What games are you playing now?

Are you saying you prefer ash of gods or ash of gods is even worse.

Originally Posted by porcozaur
First banner saga, the nth time i start it and again doesnt impress me, dont know whats the whole fuss about this series; ash of gods seems miles away from this.

Kind of disagree here. I think Far cry aged fine (yea it could be better but really not that bad). There are a few clipping errors (occasional enemies shooting through the wall but not that many and many recent games are far worse).

What I really liked about far cry was the maps and diversity in game play. It encouraged run and gun; sniping and stealth. All three could be improved (for example adding silencers to weapons with some negative) but it still seems far better than most modern shooters. The maps were mostly large and open so could be approach from many different directions and techniques.
-
I don't remember crysis having the diversity in game play nor large open maps. It did introduce those special powers but i didn't find that they added much in the balance or diversity as the original far cry.

Originally Posted by JDR13
I loved Far Cry back in the day. It was the first DirectX 9 game, and the graphics were amazing at the time. It was also one of the few shooters with levels that large and open, and it doesn't hold your hand like the more modern games.

I tried playing it again earlier this year, but I don't think it's aged very well. It was also somewhat glitchy with enemies shooting through walls, etc.

As good as Far Cry was, the Crysis games are even better imo. They're an improvement over Far Cry in almost every way, and they've aged a lot more gracefully.

Originally Posted by JDR13
I loved Far Cry back in the day. It was the first DirectX 9 game, and the graphics were amazing at the time. It was also one of the few shooters with levels that large and open, and it doesn't hold your hand like the more modern games.

I tried playing it again earlier this year, but I don't think it's aged very well. It was also somewhat glitchy with enemies shooting through walls, etc.

As good as Far Cry was, the Crysis games are even better imo. They're an improvement over Far Cry in almost every way, and they've aged a lot more gracefully.

This was a result of the last official patch, 1.4. Prior to that the AI doesn't shoot through walls. When I discovered this in my recent playthrough, I quickly reverted to version 1.32, but by then I had hopelessly FUBARED my game installation by installing those shitty fan-made AMD patches and enhancement packs. So I ended up going back to 1.4 GOG. I figured hey it just adds realism that you can be pumped full of lead through canvas tents. Hah. Never played Crysis though I have it.

Currently playing xcom 2 new tactical missions. Fantastic. Like the story telling et all. Wish the base game had been more along this direction. Only thing i don't love is you can't build your party as they level - sort of automagic but not a huge negative nad it was free

Originally Posted by you
Kind of disagree here. I think Far cry aged fine (yea it could be better but really not that bad). There are a few clipping errors (occasional enemies shooting through the wall but not that many and many recent games are far worse).

I agree. It felt fresh and exciting to me with graphics and character models that feel modern. But the most important thing about playing Far Cry 1 for me is that it weaned me off of save scumming. Sure, I could have enabled the Developer's Build which allows Save Anywhere but I didn't. So I just used the game's save point Auto Save feature, which the developer's implemented because they wanted players to re-play levels in different ways due to the unusually dynamic nature of the game and its non-scripted AI. And man o man does this game make you re-play levels! It felt like fucking Dark Souls at times with enemies that could one-shot you!

What I really liked about far cry was the maps and diversity in game play. It encouraged run and gun; sniping and stealth.

Alas, I felt the stealth mechanics were pretty poor. It's not like the Dishonored series where you could do a playthrough with a stealth build. But the increasing difficulty & diversity of the AI was pretty astounding. Lots of things to love about this game.

Originally Posted by you
Currently playing xcom 2 new tactical missions. Fantastic. Like the story telling et all. Wish the base game had been more along this direction.

I think it's a indication that XCOM 3 will have a lot more narrative missions. Maybe it's just wishfull thinking on my part, though.

A more narrative direction would really improve the entire X-com system as a whole. I found X-com two very bland and simplistic, but it's sounding like the new missions take the game in a much better direction.

Originally Posted by you
I don't remember crysis having the diversity in game play nor large open maps.

Then either you have a pretty bad memory or you've never played Crysis.

The maps in Crysis are very similar to those in Far Cry. They're quite large and open and perhaps even more so than in Far Cry.

As far as diversity, you can do everything in Crysis that you can do in Far Cry, but Crysis has better stealth mechanics.

I definitely played it and i definitely thought it was bland but the reason is less clear as it didn't make much of an impression on myself. Also the following games crysis 2, … kept getting worse and worse. Faintly i remember crysis also being short (compared to far cry which was excessively long).

Originally Posted by JDR13
Then either you have a pretty bad memory or you've never played Crysis.

The maps in Crysis are very similar to those in Far Cry. They're quite large and open and perhaps even more so than in Far Cry.

As far as diversity, you can do everything in Crysis that you can do in Far Cry, but Crysis has better stealth mechanics.

Still playing xcom 2 new missions. There are 4 mini campaigns 7 missions each. No save scumming allowed - so you live with your decisions or have to start from the begging. I'm moving at the rate of 2 to 4 hours between sets of 7. Nearly finish with the second set and will do 3 and 4 this weekend. I think they are really good but you might disagree. The one negative is that after each mission your squad is upgraded and you have a choice in equipment bonus per squad (not individual members) but you are assigned upgrades to characters which is a bit of a bummer. For example in the second set my sniper focused on pistol instead of things like long watch which is a bummer for myself. The missions themselves are not that difficult (no deaths the first 7 and missed gold by approx 5000 points - which amounts to 5 wounded across the 7 missions - there are negative points for soliders wounded or killed). These are a combination of normal sets of missions so they have some of the features like time limits to destroy radio tower and hidden enemies popping up right in front of you. So you have to chose between being fast or conservative.
-
I don't know yet what happens if someone dies (if they show up in the next mission; are replaced in the next mission or your squad is reduce by 1 for the remainder of the set of 7). The squad size does increase as the missions progress (much like it would in the real game) but you have no choice in the new character class.
-
Still I think this nearly better than the original game and being free is just a bonus.

Originally Posted by you
I definitely played it and i definitely thought it was bland but the reason is less clear as it didn't make much of an impression on myself. Also the following games crysis 2, … kept getting worse and worse. Faintly i remember crysis also being short (compared to far cry which was excessively long).

Crysis 2 was definitely a step down from Crysis. They streamlined it and made the level design more linear. It was still decent but nowhere near as good as the first game imo.

And yeah, Far Cry was excessively long for a pure shooter. They could have cut a couple of levels out and been fine.

I played a few minutes of Crysis and here are a couple of quick observations:

- in full screen mode you get a fraction of the framerate you would get in windowed. In windowed it's smooth as silk but you have that annoying menu bar showing at the top so I used WindowsBorderlessGaming to remove it but it has to be forced each time you play.

- the hardest difficulty level with regard to AI almost seems equivalent to easiest in Far Cry. Don't know how I feel about that. Still nice to see all the familiar mechanics and control schemes carried over from Far Cry 1 and streamlined and enhanced a bit.

I'm playing Dead State (Re-Animated).
The soundtrack is good, the interface is outdated and frustrating, and dialogs are awesome (so far).

It is all about the map design. Play both games to completion then compare the maps.

Originally Posted by JackOfOwls
I played a few minutes of Crysis and here are a couple of quick observations:

- in full screen mode you get a fraction of the framerate you would get in windowed. In windowed it's smooth as silk but you have that annoying menu bar showing at the top so I used WindowsBorderlessGaming to remove it but it has to be forced each time you play.

- the hardest difficulty level with regard to AI almost seems equivalent to easiest in Far Cry. Don't know how I feel about that. Still nice to see all the familiar mechanics and control schemes carried over from Far Cry 1 and streamlined and enhanced a bit.

Originally Posted by JackOfOwls
I played a few minutes of Crysis and here are a couple of quick observations:

- in full screen mode you get a fraction of the framerate you would get in windowed. In windowed it's smooth as silk but you have that annoying menu bar showing at the top so I used WindowsBorderlessGaming to remove it but it has to be forced each time you play.

- the hardest difficulty level with regard to AI almost seems equivalent to easiest in Far Cry. Don't know how I feel about that. Still nice to see all the familiar mechanics and control schemes carried over from Far Cry 1 and streamlined and enhanced a bit.

Not sure what's causing your issue with full screen mode, but I've never experienced that.

I think you're exaggerating a little on the difficulty in Far Cry. It's hard, but it isn't that hard, at least not in my opinion. When I played it earlier this year, part of the difficulty was due to enemies being able to see and shoot me through walls which caused me to quit fairly early.

Originally Posted by you
It is all about the map design. Play both games to completion then compare the maps.

Not really sure what there is to compare. They're both extremely similar in terms of level design. The only difference is Crysis is more detailed and has better visuals overall.

Originally Posted by JDR13
Not sure what's causing your issue with full screen mode, but I've never experienced that.

I think you're exaggerating a little on the difficulty in Far Cry. It's hard, but it isn't that hard, at least not in my opinion. When I played it earlier this year, part of the difficulty was due to enemies being able to see and shoot me through walls which caused me to quit fairly early.

Same - I got a new gaming laptop this summer and played about half of Far Cry and have played a few hours of Crysis so far … no real performance issues on either (though Crysis is much more 'modern system aware'). I'm playing full screen on Ultra and it is both gorgeous and high frame rate.

If you only played 'a few minutes' of Crysis, you are what is essentially the tutorial … and sorry to be blunt, but this is the third time this week I have seen different takes on this in different threads/forums … and I am frankly completely fucking sick of it. Either play a decent chunk of the game or just shut the fuck up - your 'few minutes' is completely inadequate as forming any sort of assessment or opinion. Ugh - tiresome …

Originally Posted by JDR13
Not sure what's causing your issue with full screen mode, but I've never experienced that.

Must be a driver issue on my part then. Using a GTX 1070 on v388.13. Gotta be that 13 in the build number

I think you're exaggerating a little on the difficulty in Far Cry. It's hard, but it isn't that hard, at least not in my opinion.

Well, I thought it was balls hard at times. Though the AI could be stupid as a wall, walking right up to a doorway you're crouching behind, waiting to get shot after seeing 2 of his buddies killed before him, they could also be sneaky little shits. The Rebellion level had me re-playing it more times than I've ever played a lvl in an FPS before. Try playing that lvl these days. Maybe our twitch reflexes aren't as sharp as they were 15 years ago, tho I have no trouble with Doom wads. Go figure.

Originally Posted by txa1265
and sorry to be blunt, but this is the third time this week I have seen different takes on this in different threads/forums … and I am frankly completely fucking sick of it. Either play a decent chunk of the game or just shut the fuck up - your 'few minutes' is completely inadequate as forming any sort of assessment or opinion. Ugh - tiresome …

Um, it wasn't a review just couple of QUICK observations, Mr. Potato Head. Yikes. Have a glass of chill and a bran muffin there for that IBS before you bust, bro.

But I have played both games to completion; actually I have played far cry to completion several times (3, 4, 5); though frequently i just do my favorite maps (boat for example). crysis - been a while since i played it - i should probably replay it just to refresh my memory why i found it to be such a bore.

Originally Posted by txa1265
Same - I got a new gaming laptop this summer and played about half of Far Cry and have played a few hours of Crysis so far … no real performance issues on either (though Crysis is much more 'modern system aware'). I'm playing full screen on Ultra and it is both gorgeous and high frame rate.

If you only played 'a few minutes' of Crysis, you are what is essentially the tutorial … and sorry to be blunt, but this is the third time this week I have seen different takes on this in different threads/forums … and I am frankly completely fucking sick of it. Either play a decent chunk of the game or just shut the fuck up - your 'few minutes' is completely inadequate as forming any sort of assessment or opinion. Ugh - tiresome …

"I have played far cry to completion several times (3, 4, 5)" How was Far Cry 2? Fans seem very divided about it, some claiming it's the best in the series, others saying the absolute worst.