With two games getting a semi-sequel/prequel, Crytek and GSC try to breathe new life into their 2007 FPS hits. Both companies seem to be trying to fulfill some things that weren’t realized in the original iterations, but what should actually be addressed and what do we hope the games turn out to be?
I have more authority on Crysis, because I actually played through that game. I simply couldn’t get through Stalker Shadow of Chernobyl, and here’s why.
The fact that the difficulty only seemed to affect the amount of loot, and good loot, you could snatch from dead bodies was extremely frustrating. I am a pussy and not the best shooter, even if FPS is my favorite genre. You absolutely had to make that head shot every single time or you were going get in serious trouble, and completely drained of health packs. You get to know your Quick Save/Quick Load bindings pretty quick in Stalker.
It plays, however, an important part in the feeling and atmosphere in the game, which is second to none in this genre. Bioshock did a great job, but the action took control over it too often. In Stalker, the atmosphere IS the game. You do actually live in this world and you have to survive in it. It is for real. So, sure, the game is allowed to be harder than most FPS’.
But, there is one thing that is absolutely crucial to a shooter, and something that never clicked for me with Stalker: the actual shooting. It was never any fun to blow two shotgun blasts, snipe someone or play Rambo with a machinegun. I never got any sense of inertia. The feedback just wasn’t there for me. I remember dying for the 50th time or something one night and quickly switched to Unreal Tournament 3. I got so much more engrossed in that game than in Stalker, simply because of the shooting mechanics. Call of Duty 4 and Half-Life 2 are other great examples of how I like my FPS’ to feel.
This is a heartache for me, because the game did so many things right and was so unique and unconventional, so for me not being able to play it through is a damn shame. What I don’t want to see changed, is the world. Houses just being there; maybe there’s something inside maybe it ain’t. Bandits robbing you of all your stuff and that’s it, no way you’re getting it back. Just traversing the world. Simply beautiful, as Lynch might have said.
Crysis was absolutely amazing. Until it just stopped being amazing. This, to a pretty large extent, open island could be approached in numerous ways. You decided who you wanted to be through gameplay. Do you take the car? Do you set up an ambush? Do you snipe ‘em all? The nano-suite also defined what kind of gamer you are by either choosing to play it safe, or go Rambo and jump on top of buildings or lying cloaked in the grass.
All of a sudden, the game becomes the most linear shooter with poor level design and absolutely embarrassing script and set-pieces. It takes a turn for the ridiculous, to say the least. I also am inherently allergic to vehicle combat. I’d rather use my avatar’s body than some clunky machine, that indeed can reek some havoc, but ultimately I feel constrained and I never am intrigued to get to master the controls. So, when the game introduces long parts with vehicular combat I, eerie reminiscent of Quake 4, start to dread the experience. My only motivation at this point is to see the next graphical showcase that will satisfy my graphic whore-needs.
All I want my Crysis to have is more open world and less vehicular combat. It looks as if though I might get one wish granted, but it remains to see. A better script wouldn’t hurt either…
written by Jesper Sellerberg
\\ tags: Clear Sky, Crysis, Crytek, FPS, GSC, S.T.A.L.K.E.R, shooter, Warhead
We’re excited that a spy-themed MMO shooter will make it’s way to a console, the PlayStation 3. Dressing in our most convincing attire and speaking as smooth as Vanilla Ice in ‘Cool as Ice’, we asked Lead Writer and Game Designer Matt Staroscik several questions that he was “permitted” to confirm.
Recent Comments