as a fan of crysis game i have to say something - u may like it or not but i have to say this:
crysis 1 was a masterpiece and crysis 2 was a very mediocre game. crysis 2 was not the successor of crysis 1. their a lot of reasons but ill speak only on the graphic side of this.
the graphic of crysis 2 was lower than crysis 1 to accommodate the abilitys of the consoles gaming abilitys. this was not a good business decision.
the only thing which will save this brand is being bold and looking forward. u cant make crysis 3 on the same graphic engine of crysis 2. today in this time when technology is going forward and every one looking for the last thing in technology - to make a game that will compromise graphic abilitys just for the sake of being able to work on 6,7 year old hardware (the consoles) is a first of all a bad business decision and secondly will heart the brands name - to my opinion.
people will buy the game if it will be top of the line graphic quality. and im not sure cryengine 3 is enough for it. where is all the lightning that was so famous in the crysis 1 game. why we should take a step back and wait to the new consoles to come ( in 2 years) when u have already the technology - the hardware - on the pc.
im pretty sure this is a bold way to take - but only bold people with innovative ideas r the maker of realty. only people that dream out of the box can make change and reach for the stars.
u have only one option - be bold and make the stuff dream r made of or - stay with all the riff raff and sink to oblivion and forgetfulness.

You think putting Crysis on consoles was a bad business decision? Are you actively trying to lose credibility? Wow, I've actually found a post more facepalm-worthy than "Crysis 3 will kill Halo".