Was Crysis really a good game though, or was it just appreciated for its impressive graphics at the time?
I never got around to playing it
Crysis was a game that was almost like an updated FarCry. And I mean FarCry 1 and not that bullshit that UbiSoft has been putting out year after year. The game play and visuals were outstanding on one hand but the tone pulls a Stanley Kubrick on you and switches things up about half way or so and the second half is nothing like the first.
Example 1: FarCry features an almost open world tropical island teeming with life and enemy encampments that you can approach and deal with however you choose. If an objective is in the camp you can approach it with stealth taking out each enemy one by one or go in guns blazing. If there is no objective in a location, you can simply ignore it. You can create distractions to lure enemies into different locations to either aid in your infiltration or simply gather them in one place giving you a tactical advantage. You can approach your objectives from nearly any point on the compass and how you deal with the enemy is almost entirely up to you.
This creates an interesting dynamic compared to shooters that preceded it as it gave you agency to play almost however you like. It featured interesting and engaging game play and an unparalleled experience for the first half or so of the game. Then some mutant monkey things show up and the game turns into a typical shooter where enemy encounters are scripted and since these creatures aren't designed to approximate humans, the encounters turn into the usual mindless shooting you'd expect for a science fiction shooter of the day. The plot devolves into something about as complex as Doom's which would have been acceptable if it were done in 1995.
Example 2: Crysis 1 features an almost open world tropical island teeming with life and enemy encampments that you can approach and deal with however you choose. If an objective is in the camp you can approach it with stealth taking out each enemy one by one or go in guns blazing. If there is no objective in a location, you can simply ignore it. You can create distractions to lure enemies into different locations to either aid in your infiltration or simply gather them in one place giving you a tactical advantage. You can approach your objectives from nearly any point on the compass and how you deal with the enemy is almost entirely up to you.
This creates an interesting dynamic compared to shooters that preceded it as it gave you agency to play almost however you like. It featured interesting and engaging game play and an unparalleled experience for the first half or so of the game. Then some weird techno-alien things show up and the game turns into a typical shooter where enemy encounters are scripted and since these creatures aren't designed to approximate humans, the encounters turn into the usual mindless shooting you'd expect for a science fiction shooter of the day. The plot devolves into something about as complex as Doom's which would have been acceptable if it were done in 1995.
Of course, Crysis came a few years later and expanded on the game play and had a more cohesive and interesting narrative. The narrative was hardly the focus of the original game and subsequent sequels improved on this tremendously. However, the open world aspects were dropped and while everything I said about the gameplay largely applies to its sequels, the smaller areas constrained the player in a way the first installment never did. The destructible environments of the first game were lost as was some of the interactivity.
In the original, you can interact with your environment almost like an RPG. You can pick up nearly anything and use it as a weapon increasing the creative ways you can fight through the game's enemies.
The environments are destructible and cover is never cover for very long. If you unload your guns into the jungle Predator style you'll find yourself cutting trees down as you do so and disturbing the plans and scaring off the animals. You spend the bulk of your time fighting trained mercenaries and soldiers. Eventually, you run into soldiers wearing Chinese knock offs of your own Nano-suit. Aside from the nano suits there isn't much in the way of science fiction elements aside from weapons being slightly futuristic but based on weapons of today.
Basically, Crysis was an interesting game at first, starting off strong in terms of gameplay mechanics. It was truly a technological marvel in every sense of the word. The game play is some of the best I've ever experienced and it was engaging and fun in a way that few games match even today. Each play through of the first half was different and felt fresh because of just how dynamic it truly was. Unfortunately, you do a somewhat fun vehicle segment and then it devolves into a typical shooter with vehicle sequences and largely scripted action which feels the same with each play through. It's utterly unremarkable and largely forgettable outside of its graphics once you pass the half way mark.
The narrative focus is poor in the first game but as I said it tightens up and gets better. You play as each of the squad members from the first game, each getting taking turns as the protagonist. Nomad in Crysis. Psycho in Crysis: Warhead (A largely linear expansion to the first game) and then Prophet in Crysis 3. Crysis 2 introduces a new protagonist that ends up in Prophets nano-suit ultimately getting his DNA re-written by the end of the game. Ultimately, one of the NPCs of the first game turns out to be the true protagonist of the entire series.
I wouldn't call the narrative a masterpiece, although by the third game it becomes a clear focus of the campaign and its tight and engaging. I'd even call it more memorable than most. Unfortunately, what made Crysis truly special was largely lost after the first game's first half which is a shame. After having said the good and the bad, I'd say the series is more good than bad. It's worth playing if you can pick up the trilogy at a good enough price.
