There are generally two things that people of all age, color, and creed can agree on: cute animals and great Read more →
Crysis 3 Is ‘Our Masterpiece’ Says Crytek
Cevat Yerli told Gamasutra that Crysis 3 is “so far, our masterpiece.” The Crytek founder went on to say that the game is technically and creatively superior to the first two. “It is better than Crysis 2. It is better than Crysis 1. Technical and creatively, and storytelling–all aspects,” he said.
Although he believes that the game is far superior than the other two, he said he is not surprised that the critics are not too happy with it. He had a couple of factors that he attributes this to, the first being gamer fatigue. “Some games have lost up to 20 percent, despite the fact that the games are quite good still,” Yerli said. “That’s because there’s a certain fatigue level with the old generation currently. The markets are down[…]people’s expectations are much more radical than the current generation of games are doing.”
He also blames the lingering of the old consoles and believes that will change when the new generation arrives. “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,” he said.
He also seems to think that the first game was praised so much compared to the other two because it was released on PC only and thinks people thought it was such a “different” game at the time.”It was so different to others that the relative impact it created was so much more bigger than Crysis 2 or Crysis 3,” he said.. “So, for me, 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.”
This entire set of quotes makes me think that he is trying to make an excuse as to why the game was not received too well, both critically and sales wise. If they knew that there was “gamer fatigue” and that “some games have lost up to 20%,” then why did they release the game when they did. If it meant waiting about 8 months to gain that 20% back, then why didn’t they? I believe that if you make a game and it is good, it will sell. If people saw that Skyrim got mediocre or negative reviews across the board, then it probably would not have sold as well, even with the Elder Scrolls name attached to it. I guess what I am trying to get at is this: make a better game.
Quotes provided by Gamasutra