I went through Crysis 1 and 2 on PS3 and saw a fair sized chunk of 2 on 360. It wasn't so much frame drops, more it just being consistently low throughout. Felt like it was always playing at 20-25 which considering the player is given less freedom than in Crysis 1 I expected better. Flip side of that is I preferred the design of 2 over 1, never felt the open design in 1 added much.
-
-
ok, then i get it. it's been confirmed that the PS3 ports of Crysis 2 is more prone to framerate problems than the 360 version. Digital Foundry had a very founded article on that in their "face-off" column.
Crysis' open world is more of a blender than a true sandbox - it looks and feels open but it really isn't, at least not in the same way as Far Cry was on PC. i also prefer Crysis 2 over the original because the campaign is more streamlined, better paced and designed.Comment
-
That's one of the reasons I'm glad DICE isn't involved in this anymore. MOH needs to be a tight, streamlined series and the last 2 BF entries showed that's DICE's weakness. Hopefully, the main team for this series has a very grounded mp planned too.Comment
-
Out October 23rd, the usual EA pre-COD slot.Comment
-
some more infos on multiplayer, like factions for character customization and physics.
i really like the idea of global strike teams, that's what made the original Ghost Recon games so popular. but a German KSK in game about warfare in recent global conflicts? highly doubtful.Comment
-
I really disagree . BF had its fair share of problems , but part II was one of the best 1st person shooters I've played this gen . I really liked MOH too just felt it was a bit too short and engine let it down a bit but it was still a brilliant game .Originally posted by crazytaxinext View Post
I never had any trouble with the 360 version tbh, the engine was really impressive and the game looked class . I just didn't like the game much.It wasn't so much frame drops, more it just being consistently low throughoutComment
-
Completely, it wasn't a knock against the BF series, just that don't think MOH's multiplayer needs to share elements from BF otherwise its a redundant game. For me, considering Respawn are working on an FPS for EA as well, MOH needs to find its own niche rather than trying to be COD-liteComment
-
Originally posted by crazytaxinext View Post
To me far too much time and effort is placed on bloody Multi player and Co-op modes . I wish FPS developers would spend more time on the single player mode . We don't want ever FPS to be a COD game all the time . I'm finding all FPS multi players modes becoming less and less fun to play, and more about people trying to be so anal with their rankings and taking it all far too seriously.
I miss the early days of LIVE when it was more about having fun with players from around the world , rather than upping one rankComment
-
I think a really strong and expansive grounded single player focus for the MOH series and an open mp focus for BF would be the perfect fit
Comment
-
It's not just the name they've borrowed from another game, Captain Price from Modern Warfare seems to have made it into the game.
Gameplay trailer.
If you didn't tell me this was a Medal of Honor game, I'd have told you this was a COD trailer.Comment
-
Duh COD trailers are green, this one is kinda reddishComment
-
Nah the visuals look a bit different in MOH/BF games. They look nicer actually.
Looking forward to this now. Woooowoooowoooowooo!Comment
-
Less enticing than I'd hoped it'd be. Reminds me too much of BF3's bland single player in that trailer.Comment
-
Looks utterly brilliant to me , Can't waitComment
-
right, it's not much supporting the claim that is a game about commando operations. but if this will be at least a bit more stealthy and thoughtful in respect to mission design than the predecessor, then i wont complain at all.Originally posted by chopemon View PostComment
Comment