Crysis 3 Officially Announced

[another penguin]

Woo! Crysis 3 has been officially announced. Set for release Spring 2013, 'Prophet', who I think is actually still Alcatraz with Prophet's mind/spirit in the suit comes back to New York again in 2047, with literally pretty much no suggestion of what he's been doing for the last 25-odd years. Cell have built some Nanodomes to somehow take over the world, and Prophet must stop them, using mainly a bow for some reason. They've also already announced the 'Hunter Edition' which contains an xp boost to level 5, a bow skin and some dog tags.

“Crysis 3 is a thrilling mix of sandbox gameplay, advanced combat and hi-tech human and alien weaponry that shooter fans will love,” said Cevat Yerli, Chief Executive Officer of Crytek. “Leveraging the latest CryENGINE technology, we’re able to deliver seven unique themes that offer stunning and visually loaded gameplay experiences. We cannot wait until people get their hands on the game.”

Sounds like they're bringing a more sandbox story, like in Crysis 1. Does anyone have literally any opinions at this point?

http://crytek.com/news/crytek-takes-...hooter-of-2013
http://crysis.ea.com/

[Nalkor]

I think if I try to play it on even low settings, my computer will overheat so fast it'll go nuclear. Assuming it's anything like Crysis 1 in how demanding it is, only years later and all.

[konfeta]

Damnit, I still haven't played the second one.

[ph03nIXx]

@Konfeta

Same here...gotta get a new rig for that one, even though it's already sitting on my shelf and I am only getting the new rig for the DX11 visuals, but hey, well, that new rig will do crysis 3 just fine.

Still, I feel cheated, seeing those Artworks / Screenies... for anyone that knows WW's Mage the Ascension PnP RPG: Crysis 1 was the inspiration for my last Son of Ether mage before WW stopped the printers - and as we sat around in a post apocalyptic wasteland, trying to rebuild the world after the evil mages had us wiped, Sam McAllister would have looked right like the bow guy sitting ontop of lady liberty...

[sporty]

Came here for screenshots, had to dig them up elsewhere.

Not too excited after I saw the leaked announcement last week or so. The press release indicates that it will have a completely new plot that barely builds upon the previous game, again. Huge graphical advances are probably out of the picture due to multiplatform, I hope the different environments will be interesting and distinct, and the multiplayer (which was unexpectedly great in Crysis 2) won't have as many serious technical issues.

[another penguin]

Came here for screenshots, had to dig them up

Sorry about that totally forgot about screenshots. And I also quite enjoyed Crysis 2 multiplayer but I was pretty average at it most of the time.

[Kien]

Wonder what new graphic features there will be.

[DrRansom]

Maybe they'll support the game this time for an extended period of time, or add an automatic download for user created maps.

Or, this is EA and the modern AAA first person shooters, so probably not.

[Shuma]

Meh, Crysis 2 sucked massive dick, if it's anything like that i wont be playing it. If it's more like Crysis 1, then i'm definitively interested.

[Ammon Ra]

those pictures look amazing, but i won't be surprised if they have a a monster of a pc to render those real-time.

having said that, i'm not inclined to buy another ea game for reasons stated in the last origin-related thread.

[Stingra]

Premise of the game sounds rather fail, to be honest.

Needs to begin right where Crysis 2 began.

[Hirmetrium]

Shuma is right.

Also, if you play Crysis for the story, your going to be disappointed. After the massive disconnection and lack of explanation between 1 and 2 (what with you know, the main character DYING, he's surviving squad mate DYING, and the remaining squad leader DYING in the opening) massive alien redesign and the stupid linear progression. Also the massive nerfing of the nano-suit.

Still, if they can get Crysis 3 right AND DON'T FOCUS ON SHITTY MULTIPLAYER, they will have a winner. They need to focus entirely on building a massive, living city that you can explore - then they have a winner.

[Celution]

Crysis 3 will be Sandbox, meaning it will have a lot of freedom unlike Crysis 2.

http://www.pcgamer.com/2012/04/16/cr...s-alien-robot/

However, I think the story will be just as weak as Crysis 2, and therefor I might not be interested in it so much. Crysis 1 and even Warhead blew me away with their strong story, characters, environment and gameplay. Crysis 2 lacked everything except the Graphics. The Character Alcatraz was weak, didn't even talk in the cinematics, the remaining characters were quite lame and stupid as well and the fact they let ALL THREE main characters from Crysis 1 DIE out of nowhere is just plain retarded.

They also turned the aliens from some super-advanced race superior to the Human race, to some play toys who you can easily demolish with any weapon available. I remember I was scared to death of the flying aliens in Crysis 1 until I got the Gauss which was somewhat effective against them, but even then they'd demolish you.
In Crysis 2 I just walked through the campaign barely needing to put effort in fighting the aliens.

I have a feeling the story of Crysis 3 will not be that interesting, even though they bring the freedom of Crysis 1 back. The characters Prophet, Nomad and Psycho were so strong, not to mention even Jester and Aztec who died quite fast. Alcatraz was an extremely weak character, especially because you knew he is just some random US Marine who was put into the Nano Suit, living Prophets legacy, and he didn't even say a single frekkin' word through the whole campaign.

[another penguin]

Seeing as I played Crysis 2 before the original (<3 Hargreave) I wasn't annoyed and jaded by the massive difference between them, and as a result really enjoyed them both, and am really looking forwards to Crysis 3. Completed all Crysis 1 acheivements and all Crysis 2 ones except the multiplayer ones. Screw you shitty multiplayer acheivements. What I am hoping is that they make the hardest difficulties actually challenging. Crysis 1 was fairly easy and you could run through the whole of Crysis 2 without fighting anything really.

[DeafMute]

Crysis 2 runs better on my PC then Crysis 1 does. for those who want to play 2.
It is pretty boring.

[Shoota Fodder]

I played Crysis 2 before Crysis 1 and really enjoyed it. I liked the fact it gave nothing away. I had no idea what was going on for the first 2 hours of gameplay. The gameplay was similar to CoD except with a hell of a lot more options, so not amazing, but still really quite good in my opinion. And it wasn't short either.

Took me a good 12 hours to complete, which says something when you compare it to most linear single player games that are around lately. It felt almost like Half Life 2 in that the levels were long and the story was longer. MW3 I completed in a disappointing 5 and a half hours.

Edit: And those screens look damn tasty.

[Rivy]

I liked both games. The first one with more freedom and huge maps (granted, and a mediocre plot), and the second one with an engaging story (I really enjoyed it despite the "screw Crysis 1 let's make new shit up") and optimization.
So I'm thrilled for C3, but the bow seems stupid and the nanodomes and the EVIL CORPORATION are terrible ideas (not another Umbrella, please !). It looks pretty though.

[Cortlendt]

Well, it looks like it has jungles.

[sporty]

Like the bow, certain archaic weapons don't feel out of place on a high-tech predator. As a hunter's weapons it's more fitting than a lot of the guns I think.

So much picking on the story, if that's what you're all after you may want to consider a different genre. Don't think I've played a shooter where the story was more than a cheap excuse to murder tons of baddies, but I've enjoyed a lot of them, including Crysis+Warhead and Crysis 2.

[Nalkor]

I find System Shock 2's story to be very engaging. Both in how beautiful it is and how terrifying it is as the same time.

[GreyViper]

Shouldn't they be calling it Crysis 2 expansion instead rather then a new game?

[Misiok]

Nah. Expansion only costs around 40$, while a complete new game should warrant 60-70$.

[Gorb]

Whyso, GreyViper?

Should Crysis 2 have been an expansion to Crysis? I'm not sure I follow.

[another penguin]

I am also bewildered by your comment GreyViper. Why should it be an expansion? Are you saying it should be because, like Crysis 2 it takes place in New York and thus should follow directly on, story and location-wise, or are you saying it because Crysis 2 didn't get an expansion like Warhead? Or what?

[Celution]

No, he means that the game pretty much is the same with the same characters in a different setting. Crysis 2 is a whole different game from Crysis 1 and Warhead. Crysis 3 doesn't seem to be that. Crysis 3 seems to be what Warhead is for Crysis 1.

[Gorb]

You mean apart from the large plot variance (/continuation, where Warhead was an alternate set of events to a certain point), the sandbox environment, the different weapons available, and so on?

[another penguin]

That's what I meant, extremely vaguely, by story and location wise. (I just realised I put it in the middle of a sentence with no relevance to the rest of it). What I mean is, beacause Crysis 3 appears to share many of the concepts, characters and settings from Crysis 2, GreyViper's statement in that context can be clearly understood, if not agreed with.

[MadCatChiken]

I feel like I'm going to be playing Turok for some reason.. maybe it's the jungle and the bow & arrow. I didn't like the lack of freedom Crysis 2 had compared to the first one though I still felt like it did have some freedom, it wasn't completely linear but it seems they've gone and mixed the best of both worlds with a city scape and a jungle all in one.

[Pocktio]

I really really liked Crysis 2, as I didn't expect it to be the saviour of PC gaming (Crysis 1.5) like most people did.

It was a fantastic shooter, pretty and well put together. I don't care if it's groundbreaking if it is fun. Which I hope Crysis 3 will be.

[Master Chief]

Yeah, Crysis 2 was great, I hope 3 has some of those same tones, the missions with the Marines were fantastic.

[Ammon Ra]

They also turned the aliens from some super-advanced race superior to the Human race, to some play toys who you can easily demolish with any weapon available. I remember I was scared to death of the flying aliens in Crysis 1 until I got the Gauss which was somewhat effective against them, but even then they'd demolish you.

this.

[Starblade]

I feel like I'm going to be playing Turok for some reason.. maybe it's the jungle and the bow & arrow.

If you mean the Nintendo 64 Turoks you just sold me on this.

[Hirmetrium]

Oh Crysis 2 was a perfectly enjoyable game with an acceptable story and minorly interesting characters. Some of the interactions were pretty good.

It doesn't change the fact it was a linear, watered and dumbed down version of the first game, with stupid and needless mechanics centered around collecting clouds of flies and a limited selection of skills available. Not to mention, rather than an epic final boss, you finally face off against a bunch of invisible dudes, whom end up just standing there while you stealth up behind them and snap their necks. Nor that it's story had no connection to the first save for one character and a few relatives with the same surnames. And a nanosuit. And the more boring less creepy aliens.

The idea that there were plenty of other cities under alien siege to save for Crysis 3 was great. They have now killed that by staying in new new york (here's hoping it isn't new york, or you eventually leave new york new york)

[Master Chief]

I just wish 2 didn't have a silent protagonist, and I really hope 3 doesn't. It was really stupid having guys like that one nerd scientist directly talk to you as if you're Prophet and you just kinda look at him in response. 1 was great with Nomad, bring it back to that.

[Nalkor]

@Starblade - I remember beating Turok 64 on my old N64 and doing that glitch that caused the legs to bend all to the side during the final cinematic. It felt especially satisfying as not an hour before I played some Goldeneye against my friend across the street, he picked Oddjob and I chose Jaws. Bad idea that was.

[Master Chief]

Turok Rage Wars is the best one, happy raptor never stops smilin'.

[PetarB]

Yeah, I really could not believe the ending of Crysis 2... I was like 'wait, what?' - probably exactly like what Hiremtrium describes. Crysis 2 was a huge step back from Crysis 1. Hopefully the new one can bring some of the first one back...

[Makenshi]

Meh, Crysis 2 sucked massive dick, if it's anything like that i wont be playing it. If it's more like Crysis 1, then i'm definitively interested.

I agree with all you say in 9 of 10 posts you make, and once more you didn't let me down, bro. Amazing how two persons so far away from each other can agree so much on so many stuff, huh?


EDIT: damn, Celestial's post sums it all perfectly! Cheers man!

-----

Just to add in what's been said, Crysis 1 had two awesome vibes:

1st: "I'm the just like fucking Predator getting a piece of korean ass!". It was really satisfying to see clearly that korean soldiers, while modernized, were baffled by the technology they were fighting, shouting things like "coward american" when they finally got it that I could somehow become INVISIBLE. I'm talking the reglar grunts, who probably didn't know about the "warez-nanosuits" in their own army.

2nd: The "first contact" feel, a sense of "shitstorm is coming", as the alien presence increased. Many people I know hated the part called Core, but to me it was the highest point in all things Crysis. Not even the awesome Escape part (prophet, then the jeep, then the AA guns, Strickland's death, etc) was better than that, nor the Carrier (which was the 3rd best part, imo).


Crysis 2 was a "Halofied" game in my eyes, and Crysis 3 seems to be just keeping it downhill. There are no excuse for a bow:

a) regular arrows? supressed guns beat them in range, power, capacity, reloading speed, ease of use and badassery (yes, badassery too)
b) piercing arrows? ap amunition, nuff said (disagree? gauss rifle up yours; it was a better weapon in C1 than C2, btw)
c) explosive arrows? GLs, RPGs, grenades (but mommy, I wanna play rambo)
d) fire arrows? those korean fire bullets come to mind
e) ice/eletric arrows? give me an alien weapon somehow, it will be much cooler, effective and plausible to the setting; they already shoot ice, it should be fairly easy to introduce "alien zap guns"

[lizardmech]

It's a console shooter published by EA, I don't know how can anyone have any hope for it. Being on the xbox 360 it won't be a good shooter. The terrible resolution on xbox 360 means players can't see very far so the levels will always be tiny and controllers can't turn rapidly so everything will be placed in narrow areas in front of the player. Cryengine 3 does look very nice but it doesn't matter if the game is filled with poorly detailed xbox 360 assets, if they couldn't be bothered doing the crysis 2 PC version properly it's hard to imagine crysis 3 PC version will get much attention, being limited to EA Origin will undoubtedly limit sales.

[Hirmetrium]

Look, I'm as much of an EA fan as the next guy, but Origin is GOOD - if you can name one reason why it sucks, then sure, but its a decent digital distro system and I've managed to get most of my EA catalog onto it. And tech support respond in a matter of minutes rather than days. However, this thread is not about Origin or how great/crap it is.

I agree that the fact the game is multiplatform will fuck it up. BF3 really struggled to deliver (as obvious by the crappy UI) and I can't see another studio doing any better.

Finally, some news. Lets hope that the game lives up to the legend of Crysis 1 rather than the wimper of Crysis 2.

I suspect the bow and arrow has more to do with that fact he doesn't have access to any resources (like ammo) because he's locked down in new york than anything practical. Bow and arrow is pretty stealth huntery mind.

[LoneWolf666]

Because finding/carrying arrows is easier than finding/carrying bullets, Hirm? O_o

[Hirmetrium]

Do you really want to go down this path? :P

You can collect arrows from targets you've killed, and crafting an arrow is considerably easier than 30 or so bullets to go into a magazine. Also, there are these things called quivers.

"The bow and arrow was once the pinnacle of weapons technology..."

[lizardmech]

Look, I'm as much of an EA fan as the next guy, but Origin is GOOD - if you can name one reason why it sucks, then sure, but its a decent digital distro system and I've managed to get most of my EA catalog onto it. And tech support respond in a matter of minutes rather than days. However, this thread is not about Origin or how great/crap it is.

I agree that the fact the game is multiplatform will fuck it up. BF3 really struggled to deliver (as obvious by the crappy UI) and I can't see another studio doing any better.

Finally, some news. Lets hope that the game lives up to the legend of Crysis 1 rather than the wimper of Crysis 2.

I suspect the bow and arrow has more to do with that fact he doesn't have access to any resources (like ammo) because he's locked down in new york than anything practical. Bow and arrow is pretty stealth huntery mind.

Origin is ok in North America but it's hopeless overseas. As soon as they removed their games from steam they inflated the prices overseas to $80-90+ usd, on top of that the games unlock many days late when using origin outside of North America. I don't understand what EA's problem is, take a game like crysis 3, I don't think it will be very good but if it were available on steam or origin at launch for $59 usd I might be bored that week and buy it anyway. Origin only, days late and almost twice the price of other publishers games? No way I will buy it.

This seems bad for Crytek, they're more dependent on PC sales outside of North America than other EA titles, EA's digital platform not being competitive in these markets will surely hurt sales.

[Akranadas]

Dude, that happens with 90% of Digital Purchases for Australians. Its not Origin or Steam controlling it, its distributors refusing to stock their stuff if they undercut them online.

[another penguin]

It's a console shooter published by EA, I don't know how can anyone have any hope for it. Being on the xbox 360 it won't be a good shooter. The terrible resolution on xbox 360 means players can't see very far so the levels will always be tiny and controllers can't turn rapidly so everything will be placed in narrow areas in front of the player. Cryengine 3 does look very nice but it doesn't matter if the game is filled with poorly detailed xbox 360 assets, if they couldn't be bothered doing the crysis 2 PC version properly it's hard to imagine crysis 3 PC version will get much attention, being limited to EA Origin will undoubtedly limit sales.

You seem to be very much against the Xbox360 in general and are using the fact that it's being made for the xbox to say that the game is going to be crap. The 360's resolution isn't that bad and I have always been able to see a long way into the distance in all of my games. Your arguement that the resolution is so poor we're going to have the game take place entirely in a small box makes no sense. With regards to controllers not turning fast, have you ever heard of changing the sensitivity? Games aren't made linear because we use controllers, they're generally made linear either to fit the concept of the game (Dead Space etc) or becuase the developer is lazy as shit. While I agree the pc version may well suffer slightly due to the fact that the xbox isn't quite as capable graphics-wise its more to do with what the devlopers put into the game rather than the fact that its being made for the xbox. Addtionally you seem to ignore throughout your entire post that Crysis was ported to the xbox from the pc quite successfully, further nullifying your xbox arguements. Yes its being made for xbox but if the developers decide to make its linear and crap, its not really the xboxes fault.

[Jopax]

Seems interesting I guess, if only because we get to play with the suit some more

And to echo the general sentiment on the second game, yes it was fun, much more than other modern shooters, but not as fun as the first one, and not fun in the same ways.

Kinda like Sup Com and Sup Com2, they're both fun, but the second one was greatly changed and simplified to cater to a bigger audience, it's a good game, but you really can't compare it to the first one that much.
Same goes for Crysis. I just hope they up the suit mechanics a bit, somewhere between the first games modes and the second games automatically activated stuff. Like choosing just how much power goes into that sprint or punch or whatever and how much is left for other systems like jumping or cloaking.

[lizardmech]

You seem to be very much against the Xbox360 in general and are using the fact that it's being made for the xbox to say that the game is going to be crap. The 360's resolution isn't that bad and I have always been able to see a long way into the distance in all of my games. Your arguement that the resolution is so poor we're going to have the game take place entirely in a small box makes no sense. With regards to controllers not turning fast, have you ever heard of changing the sensitivity? Games aren't made linear because we use controllers, they're generally made linear either to fit the concept of the game (Dead Space etc) or becuase the developer is lazy as shit. While I agree the pc version may well suffer slightly due to the fact that the xbox isn't quite as capable graphics-wise its more to do with what the devlopers put into the game rather than the fact that its being made for the xbox. Addtionally you seem to ignore throughout your entire post that Crysis was ported to the xbox from the pc quite successfully, further nullifying your xbox arguements. Yes its being made for xbox but if the developers decide to make its linear and crap, its not really the xboxes fault.

Most xbox 360 games run at resolutions like 1000x600 with little or no AA before being upscaled to 720p. There's physically not enough pixels to render distant objects so levels have to be much smaller. While not technically impossible developers will always try and make sure players can clearly see the enemies they're fighting, if one platform runs at a very low resolution objects will have to be closer. For an open world shooter like crysis this really limits what they can do. With something like deadspace this isn't an issue it's a game designed for consoles so they aren't having to cut features to make it playable on xbox.

I don't understand why they keep taking PC games not suited to consoles and release terrible multiplatform sequels. If Crytek had of just made a new multiplatform game instead of crysis 2 I doubt the game would have been as unpopular.

[LoneWolf666]

Do you really want to go down this path? :P

You can collect arrows from targets you've killed, and crafting an arrow is considerably easier than 30 or so bullets to go into a magazine. Also, there are these things called quivers.

"The bow and arrow was once the pinnacle of weapons technology..."

The possibility of getting an intact arrow out of a hard target is slimmer than you'd think. Crafting an arrow? We're supposed to be fighting fully armored CELL troopers and metal-clad aliens. Whatever kind of arrow would be effective against such targets, it certainly is not "easily craftable" - certainly not as easy as picking up a spare clip of a killed trooper. I'm assuming the bow will take full advantage of the ridiculous draw strength the nanosuit offers, but still, hailing it as a primary weapon just seems silly.

The key in that sentence is the word "was", by the way.

[Rivy]

Even considering the super strength from the Nanosuit I find it hard to believe you can make the arrow hit harder than a bullet or a gauss rifle projectile (or further than a rocket).
A bow is also more fragile and uncomfortable than a gun, and it plain sucks.

Not related, but I've always found it stupid how you can cloak your guns along with you in Crysis, Deus Ex and in the new Ghost Recon videos.

[Aesaar]

Would have added a whole new useful side to the SCAR if it had been the only gun to cloak with you. Sure, it was the best assault rifle in C1, but it had so little ammo it was hard to justify keeping it over, say, a shotgun.

Guns are better than bows. There's a reason no modern military uses bows anymore. Ammo's not an argument. If he's fighting guys with guns, each one should logically have a few dozen rounds on him. Take one of their guns and ammo isn't a concern as long as you keep killing them. This is why the FY-71 was the better choice in rifle in C1. At least until the Marines arrive.