izigame.me

“Nothing gold can stay.”
~Robert Frost

You know how sometimes there's a good game, but there's a big "but" about it? Crysis 3 is one of such cases. See, when Crytek came out with the first Crysis, they had a unique idea. Sure, it was rather childish, but that's probably why people still remember the first game. Nobody else was crazy enough to make a game that would only run on high-end personal computers. Even though it was a time when everything else went multiplatform, Crytek decided to make a PC-only beast—a monster to put even the most expensive hardware to the test. It was so crazy that the first Crysis quickly became a meme, one that lives on to this day. Such an approach gave Crysis a lot of press, made it famous, and—well—gave it an identity. You know, an identity. Like, everything on the market has its own niche: when you hear HALO, you think console-oriented stuff with heavy armor; when you hear Counter-Strike, it's a PC-oriented thing with quick deaths. The audiences? Drastically different. And Crysis? The first Crysis managed to achieve the most important thing—it found its own niche. It was a thing for the "PC mustard race" crowd, the same crazy hardware-loving enthusiasts.
That's why the transition to Crysis 2 felt... Well, not bad (since, let's be honest, Crysis 2 was a fine game), but wrong. Sure, Crysis 2 was one of the best-looking games on seventh-gen consoles, but at the same time, it was just that—a seventh-gen console-oriented title. Yes, the Predator-inspired nanosuits were still there, and so was some freedom of approach, but all in all, Crysis 2 wasn't that different from other "shooters with powers." You know, The Darkness, F.3.A.R.... That kind of stuff. It offered more freedom in single-player (like choosing between stealth and direct approaches) and even had fun multiplayer thanks to the suits, but the series lost its most important feature—its identity. Those huge maps and hardware-demanding visuals were gone. And for the third game? There were only two options: return to the roots or stick with the changes. Spoiler alert—the series was published by Electronic Arts. You can easily guess what they chose.
Going multiplatform means more money. Simple as that. That's why, for example, The Elder Scrolls series got dumbed down after its third installment. Bethesda managed to make a good port of Morrowind, but only the Xbox was powerful enough to run it—and even then, it took creative tricks (like quietly rebooting the console in the background to save memory). Naturally, EA didn't want to bother. They wanted something to sell across all platforms. Simple as that. The problem? We already had plenty of such games. The market was dominated by Battlefield and Call of Duty; Medal of Honor, while slowly decaying, was still around; and there were others, too. Crysis 3 desperately needed something to stand out. Did Crytek find it? Well, yes. Kinda.
I already mentioned Crysis 2 being one of the best-looking games on consoles. Guess what? Crysis 3 looks even better—a lot better, actually. And it's obvious Crytek was proud of what they achieved. The game starts during heavy rain, and soon after, we see that instead of the Big Apple from the previous game, we get a new version of it—covered in vegetation. Yes, vegetation. See, the lack of vegetation was one of the most shocking things about Crysis 2—at least to those who loved the original. The first game was pure vegetation porn, while Crysis 2? Just regular NYC. Now, in Crysis 3, Crytek played it smart, presenting a ruined city (destroyed in the previous game) overgrown with plants. And it looked fantastic. Sure, PC gamers still complained (don’t they always?), but on consoles? Dude! As someone who can't stand boring urban landscapes in games, I bloody loved what they did in Crysis 3.
What's even better, Crytek didn’t stop there. They didn’t just add vegetation for show—the nanosuits were still a thing, and to differentiate the game, they leaned into stealth mechanics. Grass, for example, isn’t just grass here. Tall grass can be used for hiding and spotting enemies—because cloaking won’t save you from disturbing the grass and alerting enemy snipers. In single-player, this brought Crysis 3 closer to the Predator vibe it always chased, and multiplayer? Let’s just say it was a sniper’s paradise. And it was fun, you know? I played the multiplayer a ton back in the day and loved it. The problem was... Why? What was the reason to pick Crysis 3 over, say, Battlefield 4? And the thing is... there wasn’t one. Like any Battlefield game since the third, Crysis 3’s story was too short (just a few hours—the shortest in the series), and the single-player felt like an excuse. As for multiplayer? It wasn’t bad, and the vegetation mechanics were cool, but come on. Battlefield had vehicles. And while technically Crysis 3 had them too, they weren’t even close. In other words, Crysis 3 was just another Battlefield-like game—and not even the best one.
Now, let’s talk about the remastered version. First things first: it looks good. It’s a pretty boring upgrade overall, but the game totally holds up visually. Compared to other 2022 releases like Overwatch 2, Warhammer 40,000: Darktide, and Shadow Warrior 3? It’s totally fine. The problem is (and if you’ve played the remastered trilogy, you saw this coming)—Crytek removed the multiplayer. Completely. That's it. There's no freakin' way to play multiplayer. Multiplayer here is no more! It ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet its maker! It's a stiff! Bereft of life, it rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed it to the perch it'd be pushing up the daisies! Its metabolic processes are now history! It's off the twig! It's kicked the bucket, it's shuffled off its mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible!! IT'S AN EX-MULTIPLAYER!! Now think about it. We have a typical Battlefield-like game where nobody takes the single-player seriously—yet there’s no multiplayer. Like... What? Sure, cutting it from the previous game was bad too, but here? Here it’s a joke. If you’ve played these games before, you can beat the whole thing in, like, 3–4 hours. And that’s it. Should I even say how wrong that feels? Playing the remastered Crysis 3 is like finding one of those dead games in your Steam library—playing through the single-player and wondering how great the multiplayer must’ve been back when it was alive. The first Crysis? At least its longer campaign made it worth the time. This? This is just sad. But hey, it looks good. Can’t argue with that—it looks good...