote:

in my book crysis is an awsome game but i rarely saw people buy crysis at my local computer store. even some top of the line computers struggled to run the game at peak performance. that translates to low sales.
Accept not playing at very high and play at high, besides these stupid fucks are ramping up the resolution and whining that it can't play that high. Even after that, it's not like they buy Crysis and look at it as a goal, they just thumb their nose at something that, in this regard, is better then them and their system.

Sorry you can't run it at 2560x1600, Very High, 4xAA, it's not exactly Crytek's problem they can build an engine more powerful then current hardware.

I know few people that actually look at it like that, but I can't say that's the main problem of Crysis. It's not bad gameplay but it's not all that original. The only twist is the nano-suit which only serves to make the game stupid easy. Run in front of a shit ton of enemies, cloak, shoot, cloak, shoot, regen, cloak, shoot, prize. Seriously? That's why it didn't sell well to the mainstream.

The first time I played Crysis was with a 6800 GT, and if it was really nice gameplay I would easily suffer through performance issues to the end. I did with Bioshock.
2008-09-15 22:45:33
some_random_panda
Flamesuit essential
+454|6650

Defiance wrote:

specialistx2324 wrote:

in my book crysis is an awsome game but i rarely saw people buy crysis at my local computer store. even some top of the line computers struggled to run the game at peak performance. that translates to low sales.
Accept not playing at very high and play at high, besides these stupid fucks are ramping up the resolution and whining that it can't play that high. Even after that, it's not like they buy Crysis and look at it as a goal, they just thumb their nose at something that, in this regard, is better then them and their system.

Sorry you can't run it at 2560x1600, Very High, 4xAA, it's not exactly Crytek's problem they can build an engine more powerful then current hardware.

I know few people that actually look at it like that, but I can't say that's the main problem of Crysis. It's not bad gameplay but it's not all that original. The only twist is the nano-suit which only serves to make the game stupid easy. Run in front of a shit ton of enemies, cloak, shoot, cloak, shoot, regen, cloak, shoot, prize. Seriously? That's why it didn't sell well to the mainstream.

The first time I played Crysis was with a 6800 GT, and if it was really nice gameplay I would easily suffer through performance issues to the end. I did with Bioshock.
Bioshock and Crysis are two games that, with a 2 year old system, I can't actually get to run properly.  However, I expect this to change when I get my 4870.

Also, I think that it's unreasonable to expect anyone to play bioshock on low settings.  It looks shit, no matter how you put it.  Crysis too has the really awkward problem of being too high performance - sometimes the bots would load before the scenery, so I'd think I was shooting at a guy on an empty beach, then drive forward and realise the guy was behind a rock the whole time.

Also, what's with the zooming in when you fire a machine gun?  How many people put their faces closer to the barrel of a 50 cal when shooting it?

Sure, that rock might look really nice, but I'd like to be able to see the damn thing before I see the target it's hiding.

Last edited by some_random_panda (2008-09-15 22:46:38)

 

Pages: 1 2

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard