Crysis 3 reviews are go, all the scores here

Tuesday, 19th February 2013 14:15 GMT By Dave Cook

Crysis 3 reviews have started appearing in the wild. We’ve rounded them all up below.

The scores are below, and you can also check out my opinion blog on why Crysis 3 is much better as a stealth game here.

IGN – 8.5
OPM – 8
Videogamer – 6/10
Destructoid – 7.5
Shacknews – No Score
Gamespot – 7.5
Polygon – 7
Digital Spy – 4/5
Eurogamer – 7
Kotaku – “No”
Games Master UK Magazine (PC) – 8.5
Gamereactor Sweden (PC) – 8
Joystiq – 4/5
GameTrailers – 9
CVG - 8.5
GamesBeat – 85/100
NY Daily News – 5/5
PC Gamer – 81/100
MTV – No Score “you shouldn’t pass on “Crysis 3″
GameInformer – 8.5

Got a score? Stick it below and we’ll add it above when we can.



  1. CPC_RedDawn

    I expected much higher than this.

    Number 1 was great until the aliens showed up. Number 2 was epic and yea sure it was held back by console development but seriously the grand scale and epic battles in the streets, roof tops, etc, and the aliens this time actually looked good. Number 3 just looks like a cashin to me now.

    #1 2 years ago
  2. Crazyreyn

    Digital Spy, 4/5

    #2 2 years ago
  3. diego-rbb-93

    Kotaku says “NO”.

    I respect them. But what its worse… I believe them.

    #3 2 years ago
  4. rafterman83

    Completed it on Veteran in just over 6 hours; call me a cynic but that’s jut not long enough for a £40 game. Enjoyed it, and it looks incredible, but far too short :/

    #4 2 years ago
  5. Steve Burns 6/10

    #5 2 years ago
  6. Erthazus

    So Crysis 1 and Warhead were the best ones in the series so far… Lol.

    In my opinion Crytek has gone to shit when console development started. They were always PC devs and they knew what was best for the platform.

    Far Cry 1 was excellent, Crysis 1 was excellent, Warhead was decent but nothing spectacular. Warhead was more of a soulless addon to the first Crysis. At least gameplay was there.

    Crysis 2 was SHIT and this one i’m still going to try out. I guess it is going to be the same POS as the second game but I loved the first game and previous Crytek games. I want to try it.

    P.S. People who played say that it is a CoD game with dumbed down suit and ” “Follow there” missions” with stupid Console boss fights and small environments… Great Crysis game.

    #6 2 years ago
  7. davoodm

    no matter what the scores are :-/

    #7 2 years ago
  8. Samoan Spider

    I’m not one for listening to critics, but damn I hate seeing scores so low. But then again, I’ll do what I always do and just buy/play it and judge for myself. Its got a bow, thats got to count for something! :p

    #8 2 years ago
  9. loki

    AQnother fail from EA, another boring crysis

    #9 2 years ago
  10. Moonwalker1982


    And you didn’t rush through it? Cause i remember people saying the same thing about Crysis 2 back then, but it took my more than 10 hours to finish it. And i’m not a rusher, nor like a snail or anything. Normal pace :D

    #10 2 years ago
  11. ps3fanboy

    “Another wit-and-humourless jaunt through nonsensical plotting, dumb enemies, and prescribed action, with only glimpses of the series’ potential.”

    after that being said i agree with Kotaku “NO”… this is not a game i am using my £40 on. maybe if it end up in the bargain bin for a 10′er next year i will have to rethink…

    #11 2 years ago
  12. YoungZer0

    @11: How can you agree with Kotaku even though you have not played this game? You agree that Kotakus review is right after you read ANOTHER review?

    #12 2 years ago
  13. Max Payne

    Why are people so harsh on Crysis 2/3 even if their levels are much bigger and non linear unlike your scripted Killzone,Uncharted,Gears,MoH,BF,CoD… AND still looks amazing ?

    #13 2 years ago
  14. Bomba Luigi

    A lot of 7/10 and 8/10 like scores. And that for sure dosn’t mean the Game is bad. Why are People today think that everything that is under 9/10 is total Shit? Its Curios.

    #14 2 years ago
  15. Erthazus

    @13, Uncharted, gears and BF are just better games in general.

    @14, Because it’s a gaming industry. There are two scores: 7-8 and 9-10.

    #15 2 years ago
  16. Raini PC 8/10, Console 7,5/10,176303

    #16 2 years ago
  17. SyNx153


    #17 2 years ago
  18. ps3fanboy


    i have played the demo and i have a friend that also work as a reviewer and he let me try the first level…

    so i know what i am talking about, the game sucks and are not up to the standards i expect from a crytek game, nice to look at but that is all..

    a lot of these reviewer that give good scores are just paid to give good scores…

    #18 2 years ago
  19. Beta

    So it’s not a bad game. Just an average one.

    Never been able to get into the Crysis series.

    #19 2 years ago
  20. CaptPierce

    7′s and 8′s are NOT bad scores by any means; they’re just underwhelming to most triple-A titles like this. It certainly looks good, but it just feels a bit too familiar. Probably get it when it’s $40.

    #20 2 years ago
  21. _LarZen_

    I like this comment from Kirk Hamilton from “This is it: The mediocre game that screenshots will sell.”

    And he is probably spot on…

    #21 2 years ago
  22. Edo

    As expected,about the same as Dead Space 3 in terms of reviews.

    #22 2 years ago
  23. Gnosis

    @14: No, but most of the time not worth full 60€ price. Gaming is an expensive hobby.

    #23 2 years ago
  24. nhowell14

    meh i dont care bout any past the first game, it’s not one of those game series that continues to improve in story and gameplay….

    Maybe whats his face should spend more time developing the game vs overly exaggerating how slow the current 7+ year old console hardware is and how “superior” PC as a platform is.

    I just find it exceptionally humorous that this guy spends a crap ton of time, just as any other PC gamer tries to, in justifying spending a crap ton of money on instantly outdated PC hardware when the PS3/360 run the original Crysis. seeing as the original game brought even the most extreme PC hardware to its knees all the while the current HD game consoles run the same game being a couple years older. Not to mention the most current Crysis iteration is available for the PS3/360 as well.

    know what they say, walk the walk if you talk the talk.

    #24 2 years ago
  25. ps3fanboy


    The framerate on the console version drops to the LOW 20′s, making it almost unplayable. so it is junk and not worth full price for sure….

    #25 2 years ago
  26. LuLshuck

    @13 Scripted as in what? crysis 2/3 pretty much is scripted, you go from A to B just to get a scripted cut scene and then repeat, pretty much like gears and killzone you fucking idiot

    #26 2 years ago
  27. Moonwalker1982

    I saw some videos of the 360 version and the faces especially are just insane, how did they get this looking so damn good on such old hardware? It sucks about the framerate, but i heard it only happens now and then, definitely not a whole lotta times.

    #27 2 years ago
  28. Gadzooks!

    Looks really good from what I see. I loved Crysis 2 so am definitely getting 3.

    #28 2 years ago
  29. gamereck36

    The game will drop in 2 weeks in price. I will wait until it drops by $25 or more………..

    #29 2 years ago
  30. pukem0n

    how is anything above a 7 a bad score?

    i dont get it.

    its like a B in school grades, and all of us were more than happy with a B in school, arent we?

    #30 2 years ago
  31. rafterman83

    @10 DIdn’t rush through it, in fact played it quite stealthly and died quite a bit – but unfortunately it’s almost certainly 2-3 hours shorter than the Crysis 2. Framerate-wise it’s near perfect, certainly a hell of a lot better than 2, certainly not a deal breaker.

    #31 2 years ago
  32. Max Payne

    @26 Are you for real ? I was talking about size of level and option to go stealth or rambo style any time you want , and overall sandbox type level.

    #32 2 years ago
  33. nollie4545

    lol @ #24

    You jealous much? Spot the wannabe PC gamer right there.

    You know, not every PC gamer spends thousands on ‘instantly outdated hardware’, some of us just enjoy playing games in the form they were meant to be and with the settings that do them justice. Not only that but PC games tend to be cheaper (many are given away free on steam or sold on offer for half what they cost on console- say hello to Steam!). Besides, even if a game was a identical price on console or PC, who is getting better value for money? The guy with all his settings cranked up, or the one playing on hardware so old it can barely run the game?

    Not everyone spends hundreds on their gaming rig each year you know. It isn’t necessary, you could quite happily run modern titles happily at sensible settings if you merely bought a new mid range graphics card every two years.

    As for Crysis 3. I’ve pre-ordered it. Crysis 1 was very good but Crysis 2 wins for sheer accessibility and polish it feels more complete and less like a game only a PC nerd could play. Crysis 3 offering more of the same, and with even better graphics? Sold!

    #33 2 years ago
  34. Grey Wolf

    A review of a german site:

    #34 2 years ago
  35. pja137

    Well, it’s been more than five hours for me, but then I’ve always been a bit slow at these games.

    Here’s my problem with the game. I played Crysis through, beginning to end, three times. I’d play it again before I played this one again. I played Crysis 2 through, beginning to end, FOUR times. I’d play it again before I played this one again. What’s the difference? The first two seemed more like real life than this one. This one is too much a game. How so? The bosses. Come on now. I want a game that I could, in real life, survive realistically. Getting by these bosses takes multiple efforts, and they are just way too difficult. Now it’s a game. The first two didn’t have that. Yes, some parts were difficult, but not THAT difficult.

    I like to feel like I’m in a real world. I like the illusion of being part of that world. Crysis 3 gives me that much of the time, but the bosses kill the illusion. Suddenly, I’m back in a game.
    By the way, I’m still stuck trying to get past the boss with what looks like whirling blades. I survive it once, kill a few aliens, then it attacks me again and I always die. Can’t get past it.

    Stuck in a game.

    By the way, there’s a lot more than five hours gameplay here. I tend to take my time and explore. Some of you rush through, miss a lot, and then complain. Try taking your time. It doesn’t have to be a race.

    #35 1 year ago
  36. Talkar

    Your post makes no sense.. First off, the game is not difficult at all. I’ve completed it on my first playthrough on whatever the name of the hardest difficulty available to me at the time was called.
    Secondly, you’re complaining that you don’t like the game because it feels like a game? Really? And you say that the first two games were realistic at the same time.. Tell me, when was the last time you put on a nanosuit and threw a guy through a shed, literally through the shed?

    #36 1 year ago
  37. DSB

    @36 I could tell ya, but I’d have to kill ya ;)

    #37 1 year ago
  38. pja137

    I stand by my post. When I say “realistic”, it is the same as when people read a science fiction book. You don’t determine it’s “realism” by whether it’s like my life here and now. You determine whether it’s true to the world it’s set in and the rules that apply there.

    If I’m playing a western game, and it’s true to the way things were in those days, that’s realistic. But if you throw in an encounter where you have to survive being attacked by 100 cyborg Indians, and there’s no possible way you could accomplish that the first time through, then it’s just a game at that point in the storyline.

    If you want to be helpful, though (I know it’s a long shot), then tell me how to get past this silly boss machine. I would really appreciate that.

    #38 1 year ago

Comments are now closed on this article.