Crytek: “PC players fundamentally only want Crysis to be on PC”

Monday, 7th May 2012 09:08 GMT By Patrick Garratt

Crytek’s Rasmus Højengaard has assured the PC version of Crysis 3 will ship with platform-specific graphical features, saying the IP’s PC community is always keen to keep Crysis games away from consoles.

Speaking to Spong, Højengaard joked about the aftermath of Crysis’s PC legacy.

“PC players, fundamentally only want Crysis to be on PC, right? And, you know, that’s kind of understandable when you consider how the original game – and even Crytek itself – started out,” he said.

“But, we’re definitely pushing this game a lot from a visual standpoint, and for sure there’s going to be visual goodies in it that you can only get if you have a super-high-end PC.

“At the same time, we want to ensure if you don’t have a super-high-end PC, the game will still look amazing. On top of that, we want to make sure the experience is not different from platform to platform.”

No mention was made of the graphical features specific to the PC version of Crysis 3.

The original Crysis was a PC-only release in 2007, but has since been put out on 360 and PS3 via XBLA and PSN.

Crysis 2, released in 2011 for PC, 360 and PS3, leading some PC zealots to complain about treachery.

Crysis 3 will release next year. It was announced last month. Watch a gameplay trailer here.



  1. Christopher Jack

    After simply reading the headline, all I can say is: Erthazus agrees!

    #1 3 years ago
  2. El_MUERkO

    Graphics are not the concern, gameplay is the concern, Crytek have compromised the open world gameplay of Far Cryto make their games run on Consoles. That’s their right, just don’t expect PC gamers to care.

    #2 3 years ago
  3. Gekidami

    ^ Damn right, the first Crysis simply couldnt run on consoles so they had to axe the open world part. Thats why we’ll never seen Crysis on consoles, never ever. Like, it’ll totally never be put up on PSN & XBL, nu-uh.

    #3 3 years ago
  4. Erthazus

    @1, Nice trolling, but i don’t care anymore. Crytek is not the same as before.

    @3, “^ Damn right, the first Crysis simply couldnt run on consoles so they had to axe the open world part.”

    and The First Crysis is not on Consoles dumbass. First Crysis was made on Cryengine 2 and there is a huge difference in gameplay and visuals. There is a difference with Nano Suit abilities interface and visuals that is another story.

    What is on PSN and XBL is a gigantic mess (or gigantic port mess) with Cryengine 3 (that is made for consoles) that have visuals below Low settings with cartoonish pallete so it can hide horrible and disgusting textures from 2000 with low FPS especially if you try to crush something.

    So no, Crysis 1 that is on the PC is not on consoles.

    #4 3 years ago
  5. Ge0force

    PC players just don’t want a dumbed down shooter for mainstream console audience. Real sandbox gameplay as in Crysis 1, and not another linear shooter with “go left for stealth and go right for action” Crysis 2.

    #5 3 years ago
  6. endgame

    Well what do you know! Crytek is being dumb as usual. We don’t want Crysis to be PC-only. Everyone should be able to play it. What we want is high-res textures and good mouse and keyboard controls. That’s pretty much common knowledge. Come on! Who the f**k hires these idiots?

    #6 3 years ago
  7. GwynbleiddiuM

    Seems to me Crytek has got stupid, I agree with 2, 3, 4 and 5.

    #7 3 years ago
  8. Gekidami

    Nah, its on consoles. It might not look as good, but its still the same game. I know, reality sucks but what whatcha gonna do? O-oh, ignore it? …Ok then.

    #8 3 years ago
  9. kingofscotland

    @1 That was the 1st thing I thought of when read headline.

    I’m a console gamer but if I had blown a fortune on Graphics cards etc to run games like BF3 & Crysis on PC at max then I guess I’d be pretty peeved with them dialing down things in Crysis 2 to suit consoles.

    I haven’t even finished Crysis 2, it was just generic and got boring after a while – so to me Crytek has ruined their great name they created on the back of Crysis and I’m not really that interested in Crysis 3.

    #9 3 years ago
  10. minxamo

    @4 Haha, says a lot about PC gamers’ priorities.
    Graphics > gameplay, right?

    #10 3 years ago
  11. Edo

    He represents the small minority of PC gamers…the trolling one.

    #11 3 years ago
  12. absolutezero

    So what we are talking about here is not that Crytek made a game for the consoles, because Crysis has been shown to work perfectly well on the them. What Crytek did was make a worse game for unknown reasons.

    So they created a sequel that reduced the scale of everything going on in the first game of the series just because. They just did it for no reason, thats just the game they were planning to make from the beginning. A lesser more straight forward linear game with less options.

    Seems legit.

    #12 3 years ago
  13. _LarZen_

    Crysis was just a benchmark for growing som e-penis, nothing more.

    #13 3 years ago
  14. NiceFellow

    Nonsense. As a PC (and console) gamer I just want it to take advantage of the platform, that’s all. The issue with Crysis 2 was the obvious design changes specific to consoles.

    I just don’t get why they don’t produce say three areas on console with corridors linking them but on PC remove the corridors and have one much larger area. Would it really be that hard to do?

    #14 3 years ago
  15. Christopher Jack

    @11, Not really a troll, just a pseudo-intellectual with an overblown sense of entitlement.

    @14, There’s no reason it can’t be the same game just looking better on PC.

    #15 3 years ago
  16. Maximum Payne

    @13 You are wrong on so many level.s

    #16 3 years ago
  17. Erthazus

    @15, Playstation Fanboy is talking to me about “Overblown sense of entitlement”? Okay.

    and fanboyish “There’s no reason it can’t be the same game just looking better on PC”

    Judging by Crysis 2 and other Games it’s not. It was a consolized piece of crap with corridors… But corridors are okay, okay if you can make them right.
    but making that interface is just a horrible idea.

    Different platforms, different cultures, but you as a playstation fanboy will never understand that. You can only insult me at the start of the page for no reason at all. Good luck with that attitude.

    @10, “Haha, says a lot about PC gamers’ priorities.
    Graphics > gameplay, right?”

    No, sorry. My priority is everything from Story, Gameplay to graphics. I play on the PC because i don’t want to spend 60$ to have half-assed game.

    Especially Crysis 1 on PS3 or 360.

    It’s the same if someone ported a console game to mobile game and call it a day. Oh, it’s already happened.

    #17 3 years ago
  18. loki

    just lol

    PC players also fundamentally want download games from torrents and doing this very well

    #18 3 years ago
  19. Erthazus

    @Gekidami, “but its still the same game.”

    In your dreams because it is not the same game. It’s the same game in it’s core, of course but there is a difference in interface that makes a huge change to the pace. I played both games and finished on both platforms. Crysis on the PS3 is a mess.

    Thank god that it was a downloadable title.

    #19 3 years ago
  20. albo88

    as a PC gamer im not expecting any magic here is over its cryengine 3 so get over it fast
    unit next engine there is nothing to see here in terms of graphic
    now lets wait and see how they made the gameplay i like to hunt

    #20 3 years ago
  21. Gekidami


    Sorry but this guy is so caught up in his own dishonesty, i think he lives in another reality only available to him, trapped inside his own mind. Seek help.

    #21 3 years ago
  22. Gama_888

    “No, sorry. My priority is everything from Story, Gameplay to graphics. I play on the PC because i don’t want to spend 60$ to have half-assed game.”


    You quite obviously give about a much bigger hoot about the graphics then any other point of a game, considering the fact that in your very first comment you were talking about low textures and bad fps, right from the get go.

    Your just pissed that you £1000+ Pc isnt being used to its full potential unlike a £250 console.

    #22 3 years ago
  23. blackdreamhunk

    crysis 2 was watered down and crytec lied to pc gamers

    #23 3 years ago
  24. runbmp

    Crysis 2 was a complete mess on PC. At best it could of been a bargain bin game.

    The implementation of DX11 was done after the game release and clearly Crysis never intended to do it. At least until the PC community started voicing their feedback.

    POOR DX11 implementation

    In some way you can’t blame Crytek for scaling down their game and production to the console market. Especially when its userbase spends 60$ on games and are willing to buy any DLC thrown at them. (soon they wont even be able to buy used games…)

    I think for most PC gamers, they played Crysis 2 after it came on special for a few dollars and then moved on. I didn’t finish it myself, I really just got bored with it.

    Crysis 1 was an amazing experience, one that I’ll cherish for a long time. Who knows, some indie company may take up the gauntlet and make something that Crytek no longer makes.

    Consoles are just as expensive as PC FYI. In the long run your just paying it in your game titles, DLC and yearly subscription fee. If you took the time to put money aside, you would have saved enough for a pc.

    #24 3 years ago
  25. SolomanAu

    Does anyone care that the story doesn’t even carry on from Crysis 1 ?? I mean you only saw the aliens at the end and even then they look nothing like the shit mechs you see in crysis 2. It wasn’t a bad game but crysis 2 was shithouse compared to the first one… hope the third one brings the game back to reality ….but seeing it is in new york again I am not holding my breath….what about nomad?????????

    crysis 1 rocked on pc I must have played it through about 10 times on different pc hardware builds…nice thats how pc gaming is supposed to be!!!

    #25 3 years ago
  26. YoungZer0

    @25: Why should we? The story of Crysis 1 was one of the worst aspects of the game. Crysis 2 did an amazing job with that.

    @24: Poor DX11 implementation? Did you play it with DX11? I’ve yet to see a game that uses DX11 better than Crysis 2.

    @17: “No, sorry. My priority is everything from Story, Gameplay to graphics. I play on the PC because i don’t want to spend 60$ to have half-assed game.”

    #26 3 years ago
  27. mehdidante

    you are really professional guys in crytek . but what i think the game need is strong story .

    #27 3 years ago
  28. ItsFade

    Crysis 2 was a game much like any other shooter, not particularly unique or special but a decent game with decent graphics. I sure as shit don’t think it was a worthy sequel to Crysis and it had nothing of what made Crysis feel like Crysis. I.e open sandbox environment and the ability to approach your objectives and goals in a variety of ways whereas in Crysis 2 that usually resulted in getting forced into a firefight due to the extremely linear map design and the A.I.

    By all means Crytek keep blaming your shortcomings as a video game developer on rabid fanboys arguing over some silly shit like which platform is superior.

    #28 3 years ago
  29. Lord Gremlin

    I’ve experienced Crysis 1 on PC on High and on PS3. Well, yeah there is a difference, but not a major one. Which made me think… What if Crysis on PC actually had shitty optimization?
    @28 Well, Crysis 1 is not much better – stealth, hide in a bush, recover energy, stealth again, run to the next bush. Feel like a rabbit.
    And you were forced into firefights too. Remember bosses?

    The truth is, at it’s core all Crysis games are fairly shitty. There’s technology and there’s how you USE the technology. Killzone 2 on PS3 looked better then Crysis on PC at times…

    #29 3 years ago
  30. TheWulf

    I don’t think he’s exactly right, I think there are a lot of factors involved.

    One of them is AI. Consoles have been getting better at this, but the best AI still exists in PC games. This is because the PC leaves the consoles in the dust when it comes to AI. And when the AI of something as ancient as the first Creatures game is better than anything on consoles, then you realise that maybe it’s time that Microsoft and Sony looked at beefing up their processing power. (And the RAM to go along with it.)

    Another issue is the mainstream. As I pointed out, television and games are in a horrible spot with the mainstream at the moment. I keep pointing this out and I will continue to. To see how much of a mess the mainstream is right now, you only need to look at how the largest Sci-Fi channel (SyFy) believes that Wrestling genuinely is more popular on their channel than things like Caprica or Stargate Universe.

    The consoles are the same. When a developer goes to develop something for a console, they’re trying to hit that ur-game standard which I’ve explained. So it’ll never be quirky, risky, offensive, new, interesting, or fresh. It’ll be exactly the same. Essentially, Crysis 3 is going to be Crysis 2 with updated graphics. And we all know that this is true. I mean, look at Call of Duty: Black Ops. The publisher felt that they went too far with that, that it was out of left field, so now they’re turning BLOPS into Modern Warfare.

    I won’t lie, I’ve been spending more and more time on my iPad lately. Because Waking Mars, because Crow, because MacGuffin’s Curse, because Spider: The Secret of Bryce Manor, because Superbrothers: Sword & Sworcery. And these are things that you couldn’t hope to see on the console because the pull of the ur-game is strong there. Slowly these titles are making their way over to the PC. Sword & Sworcery has, MacGuffin’s Curse did, Waking Mars is on the way, and so on.

    And titles have been migrating from the consoles to the PC and mobile platforms because they’re just not getting enough sales there. Titles like Insanely Twisted Shadow Planet, Super Meat Boy, Cthulhu Saves the world, and so on. And they’re seeing far better sales on the Pc and mobile platforms, too, and this is because the pull of the ur-game isn’t as strong, there.

    Further examples include Telltale Games, who’ve also had more success on the PC and mobile platforms than on the consoles (sales wise), who’ve just put out the first episode of the absolutely amazing Walking Dead game. A game that actually makes you feel genuinely uncomfortable and queasy about violence, and isn’t about instant gratification (imagine that).

    So I think if the reason people want to keep something off a console, it’s because they believe they’ve found something special in a game. And that specialness would be torn down upon hitting the consoles. Another example? Morrowind wasn’t popular on consoles, so Oblivion became this idyllic countryside thing of incredible dullness. I found Oblivion insidiously narcoleptic, it was that boring by comparison. But that’s the ur-game for you. Morrowind was too strange for the mainstream.

    Further, look at Kickstarter and how the target platforms for the projects there are PC and mobile platforms (iPhone, iPad, android, et cetera). And there’s a reason for all this that we can’t deny. What the consoles need to do with the next generation is make it easier for people to publish their own games on them, to move away from the ur-game.

    IF (IF) the console market is shrinking, then this is why.

    But yeah, there is a definite correlation between something hitting the console and becoming less. In my case, that would be Morrowind to Oblivion (not because a console couldn’t handle Morrowind, but because the console audience apparently couldn’t). But what people want from Crysis is the processing power of the PC. Because the consoles are so far in the past hardware wise (to the point where the iPad has overtaken them in a good number of regards), they can’t handle the sort of open environments or AI that the original Crysis had.

    Maybe with the next console generation, things will become better.


    We’ll have to wait and see.

    But yeah, I’ve never had anything against consoles. It’s just that I’ve begun to realise how limited the scope of a console is in regards to what you can run on it and what you can sell on it. And this is a startling realisation. Again, we can’t deny the limited hardware, that’s why we’re waiting for the next generation of consoles which will hopefully fix the weedy processing power they have now. And we can’t deny how the pull of the ur-game has made things worse.

    #30 3 years ago
  31. TheWulf


    In all fairness, having played both, you should have seen that there is a notable difference in the AI of both games. Play both with the AI cranked up and see which is the more intelligent opponent.

    That’s where the console version really loses out.

    I mean, even in Mass Effect 3, a game which I love, I can see how the AI is pretty damned stupid. You can do gold difficulty with two people if you’re clever about it. The AI just tends to try tactics but it’s never too smart with how it pulls them off. You can come up behind AI shooting at someone who’s in cover and they don’t turn to shoot you or run away.

    Sometimes it’s just like… “Hello, I’m punching you in the back of the head now. You may want to stop shooting at the guy who’s in cover and run away or something.”

    Ultima VII had better AI than most games these days, and that’s really kind of sad when you think about it.

    #31 3 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.