Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Is crysis 2 still worth getting?

Last response: in Video Games
Share
December 3, 2011 9:28:51 PM

My pc should be able to run it okay but how is the gameplay? Is the multiplayer still populated? Is it worth paying $10 for it?

More about : crysis worth

December 3, 2011 9:59:40 PM

10 dollars for Crysis 2? Definitely worth it. Single player was pretty fun. Multiplayer still has people in it and imo it is the only thing to really fill the Quake void, multiplayer-wise atm. Everything else is a war sim.
December 4, 2011 6:13:30 AM

At $10, at least for the single player campaign, it's well worth it.
Related resources
December 4, 2011 7:46:49 AM

Go for it, you won´t regret!
December 4, 2011 1:43:32 PM

I bought it for $10 on origin a couple of days ago, and it is the best 10 bucks I ever spent on a game.

Listen!

Be sure and patch it to DX11. And afterwards get the high res textures patch.

The mp is still going strong, and the game is the best system crusher I currently own - provided you play in DX11/high res textures.
December 4, 2011 3:41:40 PM

Get it...download the HD / DX11 patch, and then download the MaLDoHDv3 Mod, which adds another round of texture improvement, and also provides a nice easy interface for changing game settings - - something the game should have come with in the first place (easily change FoV, which is ridiculously narrow by default, motion blur, LOD ratio, an option to skip the intro movies (yay!!!!), etc..)
December 5, 2011 6:26:49 AM

is the map packs worth getting?
December 5, 2011 7:00:37 PM

SP is a lot of fun. Unfortunately the mp never reached levels they thought it would. It had the potential to be a great mp game (I thought the map design was great), but launch bugs really turned people off to it and died relatively quickly. I haven't played it in quite a while so I don't know how active it is anymore. But $10 is worth the SP alone so it's a safe bet.
December 5, 2011 7:02:40 PM

tjosborne said:
is the map packs worth getting?


Check the server list and see if there are servers running the map packs. If not, I would say it's probably not worth it.
December 6, 2011 12:33:28 PM

Yes it's worth the $10. But man, DX11 kicks my ass. I only manage to get 25FPS near the beginning of the game. Is 25 FPS about right or is there something wrong on my end?

Edit: Why isn't my signature being applied?

Specs: 2500k @ 3.3GHz, 8GB DDR3, EVGA GTX 570 reference.
December 6, 2011 12:49:22 PM

It's worth getting if you want a system workout. Running on ultra with DX11 enabled and High Res Textures will definitely be stressful.
December 6, 2011 12:58:26 PM

Definitely worth it for singleplayer, its worth it for multiplayer too, but I'm not sure how active multiplayer still is.
December 6, 2011 2:13:32 PM

From_Canada said:
Yes it's worth the $10. But man, DX11 kicks my ass. I only manage to get 25FPS near the beginning of the game. Is 25 FPS about right or is there something wrong on my end?

Edit: Why isn't my signature being applied?

Specs: 2500k @ 3.3GHz, 8GB DDR3, EVGA GTX 570 reference.


My system is the same as yours as far as power goes, and all I get is about 25-35fps using the DX11 patch and high res mod, so you are doing about right. Also, I turn everything except shaders, textures, objects, physics, and sound down a notch. Also, I turn motion blur down 2 notches. I get about 35-45 fps like that, and it is playable.

Also, to apply your signature, make sure the box under the signature is checked. Once checked, hit apply. Then immediately hit the Tom's Hardware logo at the top once you apply it, go into a thread, and it should be there.
December 6, 2011 5:05:05 PM

Crysis 2 is a good game so $10 is worth it. I think the original is better though. Crysis 2 really feels like a console game because you basically follow a straight path.

I don't play online multiplayer games. But overall the single player campaign is good.
December 6, 2011 5:20:21 PM

jaguarskx said:
Crysis 2 is a good game so $10 is worth it. I think the original is better though. Crysis 2 really feels like a console game because you basically follow a straight path.

I don't play online multiplayer games. But overall the single player campaign is good.


I think Crysis is better than Crysis 2, although I think Crysis 2 has better graphics in DX11 w/ high res textures.

I think Warhead is quite possibly better than both.
December 6, 2011 7:13:33 PM

PCgamer81 said:
My system is the same as yours as far as power goes, and all I get is about 25-35fps using the DX11 patch and high res mod, so you are doing about right. Also, I turn everything except shaders, textures, objects, physics, and sound down a notch. Also, I turn motion blur down 2 notches. I get about 35-45 fps like that, and it is playable.

Also, to apply your signature, make sure the box under the signature is checked. Once checked, hit apply. Then immediately hit the Tom's Hardware logo at the top once you apply it, go into a thread, and it should be there.



That is strange. I also have an i5-2500k and a gtx 570. With dx11 and the hi-res texture pack, the only thing I had to bump down a notch was shadows and I was able to maintain 60-70 fps pretty easily in single player as well as multiplayer. I can only presume you play at like 1920x1200 or something. I play at 1680x1050 personally, so I presume this accounts for the variation.
December 6, 2011 7:49:45 PM

casualcolors said:
That is strange. I also have an i5-2500k and a gtx 570. With dx11 and the hi-res texture pack, the only thing I had to bump down a notch was shadows and I was able to maintain 60-70 fps pretty easily in single player as well as multiplayer. I can only presume you play at like 1920x1200 or something. I play at 1680x1050 personally, so I presume this accounts for the variation.


I play in 1920x1080, and using full AA and AF - also, my CCC settings are kind of mixed, not all set to performance.
December 6, 2011 7:53:49 PM

PCgamer81 said:
I play in 1920x1080, and using full AA and AF - also, my CCC settings are kind of mixed, not all set to performance.


Are you using increased FoV or default? When I bought the game I had to immediately change that.....I felt like I was looking through a little tube.


Oh....here's a screen of the MaLDoHD mod config utility I was talking about earlier. Really great mod and very well done.

December 6, 2011 7:55:50 PM

Stringjam said:
Are you using increased FoV or default? When I bought the game I had to immediately change that.....I felt like I was looking through a little tube.


I play it set to 90 and wish like hell I could set it higher. I would try to alter the file but I am afraid I would get banned.
December 6, 2011 9:41:14 PM

Meh, if you played crysis and warhead you will not like crysis 2. Not a sequel and feels like a new halo game with crysis written on the box/download...
December 6, 2011 10:11:49 PM

Stringjam said:
Are you using increased FoV or default? When I bought the game I had to immediately change that.....I felt like I was looking through a little tube.


Oh....here's a screen of the MaLDoHD mod config utility I was talking about earlier. Really great mod and very well done.

http://i54.tinypic.com/ehhc1l.png


Man, I got off track and thought you were talking about BF3 when you asked what my FoV was. (Too many threads going at once)

I play Crysis 2 at default, and have never really thought about it because I haven't taken it online yet.

I will have to try out the mod you posted. :D 
December 7, 2011 12:36:42 AM

nocturnal7x said:
Meh, if you played crysis and warhead you will not like crysis 2. Not a sequel and feels like a new halo game with crysis written on the box/download...


Not Halo, but Call of Duty: Future Alien Warfare.
December 7, 2011 10:15:13 PM

PCgamer81 said:
I play in 1920x1080, and using full AA and AF - also, my CCC settings are kind of mixed, not all set to performance.


Ah yeah, it must be the resolution difference. I also play with full AA and AF (not that AF has much of a performance impact really).
December 8, 2011 12:58:25 AM

casualcolors said:
Ah yeah, it must be the resolution difference. I also play with full AA and AF (not that AF has much of a performance impact really).


But you have a 570 so you have to remember that the 570 usually does better than the 6970 until you get to very high resolutions...
December 8, 2011 7:34:44 PM

PCgamer81 said:
But you have a 570 so you have to remember that the 570 usually does better than the 6970 until you get to very high resolutions...


Presumably because the 6970 is 2gb yeah? In any case, the difference in our resolution is clearly the difference in performance.
December 9, 2011 4:49:18 PM

casualcolors said:
Presumably because the 6970 is 2gb yeah? In any case, the difference in our resolution is clearly the difference in performance.


Yeah, for some reason the AMD outshines Nvidia at resolutions greater than 1920x1080. But at 1920x1080 or below, Nvidia smokes AMD (including the 570 and 6970).
December 9, 2011 4:50:27 PM

casualcolors said:
Presumably because the 6970 is 2gb yeah? In any case, the difference in our resolution is clearly the difference in performance.


Yeah, for some reason AMD outshines Nvidia at resolutions greater than 1920x1080. But at 1920x1080 or below, Nvidia smokes AMD - including the 570 (smoking the 6970).
December 10, 2011 8:50:41 PM

Penley54 said:
My pc should be able to run it okay but how is the gameplay? Is the multiplayer still populated? Is it worth paying $10 for it?


Multiplayer?! Who gives a crap about multiplayer? I personally think it's worth at least $30 to do the SP Campaign, so imo you should still buy it on that basis alone....
!