Crysis 2

[ElNono]

But that very chart shows MMORPG players as separate from PC gamers. It also includes DS and PSP users in "console gamers", which is very odd to me. If you assume the split between the PS3 and the 360 are even, subtract the DS and PSP gamers (since no one would ever call them "console" in a pie chart with a "mobile" slice), and then add the MMO section to PC gaming, it stands to reason that PC alone is bigger than either console by a substantial margin.

It also should be called into question on whether or not they are getting their sales numbers from all available sources. There are dozens, perhaps hundreds of websites that you can buy and stream games from, where as with console you're restricted to A) retailers or B) the respective sales market of each system, be it PSN or Xbox Live.

I added the MMO to PC sales when I said 25%...
And I would definitely call anything that's on DS or PSP console games. They're portable consoles, and I don't think there's anything sketchy about it. They share shelf-space on any major retailer with console games.

The numbers do include digital downloads, according to the article.

Than again, time will tell how this evolves. I suspect the mobile market growing and eating up on some of the console market as their hardware improves.

[Cry Havoc]

I added the MMO to PC sales when I said 25%...
And I would definitely call anything that's on DS or PSP console games. They're portable consoles, and I don't think there's anything sketchy about it. They share shelf-space on any major retailer with console games.

That's patently ridiculous. We're talking sales comparisons. Do you think the DS and PSP compete with the PS3/360 or PC gaming? Do you think gamers make a decision between a DS OR a 360? If not, they need to be separated, because the fact that the DS has sold 135,000,000 units worldwide has a negligible impact on console sales. I don't know of anyone that's referred to the "console" PSP, or the "console" DS. They are separate worlds.

The numbers do include digital downloads, according to the article.

Than again, time will tell how this evolves. I suspect the mobile market growing and eating up on some of the console market as their hardware improves.

I gotta admit... the Next Gen PSP looks absolutely amazing. It's high on my list of things to get this year.

http://kotaku.com/#!5744485/the-psp-...10452:36210452

[ElNono]

That's patently ridiculous. We're talking sales comparisons. Do you think the DS and PSP compete with the PS3/360 or PC gaming? Do you think gamers make a decision between a DS OR a 360? If not, they need to be separated, because the fact that the DS has sold 135,000,000 units worldwide has a negligible impact on console sales. I don't know of anyone that's referred to the "console" PSP, or the "console" DS. They are separate worlds.

Of course they compete with PC game sales or sales from any other platform. A game sale on any platform is a game sale that most likely cannibalizes a sale on another. People don't have infinite money.

As far as lumping PSP or DS console sales alongside PS3/360, we can debate all day, but if you're going to lump PC game sales with MMO income (which is not per-unit, but subscription based), I don't see the reason not to lump all consoles together and compare platforms.

Ultimately, that kind of information is not used by gamers, but by developers to establish where they will invest their time and money to develop. It makes economic sense to target the biggest money makers.

I don't think it's a surprise to see big devs like Rock Star developing big les (RDR, LA Noire) exclusively for consoles. If anything, it would be interesting to see if it turns into a trend.

I gotta admit... the Next Gen PSP looks absolutely amazing. It's high on my list of things to get this year.

http://kotaku.com/#!5744485/the-psp-...10452:36210452

I was disappointed with the original PSP, and the whole downloadable thing never took off with the PSP Go. I'll wait this time around before I get another dud.

[z0sa]

elNono,

Handhelds are consoles but IMHO aren't kosher for a debate concerning PC vs. Console.

1 point is the fact many developers are unable to directly port games made for PC *or* console to handheld. Consoles and PC's are much more powerful, at least at this point (the gap is obviously tightening very quickly). Handheld versions have to be scaled down

2, the vast majority of game developers (to my knowledge .. this is technically "anecdotal" and my opinion) develop their games, even console exclusives, on computers and then port them to said console. Handhelds are never part of this process.

3, MMO gaming should be counted for PC simply because, by the numbers, it is a completely PC-oriented genre. The vast majority of MMO gamers play exclusively on PC. This is as much to do with the PC's much wider array of customizing options as it does with the fact the major developers simply haven't shown any want -- or need -- to port or develop a successful console MMO.

[ElNono]

elNono,

Handhelds are consoles but IMHO aren't kosher for a debate concerning PC vs. Console.

1 point is the fact many developers are unable to directly port games made for PC *or* console to handheld. Consoles and PC's are much more powerful, at least at this point (the gap is obviously tightening very quickly). Handheld versions have to be scaled down

Most companies I know of actually sub-contract handheld ports, and do it on a revenue-sharing agreement. That is, the smaller studio normally contacts the big company to do the handheld port and gets a percentage off the revenue of the sales, and so they also share on the risk. It's a good way for smaller studios to get into the market, and it basically involves minimal risk from the main game studio. There are exceptions, like the in-house studios of the handheld maker, but if you look at the big companies (EA, Activision, etc) they all use the model mentioned above.

This actually used to be the model too when PC gaming was king, and consoles were only a small part of the market. That has shifted these days with the console business growing tremendously and big studios trying to get as much profit as possible cutting third party costs.

2, the vast majority of game developers (to my knowledge .. this is technically "anecdotal" and my opinion) develop their games, even console exclusives, on computers and then port them to said console. Handhelds are never part of this process.

True to an extent. In the handheld case, you'll rarely use the same codebase, only mostly assets (gfx, sound), unless it's a painfully simple game (Plant vs Zombies, that kind). But the port itself is rarely done by the main studio anyways. They basically shift into being merely publishers.
As far as developing in a PC, sure. I mostly agree most companies do develop there, and while SDKs can (and normally are) very different between PC, Xbox and PS3, most AAA les use engine tech that are readily available on all platforms, so they end up only needing to work on the assets and scripting. This, however, turns the economy of publishing around. The licensing costs add up quickly. They can be per-product, per-platform, etc.
In the rare cases where the tech is built in-house (ID software), that's not a concern, but on most any other large studio, it's a very real concern.

Plus PC games are normally sold about $10 cheaper than console games. You also have to add that a PC port can cannibalize on the console game sale, thus delaying it would make economic sense for some of them.

I'm pretty sure RockStar doesn't publish on the PC not because they can't whip up quickly a PC port. I suspect they might do a RDR port eventually when the cost of the tech on the PC might come down (becomes somewhat obsolete thus priced cheaper).
In a way, that's why I expect there will always be some sort of support for AAA les on the PC side.

3, MMO gaming should be counted for PC simply because, by the numbers, it is a completely PC-oriented genre. The vast majority of MMO gamers play exclusively on PC. This is as much to do with the PC's much wider array of customizing options as it does with the fact the major developers simply haven't shown any want -- or need -- to port or develop a successful console MMO.

I agree. It's part of the PC game revenue stream.

[Cry Havoc]

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011...er,+Shotgun%29

[MaNuMaNiAc]

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011...er,+Shotgun%29

That dude is an annoying fanboy if I ever saw one...

[Cry Havoc]

That dude is an annoying fanboy if I ever saw one...

True, but the links to the press releases are relatively objective.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

True, but the links to the press releases are relatively objective.

granted

[Cry Havoc]

FWIW, I pre-ordered Crysis 2 for PC on Sunday.

[symple19]

Well, Crysis 2 is sick. Not as good as the first (at least so far, only about 2 1/2 hours in), but badass nonetheless.

Really like the customization options for the Nanosuit, as well as the tactical hood

Weapons feel great. Shooting CELL members produces satisfying blood spurts.

AI is pretty good, but I've noticed enemies get caught up on objects from time to time

Areas aren't as big as the first installment, but being able to go vertical makes up for it somewhat.

It runs surprisingly good on my aging machine, average between 40-60 FPS on the middle setting. Looks great, not quite as good as the first (IMO), but better than anything else out there right now. By a long shot

Won't check out MP till I beat the SP campaign, but most have reviewed it favorably

All in all, I'm pleased. Especially after the HUGE disappointment that is DA2.

[MannyIsGod]

Are you lost in the story if you never played one?

[vander]

Are you lost in the story if you never played one?

they're basically ignoring what happened in 1

going to be typical overblown sequel crap

[symple19]

Are you lost in the story if you never played one?

No.

Although a character from the first installment makes an early appearance, there isn't much of a tie-in. Kinda sucks for those like me that beat C1/Warhead, but totally reasonable considering console peeps probably didn't play the first one.

Whereas the focus in C1 and Warhead was more on the Koreans and the discovery of the Ceph (the Aliens), this one seems to be more focused on the suit itself.

I'm only 5 hours or so through, but it definitely keeps getting better, and much more difficult.

[symple19]

going to be typical overblown sequel crap

ummm, no

Like I said, it's not as good as the first, but it's head and shoulders above anything else that has come out since Warhead.

[Hooks]

Beat it earlier today, it was pretty damn easy on hard mode (never played crysis 1). The campaign was pretty fun, there were a couple of glitches though. Enemies would sort of get stuck on things, sometimes my guns wouldn't shoot bullets (all I had to do to fix it was switch weapons), and that's pretty much it. It took me about 2 days to beat it, the campaign was kind of long, it'll probably take around 11 hours to beat.

It reminds me a lot of Predator: Concrete Jungle, mixed with COD.

There aren't that many guns in the game, maybe like 10-15 different guns. You can sort of customize them though, such as putting a silencer on it or using iron sights or a laser. The aiming and firing is pretty similar to COD, I was pretty happy with that.

I didn't like the multiplayer though, you die way too fast imo. I'm playing this on the 360 btw.


Overall I give the game a 9/10.

[symple19]

Just beat it myself, and it was ing boss. There's a legit reason it's received so many good reviews.

The game had so many epic moments, possibly more than any other game I've ever played, including the C1. While I still give the edge to the first one (mostly due to the larger environments), C2 definitely delivered more jaw dropping moments, The depiction of NYC being annihilated was amazing.

Plenty of destructibility, and you can interact with the environment in many interesting ways. For instance, you can pick up random items and throw them to distract your enemies before putting a bullet through their head. Or, stick some C4 to an explosive barrel, pick it up, then throw it at your enemy and detonate the explosives. satisfaction.

Stealth kills are cool, since I like to run around cloaked so much. Sneak up behind somebody and either break their neck or stick a knife in their throat. Nice

Melee in this one was awesome. A couple of my favorite moments were grabbing some asshole and then throwing him off the side of a building, or kicking a car and knocking it into an enemy which in turn sent both over a cliffside.

The changes to the suit, which at first I didn't like, also grew on me to the point where I think it's far better than the first. Much more fluid, and not "dumbed down" like so many other PC gamers have complained about, IMO

I clocked in at just over 12 hours to beat it, which is how long it would take to beat MW2 and BLOPS combined.

Best SP/FPS experience I've had since C1 and the S.T.A.L.K.E.R series. I'd also give it a very enthusiastic 9/10

Do yourself a favor and play this game

[symple19]

Oh, and the story turned out pretty nice too, definitely setting up a third while explaining both the suit and the reasons why C1 took place.

[MannyIsGod]

12 hours for a SP campaign? yeah.

[Hooks]

Plenty of destructibility, and you can interact with the environment in many interesting ways. For instance, you can pick up random items and throw them to distract your enemies before putting a bullet through their head. Or, stick some C4 to an explosive barrel, pick it up, then throw it at your enemy and detonate the explosives. satisfaction.

WTF, I never thought of this .

I'm gonna try it on my next play through on super soldier. I just went ape on everybody most of the time and rarely used my stealth.

[vander]

no dx11? limited graphics options? people saying it plays like it was ported TO the PC? fast paced linear hallway shooter with a dumbed down suit?

Looking more and more like epic fail by crytek

[balli]

no dx11? limited graphics options? people saying it plays like it was ported TO the PC? fast paced linear hallway shooter with a dumbed down suit?

Looking more and more like epic fail by crytek

Maybe if you care about dx11. Whatever the that is.

If one's gaming experience is defined by how many pixels can be generated and crammed onto a monitor, by all means, go ahead and consider this by all accounts VERY decent game an 'epic fail'. For those inclined otherwise, whose gaming experience is defined by having an enjoyable and memorable and fun time, regardless of a liquid cooled $600 GPU, Crysis 2 seems to be doing just fine.

[Muser]

Exactly, vander is making out like the graphics are taken right from the NES or something.

[vander]

You people have no standards, you're just happy it didn't suck. some of us were expecting Crysis 2 to build on the greatness of Crysis, not become just another Call of Duty style shooter with aliens. If you're happy with Crysis 2 you have no idea what Crysis 1 was to PC gaming.

compared to Call of Duty, C2 is probably a pretty good game, compared to Crysis, it appears to have failed in just about every way.

[symple19]

You people have no standards, you're just happy it didn't suck. some of us were expecting Crysis 2 to build on the greatness of Crysis, not become just another Call of Duty style shooter with aliens. If you're happy with Crysis 2 you have no idea what Crysis 1 was to PC gaming.

compared to Call of Duty, C2 is probably a pretty good game, compared to Crysis, it appears to have failed in just about every way.

You keep saying things like, "appears" and "people saying".

You haven't played it yet have you?

So basically you're just listening to what a minority are saying and taking it as gospel. Okay...

Here's a review from a PC only blog that I really respect, since I'm a PC only gamer. For you Vander

Warning, some spoilers in review

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011...w-crysis-2-pc/

An excerpt below. He does have some criticism however, and doesn't really gush. One of the reasons I like his reviews

I say firm, because the game feels firm. The combat is brawny and sometimes brilliant. You are powerful, and can grab and throw anything around you, including being and to kick and flip cars over. It’s one of those situations in which the “feel” of the game is extremely tight. The audio-visual feedback from every action, from vaulting a wall to firing a shotgun, is remarkably solid, and the game is even more palpable and believable than the original. I’d go far as to say that in terms of banishing general floatiness and disconnectedness from its experience of movement and combat, Crysis 2 is the prime achiever among all FPS games. Enemies are always dangerous, too. You have to use cover, and to manipulate the suit, because anyone could do enough damage to kill you. It’s never outlandishly difficulty to beat, but the sense of threat is good. Crysis 2 is a game is perpetual hit and run, rather than a hit-point tank. (Although there are some on-rails shooty bits for the over-the-top explodo-murder, too.)