That means that even IGN is 'misguided'. http://uk.pc.ign.com/articles/115/1156497p2.html While the game doesnt look as good as Crysis/Warhead http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/crysis-2/review.html?tag=topslot%3Bthumb%3B1&page=2 And theres two more Dutch and Three Swedish review sites saying about the same thing. Thanks to consoles, it looks worse then Warhead, but it runs smoother. Seems you are the one thats misguided.
Quicksaving is a form of cheating. You quickly press a key to save the game and if you die or use too much ammo in your next encounter you just press another key and you're back to a couple of seconds before the altercation so there's no fear of death. There's not really a penalty since you go back about 3 steps when you die instead of back to the last checkpoint. I'm glad they removed it and made people have to worry about dying for a change lol. Comparison time! Crysis 1 vs Crysis 2: http://gamingbolt.com/crysis-2-versus-crysis-1-hd-screenshot-comparison Yeah, you're right. Crysis 2 looks way worse than Crysis 1. One more point; I rest my case... I mean, case closed.
In a way that it runs smoother, thanks to the consoles aging hardware. Therefor, the game doesnt look as good as Crysis (Warhead) did in 2007. Oh and, with your comparisons, GameSpot and IGN reviewed the final, you came with a page dating from almost a month ago (beta time!). Besides, its better to compare ingame screens, instead of the artwork your looking at. On top of that, GameSpot and IGN probally know better then you, they actually reviewed their games today, on all platforms. And concluded the game doesnt look as nice as Crysis.
I too have gone PC only, when I get around to gaming nowadays. I just can't be bothered with this ridiculous discussion...
With the way things are going, with most games being multiplatform, a card like the GTX 590 almost seems like a waste of money. There's nothing that takes advantage of it, and I doubt anything will in the near future. If I were building a PC today, I don't think I would go with anything higher than a GTX 460 or maybe a GTX 560Ti.
They have to thinkof consoles. Btw, that review was about 2 gtx590's in sli, it CAN scale in some games.
Maximum PC had a feature on how consoles are hurting PC gaming. http://www.maximumpc.com/article/12_ways_consoles_are_hurting_pc_gaming A lot of developers just don't give a shit, and make crappy multiplatform games. It's not just the PC that suffers. The PS3 often gets crappy versions of multiplatform games too. Moreover, everyone suffers because the casual average Joe types keep buying shitty games. They'll pay full price for garbage like Call of Duty Black Ops, so developers keep pumping out crap. It's a problem on all platforms, not just the PC.
There have recently alot of discussions regarding 'consolization' due to Crysis 2's release. I agree that the PS3 is also suffering from it from time to time, getting ports from the 360.
I think part of the problem Crytek had with Crysis 2 was that they clearly didn't allocate themselves enough time in the development cycle. They underestimated what an undertaking developing their first multiplatform game would be. It was delayed, rushed, and the PC version was unfinished. They didn't add DX11 features until much later, and those only ran properly on Nvidia cards.