I WAS REALLY LOOKING FORWARD to playing Crysis 2 when it released a few weeks ago, despite concerns from the gaming community over the addition of console versions. So what if the graphics weren’t the most cutting-edge ever? Between the open-ended areas that have been a hallmark of Crytek’s games and the nanosuit introduced in Crysis, you had to expect that tactics and gameplay would carry the day. But the more I play Crysis 2, the less interested I am in finishing it, and I can’t help wonder if the shift to console development wasn’t in fact the main culprit.
As has been true with every game Crytek has ever made, the first few levels are a blast. The move away from jungle settings to a New York City under alien attack gets a big thumbs up, as you get dropped into large areas of crumbling streets and have a wide berth in how to navigate each area. In many of the early scenes, you can make a beeline for the next checkpoint or take a more roundabout path – a freedom sorely lacking in most shooters. You can use the cloaking capabilities of the nanosuit to scope out areas before you attack or walk up to enemies and pop them in the face with a shotgun at point-blank range, which never ceases to amuse. You feel like each area is a playground, and you get to make up the rules.
But something happens as the game progresses: you feel the levels constrict around you. Combat areas get smaller. Linear hallways become more common. Instead of human soldiers who track you relentlessly, you end up fighting more and more aliens who make up for a lack of smarts with the boring tradeoff of more hitpoints. An alien who’s an end-level boss in one level becomes a common sight in later missions. Where a lot of Crysis felt like you could invent a dozen different approaches to any given area, Crysis 2 feels like a more traditional shooter where you’re being led by the nose most of the way through.
It doesn’t help that the savegame system is a lazy mess. You’ll pick your way through two or three areas, run into a boss at the end and have to start the whole area over from scratch. I don’t mind dying, but when I have to replay the same 10-15 minutes several times, I can only scratch my head. Didn’t we figure out how to do savegames right ten years ago? I don’t necessarily need the type of save-anywhere system that PC gamers have always been spoiled with, but Crysis 2‘s checkpoints are often so far apart that I want to turn the game off every time I die.
So I can’t help but wonder: were these concessions, which all weaken the game in various ways, prompted by the console versions? Is that why the areas are smaller, the fights more compact, and the savegame system balanced the way it is? Even the graphics, which are stunning, are a notch below those its predecessor. I’ve often said that the best compliment you can pay a shooter is how you can’t wait to play it again after you finish, and the most damning criticism is that you don’t want to finish it at all. When I of all the things that were great in Crysis and have been diluted to some extent in Crysis 2, I can’t help wonder if the crazies were right: maybe consoles really did ruin this game, after all.
And maybe it’s a sad commentary on the state of videogames that I fully understand why Crytek jumped to consoles to begin with. In late 2007, Crytek watched Call of Duty: Modern Warfare – a franchise that also started out as a PC exclusive – sell a gazillion copies on the consoles, while Crysis, which sold well, was also the most pirated game of that year. At a time when so many game developers are struggling to stay afloat, you can hardly blame Crytek for not wanting to leave easy money on the table. It’s just a shame to see that the end result is a step backward.
Crysis 2: Maybe consoles DID ruin it, after all
I WAS REALLY LOOKING FORWARD to playing Crysis 2 when it released a few weeks ago, despite concerns from the gaming community over the addition of console versions. So what if the graphics weren’t the most cutting-edge ever? Between the open-ended areas that have been a hallmark of Crytek’s games and the nanosuit introduced in Crysis, you had to expect that tactics and gameplay would carry the day. But the more I play Crysis 2, the less interested I am in finishing it, and I can’t help wonder if the shift to console development wasn’t in fact the main culprit.
As has been true with every game Crytek has ever made, the first few levels are a blast. The move away from jungle settings to a New York City under alien attack gets a big thumbs up, as you get dropped into large areas of crumbling streets and have a wide berth in how to navigate each area. In many of the early scenes, you can make a beeline for the next checkpoint or take a more roundabout path – a freedom sorely lacking in most shooters. You can use the cloaking capabilities of the nanosuit to scope out areas before you attack or walk up to enemies and pop them in the face with a shotgun at point-blank range, which never ceases to amuse. You feel like each area is a playground, and you get to make up the rules.
But something happens as the game progresses: you feel the levels constrict around you. Combat areas get smaller. Linear hallways become more common. Instead of human soldiers who track you relentlessly, you end up fighting more and more aliens who make up for a lack of smarts with the boring tradeoff of more hitpoints. An alien who’s an end-level boss in one level becomes a common sight in later missions. Where a lot of Crysis felt like you could invent a dozen different approaches to any given area, Crysis 2 feels like a more traditional shooter where you’re being led by the nose most of the way through.
It doesn’t help that the savegame system is a lazy mess. You’ll pick your way through two or three areas, run into a boss at the end and have to start the whole area over from scratch. I don’t mind dying, but when I have to replay the same 10-15 minutes several times, I can only scratch my head. Didn’t we figure out how to do savegames right ten years ago? I don’t necessarily need the type of save-anywhere system that PC gamers have always been spoiled with, but Crysis 2‘s checkpoints are often so far apart that I want to turn the game off every time I die.
So I can’t help but wonder: were these concessions, which all weaken the game in various ways, prompted by the console versions? Is that why the areas are smaller, the fights more compact, and the savegame system balanced the way it is? Even the graphics, which are stunning, are a notch below those its predecessor. I’ve often said that the best compliment you can pay a shooter is how you can’t wait to play it again after you finish, and the most damning criticism is that you don’t want to finish it at all. When I of all the things that were great in Crysis and have been diluted to some extent in Crysis 2, I can’t help wonder if the crazies were right: maybe consoles really did ruin this game, after all.
And maybe it’s a sad commentary on the state of videogames that I fully understand why Crytek jumped to consoles to begin with. In late 2007, Crytek watched Call of Duty: Modern Warfare – a franchise that also started out as a PC exclusive – sell a gazillion copies on the consoles, while Crysis, which sold well, was also the most pirated game of that year. At a time when so many game developers are struggling to stay afloat, you can hardly blame Crytek for not wanting to leave easy money on the table. It’s just a shame to see that the end result is a step backward.