Average User Score: 5.6Apr 4, 2014This game is amazing. Don't listen to all the people complaining about a sub fee. It's better to pay a small amount and not have to buy anThis game is amazing. Don't listen to all the people complaining about a sub fee. It's better to pay a small amount and not have to buy an item here and an item there, which ends up costing more in the long run anyway. People are just too dumb to realise that. A perfect mix of MMO and TES. Don't expect Skyrim or Oblivion online, because that wouldn't be possible in an MMO. But this is the best MMO I have played since WoW (played thousands of hours), and the only one worth paying for. The graphics are amazing, the art design is fantastic. A few bugs here and there but they are getting fixed. So much of this game has changed over the past year of development and it's changed for the better because the developers listened to the players. The low average score isn't because it's a bad game, because it truly is fantastic! It's because people are happy to pay $4 a day for a coffee or $15 for a movie ticket for a movie that only goes for 90 minutes, but they go psycho about paying 50c a day for something that provides potentially hundreds or even thousands of hours of fun. Those people aren't the types we want playing anyway.… Expand
Average User Score: 3.9May 15, 2012I felt the need to write this because of how many trolls and haters there are. They're being completely unreasonable and just want to vent onI felt the need to write this because of how many trolls and haters there are. They're being completely unreasonable and just want to vent on the internets. I have played up to what I think is almost the end of Act 2 and I'm absolutely loving this game. The combat is so satisfying, the story is engaging, the graphics are great (I'm a graphics whore). The graphics aren't perhaps the absolute best they could be, but I don't even care because it has an awesome style that almost looks like it's been hand painted. The art style of the game is great. The GUI, like all Blizzard games, is fantastic. There were server issues at first. It took me 1.5 hours just to be able to log on. That was frustrating, but now that it's working, the game is amazing. Can't wait to try co-op, PvP and the Real-money auction house. Don't listen to the idiots giving this 0 or 1, the game is amazing.… Expand
Average User Score: 8.4Nov 12, 2011Skyrim is brilliant. It improves on Oblivion in every way possible. I really like the new menus and while they may not be perfect, they'reSkyrim is brilliant. It improves on Oblivion in every way possible. I really like the new menus and while they may not be perfect, they're still unbelievably better than the ones in Oblivion. I've played 20 hours so far. Mostly the main story with a minimal amount of side quests and almost no exploring. The story so far (reckon I'm getting towards the end) is brilliant and even better than Oblivion's fantastic story. Gameplay is amazing, with the new spellcasting system seeing the largest improvement. Melee combat hasn't really changed or improved much but duel-wielding is a big plus. The new levelling and skills/perks system is fantastic. Classes and skills seem so pointless now and it makes far more sense to just naturally develop your character as you play. There are some bugs here and there but they're small and nothing really breaks the game. I've encountered about five crashes and a few instances where talking to an NPC to hand in or start a quest didn't work and I had to reload. These should get patched and they're not so bad. I'd say the only thing that really is sub-standard would be the graphics. Pete Hines of Bethesda said the PC graphics would "blow your mind" and they haven't at all. Bethesda also said that they author their textures really high res. The textures are terrible and are really the only downside to the game. Most of them aren't much better than Oblivion and look like a game from years ago. The snow textures on rock or stone are by far the worst and look like they're 100x100 pixels. The lighting in non-dynamic so interiors are lit by non-existant light sources. Object meshes are also pretty bad and look extremely dated and jaggy. On a positive note, the art design is absolutely fantastic. Everything about the world is immersing and the environmental effects are so damn good. The best environmental effects are the snow and fog. It makes you feel cold and the graphics of these effects are actually very very good even compared to other games. The engine doesn't perform very well and I have a suspicion that it doesn't support mutiple graphics cards. I have an i7 930, GTX 460 1Gb SLi and 6Gb DDR3 RAM and I couldn't run this game at maximum settings without some lag. I had to drop shadows down to high plus a few other things. Considering my computer can run Battlefield 3 on high/ultra at 1080p this is pretty badly optimised imo. People's faces are a huge improvement over Oblivion, but NPC running/combat animations can sometimes be terrible and their pathfinding and overall intelligence isn't very good. Despite all the bad things I've mentioned, it's the gameplay, and not the graphics, that count. It is in my opinion the best RPG made to date, partly because it's my style of RPG, but also because the story, gameplay and art/level design are so well done.… Expand
Average User Score: 2.4Nov 9, 2011This is a singleplayer only review as I haven't yet had the chance to try multiplayer. I convinced myself I wasn't going to buy MW3 beingThis is a singleplayer only review as I haven't yet had the chance to try multiplayer. I convinced myself I wasn't going to buy MW3 being somewhat of a Battlefield fanboy. I loved Modern Warfare 1 but as a PC player hated MW2 due to lack of dedicated servers. It also had a rather disjointed story which really put me off. I decided to never buy another CoD game again because of the lack of innovation and the fact that it's basically the same game every year. Well I woke up on MW3 release day and impulsively decided to buy it just to see if it lived up to Modern Warfare 1. First thing I noticed was the campaign length. Normally a CoD game takes me only 3-5 hours to complete on regular. This one took me just under 9 hours which I was really happy with. The story truly lived up to MW1 and I enjoyed it much more than MW2. I'm giving it an 8 out of 10 because I really enjoyed it, it was very entertaining and wrapped up the Modern Warfare story quite nicely. I took two points off for dated visuals, lack of any proper physics and other engine-related badness. Also the fact that it's another iterative CoD. Now we just need some real innovation in the future and CoD can move forward the way it needs to.… Expand
Average User Score: 7.4Oct 19, 2011This is not Crysis, it's Crysis 1.5
There are many differences to the original game. The nanosuit is not the same as in the first game, it'sThis is not Crysis, it's Crysis 1.5
There are many differences to the original game. The nanosuit is not the same as in the first game, it's the one from Crysis 2 which was far worse. Armour mode is not default and now uses energy even when not being shot at. Speed mode is not a selectable mode anymore and strength mode is the default mode insterad of armour. Sprinting in speed mode is far slower too.
Enemies are in places they never used to be and missing from places they used to be. They're far easier to kill and their AI is far worse.
A whole level is missing and while it wasn't the best level in the game, it was still a part of the original game that hasn't been included here. Textures are terrible and the lighting is too. A lot of sounds have been changed, including most of the guns. The FY71 sounds so bad compared to the original.
All Crytek had to do was downgrade the graphics so the game would run on consoles. Instead they have remade the game so it's a different experience. Why they changed the nanosuit to the same one from Crysis 2 is beyond me. This is meant to be the original game, not the sequel. Crytek have failed miserably again just like they did with Crysis 2. The original Crysis on PC was one of my favourite games of all time but Crytek have lost all my respect with a failed sequel and failed port. Won't be buying any more of their products.
If you can, get Crysis for pc. Even on medium graphics it will look better than this port. You'll also get the full experience and get to play the game in the awesome way it was originally intended. If you want to use a controller, the pc version has always supported a 360 controller anyway.
This port deserves a 0. It's not the original Crysis, it's been modified and made far worse.… Expand
Average User Score: 6.7Oct 17, 2011I was a huge fan of the original Crysis. I played the singleplayer maybe 5+ times through. I also spent countless hours in the editor. I couldI was a huge fan of the original Crysis. I played the singleplayer maybe 5+ times through. I also spent countless hours in the editor. I could only run it on medium but it was the game that inspired me to build a gaming monster of a PC and finally run it maxed at 60fps two years after it's release. I was so excited for Crysis 2, although I was disappointed it would be set in a city. I preordered the limited edition. Well after playing through it on the day it came out I was deeply disappointed with it. Compared to the original, it sucks. It's a completely different game, it just doesn't feel like Crysis at all. I'm so angry that Crytek betrayed it's PC fanbase. I don't care that it went to consoles, but they made the PC version so bad. No DX11, or even DX10 for that matter, at launch. This is unacceptable. Crysis 1 pushed graphics to the limit, Crysis 2 failed completely in this regard. It should have been 2 years ahead of every other game just like the original but it really wasn't even as good as some current gen games. Then there's the story. It sucked. The story from the first game was far better because it was explained so well. Crysis 2's story was so vague, the characters were boring and it didn't link to the first game in any way. Where are Nomad and Psycho? It never talks about them once. I expected Crysis 2 to be based on the island from the first game, with the characters going back to the island like the end cutscene but we don't know anything about them. Then there's the gameplay. That sucked too. The city maps were just way way way too small. The game was linear, the enemies boring and overall it just felt like CoD. The Nanosuit 2 is far worse than the origianl suit. I can't select speed mode individually, or strength mode either. I hate it that sprint/jump and punch just activate the modes instead of having to actively select just one mode. It destroyed the nuances of the suit and the suit mode menu. Armour mode also drained energy even when you weren't being shot instead of just being the default mode like in Crysis 1. This game was so disappointing. It's stuffed up in so many ways. Graphics, story, setting, gameplay, the nanosuit, characters. They're all worse than the original and to top it off it's a console port with no innovation. Crysis 1 and Warhead were so much better. Don't know what Crytek were thinking but they've lost one of their biggest fans. I won't be buying Crysis 3 or any of their other games, even if they're brilliant.… Expand