Recommended Posts

I hope they scrap the multiplayer portion of Crysis 3 altogether. I had fun with it but uh yeah... everything that could go wrong with it did go wrong and I don't have faith in Crytek getting it right. I also don't see them going back to the multiplayer style of Crysis 1 which is disappointing as it was far more fun than the poor CoD clone they tried to go for with Crysis 2.

I hope they scrap the multiplayer portion of crysis 3 altogether. I had fun with it but uh yeah... everything that could go wrong with it did go wrong. I don't see them going back to the multiplayer style of crysis 1 which is disappointing.

I feel they put a lot of effort into Crysis 2's multiplayer and I enjoy it a lot.

I just wish it was more popular :/

I feel they put a lot of effort into Crysis 2's multiplayer and I enjoy it a lot.

I just wish it was more popular :/

I did play it a lot too and enjoyed it. But the pc version was just bad bad bad. For starters they let people who pirated the game play on retail servers and if they got banned they could use a key generator to create a new key. So all they had to do was reinstall the game and continue playing like nothing happened. And to make matters even worse was that there was no cheat detection to speak of. It was an internet douche bags wet dream basically. Hackers had a lot of fun, no one else did. It was just terrible.

And then after having to put up with that crap Crytek/EA wanted to charge us for more maps. That pretty much killed the game in a hurry for the pc version.

I did play it a lot too and enjoyed. But the pc version was just bad bad bad. For starters they let people who pirated the game play on retail servers and if they got banned they could use a key generator to create a new key. So all they had to do was reinstall the game and continue playing like nothing happened. And to make matters even worse was that there was no cheat detection at all so that just makes the first two problems worse. It was just terrible.

And then after having to put up with that crap they wanted to charge us for more maps. That pretty much killed the game in a hurry for the pc version.

I wasn't aware of those points.

That is a shame :(

Yeah I read this as 'we want to make patches easier instead of having to make 3 completely different patch systems and patches' so they'll be screwing PC gamers over again.

I look forward to the final version's screenshots but I won't be getting it.

why the guess work if these are in game or not, there are videos of the game out already that show these parts of the game

<video snipped>

We never disputed whether these were in-game or not.

I am saying they look the same quality as Crysis 2, which is to be expected in this case.

Didn't get the second one, probably won't get the third one. :p After Crysis it just got worse IMO.

How do you know if you didn't get Crysis 2?

  • Like 2

I read that as "PC players will get screwed out of a great shooter because the consoles aren't as capable". It's Crysis 2 all over again :(

Glad I wasnt the only one who thought that.....

The images look interesting to me but how a still image actually renders when running is a whole different ball game.......

You said " I don't understand why people think they gameplay or story in that pile is so good."

People think it's good because it is good. Your opinion isn't with the majority on this one and the mile of great reviews and the fact it made game of the year etc just shows how good the game was received. A game doesn't need to only tickle the fancy of 10,000 people and be a total niche to be great. Tomb Raider is a great game, you obviously play it based on your Signature and it also got rave reviews when it released on the PC and PS1. Do you disagree that Tomb Raider is a great game?

We get it, you didn't like Half Life 2, that's fine. It is still a great game and one by which other FPS's will be judged.

i consider more of a mediocre game, it's entertaining, but not up there, and like HL one of the games i don't have an immediate need to finish. also as I remember this particular Tom Raider didn't

i consider more of a mediocre game, it's entertaining, but not up there, and like HL one of the games i don't have an immediate need to finish. also as I remember this particular Tom Raider didn't

So which FPS would you consider to be better than Half Life 2?

I feel they put a lot of effort into Crysis 2's multiplayer and I enjoy it a lot.

I just wish it was more popular :/

I was a big fan of the multiplayer as well. Never really got into the original's multiplayer, personally.

As impressive as this is, my experience with the Crysis games so far has been that they're all about visual impact. In most of them I have found the gameplay either boring or outright frustrating. Hopefully this one will be different.

  • Like 1

So which FPS would you consider to be better than Half Life 2?

Well Crysis for one. heck even the Modern Warfare games, which do tell the story in an excellent way with their cinematography. But personally I find Raven shield and it's earlier RB6 and the original Ghost recon to be best. Even though they may focus more on the gameplay than the story.

They don't look all that technically impressive, imo.

Nowhere near ultra-realistic and none of the trees look lifelike.

Always amazes me , the utter disrespect of some people. I'd like to see you put together assets that look that good. Those screen shots may not be ultra realistic... but who cares? They're still stunningly well drawn. Artists put in a lot of hours ... tons of overtime (most of the time unpaid extra time btw) to put graphics into video games. Then when people come on and say such narrow minded and insulting things like this, it makes them wonder why they bother. You know what? These graphics look incredible and I'm sorry, but your statements are just terribly misplaced.

Modern Warfare better than Half Life 2?

That's not an opinion many people are going to have.

Always amazes me , the utter disrespect of some people. I'd like to see you put together assets that look that good. Those screen shots may not be ultra realistic... but who cares? They're still stunningly well drawn. Artists put in a lot of hours ... tons of overtime (most of the time unpaid extra time btw) to put graphics into video games. Then when people come on and say such narrow minded and insulting things like this, it makes them wonder why they bother. You know what? These graphics look incredible and I'm sorry, but your statements are just terribly misplaced.

For the love of.. What is wrong with you?

I'm sorry, are people not allowed to comment on the game?

At what point did I personally insult the artists and declare their life's work in vain? Of course they're well drawn, but how they're created technically is not that impressive! Where did I say the artists are hopeless? The screenshots are nowhere near as impressive as previous Crysis games (which was by far the prettiest game ever made when it was released), given that they don't look any better than those of Skyrim with mods? If the whole point of the thread (or source) is to say "Look how good this technology looks!" and it contains a screenshot that has really fake looking plant life, why is it so wrong to point it out?

People are allowed to have opinions, regardless of whether you like them or not.

As impressive as this is, my experience with the Crysis games so far has been that they're all about visual impact. In most of them I have found the gameplay either boring or outright frustrating. Hopefully this one will be different.

Some people love the Crysis series, others hate it. I personally enjoy them a lot. I do think the story line is definitely not a strong point at all, but it gives the player one reason to carry on. Crytek probably use Crysis as a method to market the Crytek engine to other dev's.

Modern Warfare better than Half Life 2?

That's not an opinion many people are going to have.

For the love of.. What is wrong with you?

I'm sorry, are people not allowed to comment on the game?

At what point did I personally insult the artists and declare their life's work in vain? Of course they're well drawn, but how they're created technically is not that impressive! Where did I say the artists are hopeless? The screenshots are nowhere near as impressive as previous Crysis games (which was by far the prettiest game ever made when it was released), given that they don't look any better than those of Skyrim with mods? If the whole point of the thread (or source) is to say "Look how good this technology looks!" and it contains a screenshot that has really fake looking plant life, why is it so wrong to point it out?

People are allowed to have opinions, regardless of whether you like them or not.

Yes that's true but too often these days I see comments like "That looks crap" or "That's not impressive at all" ... when it IS impressive. It isn't crap. It's actually amazingly well drawn. People are just so extreme with their comments. Perhaps a better way of saying something's not to your liking is "Well, it's really good quality but I've seen better". That'd be fair.

Maybe I am using your post as an example, but only because it is just something I see so often. People have these super high standards as if anything less than perfection is 'crap'. Like PC gamers saying console games look crap. In fact, they don't. They look amazing. Battlefield on the PS3 is beautiful looking, as is Killzone 2 and 3. They're exceptional works of game art.

So nothing's wrong with me. I just believe that people have become complacent about the art in video games and it's sad.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
    • Cheers everyone for the replies. It's been very useful. 👍
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!