Does Crysis deserve the title of GOTY?

Crysis is no doubt the best technical achievement of all time...so far.The gameplay is certainly top-notch as well.But I doubt the validity of bestowing the title of game of the year to a game with a fan base as esoteric as those with the most high-end PCs.And let's face it, the multiplayer certainly isn't all that it should have been. I mean, the omission of team deathmatch is just mind-boggling. It sure could have used a little more than 5 maps. It sure could have used a lot more multiplayer modes such as staples like capture the flag and king of the hill, and some others like juggarnat, oddball, and VIP. And I definitely think Crytek should have been keeping up with the Joneses (the Joneses being Infinity Ward) and had some sort of point-based character-building system whereby players can:

• unlock new nanosuits with new abilities
• unlock new add-ons to customize their weapons
• unlock new weapons available for purchase
• unlock new vehicles available for purchase
• and unlock a master nanosuit with customizable and inter-changeable abilities

I mean let's face it, people go crazy for the whole RPG-sty|e leveling system and, shallow or not, it sure goes a long way towards a game's replay value.But multiplayer aside, Spike TV has certainly shown us that even a single-player game is GOTY-worthy (in their opinion, anyway) and perhaps I'm overlooking the fact that just because I consider a plentiful and lasting multiplayer to be the most valid measure of a game that doesn't mean that game reviewers view it as the most critical merit.That's why in my opinion the game of the year is Call of Duty 4 but I seriously doubt that either it or Crysis will be GameSpot's GOTY, as Super Mario Galaxy seems to be the darling of this years awards, but I'm still very much interested to see what the rest of you have to say about all this before my head swells any more.Does Crysis deserve the title of GOTY?
Not based on what I played of the demo... :?Does Crysis deserve the title of GOTY?
[QUOTE=''MatthewX'']Crysis is no doubt the best technical achievement of all time...so far.The gameplay is certainly top-notch as well.But I doubt the validity of bestowing the title of game of the year to a game with a fan base as esoteric as those with the most high-end PCs.

[/QUOTE]

What on earth does a game's fan base have to do with it getting an award for GOTY? These awards are given to game based on its merits, not because its fan base made the most noise on internet forums (contrary to popular belief).
[QUOTE=''MatthewX''] And let's face it, the multiplayer certainly isn't all that it should have been. I mean, the omission of team deathmatch is just mind-boggling. It sure could have used a little more than 5 maps. It sure could have used a lot more multiplayer modes such as staples like capture the flag and king of the hill, and some others like juggarnat, oddball, and VIP. And I definitely think Crytek should have been keeping up with the Joneses (the Joneses being Infinity Ward) and had some sort of point-based character-building system whereby players can:

• unlock new nanosuits with new abilities
• unlock new add-ons to customize their weapons
• unlock new weapons available for purchase
• unlock new vehicles available for purchase
• and unlock a master nanosuit with customizable and inter-changeable abilities

I mean let's face it, people go crazy for the whole RPG-sty|e leveling system and, shallow or not, it sure goes a long way towards a game's replay value.[/QUOTE]

Umm...Crysis has an leveling system. It's just local to a specific match (which are much longer and bigger than a COD4 match), rather than being persistent. Frankly I think it's a nice take on the idea, since it means that vet's don't always automatically start out with better equipment. While its fine if you don't like the Crysis multiplayer (especially since, as you already noted, it has an incredibly strong singleplayer component) I don't understand why you would basically want it to be a carbon copy of COD4 or Halo 3 multiplayer.


So,the game has great gameplay,wonderfull graphics and the only reasons it would not be deserving of a GOTY are that is lacks rpg aspects,and fails in multiplayer? As for the graphics only being worth of top-notch computers,why should that be a hindrence to the game?

Simply tacking on an rpg element to every FPS that comes out is becomeing something of an annoyance of mine,being that most feature the most useless choices,or just let you max them out in the end. Games that actually do it well are few and far between(Deus Ex,Vampire:TMB). And the same is true for multiplayer aspects being thrown together just so the company can say ''Hey,its got online multiplayer''. If these elements are done well you get a supurb game,but the lacking of them dosen't discredit what a game already has.

From what I've played I cant give a valid arguement for it to be a GOTY,but thats because I've only played the demo. However from what I have played I would think it has many great points that should lend themselves to the title.

It's all subjective anyway,really. I mean my Game of The Year would be either Portal or The Witcher,both of which lacked any multiplayer,and where by far the most interesting games,in my opinion,of the year.


[QUOTE=''Teufelhuhn'']I don't understand why you would basically want it to be a carbon copy of COD4 or Halo 3 multiplayer.

[/QUOTE]Not necessarily a carbon copy but, like I said, ''keepin up with the Joneses.'' That's probably why the COD 4 and Halo 3 multiplayers are more successful.
Not when its up against Kane %26 Lynch. THAT GAME WAS/IS FANTASTIC!VOTE KANE AND LYNCH FOR GOTY.
First...what does the fanbase have to do with the title itself deserving an award......that's like saying shows like Sopranos or Six Feet Under shouldn't have gotten the awards they did cause the amount of people who have subscription television is much smaller then the people who watch network primetime TV.If a game is an achievement it should be deserved to be honored for that achievement.....Period.Also, who cares if the multiplayer isn't everything it could have been....Crysis billed itself on being a Single Player experience, and in that aspect it delivered. There is a reason why ''Best Multiplayer'' award is seperate from the Genre awards.As for you're question....No, I don't think it should get GOTY........but I do believe it should get Shooter of the Year, and Definitely Best Technical Achievement for Graphics.
honestly...have you actually played the game?the whole leveling system, unlocks...etc is all in crysis, but its done in a match specific format....they left out team deathmatch because they wanted one team based mode, and one individial mode...its really not that complicated.
Haven't played it yet but I certainly think it's GOTY material.
I played the demo on low settings and think through technical achievement alone (not including the stupendous gameplay) deserves GOTY. Sure, Portal is creative but no game has raised the bar as much as Crysis.
[QUOTE=''foxhound_fox'']I played the demo on low settings and think through technical achievement alone (not including the stupendous gameplay) deserves GOTY. Sure, Portal is creative but no game has raised the bar as much as Crysis.[/QUOTE]

Guess you're waiting to get some new hardware before picking up Crysis, eh? :P

If Crysis wins, we'll get more games that most people can't play.
I've played the game and it was the best FPS game I've played, the gameplay is the best compared to all the FPS games I played, it is also the best game I played for this year, the multiplayer has only two modes but its still enjoying. in my opinion I think Crysis deserves the title of GOTY, Crytek really raised the standards of FPS games. The games I think will get the title of GOTY is either one of these 4: Halo 3, Crysis, Super Mario Galaxy or Orange Box.
[QUOTE=''MatthewX''][QUOTE=''Teufelhuhn'']I don't understand why you would basically want it to be a carbon copy of COD4 or Halo 3 multiplayer.

[/QUOTE]Not necessarily a carbon copy but, like I said, ''keepin up with the Joneses.'' That's probably why the COD 4 and Halo 3 multiplayers are more successful.[/QUOTE]

Okay then. So why isn't Halo 3 ''keeping up with the Joneses'' with its 16-player limit? Or COD4 with its lack of vehicles?

[QUOTE=''RK-Mara'']If Crysis wins, we'll get more games that most people can't play.[/QUOTE]

I'm pretty sure that any game that comes out on any platform is a game that ''most people can't play''. I don't think there's a platform that you could say most ''gamers'' own, except maybe the PS2.

I really hate to keep coming off as the almighty defender of Crysis in this forum, but I'm tired of seeing its merits overlooked because of its system requirements.
[QUOTE=''Teufelhuhn''][QUOTE=''RK-Mara'']If Crysis wins, we'll get more games that most people can't play.[/QUOTE]

I'm pretty sure that any game that comes out on any platform is a game that ''most people can't play''. I don't think there's a platform that you could say most ''gamers'' own, except maybe the PS2.

I really hate to keep coming off as the almighty defender of Crysis in this forum, but I'm tired of seeing its merits overlooked because of its system requirements. [/QUOTE]I don't mind the system specs of Crysis. I can play it on high and it's just a single game. It would be a different thing though, if every game had the same kind of requirements as Crysis.
Well I just got Crysis today and I have to say it is awesome. Thankfully my PC was able to handle every setting up at High apart from AA which caused major slowdown, but the graphics, especially in the character details (faces most notably brilliant) are second to none. Besides the graphics being the best I have ever seen the gameplay is commendable as well. So far I have only been fighting Koreans but the fights throughout the jungle and small military out posts have been insane, so intense and exciting. The story also seems to be interesting enough for me to keep wanting to know what's going to happen next. Bottomline, not only do I think it deserves to be in the running, it gets my vote for GOTY.
[QUOTE=''RK-Mara'']If Crysis wins, we'll get more games that most people can't play.[/QUOTE]Just because you can't play it on high settings doesn't mean you can't play it at all. Personally, I think it's about damn time someone started pushing the standard forward and creating a few games for people willing to invest in a high-powered computer. Otherwise,we'd never get to use our expensive hardware.There's hundreds and hundreds of games out there that are geared towards the ''family PC'', but games that are geared towards the ''enthusiast PC'' are few and far between. That said, I think it's a wee-bit selfish of folks to complain when one, single game comes out that they can't play because they have a five to eight year old computer. I mean seriously, when consoles now-a-days cost almost $800 for the full package, why not just fork over another $200 and get a decent rig that's ten times as strong as the console and can perform in ten times as many ways?Anyway, back on topic. [QUOTE=''MatthewX''] Crysis is no doubt the best technical achievement of all time...so far.The gameplay is certainly top-notch as well.But I doubt the validity of bestowing the title of game of the year to a game with a fan base as esoteric as those with the most high-end PCs.[/QUOTE]Again, it doesn't take a high-end PC to run the game. You may not be able to play it at the highest settings, but you can still play it and it still looks really, really good. So, in my opinion, that's a moot point.[QUOTE=''MatthewX'']And let's face it, the multiplayer certainly isn't all that it should have been. I mean, the omission of team deathmatch is just mind-boggling. It sure could have used a little more than 5 maps. It sure could have used a lot more multiplayer modes such as staples like capture the flag and king of the hill, and some others like juggarnat, oddball, and VIP. And I definitely think Crytek should have been keeping up with the Joneses (the Joneses being Infinity Ward) and had some sort of point-based character-building system whereby players can:

• unlock new nanosuits with new abilities
• unlock new add-ons to customize their weapons
• unlock new weapons available for purchase
• unlock new vehicles available for purchase
• and unlock a master nanosuit with customizable and inter-changeable abilities

I mean let's face it, people go crazy for the whole RPG-sty|e leveling system and, shallow or not, it sure goes a long way towards a game's replay value.[/QUOTE]Crysis was never meant to offer a spectacular multiplayer experience. It's just not what the game is all about. I'm so ridiculously glad Crytek didn't sell out to the masses and simplify the single-player game to cater to multiplayer fanatics like Infinity Ward did. With games like TF2 and CoD4 coming out within the same quarter, it would have been foolish for them to try and compete in the multiplayer market. Sure, the multiplayer would have been cooler with some additions, but that's the beauty of PC games -if players really want those things, they have the ability to create their own modifications to the game and distribute them to the community. [QUOTE=''MatthewX'']But multiplayer aside, Spike TV has certainly shown us that even a single-player game is GOTY-worthy (in their opinion, anyway) and perhaps I'm overlooking the fact that just because I consider a plentiful and lasting multiplayer to be the most valid measure of a game that doesn't mean that game reviewers view it as the most critical merit.[/QUOTE]You say ''even a single-player game is GOTY worthy'', but let me remind you that twelve of the past fourteen games that recieved the award of GOTY have been primarily single-player games. The only two primarily multiplayer games that have won since 1996 are EverQuest and World and Warcraft. I think a strong multiplayer component should be taken into consideration in the decision making process, but it's definitely not the most valid way to judge games. I think single-player games are the most GOTY-worthy candidates because they have the ability to offer much more enguaging storylines, characters, emotions, and events. Deathmatch and CTF are fun, but they aren't very deep or thought-provoking. But that's just my opinion, and your entitled to your own.[QUOTE=''MatthewX'']That's why in my opinion the game of the year is Call of Duty 4 but I seriously doubt that either it or Crysis will be GameSpot's GOTY, as Super Mario Galaxy seems to be the darling of this years awards, but I'm still very much interested to see what the rest of you have to say about all this before my head swells any more.[/QUOTE]Despite that fact that CoD4 seriously dissapointed me on multiple levels, it's an awesome game and I think it has a better chance of winning GOTY simply because it has more mass appeal as a multiplatform modern-war game. I seriously hope Mario Galaxy doesn't win, even though it's a really good game. But I think you're right. My money is on Mario simply because it's the only AAA platformer in a sea of AAA shooters.
If the last half of the game would've been as brilliant as the first half it could very well be GOTY for me. It's not though, so no. IMO.The multiplayer is quite good but it requires far more teamwork to be really fun than what you find on random servers. If you played with a couple of friends I'm sure it would be a blast. Now if I only had a couple of friends capable of running the game... :P
[QUOTE=''Teufelhuhn'']Guess you're waiting to get some new hardware before picking up Crysis, eh? :P
[/QUOTE]
No duh! :P

Even though its a great game I want to be able to play it with a butter-smooth framerate and all those beautiful shaders and effects. The way its meant to be played. Also, I'm still working on playing games from early 2007...