EA Remasters-Crysis Anyone?

Peter_Brosdahl

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
May 28, 2019
Messages
5,439
Points
113
Crysis_2019_11_01_07_02_53_671-1024x576.jpg


EA has been in the news recently with their announcement of coming back to Steam. Well they’ve also announced their are working on ‘remasters’. Some people will rightfully cringe at such a statement. It often reflects nothing more than updated versions of games to make them console friendly. However, in some cases, it also benefits the PC community by updating older games to newer API’s allowing them to perform better with newer technology.

OC3D had reported on a potential rumor about Crysis remasters in August when Crytek released a trailer for their newest engine. In that trailer there were images that looked very much like some scenery from Crysis. Well as the rumor mill churns OC3D is reporting that EA is planning on remasters coming in 2021.


The franchise is famous for the “Can it run Crysis” meme. It was also famous for continually running the most state of the art features and API with every release. From DX12 to potential Ray Tracing, HDR, 4k, there’s a plethora of things that these games could benefit from now.
Crysis anyone?
 

Zarathustra

Cloudless
Joined
Jun 19, 2019
Messages
2,756
Points
113
Was Crysis really a good game though, or was it just appreciated for its impressive graphics at the time?

I never got around to playing it
 

_k_

Slightly less n00b
Joined
May 28, 2019
Messages
108
Points
28
Was Crysis really a good game though, or was it just appreciated for its impressive graphics at the time?

I never got around to playing it
I thought it was a good game, generally received very well in the community. The story was pretty straight forward with a strong turn or two. Game play let you have a lot of choices besides shoot everyone in the face, which amounts to replays. Recently finished Crysis 2 and it is trash.
 

jardows

n00b
Joined
May 28, 2019
Messages
41
Points
8
I thought it was a good game, generally received very well in the community. The story was pretty straight forward with a strong turn or two. Game play let you have a lot of choices besides shoot everyone in the face, which amounts to replays. Recently finished Crysis 2 and it is trash.
I never played Crysis. I got Crysis 2 in a humble bundle, and it was horrible. Couldn't finish it. I've heard that the original and C3 were better, but my experience has made me hesitant to try them.
 

ThreeDee

Semi-regular
Joined
Jun 11, 2019
Messages
556
Points
63
The first Crysis game was great fun and one of the first games that I had played where you weren't stuck on rails and you could creep it .. or go loud and proud.

The first part of this video is all Hunt:Showdown .. the game that sucked me back into PC gaming o_O
 

Peter_Brosdahl

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
May 28, 2019
Messages
5,439
Points
113
I've played Crysis, Warhead, 2 & 3. Warhead was the first to use a 64bit engine but there's stories that some people were able to get a 64bit version of the 1st game. I was never able to find a true one but there's also ways to patch different things to force the first into 64bit. Only mention it because it lets you get beyond various ram/vram limitations of the time. Unfortunately the work around does make the game a bit crash happy even though performance does improve with modern cards. I tried it last year with my 2080TI. Back in the day they were also one of the few franchises that continually supported SLI and scaled well. I'd be surprised if these remasters happened and continued with that.

Crysis 2 was definitely my least favorite but there are some parts that I liked. I recommend all of the other ones though. I mostly enjoyed the visuals and story lines of each. Recently did another play thru of Crysis 3 in 4k and that was a lot of fun. A mixed blessing is that they're generally short campaigns that even with some sight seeing you can finish in an afternoon.
 

Peter_Brosdahl

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
May 28, 2019
Messages
5,439
Points
113
The first part of this video is all Hunt:Showdown .. the game that sucked me back into PC gaming

Even though Crytek has had some successful uses of it's engine in recent years I believe that Hunt:Showdown and KCD may be inspiring them to come back to gaming as well.;)
 

Niner51

FPS Regular
Joined
May 29, 2019
Messages
1,250
Points
113
Tried it and besides the great graphics for the time I wasn't impressed.
 

s3thra

n00b
Joined
Jul 2, 2019
Messages
56
Points
18
I’d be interested in this sort of thing just as a curiosity. I remember watching a video about Crysis 1 being relatively held back on modern systems because it wasn’t written with CPUs with lots of cores in mind. Makes sense given the time of release. Couple that with 32 bit VRAM limitations and it’s quite held back. So updating the engine alone would allow for tremendous performance benefits.
 

Grog6

n00b
Joined
Oct 12, 2019
Messages
16
Points
3
I recently replayed all 4 Crysis games; I like them a lot.

Especially on maximum difficulty. That changes a lot; you aren't going to blast your way thru it. :)

2 was probably the worst, and Warhead should have been a $20 expansion pack, really; but they were both fun.

Crysis 3 is a bit more fun than 1, mostly because of the Bow.

There is a 64 bit version of Crysis1; I'm running it. I think it came on the DVD version, but IIRC there was a patch from hell for the first release.

It's NOT the Steam version.
 

Peter_Brosdahl

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
May 28, 2019
Messages
5,439
Points
113
There is a 64 bit version of Crysis1; I'm running it. I think it came on the DVD version

Yeah that's what I read back in the day. Unfortunately I got on the Crysis train when the second came out and wasn't very knowledgeable about the different versions at the time. I tried looking in various places on the net for files but mostly they were patched versions using bits of Warhead to run it in 64 bit. So far I've got it from both Steam and Origin. I agree that Warhead should've been a add on pack.
 

Grog6

n00b
Joined
Oct 12, 2019
Messages
16
Points
3
I still think Crysis Wars is the best multiplayer; we still play LAN games, and there are ways to play online, but there are few servers.
 

Dan_D

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Messages
2,732
Points
113
Was Crysis really a good game though, or was it just appreciated for its impressive graphics at the time?

I never got around to playing it

Crysis was a game that was almost like an updated FarCry. And I mean FarCry 1 and not that bullshit that UbiSoft has been putting out year after year. The game play and visuals were outstanding on one hand but the tone pulls a Stanley Kubrick on you and switches things up about half way or so and the second half is nothing like the first.

Example 1: FarCry features an almost open world tropical island teeming with life and enemy encampments that you can approach and deal with however you choose. If an objective is in the camp you can approach it with stealth taking out each enemy one by one or go in guns blazing. If there is no objective in a location, you can simply ignore it. You can create distractions to lure enemies into different locations to either aid in your infiltration or simply gather them in one place giving you a tactical advantage. You can approach your objectives from nearly any point on the compass and how you deal with the enemy is almost entirely up to you.

This creates an interesting dynamic compared to shooters that preceded it as it gave you agency to play almost however you like. It featured interesting and engaging game play and an unparalleled experience for the first half or so of the game. Then some mutant monkey things show up and the game turns into a typical shooter where enemy encounters are scripted and since these creatures aren't designed to approximate humans, the encounters turn into the usual mindless shooting you'd expect for a science fiction shooter of the day. The plot devolves into something about as complex as Doom's which would have been acceptable if it were done in 1995.

Example 2: Crysis 1 features an almost open world tropical island teeming with life and enemy encampments that you can approach and deal with however you choose. If an objective is in the camp you can approach it with stealth taking out each enemy one by one or go in guns blazing. If there is no objective in a location, you can simply ignore it. You can create distractions to lure enemies into different locations to either aid in your infiltration or simply gather them in one place giving you a tactical advantage. You can approach your objectives from nearly any point on the compass and how you deal with the enemy is almost entirely up to you.

This creates an interesting dynamic compared to shooters that preceded it as it gave you agency to play almost however you like. It featured interesting and engaging game play and an unparalleled experience for the first half or so of the game. Then some weird techno-alien things show up and the game turns into a typical shooter where enemy encounters are scripted and since these creatures aren't designed to approximate humans, the encounters turn into the usual mindless shooting you'd expect for a science fiction shooter of the day. The plot devolves into something about as complex as Doom's which would have been acceptable if it were done in 1995.

Of course, Crysis came a few years later and expanded on the game play and had a more cohesive and interesting narrative. The narrative was hardly the focus of the original game and subsequent sequels improved on this tremendously. However, the open world aspects were dropped and while everything I said about the gameplay largely applies to its sequels, the smaller areas constrained the player in a way the first installment never did. The destructible environments of the first game were lost as was some of the interactivity.

In the original, you can interact with your environment almost like an RPG. You can pick up nearly anything and use it as a weapon increasing the creative ways you can fight through the game's enemies.

The environments are destructible and cover is never cover for very long. If you unload your guns into the jungle Predator style you'll find yourself cutting trees down as you do so and disturbing the plans and scaring off the animals. You spend the bulk of your time fighting trained mercenaries and soldiers. Eventually, you run into soldiers wearing Chinese knock offs of your own Nano-suit. Aside from the nano suits there isn't much in the way of science fiction elements aside from weapons being slightly futuristic but based on weapons of today.

Basically, Crysis was an interesting game at first, starting off strong in terms of gameplay mechanics. It was truly a technological marvel in every sense of the word. The game play is some of the best I've ever experienced and it was engaging and fun in a way that few games match even today. Each play through of the first half was different and felt fresh because of just how dynamic it truly was. Unfortunately, you do a somewhat fun vehicle segment and then it devolves into a typical shooter with vehicle sequences and largely scripted action which feels the same with each play through. It's utterly unremarkable and largely forgettable outside of its graphics once you pass the half way mark.

The narrative focus is poor in the first game but as I said it tightens up and gets better. You play as each of the squad members from the first game, each getting taking turns as the protagonist. Nomad in Crysis. Psycho in Crysis: Warhead (A largely linear expansion to the first game) and then Prophet in Crysis 3. Crysis 2 introduces a new protagonist that ends up in Prophets nano-suit ultimately getting his DNA re-written by the end of the game. Ultimately, one of the NPCs of the first game turns out to be the true protagonist of the entire series.

I wouldn't call the narrative a masterpiece, although by the third game it becomes a clear focus of the campaign and its tight and engaging. I'd even call it more memorable than most. Unfortunately, what made Crysis truly special was largely lost after the first game's first half which is a shame. After having said the good and the bad, I'd say the series is more good than bad. It's worth playing if you can pick up the trilogy at a good enough price.
 

Zarathustra

Cloudless
Joined
Jun 19, 2019
Messages
2,756
Points
113
Crysis was a game that was almost like an updated FarCry. And I mean FarCry 1 and not that bullshit that UbiSoft has been putting out year after year. The game play and visuals were outstanding on one hand but the tone pulls a Stanley Kubrick on you and switches things up about half way or so and the second half is nothing like the first.

Example 1: FarCry features an almost open world tropical island teeming with life and enemy encampments that you can approach and deal with however you choose. If an objective is in the camp you can approach it with stealth taking out each enemy one by one or go in guns blazing. If there is no objective in a location, you can simply ignore it. You can create distractions to lure enemies into different locations to either aid in your infiltration or simply gather them in one place giving you a tactical advantage. You can approach your objectives from nearly any point on the compass and how you deal with the enemy is almost entirely up to you.

This creates an interesting dynamic compared to shooters that preceded it as it gave you agency to play almost however you like. It featured interesting and engaging game play and an unparalleled experience for the first half or so of the game. Then some mutant monkey things show up and the game turns into a typical shooter where enemy encounters are scripted and since these creatures aren't designed to approximate humans, the encounters turn into the usual mindless shooting you'd expect for a science fiction shooter of the day. The plot devolves into something about as complex as Doom's which would have been acceptable if it were done in 1995.

Example 2: Crysis 1 features an almost open world tropical island teeming with life and enemy encampments that you can approach and deal with however you choose. If an objective is in the camp you can approach it with stealth taking out each enemy one by one or go in guns blazing. If there is no objective in a location, you can simply ignore it. You can create distractions to lure enemies into different locations to either aid in your infiltration or simply gather them in one place giving you a tactical advantage. You can approach your objectives from nearly any point on the compass and how you deal with the enemy is almost entirely up to you.

This creates an interesting dynamic compared to shooters that preceded it as it gave you agency to play almost however you like. It featured interesting and engaging game play and an unparalleled experience for the first half or so of the game. Then some weird techno-alien things show up and the game turns into a typical shooter where enemy encounters are scripted and since these creatures aren't designed to approximate humans, the encounters turn into the usual mindless shooting you'd expect for a science fiction shooter of the day. The plot devolves into something about as complex as Doom's which would have been acceptable if it were done in 1995.

Of course, Crysis came a few years later and expanded on the game play and had a more cohesive and interesting narrative. The narrative was hardly the focus of the original game and subsequent sequels improved on this tremendously. However, the open world aspects were dropped and while everything I said about the gameplay largely applies to its sequels, the smaller areas constrained the player in a way the first installment never did. The destructible environments of the first game were lost as was some of the interactivity.

In the original, you can interact with your environment almost like an RPG. You can pick up nearly anything and use it as a weapon increasing the creative ways you can fight through the game's enemies.

The environments are destructible and cover is never cover for very long. If you unload your guns into the jungle Predator style you'll find yourself cutting trees down as you do so and disturbing the plans and scaring off the animals. You spend the bulk of your time fighting trained mercenaries and soldiers. Eventually, you run into soldiers wearing Chinese knock offs of your own Nano-suit. Aside from the nano suits there isn't much in the way of science fiction elements aside from weapons being slightly futuristic but based on weapons of today.

Basically, Crysis was an interesting game at first, starting off strong in terms of gameplay mechanics. It was truly a technological marvel in every sense of the word. The game play is some of the best I've ever experienced and it was engaging and fun in a way that few games match even today. Each play through of the first half was different and felt fresh because of just how dynamic it truly was. Unfortunately, you do a somewhat fun vehicle segment and then it devolves into a typical shooter with vehicle sequences and largely scripted action which feels the same with each play through. It's utterly unremarkable and largely forgettable outside of its graphics once you pass the half way mark.

The narrative focus is poor in the first game but as I said it tightens up and gets better. You play as each of the squad members from the first game, each getting taking turns as the protagonist. Nomad in Crysis. Psycho in Crysis: Warhead (A largely linear expansion to the first game) and then Prophet in Crysis 3. Crysis 2 introduces a new protagonist that ends up in Prophets nano-suit ultimately getting his DNA re-written by the end of the game. Ultimately, one of the NPCs of the first game turns out to be the true protagonist of the entire series.

I wouldn't call the narrative a masterpiece, although by the third game it becomes a clear focus of the campaign and its tight and engaging. I'd even call it more memorable than most. Unfortunately, what made Crysis truly special was largely lost after the first game's first half which is a shame. After having said the good and the bad, I'd say the series is more good than bad. It's worth playing if you can pick up the trilogy at a good enough price.


Huh.

I'll probably pass then. I replayed the Far Cry series recently. First one bored me to tears.

2 and on were actually interesting, if maybe a little repetitive.
 

Dan_D

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Messages
2,732
Points
113
2 was excessively repetitive and stupid. It's one of the worst games i've ever played.
 
  • Like
Reactions: _k_

Zarathustra

Cloudless
Joined
Jun 19, 2019
Messages
2,756
Points
113
2 was excessively repetitive and stupid. It's one of the worst games i've ever played.

I enjoyed the big open world and side quests.

Hated the ending though.

I feel like the first Far Cry's only redeeming quality was that it was graphically impressive at the time it was originally launched. Other than that, the characters were lame, voice actors were absolutely gratingly bad, gameplay was unfathomably boring. Too much of a linear shooter.

I liked 2 and 3 (except for the endings as noted above, they both had horrid forced endings). 4 improved upon this a little. 5 is pretty decent too.

I will admit that the whole "take base, gain territory" concept gets a little repetitive over time, but there are also a lot of side quests and other things to amuse oneself with.

Along with Prey, Dying Light, the Fallout series (since 3) I'd argue these are some of the top games of the last 15 years.
 

Grimham

n00b
Joined
Jun 11, 2019
Messages
15
Points
3
Of all the games to update, why Crysis? It doesn't need it. Sure, there are better looking games out there now, but Crysis still looks nice imo.
I do love the first 2/3 of the game - all to the point where you start fighting the aliens. I've probably played the first 2/3 10 times or more.
 

Grog6

n00b
Joined
Oct 12, 2019
Messages
16
Points
3
I really like FC2; I've replayed it more than any of the others; same with Crysis 3.
Those aliens at the end of C3 are really hard to kill, and very aggressive.
There's a way to kill the Jackal at the end of FC2; search for it online. It's a glitch.

After you know the plot, you play differently; Screw the "Friends", get the missions and shoot them, lol.

The travel is a drag, but it can be minimized by using the Bus for travel; but you still need to get diamonds for guns; but I blow that off after I have my standard loadout.

FC3 I hated due to the *******s you have to kill; the game is almost psychological torture. Yeah, they want you to hate the antagonist, but dang.

Same with FC4; I liked it best when I took out both Main characters, and just killed everything that moved, basically.

The graphics on FC3 and FC4 are amazing, tho.

The best shooter for AI that is hard to kill is FEAR, and it's sequels.
They use excellent tactics, and are almost impossible to kill on the hardest level.
 
Become a Patron!
Top