Crytek CEO calls Crysis 3 a “masterpiece”, defends against negative critics

Monday, 4th March 2013 10:58 GMT By Dave Cook

Crysis 3 is developer Crytek’s “masterpiece”, according to CEO Cevat Yerli. Despite a mixed batch of reviews, Yerli places the game’s critical response on “fatigue” in the market, and has stated that it’s better then the first two games.

Speaking with Gamasutra Yerli called Crysis 3, “our masterpiece”, and added, “The relative impact that Crysis 3 has created is lower than what Crysis 1 did. But I would think at any level it’s better than Crysis 2, and it’s certainly still better than Crysis 1. People remember Crysis 1 much bigger than it was, because it had a high impact.”

He went on to explain that gamers’ fatigue at current consoles is to blame for Crysis 3′s weakened impact, “The markets are down. People’s expectations are much more radical than the current generation of games are doing. I think the new generation of consoles will reinvigorate that and help to elevate that again, and elevate new concepts of gaming which old platforms are right now limiting, too.

“The consoles are eight year old devices. Of course, in one way or another, they will limit you. It’s impossible not to be limited by a limited console. By definition it’s the case. So if it were PC only, could we have done more things? Certainly, yes. Could we have afforded a budget to make a game like Crysis 3 PC only? No. People have to understand that this is a journey of give and take.”

Yerli’s been talking a lot recently, and has been getting some readers upset. Last week he said that >“the notion of a single-player experience has to go away”. What do you make of that?

Thanks >MCV.



  1. Francis O

    Masterpiece? Crysis 3? Another bland shooter, with no new gameplay mechanics. PLEASE! Mario Galaxy is a masterpiece, Half-Life is a masterpiece. Crysis 3 is not.

    #1 2 years ago
  2. Samoan Spider

    @1 Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. An excellent piece of benchmarking tech, but a sorry state of storytelling.
    He’s desperate to stay relevant. Like the guy talking to pigeons in the high street dressed as a gnome, just avoid eye contact and slowly move away. He’ll find something more meaningful to do soon enough I’m sure.

    #2 2 years ago
  3. Beta

    Crysis 3 is not a masterpiece by any stretch of the imagination.

    Good God this man is annoying. :P

    #3 2 years ago
  4. Talkar

    Half-Life was no masterpiece at all. The story was generic, and it was basically a shooter trying to feed off of the success of Quake, which it succeeded at.

    But yeah, Crysis 3 is no masterpiece either, it is good, but no masterpiece.

    #4 2 years ago
  5. GwynbleiddiuM

    Someone please GAG this idiot, UGH!

    #5 2 years ago
  6. CPC_RedDawn

    Half Life 1 was a great game. But Half Life 2 was and still is a masterpiece of fps gaming. How the hell can you compare it to Quake? HL2 created most of the genre standards we know now almost every fps game has copied HL2 in some way or another.

    #6 2 years ago
  7. YoungZer0

    @4: And lets not forget the many platform sections in Half-Life 1. Total and utter disaster.

    @6: Absurd statement.

    #7 2 years ago
  8. sh4dow

    What GwynbleiddiuM said…

    Although one might say that it’s not his fault that all the gaming sites think it would be a good idea to keep talking to him.

    #8 2 years ago
  9. Sylrissa

    I actually enjoyed my time with Crysis 3, it was fun.

    However Masterpiece?, not even close.

    #9 2 years ago
  10. NocturnalB

    For me, Crysis has always been pretty to look at, but completely hollow on the inside…. looks mean nothing when both the gameplay and story are totally generic and boring.

    #10 2 years ago
  11. Grey Wolf

    What’s the name for “Größenwahnsinnig”? Yerli speakes too much, before that he should think about what he want to say…

    #11 2 years ago
  12. _LarZen_

    After reading what players think about the game I have not bothered to buy it yet, but from what I can tell people ain’t that excited about the game.

    And when the developer comes out telling it IS a masterpiece and that the score on metacritic is just gaming fatigue…well..then I know that the game is probably just a other mediocre fps game.

    Nothing you should run and buy….wait for it to come in the bargain bins around shops.

    #12 2 years ago
  13. Erthazus

    Crysis 3 is a gigantic mistake. It’s horrible in every aspect there is.

    dumbed down suit, dumbed down story, locations, gameplay and while graphics are amazing, nothing to brag about. Sure it’s a benchmark that consoles won’t do for another 2-3 years but at the same time it’s not that far from Crysis 1 Ultra settings.

    #13 2 years ago
  14. ArithonUK

    Graphics masterpiece? Sure. On max setting. Gaming masterpiece? No chance. It’s a masterful replica of COD multi-player, with twitch-shooting and absurd levels of HUD clutter.
    But masterpiece game? No. It’s a sad indictment of commercially-dictated gaming development for the lowest-common denominator.

    We’ve gone from sandbox exploration in Crysis to running down a scripted tunnel shooting and screaming expletives. The only kind of single player that “must go away” is the example we see in Crysis 3.

    If Yerli cared about multi-player and gaming at all, Crysis 3 would run LAN games and have mod support. But since LAN games would not need their servers, that’s disabled and mod support *might* stop people buying DLC, so that’s ruled out too.

    Phrases that come to mind with Crysis 3 are “By the numbers” “Run of the mill” “Rinse and repeat” “Console fodder” – “Masterpiece” isn’t in there at all.

    #14 2 years ago
  15. xXNapsterManXx

    Yeah, it’s everybody else’s games that made your game 5 hours long and have a dull story.
    It’s not all about GFX crytek most the games we consider masterpieces have bad out dated GFX.

    #15 2 years ago
  16. KrazyKraut

    Nice tech, bad game.

    #16 2 years ago
  17. Erthazus – meanwhile at Crytek Ukraine.

    #17 2 years ago
  18. Old MacDonald

    It’s by far the worst game in the series. Even II was more enjoyable.

    (I’ve always felt that CryTeks games have been better than their reputation, but if this is their masterpiece I’m not much interested in what they’ve got coming next, f2p or not)

    #18 2 years ago
  19. ps3fanboy

    read eurogamers face off about this so called masterpiece..

    Crytek games are terribly optimised, that is a fact.. masterpiece my ASS!

    #19 2 years ago
  20. Erthazus

    @19, It’s not poorly optimized. Console hardware is dead and on the PC if you have GTX 680 you have no issues. On highest settings, although 60 frames per second you won’t get because it is for SLI benchmark so there are two options:

    1) SLI option with high end cards
    2) Wait for the next graphics card if you really want to play Crysis 3 in 60 frames on Ultra (which i’m sure no one wants.)

    What can you expect from a PS3 hardware that can only do 18-26 fps in sub-HD resolution and on minimum settings…. Lol

    #20 2 years ago
  21. powerbuoy

    “[...] at any level it’s better than Crysis 2, and it’s certainly still better than Crysis 1″ – so Yerli actually believes that Crysis 2 was better than 1?! That’s a massive problem right there.

    #21 2 years ago
  22. partchimp

    @ 20 “lol” Yes, hilarious. *attaches usb cock-dongle*

    #22 2 years ago
  23. _LarZen_

    @20 And yet only 0.94% of the millions of Steam users has a GTX680.


    #23 2 years ago
  24. DSB

    Crytek failed to check themselves, and thus wrecked themselves with Crysis 2.

    It obviously had it’s moments, but it never came close to living up to the everflowing stream of inane bragging that had been coming out of Crytek for months in advance.

    If Crytek cared just a tiny bit about balancing peoples expectations, their games would fare a lot better.

    Being reduced to going “It’s not me, it’s the market” is just beyond sad. What a bunch of fucking losers.

    “Crytek will make you its bitch. Suck it down”

    #24 2 years ago
  25. Night Hunter

    What does it say about a game if only the creator thinks it’s a masterpiece and nobody else …

    BTW@11: megalomaniac is the english term

    #25 2 years ago
  26. Imperius

    Can we have this man drug tested?

    #26 2 years ago
  27. ps3fanboy

    @20 Erthazus

    try run crysis3 on a pc from 2005 with 256mb ram and 256mb gfx ram… and we will see how GREAT THE PC IS… idiot!

    #27 2 years ago
  28. Erthazus

    @27, PS3 was out in 2006 first of all and in 2006 people had PC’s with more then 256mb of Ram. I’m not talking right now about gamers just for fun fact.

    In 2007 Crysis 1 came out which is still a benchmark and in 2007 I could run it on Ultra in 720P with 40-50 frames per second and it looks better then 99% of titles on the PS3 to this day.

    go figure, “idiot”.

    anyway, it doesn’t matter. Console gamers can play Crysis 3 in 15 frames per second on minimum settings. I think they like it.

    #28 2 years ago
  29. TheWulf

    It’s hardly a masterpiece. A masterpiece is something that people will remember for decades to come, and hasn’t been lost to the sands of time. A masterpiece is something like To the Moon, Beyond Good & Evil, Okami, The Longest Journey (Ragnar’s only good game), Ultima VII, and so on. Games which were singularly brilliant and so very unique, games which represented the passion of their creators, games developed by people who cared about what they were doing.

    Many AAA games today, from Assassin’s Creed, to the new Tomb Raider, to this, tend to feel like sweatshop games. I don’t really get the feeling from them that anyone was trying to do something unique, instead it was just a bunch of people trying to meet the lowest expectations of their pay-grade. Just to get something out there, and let marketing do the rest. Far too many games feel like that of late.

    To be honest, of recent years, I’d call Sonic & All-Stars Racing Transformed more of a genuine masterpiece than most titles, because you can really tell that the developers had a blast making it. And the result? The first kart game that’s truly better than every Mario Kart title out there, hands down. Something so much better that it just buries prior efforts.

    Mass Effect 3 I’d even go so far as to call a masterpiece, because at least the developers were doing something that meant something to them. Even if it went over the heads of a lot of gamers, but that’s irrelevant. It’s still a special game, they were passionate about it, and it was clever. It’ll be remembered, and it was likely a good decade ahead of its time. (Damned because most gamers want black & white endings where player 1 destroys the evil space empire, marries the space princess, and then sails off into the sunset. Most gamers are sadly taken so far out of their comfort zone that they freak out if you don’t give them that, which is a pity. But to me that’s kind of like preferring the original Blade Runner over the Director’s Cut.)

    So there are many games that you could attach masterpiece to, for various reasons. Clever games. Ingenious games. Brave games. But a thing as bland and ultimately characterless as Crysis? No. Sorry. That’s just another one of those “sweatshop” games the industry seems so intent on cranking out. If there’s one of those, there’s a million of them.

    #29 2 years ago
  30. mkotechno

    A masterpiece of slideshows… 15 hz in consoles.

    #30 2 years ago
  31. Spider Law

    Half-Life is a masterpiece.
    There was nothing generic about it when it was released. Only problem was that the germans and some others didnt get the same game we got.
    For it’s time, it was amazing and is still fun to play.

    #31 2 years ago
  32. YoungZer0

    @31: Yeah, we had robots instead of human soldiers and the humans that got shot would sit down and disappear. It was fucking weird. Still not a good game. Don’t care what it was back then, a good game is a good game, no matter the time.

    #32 2 years ago
  33. The Auracle

    Crytek’s CEO called the game in question their [sic?] masterpiece, not a masterpiece full-stop.

    I can see everyone has differing opinions in what they consider a masterpiece but as the conversation digressed somewhat into what games are and aren’t a masterpiece, consider this:

    You may or may not have liked Half-Life but that game and the series as a whole is more important to the evolution of the FPS than any of the recent offerings. Half-Life definitely set a new standard in FPS gaming, bringing great storytelling to a genre that was stagnating after the successes of DOOM, Quake, and the cult popularity Duke Nukem 3D enjoyed. Half-Life 2 took that standard and raised the bar even higher.

    I mean… if you can’t respect that, then your whole perspective is out of wack IMHO.

    #33 2 years ago
  34. DSB

    Yup, there was gaming before Half-Life, and then there was gaming after Half-Life.

    I played Unreal and Quake and I loved it, but neither one ever came close to doing what Half-Life did. It was a gamechanger, literally.

    I’m playing through Black Mesa at the moment, and it’s still a great ride. Design conventions change, but it went a long way to define the fundamentals.

    Half-Life 2 wasn’t nearly the same leap, and I have a somewhat ambivalent relationship with that game, but it’s still good.

    #34 2 years ago
  35. Lengendaryboss

    Jesus christ blaming it on old hardware is silly, if you feel that way stick to PC and maybe your the next Crysis game will be a “masterpiece”. Whenever this guy speaks i feel like smacking him the face.

    #35 2 years ago
  36. nollie4545

    Crysis 3 is a masterpiece or almost is, and we should celebrate its publication as gamers because it will set a bar other developers will strive to follow. Competition and innovation is always good for gamers. It might create some weak or even totally poor games but it is always good.

    Crysis 2 and 3 are good solid titles, the people who claim they aren’t are obviously those who think the world revolves around butt-hurt-filled 3 or COD or something, with an even more dubious claim to originality and moving the game on a bit, when in actual fact, you just shelled out $50 for the same content rehashed.

    Things like Doom, Quake, Half life and Crysis are game changers not because of graphics or the engine or the story, but because they move the bar on in the name of progress.

    I know many PC gamers, me included bemoan the fact C2 and C3 were not like the original Crysis. But the fact is they never were going to be the same as Crysis. Crysis is not accessible enough to every gamer, running it on consoles would be a joke. It was more of an enthusiast offering, and not everyone likes that kind of offer. At least 2 and 3 bring a more open and fluid offering, something you can pick up and play without having to be a computer geek.

    #36 2 years ago
  37. Vice

    Crysis-3 is a really gorgeous game graphics-wise, but actual gameplay is boring and unimpressive.

    #37 2 years ago
  38. bourne714

    -”fatigue at current consoles is to blame for Crysis 3′s weakened impact, The markets are down. People’s expectations are much more radical than the current generation of games are doing”-
    Halo 4, Tomb Raider, Far Cry 3, and The Last Of Us didn’t have that problem. Your game just sucks.

    #38 2 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.