Sure I'm late, but what gives with Crysis Warhead?

S

stateofjermaine

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
1,256
Atech said:
Crysis has better graphics than Crysis Warhead...hence the "added" performance in the latter game.
Click to expand...
Wow, QFT. I didn't realize how true this would be.

I downloaded the original Crysis Demo while I prepared to get the full version of Warhead to actually play through (since according to the reviews I read, the sequel's gameplay was much improved and the graphics were roughly identical). Playing the original Crysis, my eyes wept even at the intro cinematic. Just trudging through the jungle was a "Wow," experience. Objectives felt slightly more subtle, and the story sort of crept along at an eerie pace. It was beautiful. I ran Fraps a few times just to figure out what settings I liked, and then waited for Warhead to arrive.

And, "Wow." As the first few scenes played out, and I played with the settings (all Enthusiast, 1920x1200, 4XAA) I knew it would be a short relationship. It was so sad . . . I don't know what it was exactly, but it just wasn't the same eye-popping, blood-pumping experience. The details weren't there. Even Gears of War looked better, in my opinion. I know a lot of people prefer Warhead to the original, but I was hugely disappointed. I played for about an hour, but it just wasn't very engaging. I wept as I trashed it.

But I looked online, and I couldn't find anyone else who felt this way. Does nobody else think the original Crysis was significantly better than Warhead? Is there a support group or something?
 
Last edited:
sign me up for liking Warhead over Crysis in every aspect except length.
Maybe the original deflowered you and you expected too much?
 
i like explosions and other effects better in WH
But Crysis has a more realistic look overall, where i see WH a bit more cartonney
 
JoNo216 said:
sign me up for liking Warhead over Crysis in every aspect except length.
Maybe the original deflowered you and you expected too much?
Click to expand...
Heh, yes, I did feel deflowered! Maybe you are right. :(

So you thought the graphics were better in WH, also?
 
Brownstone said:
i like explosions and other effects better in WH
But Crysis has a more realistic look overall, where i see WH a bit more cartonney
Click to expand...
Just seemed like their "optimizations" were basically "detail removals". Little things that made Crysis look so incredible seemed to be sort of blurred over a bit.
 
Crysis looks better than Warhead, but for the most part they are damn near identical IMO.
 
I feel that Warhead was a better game, length notwithstanding. Crysis did have better/more visuals, but I think Warhead was a better overall experience.

I did not, however, enjoy calling EA repeatedly to have them unlock the game for me. I went past their 3 install limit a couple of days after I bought it.
 
I thought that Crysis was bigger just because it had more "moments". Like the tank through the valley level, stopping the giant exo in the river, had more characters in it too. But that's more due to length than anything. Loved both games lots. The nanosuit just adds so much to gameplay, it's almost like playing Far Cry as a Predator.
 
pigwalk said:
I thought that Crysis was bigger just because it had more "moments". Like the tank through the valley level, stopping the giant exo in the river, had more characters in it too. But that's more due to length than anything. Loved both games lots. The nanosuit just adds so much to gameplay, it's almost like playing Far Cry as a Predator.
Click to expand...
Heh, a half-agreement. I'll take it.
 
The graphics were comparable, but the gameplay was just a lot more fun in Warhead.. in my opinion. I did enjoy Crysis though.
 
they are pretty much the same. I did like the storyline and stuff of the original more though. Inside the mountain parts were awesome
 
Bah! Fair enough. But I'm telling you guys, my eyes wept at the first one! The suits/weapons/water effects were just stunning. Good in the Warhead, but not stunning. And I don't know, somehow the gameplay in WH just bored me a little.

Heh, maybe I'm nuts. :p
 
If you like old school shooters with excellent graphics and have the hardware to run them, these are EXCELLENT games.
 
I'm with you man. I liked the original way more than warhead. I finished the original and never even got halfway through warhead. I think it looked better and felt a bit more polished, warhead seemed more cartooney and arcade-ish (if that's a word hah).
 
I thought that Crysis was better than Warhead in every way. I played through Crysis 3 times so far. I will replay it again once I get a new rig. I played through Warhead once and was extremely underwhelmed. I suppose I just enjoyed the slower pace of the original.
 
Warhead wasn't bad,it just wasn't a true sequel,more like an extended side mission.I thought Psycho was a more interesting character than Nomad,though.
 
Justinimcool2001 said:
I'm with you man. I liked the original way more than Warhead. I finished the original and never even got halfway through Warhead. I think it looked better and felt a bit more polished. Warhead seemed more cartooney and arcade-ish (if that's a word).
Click to expand...
Heh, awesome. At least I'm not the only crazy one. :D
 
Chombo said:
I thought that Crysis was better than Warhead in every way. I played through Crysis 3 times so far. I will replay it again once I get a new rig. I played through Warhead once and was extremely underwhelmed. I suppose I just enjoyed the slower pace of the original.
Click to expand...
YES. I knew it couldn't be just me. Although, I guess it could be just the three of us.
 
I was really hoping we'd get to control Psycho during that one mission where he's covering Nomad on the port with sniper fire.
 
Crysis was less linear than Warhead. The maps were bigger and you had so many different ways to get to the objective. Warhead was more like COD.
 
TheQuestian said:
But I looked online, and I couldn't find anyone else who felt this way. Does nobody else think the original Crysis was significantly better than Warhead? Is there a support group or something?
Click to expand...

Graphically I'm with you. Warhead was Crytek's answer to the people who were upset that Crysis wouldn't run maxed-out on their mid-range machines, but the "optimizations" seemed to involve taking out whatever made Crysis look good, and then changing the names of the detail levels. It didn't even run significantly better in my experience.
I know a lot of people prefer Warhead's gameplay, I don't think I have a preference.
 
Litfod said:
Graphically I'm with you. Warhead was Crytek's answer to the people who were upset that Crysis wouldn't run maxed-out on their mid-range machines, but the "optimizations" seemed to involve taking out whatever made Crysis look good, and then changing the names of the detail levels. It didn't even run significantly better in my experience.

I know a lot of people prefer Warhead's gameplay, I don't think I have a preference.
Click to expand...
This.

</THREAD>
 
The original Crysis was much more immersive for me. Not just the graphics and more realistic color scheme, but the music too. Warhead was mostly just jungle beats when nothing significant was going on. Also, the short and narrow stages just made me feel more confined to where the action was.
 
Yoshiyuki Blade said:
T the music too. Warhead was mostly just jungle beats when nothing significant was going on. .
Click to expand...

Maybe it's just because Warhead is fresh on my mind, but when the action picks up, the percussion is 100% big hollywood action flick. I loved it and it really drove home the 80's action movie feel.
 
TheQuestian said:
Wow, QFT. I didn't realize how true this would be.

I downloaded the original Crysis Demo while I prepared to get the full version of Warhead to actually play through (since according to the reviews I read, the sequel's gameplay was much improved and the graphics were roughly identical). Playing the original Crysis, my eyes wept even at the intro cinematic. Just trudging through the jungle was a "Wow," experience. Objectives felt slightly more subtle, and the story sort of crept along at an eerie pace. It was beautiful. I ran Fraps a few times just to figure out what settings I liked, and then waited for Warhead to arrive.

And, "Wow." As the first few scenes played out, and I played with the settings (all Enthusiast, 1920x1200, 4XAA) I knew it would be a short relationship. It was so sad . . . I don't know what it was exactly, but it just wasn't the same eye-popping, blood-pumping experience. The details weren't there. Even Gears of War looked better, in my opinion. I know a lot of people prefer Warhead to the original, but I was hugely disappointed. I played for about an hour, but it just wasn't very engaging. I wept as I trashed it.

But I looked online, and I couldn't find anyone else who felt this way. Does nobody else think the original Crysis was significantly better than Warhead? Is there a support group or something?
Click to expand...

Told you so ;)
And I liked Crysis better than Warhead to...to much "console" over warhead.
 
Yeah I also thought Crysis had better graphics than Warhead. However Warhead was more action packed, so I liked Warhead's game play slightly more than Crysis' game play.
 
Yoshiyuki Blade said:
Yeah I remember that, I guess pure percussion instruments just don't appeal to me very much.
Click to expand...
Quite frankly, I thought the music in both Crysis and Warhead was just kind of there.. I never really noticed it too much.

I think Far Cry had much better music than both of them. That music that played on the treetop level when you first encounter the Trigens was great!
 
tickle_me_emo said:
Yeah I also thought Crysis had better graphics than Warhead. However Warhead was more action packed, so I liked Warhead's game play slightly more than Crysis' game play.
Click to expand...
Action-packed is what people say. Mindless is what I felt. Again, Gears of War was superior to Warhead, to me.
 
drako said:
I think Far Cry had much better music than both of them. That music that played on the treetop level when you first encounter the Trigens was great!
Click to expand...
So, is Far Cry/Far Cry 2 worth a play? I've heard very mixed reviews.
 
I prefer the original Crysis, but it does run a little slower than WH. I'm more biased because I think WH sucked in comparison:

---- SPOILER ----
There was just something about trecking through the inside of the crashed spacecraft/pod that made me all warm and fuzzy. The ambiance, audio, visuals.. all done so well. Loved it.
---- SPOILER
 
TheQuestian said:
So, is Far Cry/Far Cry 2 worth a play? I've heard very mixed reviews.
Click to expand...
I can't comment on FC2, but the original was fantastic. I'd say its certainly worth a play through, especially since you can get it for like $5 these days. Just be forewarned, it's harder than Crysis, and since you played that game first, you'll probably be missing the nano suit!
 
drako said:
I can't comment on FC2, but the original was fantastic. I'd say its certainly worth a play through, especially since you can get it for like $5 these days. Just be forewarned, it's harder than Crysis, and since you played that game first, you'll probably be missing the nano suit!
Click to expand...

A sad trend of games getting more and more easy...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top