Recently, people talk a lot about dying licenses: Dead Space, Resident Evil, and now Crysis.

The point is Crysis was never a hit for his gameplay. All it does is promote technology. The first Crysis was fun when you fought soldiers, then it became annoying when aliens came. Crysis 2 was too linear.

And now Crysis 3, the symbol of what is going wrong in the video game world. No story, short campaign, poor gameplay. Contemp for dx10 cards owners. I have the feeling Crytek has taken the wwrong path, and that their recent decision to develop content for F2P is only gonna make things worse.

I think Crysis 3 can be listed among the fails of the years. No matter what can say english reviews, we all know review from big english websites are bought.

Poor gameplay?another unnecessary and pointless post..Can you explain why the game fails(in your opinion)?..if you are just reading reviews and judge the game the way they judged it..you sir are completely IDIOT...i never trusted any reviewer....i've to play the game myself then judge it no matter what is the game's score or anything..for example MoHW an underrated and unappreciated game..

Meh

Crysis 1 was also a step forward with gameplay,although it had its parts that made it look like a tech demo

It was a combination of sandbox,beautiful scenery,good story,new mechanics such as the powers and handling of weapons,complete freedom in most cases on how and where you move on the battlefield and what you do there,and other things that were present in some older games,but were never combined.Graphics were indeed the selling point,but they were used in a way that enhanced the previous good points and created some kind of new art style.In my mind Crysis will always be about jungle and a hunting vibe,being a world saviour and fighting in bricks are just too generic

Crysis 2 lost sandbox,beautiful scenery,good story (looked good on paper,bad execution),had no new mechanics except a ledge animation and melee kill,no freedom etc.Everything that made C1 a signature instead of another generic shooter died

Crysis 3 pretty much the same,but the addition of a ridiculously short campaign.So yeah,pretty much a dying license.

Other ruined licenses for the record: Battlefield,Dead Space,Splinter Cell,Hitman,Ghost Recon,Medal Of Honor

i've to play the game myself then judge it no matter what is the game's score or anything..for example MoHW an underrated and unappreciated game..

So you buy games in order to judge them.And if they're good you buy them,if they're bad you don't buy them.Oh wait,you already did

Also MoH was a disgrace for every medal of honor along with the 2010 one,and if you liked it you probably had the console version,or have a strong attraction to bad games

Crysis has been dead since Crysis Warhead. But I disagree with you about Crysis 1 having lame gameplay. Crysis Wars had the best multiplayer gameplay in the series.

i've to play the game myself then judge it no matter what is the game's score or anything..for example MoHW an underrated and unappreciated game..

So you buy games in order to judge them.And if they're good you buy them,if they're bad you don't buy them.Oh wait,you already did

Also MoH was a disgrace for every medal of honor along with the 2010 one,and if you liked it you probably had the console version,or have a strong attraction to bad games
I've no Consoles...I just don't trust reviewers since they are giving CoDs 8-10 scores

I bought and played every popular games in recent years: Call of Duty (4, MW2, MW3, BO2), Battlefield 2 & 3, Crysis 1, WH, 2, 3. MoH WF and I enjoyed every single one. I do know that most shooters are more focused on more pewpew from think and then pewpew. This is change. It is not Crysis that is dying, but the shooter genre as a whole. Some goes for MMORPGs (I play WoW (from the beginning), GW2).

Realise you can't judge a game just mashing the games into google. You have to play it.

Why dont quit playing games, and instead make them by yourself?