First part is well know information, second part is kinda obvious...

 I've played nearly every FPS (with a rating better then 7) in my gaming life and now way it's mediocre, IMO it was the best FPS out last year, not only because of the graphics but because of the game play and the variation. 

That's bull. There was no free-raoming in Crysis. It was extremely linear. You could deviate from the straight path maybe 100 yards on each side through 90% of the game. Add to that the awful zero gravity controls and the even worse helicopter ship thing controls and it's lucky to call itself mediocre.

Did you ever play it? What did Crysis do that hadn't been done far better before from a gameplay standpoint? Yes, graphics and physics were great, but it was extremely generic from a gameplay perspective, and the plot was one of the most awful FPS plots I've ever seen.

Crysis' gameplay is nowhere near generic, it gives you the freedom to choose how to attack, when to attack, from where to attack with more complexity than any other shooter. It requires more strategy and thinking than all the Halos and Bioshocks. Anyone who says Crysis has a generic gameplay is blind.

How many FPS DO have a comparable gameplay structure to Crysis? Tell me. There are very few, and Far Cry is the only FPS that can be comparable to Crysis (if you ignore Crysis' physics, more dynamic environment, realtime weapon modding, and just better all-around gameplay and design)

Sorry if this is a double post, hit enter by mistake however the post isn't showing up in recent forum activity so hopefully I cancelled in time ^^

I would say it is a sure thing that if a PS3 version is being made then a 360 version would also. In fact the link makes no mention of the game being PS3 exclusive.

The developers would have to be crazy. I don't think there has been a single multiplatform shooter that has sold better on PS3 than 360 so far. Also isn't porting from Pc to 360 meant to be much easier than PC to PS3? So it would be strange to go through all the trouble of making a PS3 port and ignore the 360.

Although interestingly if you enter 360 and PS3 on the games database and select the genre as shooter you get different games. E.g blacksite and kane and lynch are listed for the ps3 whereas not for the 360. So somehow they aren't classed as shooters on 360 hehe. CoD4 appears as a FPS on 360 but not PS3 etc etc. Database is crazy lol

First of all, Far Cry was and still is a far better game all around. And Crysis hardly required more strategy than Bioshock which required creative combinations of unique abilities (as opposed to generic STRONG ARMOR STEALTH RAWR skills in Crysis).

Second, Freedom to choose how you attack? Bull. On anything except Easy the only valid method of attack was Stealth Mode > Kill > Stealth Mode again > Kill again... you never had the chance to actually fight anything head on. It was an illusion of freedom. And there was no strategy in it. Stealth mode, kill someone, hide in a bush while you recharge your energy, repeat ad nauseum.

As far as the single-player goes, it was extremely linear. You weren't given a choice of where to go. You were given a mission and a straight path to get there. Oh but wait, the game will let me pick which side of the camp I come in from! Wow! What freedom!!!!111!ONE!.

Now, Linear isn't a bad thing, but their claims were complete bullshit. Free roaming did not exist in that game, and if you are going to make it linear, add some f*cking variety to the combat. I'm tired of killing Koreans for 8 hours then the same stupid aliens (with awful combat controls) for the last 5. If I'm going to play a linear game, I'd much rather play something like Call of Duty 4 or Bioshock. Both of which had far superior level design allowing for much more diverse combat enoucnters.

Crysis is generic, mediocre, and a sad excuse for an FPS that relied completely on its graphics and physics to sell it's extremely poor design. Thank god Far Cry 2 looks like it will actually be able to do what Crysis claimed it could but failed to.

umm...cool?

I agree with Nazna here, Crysis gameplay is very very linear and the suit is mostly useless outside of the armor aspect.
Sprint works only for 3-4 seconds and is useless because of it, and if you try to sprint away from an enemy he'll kill you because you're already dead without the armor...
Stealth is also kinda useless unless its on easy settings, it consumes so much power upon movement and you instantly turn visible the moment you attack.
And again, if the suit is depleted of energy after using stealth, you have no protection and you're dead. Again.
Strength? Load of bull, the added a few ledges which are mandatory to scale in order to force you to use strength at least a few times throughout the game.
And, yet again, if you use strength in combat, you have no armor and you die, pluss the strength eats away at suit power really quickly, making possible only 4-5 attacks before you're empty.

And there is no free roaming, the only aspect of such is the fact that you can stay off the roads and walk through the brush 100-200 feet away from the road.
You can't even swim to take shortcuts, there's a naval unit that shoots a missile at you if you swim too far.

AI is incredibly poor for such a "high-tech" game, often turning their back at you instead of shooting because they're programmed to find cover before shooting. And don't even get me started on those idiots operating vehicles or boats...
The physics are very tangible and immersive, but very very unrealistic.
You can shoot down trees with 9mm's, make iron containers and huge spindles of steel cable float on water, destroy entire houses simply by using a shotgun and cars behave like cardboard boxes on polished glass.
The level design and gameplay is extremely linear and gets really tired really fast. The alien levels are plain boring and made me uninstall the entire game.
There are instances where the game will suddenly take away your rocket launcher right before a combat helicopter shows up, if you crawl through bushes your sight will sometimes suddenly point skywards or your weapon can suddenly go off and empty the entire clip for no reason at all.
Story is lame as hell and has nothing on behemoths like Half-Life series or Halo, the characters are extreme stereotypes as is the setting (are there really no one outside of Korea or Russia post WWII that could possible antagonize the free world?).
Many of the enemies can take 10-20 shots to the torso from a heavy caliber weapon before finally succumbing to death, and they regularly kill their own with grenades or cavalry.

All in all, a decent game but miles from being the epic masterpiece many would have it to be, and this comes from an avid PC gamer! Far Cry was lots better in all areas save for visuals (including sound FX) and Far Cry 2 has me 100 times more enticed than Crysis 2.

So there you have it.

Who gives a crap if the gameplay in Crysis was linear? It was fucking fun. Bioshock was too worried about trying to deliver a moral dilemma and a supposedly great story(which it failed at) to deliver gameplay that was extremely fun.