News Article

Crytek: Crysis 3 Was "Very Close To Launching" On Wii U

Posted by Andy Green

The game was running on Nintendo's system

EA published Crysis 3 in February on PC, PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360. Unfortunately, Wii U missed out on the futuristic first person shooter, but that hasn't stopped people holding out hope for it.

Back in January, Cevat Yerli, CEO and founder of Crytek, the game's developer, said Nintendo and EA did hold discussions about a Wii U version of Crysis 3 but a deal never happened due to a lack of business drive.

However it turns out that a Wii U version was closer to becoming a reality than people think, as Crytek revealed in a recent interview with Venture Beat that it had Crysis 3 running on Nintendo's system:

We did have Crysis 3 running on the Wii U. We were very close to launching it.

It's not known how close Crysis 3 was to becoming a Wii U title, but it appears the developer had a version at the ready if EA and Nintendo struck a deal.

It's not known what the future holds for Crytek on Nintendo systems, as the developer is making its games free-to-play in the coming years, claiming that "the notion of a single player experience has to go away".

What are your thoughts on this one? Are you still harbouring hope for Crysis 3 on Wii U? Let us know in the comments section below.


From the web

User Comments (60)



Grubdog said:

Lots of devs speaking out about EA lately. Hope they get what's coming to them, we don't need scam artists in the gaming industry.



PhoenixUltra said:

I'm not sure why companies do this when if it comes to wii u it will sell like hotcakes. This pretty much sucks. EA seems to want to go bankrupt like THQ.



Molotov said:

Oh You Mean Like Nintendo Using A Competitors Console At E3 2011 To Showcase Supposed WiiU Games, CLAIMING They'll Run Every Bit As Good, And Then Every High End Game Running Much Worse On WiiU Than Its Competitors? But Of Course Thats Somehow Not Scam.



Molotov said:

You Mean Go Bankrupt As In Investing In A Console That Has No Current Mass Market Appeal? Think, Think Before You Speak.



arrmixer said:

You understand that the architecture of the wii u is totally different from the 360 and the ps3.
In addition, the dev kits given to the developers were not the final builds at the time the ports were developed.



LeVideoGamer said:

Shame for the people that wanted it, but I had no interest in it anyway.
I hope that Origin thing wasn't real, because God knows EA wouldn't try that crap with Microsoft or Sony. Holding such a grudge would just be petty and unnecessary.



DiddyAA said:

@Molotov actually alot of Wii U games are running better on the Wii U. Ninja Gaiden 3, Trine 2, Sonic Transformed, Need For Speed: Most Wanted and Assassins Creed 3. Don't just listen to what Youtubers for facts, look up a comparison or do actual research.



PhoenixUltra said:


Well it may have a smaller install base cause its a new console, but it's growing now. You realize other systems are 6 years older.



GraveLordXD said:

@Molotov it wouldn't take them much to port this especially since they claim they had it already running and ready to go just in case they can strike a deal with Nintendo EA was talking extremely positive about the Wii u at first hell they wanted to put orgin on it till Nintendo shot them down. Thing is we don't know what really goes on behind close doors my guess would be Nintendo sees what kind of shady company EA is hearing about all there games wanting to having micro transactions in it,always being tied to the net to even play a single player game and Nintendo shot them the finger



Captain_Balko said:

@Molotov Not sure if trolling, or just uneducated. Perhaps you're a Sony fanboy who gets his kicks by making absurd statements about Nintendo on a Nintendo website and providing no evidence to back them up. If so, it's pretty sad. And What's With The Capital Letter At The Start Of Every Word? Capital letters begin sentences, not all words.
But lets suppose you didn't know any better, and actually believe your ridiculous statement to be true. as @DiddyAA stated, the following run better on Wii U than other respective systems:
"Ninja Gaiden 3, Trine 2, Sonic Transformed, Need For Speed: Most Wanted and Assassins Creed 3"
I'd also like to point out that Batman Arkham City: Armoured Edition is considered the definitive version of the game. It runs as smoothly as the PS3 version (I've played both), and has far less glitches and problems.



DePapier said:

Honestly, on those comments, I just got Black Ops II and Tekken Tag Tournament 2 on my Wii U and I just don't see what's the fuss about framerate issues and Wii U can't handle this or that... That trolling needs to stop.



McHaggis said:

@Captain_Balko, re: "I'd also like to point out that Batman Arkham City: Armoured Edition is considered the definitive version of the game. It runs as smoothly as the PS3 version (I've played both), and has far less glitches and problems."
―Not to mention higher resolution textures, better lighting, better draw distance and other graphical improvements.

I could actually get behind one of @Molotov's comments―about EA wasting money to bring it to the Wii U―if the article didn't actually say that the team had the game running on the Wii U already and almost ready to launch. That means that EA's costs would be significantly lower than actually commissioning the game to be ported to the Wii U because that's already done. The only expenses would come through publishing, e.g. ordering copies of the game and marketing. Still, it's a risk, but not as much of a risk as what you're making out.



Transdude1996 said:

I think that the reason they stopped development was because of the PS3 port of the game. Sony would have been upset if they were upstaged.



hYdeks said:

here's a question: why didn't you release it on Wii U then? ¬¬ I swear these developers are getting dumber



dragon_rider said:

Awww, is itty bitty butt-hurt EA mad a big bad Nintendo for not wanting to implement Origin? Cry me a river.



Solatorobo said:

@Molotov Why Are You Uppercasing Every Word It Is Really Annoying Also Stop Trying To Talk Down To Everyone Who Disagrees With You It Just Makes You Look Like A Douche

Jesus capsing every first letter is a bother.



arrmixer said:

EA is just trying to see what they can get away with in terms of revenue capture... They are definitely flirting with crossing the line .... But they are always doing this ... Lets see how far the consumers will allow them to go...
Obviously Nintendo wants no part of this...



Savino said:

Played this on my PC.... is a beautifull game, but is a mediocre game....

Not a loss at all...



aaronsullivan said:

EA is a company, it needs to make money, I get that. I do wonder what Nintendo did to offend them so and whether this is childish pride rather than sensible business that is at the root of the decisions. EA could have given Wii U a boost, and it might have been in a better money-making position right now (and I'm not just talking about Crysis here). I don't doubt that.

As for the current condition of the Wii U, the eShop is really pulling us through this "dry" spot in the launch. By the end of March things should be kicking.

Side note: Trine 2 is way better with multiple players than I expected (I've got it for my PC super cheap through Steam summer sale, but it's so much more fun on the Wii U with family) not to mention how it's the best playing and looking version on consoles.

Also: addicted to MiiVerse.



Fillytase said:

I haven't bought an EA game in years--not a conscious decision, they just never publish anything I'm interested in anymore... just shooters and sports games. Pass.



Amigaengine said:

No need on feeding the troll guys.

Have Crysis 3 for my Xbox3fixme and while I enjoy the MP and would like to see it release for WiiU its not a big deal regardless.
EA could do alot to help WiiU with supporting the console a little better but to be honest would rather see Dead Space Trilogy, Crysis Trilogy along with the first 2 Mass Effect games on the Eshop.



Farmboy74 said:

Looks like EA have missed the boat here on this. If this game was released at launch, it might have sold well.



NotEnoughGolds said:


Oh I guess I was wrong...



ThumperUK said:

I don't understand why EA cannot release it on the wiiu shop? That way their publishing costs would be minimal, we would get the game, and EA won't have to give profits to those nasty retailers!



LordessMeep said:

I believe the last EA game of mine was that DRM-ridden Spore (which was, despite its various shortcomings, really fun) but my younger brother is still enjoying the same FIFA 11 for his PSP to this date. FPS isn't a genre I enjoy in general and Crysis 3's trailer didn't interest me in the least. I can see why people might have wanted to pick this up but, like @Farmboy74 noted, EA missed their opportunity there. In this drought, like the now-delayed Rayman Legends, a quality title like Crysis 3 would've sold quite well.



LordJumpMad said:

If Crysis 3 did made it on the Wii U, it should look and play the same, like the other console, and since the Wii U is a "next gen console", shouldn't it be able to play this with no problem at all?
And before you say "The Wii U is a new console better the others, or Crysis 3 is too dated for it" then your just acting like a blind fanboy, but worry not because I will show you the light.
The Wii U hasn't shown any real differents in graphic and animation then the other consoles, and yes, you can say the Wii U will make those games look better, but from what I seen, its very little. And at this point, if this the best that Nintendo can do with the Wii U? Then I guess we'll just wait for Sony or Microsoft to come out with a real gen console, not this fail attempt of a console, thats 5 to 6 years late to last gen.



Neram said:

I personally don't give a damn about Crytek or their games. I own Crysis, Far Cry played Crysis 2, so it's not that I'm being ignorant. I just think they're a crappy developer, their games aren't designed well at all, from a gameplay perspective I mean. I find them boring. They should just stick to making graphics engines for other game developers to use, that seems to be their strength after all.



arrmixer said:

My sentiments exactly... What really happen between the two?
I was really hoping for some eshop releases of bioware's IPs but doubt that's gonna happen now



dragon_rider said:

@LordJumpMad 3.2 million sales within a four-month period is a failure? I guess that would make the Vita's 2.2 million sales within an 18-month period a phenomenal success.



TheHeroOfLegend said:

I just want EA and Nintendo to get along. I really hate bad relationships between publishers and developers. Makes me feel sad.



GraveLordXD said:

@LordJumpMad yeah hopefully the nexbox will be something more than just a port machine for watered down pc games but I doubt it and I'm hyped about the ps4 because I know what it can do and it will get good games like the Wii u will eventually but the ps4 didn't really show much the games they did show looked no better then most current pc games



IxnayontheCK said:

Trouble is game companies have to have every Fing game be a "blockbuster" or else they call it a flop. Its bs and sad times for gamers because creativity is being thrown away for a quick dollar instead...



Peach64 said:

Why are you guys saying this would have sold really well on Wii U? Call of Duty is a FAR bigger franchise than Crysis and Black Ops II sales on Wii U were abysmal. Maybe EA just took a look at those?



JSuede said:

@aaronsullivan @dragon_rider @arrmixer Here's the deal with what happened between EA and Nintendo. EA wanted ALL of Nintendo's online stuff to be run through Origin, Nintendo said "No." and now EA is crying about it. So ridiculous.

@LordJumpMad Really? That's like saying that because the Xbox 360 or PS3 had some games that kind of looked better at launch, they aren't powerful. Nintendo has 2 first party games out, when their true efforts are put on the system, we will only START to see what the Wii U can do. Stop with the "real next gen" junk too. Next gen is much more than just a graphics bump, but is also much less. The Wii U is LITERALLY the next generation of Nintendo consoles.

@Peach64 I think it is mainly because there is an extreme software lull on the Wii U and a "AAA" title coming out in February would have sold big, simply based on the fact it was there. The reason BlOps2 didn't sell gangbusters is because it was a late port. Most of the people who were going to buy it already had it on PS3/360 so they weren't about to spend $300-$350 plus another $60 just to play it on Wii U. Crysis 3 having a simultaneous launch in an extreme drought would have sold much better.

P.S. First comment on here! Wooooooo



Amigaengine said:

Well said. I agree that while Crysis is not a great game it would have sold well on WiiU simply by default. But if EA was to release it now there would be a chance of some nice sales but most are waiting till the middle of march when the wave of nice titles are coming.



Megumi said:

EA, there's your know...the publisher that thinks Wii U isn't next generation.



Meaty-cheeky said:

@Savino I was going to say the same thing.
I played the first one on PC as well, very pretty visuals but mediocre game over all.

No loss for Wii U gamers at all.



Meaty-cheeky said:

@Peach64 I totally agree with you peach64 I don't understand what people are talking about on here saying this game would sell well on Wii U? Call of Duty is a much more popular game than Crysis and its not selling that good on Wii U, so why should Crysis be any different???



Gamer83 said:

It's not the best FPS but it is a good improvement over Crysis 2 and while the game probably wouldn't have sold that well, the Wii U could use any decent game it can get right now. Too bad the companies couldn't make it happen but maybe next time around.



Grubdog said:

Would have been nice with pointer controls. Even Far Cry Vengeance (Wii) was fun due to that.



retro_player_22 said:

I'm pretty sure one of the reason it never happen was cuz EA wanted the game to be free-to-play and Nintendo don't like that idea.



AcesHigh said:

There is a very good reason that I love Nintendo. They stick to their guns in terms of their philosophy towards their consumers. I love the fact that Nintendo has said many, many times that free to play is not a model they want to support. Why? Because for the vast majority of people who play a given free to play game, they will never get the full gaming experience. Most players give up on a game once they catch on to the scheme. To the player, it appears that the developer is more interested in squeezing each dime out of the player at every opportunity. Instead of crafting a complete game for all to enjoy in entirety and charging what its worth. Nintendo are craftsmen and toy makers first and businessmen second. EA are accountants first. This much is clear because they focus on the revenue model before the game. And also because they seem to believe that the single player experience needs to go away. Very simply WRONG! There are many different kinds of gamers out there and to denounce a very large segment of the market who dont like to play online and will never play online to justify their business model shows how myopic they are. Its clear that Nintendo and EA are on polar ends of the gaming spectrum. So its no surprise that they cant make a deal. Not upsetting at all. Im totally behind Nintendo on this one.



krunchykhaos said:

@Savino whoa what? How is it mediocre? Its head and shoulders above 2 and i'd say the gameplay is better than 1. Ive gotten a couple hours in and ive had multiple OHpoopiedoodledingdongs moments. I disagree with mediocre its definitely above average.



Sparkticle said:

@LordJumpMad A Horrible attempt to praise the PS4 on a Nintendo website perhaps? This console is ABSOLUTELY not failing stated the fact that there were only two Nintendo releases so far. I'm amazed how people like you can literally be only amazed by Graphics. Grow up, the PS4 games look like today's PC games, and if you think that the Wii U apparently has bad graphics, well then you have really high and stupid expectations. The Wii U didn't actually demonstrate any of the console's capabilities. I buy a PC for graphic showcase and I buy a console for the Games and game play. If you are here to praise a console that has absolutely nothing that I, or even a Sony fan I know would be excited about, you're obviously delusive and are in the wrong place.
P.S. Games on Wii U look better than PS3 games, the Wii U's REAL Graphics haven't been shown yet. 1080p and higher detail than the PS3 isn't good enough for you? Jeez. By the way, have you ever heard about the Wii U using PC Textures in Need for Speed and still having smoothed out gameplay in HD? Yeah, 5-6 years late for the gen right there.



GiftedGimp said:

EA are now Partnering with Microsoft is one reason Crysis 3 didn't hit WiiU, the other bigger reason is Nintendo's refusal to have Nintendo Network be run by Origin, (rightly so too), thus turning EA against Nintendo and the WiiU, Meaning all those blockbuster games EA will wan't to keep off WiiU out of spite.
They did the same on Xbox1 when MS refused EA something... lasted about 18/24 months then EA realised people didn't care about not having EA games on xbox.
Wonder how long it will take before EA realise WiiU owners don't really care if they don't get mico-transaction rip-offs from them.



Jellitoe said:

Yeah, I get my EA games on Steam for PC, 5 dollars during the following years summer sale. I would not spend for price for anything they make, not worth my money.



SpaceApe said:

You see this is how Nintendo fails. EA doesn't need Nintendo's Wii U but Nintendo needs EA because of the popularity of their titles. Yeah I don't care for EA but Nintendo needs to be smart about this and make common ground with EA so we can get good titles like Crysis 3. Ofcourse though Nintendo messes it up again.



SteveW said:

@Molotov - A lot of games are running better on Wii U, wow, you really have no clue what you are talking about. Just here to troll?



rickastillo said:

@Molotov what the hell are u doing in a nintendo's fans forum? there is a lot of Sony and M$ forums to whine there.
EA have a lot of great games but Origin is horrible, i dont care not having those games on my wii U just keep Origin far away from ninty.



JSuede said:

@SpaceApe Nintendo properties are far more popular than EA ones. Sorry.

EA wanted to completely control Nintendo's online service....have it run through Origin's interface and netcode. Nintendo said no and now EA is all pissy. Just last June they said that the Wii U was the first next generation console to release and they were excited about it. They pulled a complete 180 recently and said they don't consider the Wii U to be next gen and basically won't be supporting it. They definitely had PS4/720 dev kits back in June so it's not like they weren't aware of the technical difference between the two. Nintendo didn't want to sell its soul to a power hungry company with no morals. This one is on EA.

Nintendo can survive without EA easily. They have ~$20 billion in cash and assets at the moment. They could take losses of several hundred million every year and still be around in 30-50 years. Considering their lineup for the year.....that we know about.....and the fact that they will likely be making a profit on every Wii U sold without the need for a software sale by the end of the year, they aren't going anywhere. MS needs EA more than Nintendo does.

Besides, with EA's announcement about microtransactions being in every thank you. Madden will become, "Pick your favorite team! for divisions! pay for stats! Player injured? Pay money to get him healed!" They already showed off how they are handling MT's with Real Racing's bad. Really bad.

Leave A Comment

Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...