Agent Ghost
Emo said Warhead is a step back graphically with shit like more pop-up, did you notice this?
Turns out i was wrong and Emo was right...
After playing Warhead through twice i went back to the first game and was puzzled as to why it actually looked nicer. I removed my custom config and went back to Crysis vanilla and it still looked better than Warhead. There is pop-up in Warhead, i just didn't notice it at first. It can be improved by altering the AF value in your config... but it's something i wouldn't have expected from what is supposed to be a far more optimized engine.
The biggest difference though when going back to the first game are the production values. Crysis was almost perfectly directed, but Warhead feels a little cheap in that respect. I get why they've had to use 3rd person cutscenes, but in the grand scheme of things they're a little lame. It's the gameplay that counts in the end, but you might feel a little short changed.
The lighting isn't as impressive either from a purely technological standpoint. They've gone OTT with nuclear HDR which coupled with the different colour palate makes for fairly striking screenshots... but soon gets old. I also think they've reduced the texture detail on some surfaces, and perhaps made some objects lower poly. Obviously they wanted to improve performance, but to be honest... i think they've gone thew wrong way about it.
The upshot is that the expansion wasn't handled by the same team. My understanding is that there's a console version in the works and the original core team are working on modifying the engine for that. There will obviously be a second expansion next year and then a sequel proper, but i can see a move towards becoming primarily console-centric further down the line. They should have just pimped and sold the shit out of their engine like Epic did, ...and they might yet if they can get the thing running on 360 and PS3 properly... but it's a little late in the game now.