I should start out by saying I like this game at its core. It has tons of potential. But that potential seems to be lost in a sea of lag and op weapons. This game is like that crazy ex, she's the best six ever but every time you get in a fight she slashes the tires on your car.

So here's my question. Are you going to buy another game from crytek or EA? I personally don't think I will. I feel like we were sold an alpha build and told it was a finished game. I'm not sure who's fault it is EA Crytek or my own but I think all parties are responsible.

I'm going to hold out and hope it gets better. I'm sick of most other shooters out there and I see great potential in this game. I have fun playing it, but at times the inconsistency is frustrating. I'm sure there are others out there like me, and I would like to hear people's thoughts.

Eh... I'd buy another Crysis game from Crytek, yes... unless I run into glitched achievements that I can never get. I ran into that on Crysis 2, and I wouldn't have bought Crysis 3 had I not finally gotten that Dedicated achievement. I don't have any *real* complaints with Crysis 3. I run into weird things happening in the campaign and in multiplayer, but noting too bad (refusing to reload, refusing to fire weapon). I am going to go out on a limb and say that lag is the cause of 90% of the weird things that go on in multiplayer, but I have played about 25 hours of it and I have had fun. Oh, and I lost every single dog tag, lol but I really don't care... I plan on rebooting 5x, so I'll get them back. I beat the campaign on Veteran and it took me longer than 5 or 6 hours, although I tried to be stealthy most of the time, whereas I could have done it a lot more quickly had I just blasted my way through, but I plan on doing a replay of it on Normal to get all the collectibles and achievements that I have left, and then one more on Super Soldier to mop up those achievements. I think I will get my $60 worth out of it by the time everything is said and done.

I also think Cevat Yerli or whatever can svck it and stop complaining about the reception the game is getting and blaming other consoles and gamer fatigue for the lukewarm reception. The game is averaging a 7.8 on Metacritic because that's about what it is, it's no masterpiece, but it's a good game, and a 7.8 isn't a bad score. Personally, I would give it a 7, which still does not make it a bad game. It's a good game, I like it, but call it what it is.

Dedicated servers would really be nice, and it would eliminate most of the complaints, I bet. No lag, no dropping connections, no host migration, more players on the battlefield... I'd even be willing to pay a little bit for it if I wasn't already paying for Xbox Live in the first place. It looks like between Microsoft, EA, and Crytek, they could figure something out. It looks like Crytek could throw us a bone here, since PC guys get dedicated servers and the 360 version sells double the number of copies it does on PC. Everybody wants to be buddies with the PC crowd, but make they sure don't have a problem taking console gamers' money, and we're spending a lot more of it than PC gamers are on Crysis.

In the end, I guess it's all irrelevant, since Crytek is going free to play now. I don't do free to play, generally speaking. I'll take a wait and see approach to it, but there's a 95% chance I won't be buying anything that's free to play, unless there's an option to buy everything at a standard price up front. I'm not really into subsidized gaming, where there are so many microtransactions that a you could spend $200 on a game and the fools who do it subsidize the game for the 80% or more of players who won't spend a dime. If not that, then F2P is just a glorified demo with a fancy tag attached to it, like a big FREE sign and the real price in fine print. Remember Crimson Alliance on the XBLA? "Free to play", yeah... for 15 minutes. Why didn't they just call that a demo? I was interested in Crytek's Homefront 2 and Timesplitters, but I don't guess those are happening now...