No more PC exclusives, says Crytek CEO

[Gorgon]

Crytek president Cevat Yerli has revealed in an interview with PC Play that Crytek will no longer make PC-exclusive titles.

?We are suffering currently from the huge piracy that is encompassing Crysis,? he said. ?We seem to lead the charts in piracy by a large margin, a [situation] that is not desirable.?

more@

http://www.videogaming247.com/2008/04/29/no-more-pc-exclusives-says-crytek-ceo/

[Laivasse]

Oh no nigga didn't just make a game aimed at the tiniest upper strata of PC hardware and complain that it didn't sell like a console game?

[Samon]

Try making a game that can be played on the average system.

[Shakermaker]

Try making a game that can be played on the average system.

Blizzard always seems to pull that off well.

[Javert]

Try making a game that can be played on the average system.

Ask Valve too. I think they did 'ok'.

[mortiz-Redux]

I seriously think piracy is overestimated by quite some margin. I would never pirate a game unless it's exceptionally old and hard to find through retail methods.

[giant384]

eh crysis was mostly pirated as a benchmark....no one liked the game that much.

selling thier games on consoles wont do a damn thing

[Wanted Bob]

Really, I cant see this working out for them. More platforms means more delays, and we KNOW some division of gamers is gonna complain of getting a watered-down port from another platform (see Halo 2 on PC, or HL2 of the original xbox).

[StardogChampion]

I don't get why they're complaining. They could easily just make it for PC then port it over to consoles later.

And if they sped up slightly then maybe their wages wouldn't dent their pockets so much.

[Krynn72]

eh crysis was mostly pirated as a benchmark....no one liked the game that much.

This.

selling thier games on consoles wont do a damn thing

But not this. They will sell a lot more by opening themselves to consoles.

[PaoloM]

Try making a game that can be played on the average system.

Amen to that. Crysis run like a slideshow on my machine, so I switched back to Episode 2 and Portal for some fast, smooth, sweet awesomeness.

[Asuka]

I hate it when companies suffer from piracy. I kind of feel bad for CryTek.

[giant384]

But not this. They will sell a lot more by opening themselves to consoles.

what makes you think that?
the 360 cannot run the game maxed out like pc can, i mean farcry didnt even sell that well for the 360

[Krynn72]

Thats because farcry sucked just as bad, but wasnt advertised. Crysis would have sold like hotcakes on the 360.

[Javert]

Besides, Crysis was running in DIRECT COMPETITION to Bioshock, Call of Duty 4, Halo 3, The Orange Box, and Unreal Tournament III.

To blame poor sales because of "piracy" paints only half a picture.

[Sulkdodds]

Not to mention they could just implement some kind of steamlike system and that would probably help them (if not us, lol).

[DEATHMASTER]

Besides, Crysis was running in DIRECT COMPETITION to Bioshock, Call of Duty 4, Halo 3, The Orange Box, and Unreal Tournament III.

To blame poor sales because of "piracy" paints only half a picture.
Well Halo 3 isn't on PC yet. Crysis => PC only

[soulslicer]

Crysis was just darned fine. No other game will have that kind of open-ended fps gameplay and graphics in ages to come, not to mention the cinematics and as Asuka said, I feel really bad for Crytek. They should have released the game in 2008, after fixing up bugs and optimizing. They should have released it, at least for the PS3 since he himself said that the 360 can't run it, but it was possible that the PS3 could, although lack of RAM would be an issue.

Also, I have to agree with the piracy thing a little. In my country alone, there was this one shop (I'm not naming where) which sold pirated copies of Crysis, fully working for 6 Dollars. I saw it being advertised on Singapore Forums at half the price. The game must be so easy to pirate. Maybe Crytek should have steamed it?

Also, the whole point of Crysis imo was to showcase their graphics engine mostly, but they have obviously failed in getting many developers latched on. I really hope that the next game that they are making will be successful (It will be a continuation of Crysis, called Crysis Wars or something: Source: http://www.incrysis.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=559) By then, there should be cheaper but powerful systems, possibly a better console, a better graphics engine.

It's not about the game that they made. It's about the awesome engine that they have made and it's the fact that they have given good hope for PC Gaming. Respect for Crytek...although I never really liked Far Cry either

[Javert]

Well Halo 3 isn't on PC yet. Crysis => PC only

It was still released around that time. It wasn't only a competition of money and PC, but of time. People only had "x" time to play so many games.

So the question then became, why play a game that they KNEW their computer would either struggle with, or play with a low multi-player population.

[Mikael Grizzly]

Crytek: Makes an average shooter -> Doesn't sell too good -> BAAAAWWWWPiracy

[Krynn72]

They wouldnt be complaining if it were just a tech demo for their engine. They shouldnt expect people to pay full price for a demonstration.

[chu]

Good, go make shitty console games, who needs ya.

[soulslicer]

Crytek: Makes an average shooter -> Doesn't sell too good -> BAAAAWWWWPiracy

Good, go make shitty console games, who needs ya.

I'd just like to ask. What part of the game did you find very bad, or too average? Not a great game, but so many parts of the game were amazing to play. They have alot of potential.

[VirusType2]

I feel bad for them, but I'm just glad I didn't buy it after hearing all of the negative comments ever since it was released. If I would have paid $50 or $60 and it sucked, I would have felt just as ripped off as they do every time someone pirates it.


I just want to see someone play it. I almost bought it just to witness the graphics. My current computer can't even run Bioshock well yet.

[Krynn72]

I'd just like to ask. What part of the game did you find very bad, or too average? Not a great game, but so many parts of the game were amazing to play. They have alot of potential.

Every part was average or worse. All of their "features" were just gimmicks that old and annoying after the first five minutes of using them. The suit made the game retardedly easy. The flying mission was absolutely pointless, and didnt even play well.

The only thing about it that was actually good was the graphics. And even they sucked unless you had a bleeding edge PC.

[Bad^Hat]

Try making a game that can be played on the average system.
/thread

[Alterego-X]

I doubt that everyone who downloaded Crysis, would have bought it if there would be no piracy.

Crysis became a symbol of high system requirements, and everyone wanted to try it just to see how it works, but they didn't plan to play with it.

[clarky003]

Ah well, money rules the roost yet again. Imo it kindof destroys the heart of what games are now that it's massive business, yes sales drive the need for good games, but all the fun seems to slowly get sucked out of the essence of games production, and you can almost feel it in the finished piece.

I bought the game, played it, loved the immersion. I think Crytek are just whining because they arn't satisfied with the vaste amount of monies that they already have, It's like "goddamit! we could of had so much more! the pain! why!?.

[StardogChampion]

I just want to see someone play it. I almost bought it just to witness the graphics.
See demo.

[sea]

Didn't Crysis sell over a million copies on the PC?

They just want more sales and are using piracy as an excuse for it. Maybe Crytek would have sold more copies of Crysis if more than 3% of computers out there could actually play their game. There's a reason why a game like Sins of a Solar Empire has sold so well - despite its unconventional gameplay, any computer built in the last five years can play it, and it still looks good. Crytek clearly wants to keep pushing the technology, but realises it can't do it if they want to remain profitable on the PC. It's a valid reason, but you know what? You shouldn't make excuses to your customers, especially when the real reason is so plain.

[staticprimer]

They can go console exclusive for all I care. Far Cry was ass and Crysis wasn't much better. (and I paid for both of them)

[Laivasse]

It's not about the game that they made. It's about the awesome engine that they have made and it's the fact that they have given good hope for PC Gaming. Respect for Crytek...Have to disagree with this actually, considering the statement the guy made.

Developing for PC has never been about bettering or even matching console sales, since the PC games market has paled in comparison to the console market for as long as I can remember. I can't believe they're pretending they didn't know that, especially when they developed Crysis with the clear intention that it would be a tasty treat for top end PC's only. For the Crytek CEO to say they're abandoning PC exclusives and cite as a reason the fact that some console games sell more, is to send a bad message to the industry: 'We don't think PC exclusives are worth it even if they sell upwards of a million copies.'

[comoxer]

I thought they were making a expansion pack for Crysis?

Due to the ending, going back to the island

[AHA-Lambda]

they're making 2 more sequels

Besides, Crysis was running in DIRECT COMPETITION to Bioshock, Call of Duty 4, Halo 3, The Orange Box, and Unreal Tournament III.

UT III?? Hardly competition, UT III sold terribly and crysis sold over a million copies.

[BHC]

Crysis was just bad. Outstanding visuals but lame uninspired narrative, sloppy unfinished netcode and inadequate public development tools sank it, even for enthusiasts. They made, and read this carefully: every same damn mistake they made with Farcry. Perhaps with the exception of licensing deals I'm surprised they even turned a profit. Even IF Crysis scaled enough to be played on a wide range of systems it would still have been a mediocre shooter. Crytek should just be acquired by Nvidia and start developing tech demos.

How can you look at games like Crysis as being anything but a detriment to PC Gaming? Rigid system requirements: check, dated tiresome gameplay: check, non-existent multiplay: check. Crysis is one of those games that veers PC Gaming away from the public and shoves it back towards hardware enthusiasts and niche audiences who upgrade to 500 dollar video cards every few months.

And despite all this, PC Gamer U.S. gave it a stellar review. I'm glad I didn't renew my subscription. Hell, they gave it the same score as Half-Life 2 and one damn percent ABOVE Half-Life. Astonishingly stupid.

[AHA-Lambda]

I do kinda agree with you however at least crysis didn't have trigens and had quick save

[PaoloM]

Well, Crytek developed a game for a narrow elite of PC gamers so I, as a proud owner of a mid-range machine, feel personally excluded and slapped on my face. The same feeling I have for Alan Wake, that will be a Vista exclusive for no reason other than commercial agreements with Microsoft (XB360 is a DX9 machine, so the whole story about DX10 requirements is a blatant fairytale).
Other software developers have more respect and (in my humble opinion) have published more accessible and funny games (Bioshock, The Orange Box, Mass Effect coming to PC and so on).
Crytek has to put the blame on itself.

[CptStern]

I keep hearing this "crysis only runs on certain pcs" but how many hl2.netters payed for their copy of crysis vs pirated it? ...we should have a poll ..it's probably much higher than that we suspect:


http://halflife2.net/forums/showthread.php?t=94678&highlight=gaming

[BHC]

I keep hearing this "crysis only runs on certain pcs" but how many hl2.netters payed for their copy of crysis vs pirated it? ...we should have a poll ..it's probably much higher than that we suspect:


http://halflife2.net/forums/showthread.php?t=94678&highlight=gaming

I personally acquired Crysis from my new(ish) video card, it was bundled in. I'd never pay money for it. /saving throw

But I honestly don't pirate music/software simply because I have the money to buy the things I need.

[StardogChampion]

If you can run HL2 you can play Crysis. I don't see what everyone's moaning about.

I think I played it with a P4 3ghz, 1GB RAM, X800 XL AGP a while ago on medium settings.

You could buy a better system than that for $100.

[stemot]

I bought Crysis on day of release, due to the demo running nicely for me on High settings for everything, with a few cvar changes taking the graphics a little higher.

I enjoyed the game quite a bit, although for Crytek to complain after selling a million of a game that needs a top end rig to play to full effect is just stupid. Also, do they think that by making games for consoles, they can do what they have been doing on the PC? There will be no "pushing technologies" on the consoles, if they don`t run well, and look half decent, they won't sell shit, so are they really going to change the whole principle that the company was built on about being at the forefront of tech, to do something they have never done before, for a system they have never developed for, for pure greed?

Probably..they did jump into bed with EA.

[nurizeko]

Thats right, blame your high spec game on piracy, ignore the fact most folk who would buy it cant because their machines aren't NASA super-computers.

[Gray Fox]

Crysis was just bad. Outstanding visuals but lame uninspired narrative, sloppy unfinished netcode and inadequate public development tools sank it, even for enthusiasts. They made, and read this carefully: every same damn mistake they made with Farcry. Perhaps with the exception of licensing deals I'm surprised they even turned a profit. Even IF Crysis scaled enough to be played on a wide range of systems it would still have been a mediocre shooter. Crytek should just be acquired by Nvidia and start developing tech demos.

How can you look at games like Crysis as being anything but a detriment to PC Gaming? Rigid system requirements: check, dated tiresome gameplay: check, non-existent multiplay: check. Crysis is one of those games that veers PC Gaming away from the public and shoves it back towards hardware enthusiasts and niche audiences who upgrade to 500 dollar video cards every few months.

And despite all this, PC Gamer U.S. gave it a stellar review. I'm glad I didn't renew my subscription. Hell, they gave it the same score as Half-Life 2 and one damn percent ABOVE Half-Life. Astonishingly stupid.

wait how do you mean inadequate development tools, cryeditor was great and they released an sdk with exporter plugins for different 3d apps. The ****ing reason I have crysis on my pc is because of the tools.

[chu]

I'd just like to ask. What part of the game did you find very bad, or too average? Not a great game, but so many parts of the game were amazing to play. They have alot of potential.

I never even played the game only the demo. I don't want to shell $50 for a game that I can barely run med-high settings so I will wait until the hardware catches up. :hmph:

[soulslicer]

Chu, you can't make staements about Crysis being bad just by playing the demo. And to BHC, I don't understand your statement on Development tools being bad, Creditor pretty much kicks every level designers ass. Why don't you see a few youtube videos on how it actually works. The only issue is that it doesn't support 3d brushes.

And to the people who say the game was utterly bad, you just keep hitting on the reason that Crysis was meant for a niche audience with good pc's etc. You say gameplay was non-existent but I don't see why, it's an open ended game after all and you can either chose your style of playing, offensive or just plain stealth, moving past enemies without attacking. Yes, Crytek's big whine is a pile of shit considering what they have put themselves into, but the game itself has redefined quite a few things. The only other game which had this level of open ended gameplay was STALKER, which pretty much failed more than Crysis when it came to Hardware vs Visuals. Personally, I thought this was the most cinematic of all the games released last year, something that I liked. The usage of physics (sandbox style) in gameplay pretty much beats every other game in that area.

Not to say Crysis is great, it had bugs (which are fixed now), bad gameplay moments (Goddamn General Kyong Boss Fight), possibly a bad ending compared to how the game was pacing up from the start, but nevertheless, there were so many things that were good. The overall combat was good imo (since you got a choice of how you wanted to play your game), the choice of exploring so many areas was good, and I found the overall atmosphere of the game fantastic. The AI battles are fantastic. The nifty little things like little newspaper articles you find around, the radio's that you can tune into, various image artworks etc all contributed to the game. In fact, unlike what many here think, a hell of alot of hl2.netters enjoyed this game. You can see the various Crysis threads if you want.

I'm not trying to be a fanboy, defending Crytek and Crysis here, but to say the game is rubbish is bullshit. Even worse, not playing the game and just the demo and saying the game is bad, is bullshit.

/rant

[PaoloM]

If you can run HL2 you can play Crysis. I don't see what everyone's moaning about.

Then my system is flawed because Episode Two and Bioshock run as smooth as oil at maximum details while Crysis is a slideshow... ;)

[StardogChampion]

Then my system is flawed because Episode Two and Bioshock run as smooth as oil at maximum details while Crysis is a slideshow... ;)
There's your problem. Lower details and put resolution lower than 1600, maybe that'll help... :sleep:

[Raziaar]

There's your problem. Lower details and put resolution lower than 1600, maybe that'll help... :sleep:

Compared to Half-life 2 and bioshock, Crysis runs pretty crappy for my system. And I can run Half-life 2 and bioshock at absolute maximum settings with good framerate.

For Crysis to be anything good I have to lower settings quite a bit.

And I also never play any games at resolution beyind 1280x1024.


Crysis is not in the same league at all as Half-life 2 and Bioshock in terms of optimized performance code.

[PaoloM]

There's your problem. Lower details and put resolution lower than 1600, maybe that'll help... :sleep:

In my humble opinion, at lower details Crysis is just another first person shooter. Not to start a war, just a personal thought.

[VictimOfScience]

Yeah, if the specs were not so high it would have sold more. Big surprise.

[StardogChampion]

In my humble opinion, at lower details Crysis is just another first person shooter. Not to start a war, just a personal thought.
Your own problem, not the game's. I had this friend who wouldn't play NHL 99 on anything other than max settings even though it was a slideshow. It doesn't mean the game has performance problems.

Compared to Half-life 2 and bioshock, Crysis runs pretty crappy for my system. And I can run Half-life 2 and bioshock at absolute maximum settings with good framerate.

For Crysis to be anything good I have to lower settings quite a bit.

And I also never play any games at resolution beyind 1280x1024.


Crysis is not in the same league at all as Half-life 2 and Bioshock in terms of optimized performance code.
Is that a job title? We need a "code optimiser". No. It has nothing to do with code. Only what appears on the screen.

Bioshock has tiny indoor areas like Doom 3 therefore the dynamic lights etc won't impact performance much. HL2's also just a static lighting engine. If it had dynamic lights on everything outdoors it'd run worse than Crysis.

[TwwIX]

Oh noes!What are we gonna do for benchmarks in the future?

[Kadayi]

Played the demo, looked great, but bored me shitless tbh.

[Sedako]

Oh noes!What are we gonna do for benchmarks in the future?

Well, for starters, Futuremark's new DX10 only 3Dmark Vantage.

[PaoloM]

It doesn't mean the game has performance problems.

The fact stays: Crysis has high hardware requisites, so it is quite understandable that it will sell less than other games. Have a look at Steam statistics about people specs: the wide mass has mid-range DX9 machines. If I was a marketing director I will strictly adhere to that list to obtain the maximum economic gains. Valve is developing keeping that in mind and... well... we know how Valve is doing ;)

[Krynn72]

I have a quadcore PC with a 7800gt and 4 gigs of ram. I was playing crysis on 1280x1024 which is the lowest ill ever play a game. I had AA and AF off, and all the other settings at either medium or high. I was getting an average of 25 fps and lower than 15 during gunfights with more than 3 people. My computer is far better than most peoples, and it ran like ass. So unless people shelled out big for DX 10 cards, multi-core processors, and multiple gigs of ram, then there was no way crysis could have been as big a success as they apparently expected.

And you cant really compare the performance of game like bioshock or hl2, because they're totally different situations. Crysis can only really be compare to Crysis. And it ran like ass on even above average systems.

[Lucid]

I'm not trying to be a fanboy, defending Crytek and Crysis here, but to say the game is rubbish is bullshit. Even worse, not playing the game and just the demo and saying the game is bad, is bullshit.

/rant

What, you expect people to buy the game after playing the demo and forming the opinion of it being shit?

Demos are there for sole purposes of seeing how well it runs on your rig and getting a taste of what to expect when playing the full version.
Unless you're telling us to pirate the game and actually attempt to play through the slideshow, then respect everybody's opinion.

You're obviously trying to force your opinion on everybody, denying that the game is bad.

[Shodan]

Crysis was a goddamned screenshot showoff fest. It'd probably be cheaper to buy a camera and fly to somewhere to take nicer pictures than upgrade for Crysis.

[soulslicer]

What, you expect people to buy the game after playing the demo and forming the opinion of it being shit?

Demos are there for sole purposes of seeing how well it runs on your rig and getting a taste of what to expect when playing the full version.
Unless you're telling us to pirate the game and actually attempt to play through the slideshow, then respect everybody's opinion.

You're obviously trying to force your opinion on everybody, denying that the game is bad.

Huh, i played the whole game, and I'm just trying to say I'm tired of people playing the demo and saying it's bad. Also, I'm trying to defend the game not by saying it's great, but it's not crap either and if you have a good pc, you must play the game.

[Krynn72]

Huh, i played the whole game, and I'm just trying to say I'm tired of people playing the demo and saying it's bad. Also, I'm trying to defend the game not by saying it's great, but it's not crap either and if you have a good pc, you must play the game.

When people say that the game is bad based off what they played in the demo, then obviously they believe that what THE DEVELOPERS gave them as an example proved that the game wasnt worth a purchase. If its not worth a purchase then its a bad game. The only reason anyone would really like the game at all is for the graphics, which you yourself admit by saying "If you have a good pc you should play it."

[sea]

What's funny is that Far Cry ran a lot better than Crysis when it first came out a few years ago. You still needed a high-end system, sure, but the graphics were really damn impressive for the time (and still look quite good) and it was more than playable for most people with a decent gaming computer. I think with Crysis, there were (small) corners that could have been cut on image quality that would have really improved peoples' performance, like normal map resolution, etc., but Crytek just had to show everyone how amazing their game looked that they just didn't bother with it. Now, on highest settings, only the absolute newest systems can play the game somewhat smoothly (not even perfectly so), when other titles like Unreal Tournament 3 deliver nearly equivalent image quality at a framerate literally two or three times faster. For incredibly demanding games like Unreal, you'd still expect the computers of the day to be able to run it on release, and they could (frankly, it scales really well considering the image quality). With Crysis, we're six months past launch and still can't build a computer that does it justice.

[Iliketobenaked]

I payed fitty for the CE I also bought UT3 and CoD4....so stop looking at me like that!
I pay for my games! :)

[Adabiviak]

I have a quadcore PC with a 7800gt and 4 gigs of ram. I was playing crysis on 1280x1024 which is the lowest ill ever play a game. I had AA and AF off, and all the other settings at either medium or high. I was getting an average of 25 fps and lower than 15 during gunfights with more than 3 people. My computer is far better than most peoples, and it ran like ass. So unless people shelled out big for DX 10 cards, multi-core processors, and multiple gigs of ram, then there was no way crysis could have been as big a success as they apparently expected.I have a dual core system with 2GB RAM and a 7800GTX card and played it with close to the same settings you did (I believe mine were all set to dead medium... have to check) and it ran well. It is otherwise a pretty basic shooter, but I found the gameplay pretty enjoyable (the 'flying' section was quite fun), and at medium settings it was still gorgeous which made it a "good" game in my book. Compared to Bioshock and Half Life 2, the gameplay, story, etc., Crysis pales, but I wouldn't say it was a "bad" game.

Disclaimer: I like a lot of games that people think are shite, so don't take my word for any of this. :D

[DEATH eVADER]

I seriously think piracy is overestimated by quite some margin. I would never pirate a game unless it's exceptionally old and hard to find through retail methods.

Same here. You can't purchase old games online, because its usually from a site that you have never heard off, generally fraudulent. There are a few abadonware sites that I trust, and that doesn't come lightly

[Gargantou]

I actually buy alot of old games too, heck just early this year I bought a rare game from the mid 80s for around 130 euro.

[PaoloM]

I actually buy alot of old games too, heck just early this year I bought a rare game from the mid 80s for around 130 euro.

Is it a symptom of mental insanity if I buy games that I already own, just to have the Steam version? I know the answer...

[Krynn72]

Is it a symptom of mental insanity if I buy games that I already own, just to have the Steam version? I know the answer...

The answer is no, you're just willing to pay for the convenience of steam.

[Gargantou]

Yeah, I'm the same way, 'replacing' many of my hard copies with Steam versions where possible, mostly because games take up way too much space in my home currently, and I find digital distribution very convenient, shame it ain't avaible for consoles(In any large form).

[sea]

Everyone think that piracy isn't prevalent?

http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/37203/98/

Mark Rein's numbers of 40 million players attempting to pirate Unreal Tournament 3 might be inflated or inaccurate (it could be individual attempts, not individual computers or IP addresses), and obviously not every one of them was going to buy the game, but it's still very strong evidence that suggests that a significant portion of PC gamers (more than half, I'd say) just won't pay if they don't have to. I don't think that jumping ship to consoles is the best answer, though, as platforms like Steam are really helping with preventing piracy.

[Kyorisu]

We are suffering currently from the huge piracy that is encompassing Crysis

Because Crysis isn't worth paying for, it's that bad of a game. Never mind the high system specs. Going to console development will only help boost sales because the game will have to run perfectly on those systems. Everyone gets the same experience that way. However people pirate console games like mad anyway.

Chu, you can't make staements about Crysis being bad just by playing the demo.

Uh, yes you can. After all the whole ****ing point of a demo is to demonstrate how bad/good the game is.

Of course piracy is huge that is fact. What I hate is when devs going around crying how their terribly overpriced pile of mediocrity fails come sale time. Especially when it comes to 0-day piracy which is easily avoided by online checks (i.e. no critical files on disc) or by using services such as steam. Yes piracy is a problem deal with it. Make the game experience better for legitimate owner of the game.

[AHA-Lambda]

Uh, yes you can. After all that's the whole ****ing point of a demo to demonstrate how bad/good the game is.

this.

besides i have no idea what crytek is *****ing about they sold over 1 million copies and that was with problems like:

High specs that NASA can't get a smooth framerate on FFS
Piracy obviouslyas all pc games suffer from this (although they are overstating it by quite a bit)
and it really isn't that far different from the other FPS in the market

Don't get me wrong I enjoyed crysis but more for it's visuals than anything else.

[Eejit]

I pirated Crysis, and I'm glad I (well, my flatmate originally) did.
I was very disappointed, even though it ran pretty well on my machine the game was far too short. The gameplay wasn't particularly innovative, the story was definitely so-so and it was a ridiculously easy game even on the hardest settings.

I would have regretted paying for it if I'd bought the game.