Crysis 2 was about 10-12 hours for me, and now this installment is only about 6 hours long?
Ridiculous.
Video Review - Crysis 3
Review Scores
| Platform | GameSpot | Metacritic / User Score |
|---|---|---|
Related Videos
-
After using up the Pincher ammo, this player decides to go the stealthy route and just stab his opponent.Posted Feb 19, 2013 | 2:30 | 853 Views -
Tower 3 gets decimated as Prophet uses a Ceph weapon to take out the weapons.Posted Feb 19, 2013 | 2:30 | 1,554 Views -
Help defend the crash site in this multiplayer match from Crysis 3.Posted Feb 19, 2013 | 2:30 | 248 Views -
Want to see which version of Crysis 3 has the best rain drops? We do a graphics comparison video with PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 and PC versions of the game!Posted Feb 19, 2013 | 4:52 | 45,464 Views -
Crysis 3 is now available globally!Posted Feb 21, 2013 | 1:30 | 11,231 Views
- Feb 19, 2013
Kevin VanOrd suits up and hits the destroyed streets of New York in this video review for Crysis 3.
149 comments
1 Like Gamerankings:
Crysis - 90%
Crysis 2 - 85%
Crysis 3 - 75%
This is what happens when you ignore singleplayer and concentrate on multiplayer.
@isahunt That is not why each game got lower ratings, every Crysis game had multiplayer and the first game was just fine. The story just became a mess and wasn't interesting and gameplay changed and so on.
think 7.5 was fair for this i was disappointed with the story and some gameplay. think its time for crytek to go back to drawing board.
2 Like The last thing video games need is a shorter campaign. I am sick of 6 hour campaigns. grrrr
2 Like Its weird that Crytek stepped away from their winning formula that they used for Crysis and Warhead... Huge, open environments where I choose where, when and how to engage the enemy, or IF to engage in the first place. In Crysis2 they turned it into a hallway shooter essentially, and this one doesn't sound like much of an improvement on C2... As it is absolutely NOTHING sets this game apart from the other AAA FPS games that came out in the past couple of years. Normally game companies recognize a win and stick with it, Crytek seems to just degenerate into yet another FPS spewing studio... no thought paid to encounter mechanics, just mindless run and gun... and at a premium price at that! I'll stick to Crysis/Warhead and the STALKER series... the fan community seems years ahead of the game studios at producing quality content, especially so considering the limited resources of the modder teams.
2 Like Just finished it. Yes, it's short, but I still like it. In fact, here comes the blasphemy, I had more fun with it at times than with Far Cry 3. The weapons have more of a 'kick' to them, the music is so much better and I just can't understand why the main character in FC3 kills without hesitation, but is whining about his situation at every chance he gets. Maybe Crysis 3 doesn't have the best story ever, but I still care more about Prophet and Psycho then that guy in FC3.
@Dschadir I'm with you on this. Just couldn't get into the world of FC3, this however was enjoyable and engaging from the get go.
@Dschadir Big difference, one has an open sandbox of a world with stuff to explore, this is a linear shooter. Far cry 3 had a shitty story, but it was about sandbox fun. the wingsuit was fun to do stunts in.
Didn't finish the game, was just boring me with the new Tomb Raider breathing down my neck, just had no feel of wanting to come back to it. in my eye's A/CM was more moreish than this.
I laugh when PC purists say it's always better on the PC....what you don't understand is that in order to make it look better, you have to crank your settings all the way up to even notice. And as we all know, anything less than an out-of-the-box rig wont be able to run at a reasonable frame rate do so. PC fails.
@Gravity_Slave You could not be more wrong if you tried. Nothing in your post is even close to being correct, and i'm saying that as an owner of a 360, a wii, and a gaming pc.
@Shawshoe
Its always the same with you twits. You come on here saying someone is "stupid" or "wrong" but you NEVER even make a minimal attempt at giving an example to counter someone else. They're "just wrong because you say so". Well that's not good enough.
Chances are you didn't just build your rig. Its probably got age to it. So you are not putting your settings on ultra and even on medium you're still sacrificing textures and resolutions to get it just right.
Not only that, you have to close down every peripheral application and back round program so your game wont stutter. But more than likely, you're out spending the equivalent of two new Xboxes on a brand new Nvidia graphics card. So its you who couldn't be more wrong if you tried.
90% of Pc player's on this site fool themselve's into believing they have an ultra rig when they just don't, then come on this site boasting that the Pc is so much better than console. Pc is only better atm on ultra otherwize it isn't better at all.
1 Like @LukeWesty Thats why when BF3 was released everyone was furious that it looked like complete garbarge because only PC gameplay was shown and fooled all the console chumps.
4 Like @LukeWesty Wow, none of you guys know what you are talking about. Most pc versions look better on medium than most console versions today (comparing the same game, there are some ps3 games that looks great). And this is not a fanboyish statement, it's the truth. I own crysis on PC, my brother got it on 360, there is a HUGE difference between the two, and I play on High setting, only have very high on the Water Effects... Get an average of 53 fps according to Mirillis Action.
You see, what you don't understand is that one DOESN'T needa beast of a computer OR crank up the settings to make a game look better on pc compared to console. Sorry, I love my 360, and graphics isn't everything, but since you guys brought it up I thought I give you my two cents about this topic. :)
1 Like Crysis 2, for me, was so, so god damn boring. No doubt this is boring too, the gameplay is just ultimately so bland. Its wrapped up in some nice graphics and technical work but that doesn't negate it. I like Crysis 3's ending though, and it touched on some interesting themes, too bad it wasn't told so well and was painful to get to with some obligatory been-there-done-that shooting. I did like Prophet's character arc though.
*sigh* Crysis 1 story felt cool... 2 and 3 felt like they tried to "milk the cow"..this is becoming redundant.
@LukeWesty It's not a question of "performing better".. it's the graphical detail you can achieve, which on a PC is higher (some games more, some games less; depends on the way the individual games have been coded/ported and also on individual PC specs/parts).
What happens is that on a good PC, you can set the graphical details to higher settings than you can on a console, all the while keeping the same framerate and suffering no stuttering. If you were to set the same 'higher' details on the console, you would defenitly notice the stutter and the game would be 'laggy' (low framerate), due to the hardware not being powerful enough.
As usual a great review by Kevin. Nevertheless there was no discussion about the enemy AI. This was a major issue in Crysis 2, making the game super boring. In this new installment enemies seem again to simply rush at you. Together with the clocking ability this and you have a limited challenge ahead of you.
1 Like What get's me is all these PC player that bang on about how wonderfull the PC is to these dated console'e yet they never get a higher score for it performing better on the PC... weird isn't it that.
I like how PC gamers have to wait months or even years to get a PC port...if at all.
How are you tools liking Brutal Legend? Yeah, the console game we all played nearly 3 years ago. Congrats on that milestone
@Gravity_Slave @LukeWesty How are you enjoying Starcraft 2, WoW, Guild Wars 2, Empire Total War, Anno series and so on and so on. . . Every platform has it's pros and cons, stop acting like an moron.
lol how long did you wait to play StarCraft 2? Laughable. And who gives a flying f*ck about WoW and Guild Wars 2? lol you're reaching man...NT
@LukeWesty b/c whether the game is great or flawed better resolution does not negate from the fact that the game still performs that same as console when on pc
1 Like @LukeWesty I don't need a special higher score on a review site to tell me that the games look better on a PC. I'm not that insecure.
1 Like Yes but game's get higher for perfoming better, why DMC score lower on ps3 than other's. Yet PC never get's out and out better... I just find that strange.
Did Crytek pay to have them give special enphasis to The Bow? I'm more interested in the Alien stuff.
Oh hey look how awesome this typical FPS Bow is remember the Bow in Farcry 3? Yeah it's kind of like that now you definitely have to buy it because the game is so short and boring they had to review The Bow!
why in the commercial for the pulse is there a statue of a naked man pouring water on himself?? I don't think thats playing to the demographic
I don believe they call this game is a sandbox FPS game. Crysis 3 or a Alien fighter version of Doctor Price ???
5 Like Thank you very much, but if I want a tech demo or a benchmark software, I'll just use 3DMark or Unigine...AND, these are free.
I'm not paing for this crap.
I loved original Crysis and Warhead, Crysis 2 was OK, at least it had a lenghty campain, but this is just ridiculous.
I don't even care if it has awesome MP, MP should be the bonus content, not the other way around.
Devs are geting more and more lazy. Pretty soon we'll have only MP games that require no story, no characters, no nothing.
I'm supposed to pay 100$ for this? (yes, that's how much a PC game costs in my country, and NO, I cannot purchase via Steam, because it is not available in my country (> <).
The hell I am, I'll TPB this baby. Sue me.
And these guys wonder why is there a need for piracy.
5 Like Crysis 4 will feature a 2 hours single player campaign. I don't want to bash the game because I understand that gaming companies think that a FPS nowadays needs a solid multiplayer to have a chance to compete with CoD and with Battlefield(now that it is going to be one every year). But if I as a gamer can understand them, why can't they do the same for me?
Anyway if you really want things to change, don't buy the games that you feel aren't worth the money. Before you go out and buy the next 70 quid deluxe edition DRM game think if you really need it, because it may turn out you are a consumer that has his priorities messed up. Needs should be above fake desires. Even if you got plenty of money the same thing applies. If Mahatma Gandhi was a gamer he would have said: ?Be the change that you wish to see in the gaming industry.?
P.S.: Candy eye graphics are good and a pleasure to watch but are not the first element that make a game. In the movie industry the consumer likes nice effects and good CGI but at the end if the plot is thick and forced upon the viewer they will complain and won't give a rat's ass about the special effects. Gaming will get there eventually.
1 Like Im agrre with this review, the game looks amazing but Its the same thing a FPS.Im not a COD Fan but the first Black Ops game was amazing, the story was awesome.
This game looks like It has no story. I just liked the first Crysis.
@Chupacabra3332 too bad black ops felt like a rail shooter. Yanks control away from you every chance it gets.
Conversation powered by Livefyre
Crysis 3 Navigation
