Maybe in terms of visual quality? The clips may not be a deciding factor but really looked like every other shooter we've playe din the last 10-15 years.

Yup, sure looks like a good multi-player shooter. And thank god! So few of them out there these days

Looks mediocre.

looks like it plays a lot like Counter-Strike

that is a good thing

Even after watching the 1up show, I'm still not overly impressed with Crysis. Although Left 4 Dead looks great.

Oh thats shockingly boring.

Crysis: Color is for Sissies

yup, that's a shooter alright. I would like to think geaphics will look better than that in 5 years.

@Murdock.: Seriously. This game looks different in every way.

@BigChiefSmokem:

In what regard?

Those noises coming out of Cevat Yerli's ass sound an awful lot like words. Wait a minute... I think-- yes! He's talking out of it!

This looks like every other MP fps out there. Kinda reminded me of FEAR a bit. :/

If they wanted to impress folks, they really should have tried to pimp the game a lot more by wowing the audience with all of the "super human" skills you are suposed to have at the disposal, instead of the standard run and gun clusterfuck which they showed. Granted they gave little clips of some skills, it wasnt that impressive really.

The only thing five years ahead will be the wait some people will have to partake in while saving up cash to get components to upgrade their rigs to play the damned game. ;D

One thing that does look kinda nice is that the outdoor level gave the feeling of it being rather large, and since Im a big map design whore, that would make me happy.

Multiplayer looks fun, but could get kinda complicated with all those nano-suit powers.

Can't wait for the single-player mode!

Can we get some bigger gunshot sounds?

These things sound like pop-caps...

Obviously, it's nearly impossible to tell without actually going in and playing the game, but, yeah, doesn't seem so "OMG POSSUM!"

Shiny tho.

It might be more advanced in ways that don't translate well into a 60 second clip. The worlds might be much larger or the number of players might be higher. Or the single player campaign might be 20 or 30 hours long. Or there might be 100 maps to play on. But just on graphics and gameplay, it looks much the same as console shooters.

Five years ahead? If by that you mean five years from the average person being capable of affording the PC rig capable of running Crysis at a decent level, then yes.
The MP looks just like every other FPS- oh, but you have powers, so it must be awesome! Yeah, right...

Hmm, IDK, looks ok I guess. Most of those guys suck btw.

The gun kick-back hit me as call of duty-ish, but I could swear I saw a Spartan Laster at one point.

I have to good with "No", Mister Wilson.

@Heliophage: in that i love Counter-Strike's gameplay and am eagerly awaiting a "next-gen" version of said game type

kinda reminds me of Soldier of Fortune as well; pseudo realism is my cup of tea when it comes to FPSes (with Team Fortess being the sole exception)

Yeah, it is.

Halo, the epitome of console multiplayer is a fancy CounterStrike clone. This is a little more.

Looks just as boring as all the other shooters since Doom.

@BigChiefSmokem: Id say the original CS, before it got bought out by valve, and went mainsteam was better.

Since it didnt have GODDAMNED STICKY FEET, which just fucked the whole goddamned gameplay making it a total spray and pray fest.

Ever since they added that Ive stayed away from that game like the plague, that and the community turned into a bunch of tits, who just ruins the experience.

Visions of Daikatana dance around in my head.

Well, okay, not that bad but this really did absolutely nothing for me other than disappoint. Why would you release media like this?

@Witzbold: "...that and the community turned into a bunch of tits"

roflmao

Who cares about the MP.. Crytek is all about 30 hour SP campaign! Far Cry was by far in my top 3 PC shooters of the past 5 years.

Nah, not five years, but wow! That game is fast! I think I've been playin' Halo for too long.

@BigChiefSmokem: It doesn't.

@Witzbold: CS was once played by people over 14 years old? NO WAI!

@Murdock.: I feel you on that one, this just looks like the same tired old deathmatch we see in every FPS now. I didn't see anything here that made me feel excited...

@BigChiefSmokem:

I can assure you it's no Counter-Strike, though I wouldn't say it's bad from not following directly in those footsteps. There is, supposedly, some decent variation in what are now typical FPS multiplayer gametimes, but none that I have experienced first hand.

Gametypes that require organization often feel chaotic and frustrating when the teams exceed the size you would expect in a Counter-Strike-esque game. You'd probably be in the clear if you expected something more Battlefield-like, or a distant crossbreed between the two.

@Witzbold:

If you like big maps, you'll be happy.

Wow, was this article made deliberately because one of the Halo fanboys got mad and tried to show Crysis mediocrity where none exists?

Wow that totally looks 5 years ahead of console games. Yeah right.

TERRIBLE player physics. I'll stick with Team Fortress 2.

Looks like a spiffy version of Turok......using fog to cover up the short draw distance.

@Heliophage: yayz. Yeah I love huge maps, which is why I have been more of a UT fan than the Quake series.

@Moonshadow101: You saw a laser sight on a sniper-type weapon.

This looks nowhere near as good as what they had at e3 a year and a half ago. What gives?

Crysis looks so 'meh' it hurts.

This and Hellgate are looking to be the two biggest disappointments of the season. I was really looking forward to both.

Oh well, at least TF2 didn't let me down.

@FACT.50:

Not quite 30 hours of single-player, unless you include playing it several times.

How many hours of gameplay are you figuring on? Will it exceed Far Cry's play time?

So the summary is you get about 30-40 hours gameplay experience - if you replay of course - and you also get multiplayer as well. [Source]

Multiplayer looks like the same old same old, I think UT3 would be better.

That's somewhat boring compared to some of the single-player antics. Charging up your strength and just punching your way through a building is pretty epic, but here they seem to have taken all that out and given you a standard deathmatch. It seems an engine much more suited to objective based games and epic set pieces, like assaulting each others bases or something.

If, in five years, we play with crap, then yes, Crysis is five years ahead of everything else.

Let's all get together for some Halo this weekend. Yay!

@BigChiefSmokem: ....
Counter Strike Source.
And Fortress Forever, if you want TF "real"...

It looks meh.

I no longer understand why developers showcase multiplayer. When you distill a game, every FPS multiplayer follows three paths: the Doom-style deathmatch, the CS-style elimination, and the Battlefield-style objectives-based gameplay (I don't wanna call Enemy Territories a fourth category since there's only been two). The only real way a shooter can distinguish itself is in its singleplayer portion.

That, or have multiplayer so awesome nobody even cares, like Halo.

I hadn't been paying a lot of attention to Crysis, but I sort of assumed it was going to be a pretty big deal. And that might still be the case, but based on this clip? Yikes. It's looking pretty underwhelming. Visuals look... fine, but not stunning. Sort of how I'd expect a 2007 FPS to look. Comparable to Halo 3 or Resistance, not quite as good as Bioshock. The gameplay... well, again, it doesn't look bad, but it just looks bland. Mybe not the fault of the Crysis devs specifically, FPS's just seem to have reached a point where there's not a lot more to do gameplay-wise, and your best bet is to refine the features that are already there. So from a video i guess it's hard to judge that. But what I particularly disliked about the video were the environments. Utter crap. At this point, I think any given FPS has the opportunity to distinguish itself in two ways: Storytelling or level design. I can't speak for the storytelling here, but the environments were terrible. I'm sure that for MP games, they are perfectly functional, but I'm basing that assumtion on the fact that these levels were perfectly functional in the hundreds of other games that featured generic-feeling variations on The Industrial Park, The Offices, The Jungle, The Combat Training Facility, etc. Why not create something new?

Bleh. Just bleh.

i am in the beat.

crysis is not fun. hopefully the single palyer will be better.

i sugesst you look at ut3 and half 2 orange box rathe than crysis. particularly team fortress 2.

this game is pretty thats it. evrything else seem,s a after thought. making the game just boring as hell to play

Reminds me of FEAR

What the? People are hyping up this?

Suddenly I don't feel like I'm missing out on anything in the least.

That's got to be the crappiest shotgun I've ever seen in a FPS. How many fucking shells did he have to pump into the guy standing just a few feet away?

You know, I think there is very little companies can do these days to make an "original" FPS. The genre is tired, and dare I say, a bit played-out? This is coming from someone who used to be a 5+ hours a day hardcore FPS junkie. Sure graphics have improved, but I've seen very little interesting innovation in the last few years.

so what exactly is new or "5 yrs ahead"? can't really judge the graphics in that little clip but the gameplay looks "5 years behind".

The game certainly looks fun enough, but it is definitely lacking in originality, also, I don't think they could have chosen a worse level to show off, all that fog made it look like the game had the draw distance of perfect dark.

All I have to say is you have to play this game to understand how fun it is. Don't listen to the stupid ass naysayers who say it isn't fun. They just don't know how to play the game. The thing that makes Crysis great is the different ways to approach a situation. In my opinion it kicks the shit out of Team Fortress. I'm sure Unreal 3 will kick ass though.

@BigChiefSmokem: Are you being sarcastic? The only thing it has in common with Counter-Strike is the fact that you shoot things.

The multiplayer looks tacked on and boring. Single player campaign looks amazing though.

i out it like this. they took so much time making sure the enviorments look good actual animations of explaosions and such look meh.

did you know you can access wmd at certain points and is sounds awsome but its not. when i first heard the enemy had a nuke i was like oh shit. than i watched it go off. i was like what? that doesn't even look a a nuclear explosion. its things like that they underwelm in.

and vehicles, can we steal them? i have snuck up on many enimei vehicles and find out i canlt stop them casue i don't ahve any explosives, you don;t start with any grenades, or anything.

just meh. thats how i describe it. all the time to uypdate my drivers and yadda yadda yadda just to go back to team fortress 2. like i siad says alot about this game