Why Crysis 3 ?
Why Crysis 3 ?
I've been following Linus since high school now that I'm in university. Whenever he talks about a new system, he often asks if it will work with Crysis. When I looked up the game online, I saw it's been around five years and I think the new hardware will easily beat it. Still curious about why he keeps making those comments.
The Crysis joke comes from the game's notorious performance issues—early versions barely hit 30 frames per second, making it extremely tough even on high-end systems. The phrase "Will it run Crysis" began as a playful way to question if a machine could truly be called a gaming machine.
Actually, Crytek was recognized for creating challenging and visually impressive games. At launch, their titles generally demanded significant system power, with Crysis standing out as the most demanding example. You'll see that for some time, LMG utilized the Crysis 3 skybox as a real-world benchmark during graphics card testing.
This meme about running Crysis dates back to the game's original launch in 2007. It highlights how demanding and poorly optimized the title was at the time. Back then, high-end GPUs like the 8800GTX and 8800 Ultra struggled to maintain even 30 frames per second at higher resolutions. Even with maximum settings, achieving smooth performance was a challenge.
Crysis operates smoothly today. At launch, they made significant improvements through updates.
It was just the original Crysis that truly expanded what was possible in gaming. Back then, around 2007, it marked a significant leap forward—about a year after the PS3 launched. It was remarkable for its time and stayed influential for years afterward. Features like dynamic foliage, destruction effects, and excellent lighting made a big impact. It came out a month after Halo 3 and alongside Codemasters' Cod4, positioning itself as a top choice for PC enthusiasts. This game really highlighted the potential of PC gaming, pushing the boundaries before the term "PC e-peen" was even used. Despite its achievements, it also underscored how expensive and challenging PC gaming could be at the time. Nowadays, benchmarks focus on pushing games to their limits, making it tough for developers to create titles that run smoothly on today’s hardware without optimization. Crysis required a 720p setting of 30fps for most players, which was a barrier for budget gamers—leading to the famous "but can it run Crysis tho" joke. While I don’t say games should be as polished as Crysis, I’ve seen a shift where developers prioritize performance over flashy features if they can’t run them well on current systems. The 8x and 16x MSAA questions are still puzzling—why does BF1 look sharp while AA appears blurry? And why do my 1080p games handle older titles better than those in 1440p?
I believe we should focus on other priorities right now. That said, having games that strain even the top-tier hardware could motivate better GPU upgrades. Right now, such a scenario would likely spark discussions about what defines the current high-end Ti or Titan—like the 2080 or 2080 Ti. Using Shadow of the Tomb Raider as an example, my 1080 Ti with 7700k still delivers 100+ or even 120+ FPS in most sections, and this card is already two and a half years old.