Skip to content

Crysis 3 Will Be The Graphical “Benchmark” For At Least Two Years


Cevat Yerli, chief executive of Crytek, is absolutely convinced that Crysis 3 will be a graphical and technical benchmark for games for at least two years. Yerli says that even Unreal Engine 4 would have difficulty running the technically impressive Crysis 3, which is due out on February 19th. Here’s some of his thoughts.

“Crysis 3 on PC is going to be a benchmark experience for at least two years. When I see what’s happening on the PC market, and even what we do. The PC market is not going to grow vastly more before a lot of games catch up. We had the same thing with the first Crysis on PC. When Crysis launched, it was the high-end benchmark for a good three years. I think Crysis 3 is going to do that again.”

“I honestly think that Unreal Engine 4 would not be able to do Crysis 3 on consoles right now. The PC version could do it, maybe, but it would call for a higher PC spec. CryEngine 3 is capable of doing anything Unreal Engine 4 can. We don’t need to tick up the number to CryEngine 4.”

“As far as next-gen console games, I think Crysis 3 on the PC will be very comparable. Because it’s a high-end PC title, implicitly it’s a next-gen game. It’s just a next-gen PC game.”



84 thoughts on “Crysis 3 Will Be The Graphical “Benchmark” For At Least Two Years”

  1. Is it also on consoles?

    Then no, it won’t be a graphical benchmark at all.

    Also, how does this relate to Nintendo at all?

    1. Yeah. I remember when this site was just Nintendo news. It seems all the Nintendo specific site slowly start to cover ancillary topics. I personally find it annoying. Anyone know of a site that just covers Nintendo specific game news?

      1. As it’s Christmas there’s a distinct lack of Nintendo news. However, I try and post things that are interesting as I know people check the blog multiple times a day. It would be irresponsible of me to just to ignore the news and leave the site to rot. I don’t expect everyone to love every single news article that myself or Alba post, but I try my best.

        1. Still it isn’t Nintendo based hence the name of the site is pretty much invalid because you are covering Non-Nintendo News.

          Don’t become Kotaku, man

          1. Yeah, but some of us Nintendo fans care about what is going on the world(the video game world that is ;D) Remember Nintendo doesn’t live in their own little bubble. What happens with other game developers, analysts, etc affects Nintendo even if it doesn’t seem to directly relate to Nintendo at all.

        2. That guy’s being a douche. Crytek saying crysis 3 will be the graphical bench mark is more than rellevant to Nintendo Fans. After all we just got a new HD system and this guy is saying nothing in the next 2 years will top it.

      2. Does it really matter? Actually gamers play on more than one system anyway. A lot of people on here including myself own ps3’s, 360’s and/or PC’s, we just like Nintendo as well.
        No room in the world for fanboys on any side, ruining the industry and what not.

    2. Welcome to My Nintendo News. Home of a ton of flamebait articles and articles about the latest opinion of no-one-cares-who. If you stick around long enough, you’ll actually get Nintendo news. Then it’s back to all the junk you don’t care about.

    3. The PC version is DX 11 ONLY; THE FIRST DX 11 ONLY GAME and thats minimum to run the game or n other words you need a “PS/VS 5.0 GPU” to run the game

      Console versions are DX 9…

  2. So what he’s saying is it can do pretty graphics but can’t determin playability. When will the developers understand that it’s the whole package that determins a good game.

    1. It will be playable sooner than when the first one came out till it was playable.

      Also they aren’t in it for the money. Well they kinda are….but they do it to push the industry faster in the direction of better graphics. Story can come out and gameplay can come out, but the graphics is what pulls you in and see the game closer to the real life aspect. Now if the game play is shit then it falls. But two games with the same game play….and one looks better…..than you will most likely enjoy the better looking one more.

      I do agree game play is best…..and I will not play this game if it is shit. I’ll play the demo and maybe 2 hours…..but if I’m not hooked….then ehhhh.

      1. I’m on the same page as you. Gameplay will always be the most important aspect of a game, but graphics are quite important. Bad graphics can really turn me off to a game while great graphics will leave me feeling more immersed and increase my enjoyment. Graphics alone won’t make a game good, but they can go a long way to make it better.

  3. Graphical benchmark? I guess, but the gameplay is still as bland as vanilla. I remember everyone telling me how amazing Crysis 2 looked. Yet when I asked them how good was the actual game, I was always replied with a “Well…”

      1. No, no, no, no, NO. Do NOT say all FPS are shallow games because you don’t like COD or Crysis (let’s be honest here, have you even played these two games). I am so fucking tired of that stupid, STUPID generalization on this site. There are TONS of fantastic FPS. Bioshock, System Shock, Deus EX, Portal series, Team Fortress 2, Half-Life series, the old Doom and Duke Nukem games, Bulletstorm, Halo, Spec Ops, Borderlands series, and many, many, MANY more. Hell, I love the Crysis series too. The reason why there are some bland FPS’s on the market right now is that its the popular genre of today. Its just like how there were plenty of bland platformers in the 90’s. How would you feel if someone judged all 3D platformers off of Bubsy 3D? Can we please evolve from saying a certain genre of games are “shallow”? I can totally understand not being a fan of a genre, but to say it sucks or its shallow is just flat out stupid and wrong. Do NOT judge all shooters off of COD, which isn’t even THAT bad. (I will go as far as to say COD 4 is fantastic)

        1. oh, im sorry, i forgot to mention if i played FPS too, not all FPS, near all FPS are shallow, near all i said. i love far cry 2, republic commando, and view of them, but near all of them just copycat, i mean shallow copy from other who v been so popular before

          1. But that’s still a stupid comment. You clearly have not played very many FPS and yet you still say that the majority of them are shallow. I JUST mentioned around 20 games (including series of games) that are some of the greatest games of all time, with a TON of great FPS’s not included. To say that the majority of FPS’s are shallow based of TWO series (and I still think Crysis series is fantastic and COD isn’t that bad) is just sooooo fucking stupid.

            And like I said before, yes there are some FPS’s that do copy the formula from previous FPS’s, but again, that’s only because the FPS is currently a popular genre. The same thing happened to platformers in the 90s and to many other genres. There are just as many shallow games for those genres as the FPS, but you clearly turn a blind eye to those. You are biased up your ass.

            And again, I’m not saying you HAVE to like FPS, but to deny the quality that these games have made and call the majority shallow because you played COD and Crysis is just stupid.

  4. I fear if this man were any more into himself we would be left with nothing but a black hole from where his asshole absorbed everything.

    Also any game that looks as good as he claims does not deserve to be crysis. If the visuals are what he boasts I would much rather see if put to good use like a metal gear game or Zelda or perhaps just a fun game.

  5. Thats great, really…
    Shame the game is so overrated it’s laughable. It’s the living definition of graphics don’t make a better game.
    Also, a benchmark? There is no benchmark, even if we got to photorealism, that wouldnt ge the benchmark, people would still use different graphics, and artstyles. Crysis 3 has got nothing on Okami.

      1. It’s probably the best looking game ever, and it combines it artstyle with it’s gameplay. That’s fucking genius.

        1. Okami sucked big donkey dick!

          Play some motha fuckin Halo or Metroid, those games have sick graphics and epic gameplay, you feelin me?

          BlackB0nd out, Nintentards

    1. No, just no. You are allowed to not like Crysis 2 (I personally loved it) but to say it looked bad is just flat out wrong. It may not be your preferred graphic style, but c’mon, the game looks great. No, I’m not saying graphics mean everything, but Crysis 2 does look great

  6. I’m sorry to say Crytek but your engine isn’t as good as Unreal Engine 4.

    Reason why is because UE4 actually looks more realistic much like Square’s new engine. Cryengine 3 is great and all don’t get me wrong but it just can’t match up to UE4 or even UE3.5

  7. Of the engine is SOOOOOOO good. Then show me what u can do with the WII U and GamePad til then who cares……

  8. Oh, overly-good graphics, boring. To be honest, all I care is gameplay and story, just to have fun. I prefer neat art style than hyper realistic environment.

  9. From the trailers I’ve seen, the game does look gorgeous. Also, Crytek is one of the most renowned developers for setting the standard for the next-generation visuals. Crysis is still one of the best FPSs on the PC, setting a new standard for both visuals and gameplay. For those who say that graphics don’t matter, and that gameplay is everything; why can’t a game be both beautiful and play well? After all, graphics, along with sound and story, help engross the player in the gaming experience.

        1. And its moot because……? The PC is just as viable of a gaming option as a console, why should the fact that the PC looks better be excluded. The game was made for the PC and should be judged on the platform it was made on

          1. The console is holding the Pc back. The games are not using all the power Pc has to offer. If they did …..the difference would be to great and they console marked will fail. So we pc fans are aloud to stay a little ahead. So yes….judge it on the Pc

  10. Crysis 1 for PC (not a port) was really so impressive, console versions are looking much worse….

    Crysis warhead almost the same like Crysis 1, console versions were more close to PC but again the PC version looks much better.

    Crysis 2 for PC was DX 9 first (port from Xbox 360) but that wasnt that great and after months they released a DX 11 patch, the DX 9 PC version was not much better looking than console versions.

    Crysis 3 PC version WILL BE DX 11 ONLY, THE FIRST DX 11 ONLY GAME and thats minimum to run the game or in other words we need a “PS/VS 5.0 GPU” to run the game. Console versions are DX 9/opengl (PS3/60) …

    They said Crysis 3 wont be so demanding for DX 11 GPUs, DX 10 was nothing special aka more marketing… but DX 11 really shows its power, its better looking than DX 9 and faster (w/o tesselation)…

  11. Oh god. Getting real sick of Cryteks whole “Are video game is gonna be so MLG pro! Huuuuuurrrrrr”

    I’m not a fan of the Crysis series. And I’ve only played Crysis 2 once, and the graphics weren’t even that ground breaking, and I played it on PC with max settings. The game was boring. The controls were absolute crap The story was bland, like most modern day FPS’s. Online multiplayer was just as boring. There was no enjoyment at all.

    Now, I realize that there are a lot of people who enjoy this game, but I’m not one of those people who will get suckered into a game just because the developers, and gaming companies make a big deal on how the graphics looks. And it’s pretty much bullshit, that all that matters to a video game today is graphics. If that’s all you care about is how the graphics will look on your video game, as a developer, then you shouldn’t even be in the profession.

    Now, for me. I can’t wait until MGS: GZ to be released, because that will be the game that shuts Crytek up. Not only will it have a great story and easy controls, but the graphics will be absolutely unbelievable for current gen consoles. (Again, not a graphics whore, but I just have to point it out.) Hmmmmm, kinda makes me wonder why they never even mentioned that Fox Engine either?

    Anyway, that’s all I have to say. Crytek can keep being that one kid that always brags about their K/D. I really could care less about their bland video games.

    And by the way, you guys have been posting a lot of non-Nintendo related material. You guys should just rename the site to “”

  12. Pingback: NewsXpress: Édition matinale du 22 décembre 2012 | Facteur Geek

  13. Ignore what this cunt says, his shitty company is anti-Nintendo and they won’t be supporting the Wii U with this engine or game series, so who in the end who gives a fuck what they think.

  14. Pingback: Crysis 3 Won’t Be Coming To Wii U Due To Lack Of “Business Drive” Between EA And Nintendo | My Nintendo News

  15. Pingback: Crysis 3 Not Releasing On Wii U Was Purely A Business Decision

  16. Pingback: Crytek Had A Virtually Finished Version Of Crysis 3 Running On Wii U | My Nintendo News

  17. Pingback: Crytek Had A Virtually Finished Version Of Crysis 3 Running On Wii U | Nintendo 3DS News

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: