Even if they did start quoting the Bible and Jesus references, why would that matter? I’m a Christian, and yes, I acknowledge that religious wackos exist, some of a “Christian” nature, and some are dangerous. It’s no harm to my faith any more than the fact that Stalin and Mao were atheists that killed millions is a harm to atheists :) What I’m interested in is whether they really push the boundaries and there’s also a while supremacist/racial angle here also.
So…The setting is Montana. The enemies are heavily armed religious Christian zealots.
I’m going to place my bet now.
The player character is a Native American.
I guess it depends on if you’re going in there somewhat undercover or you’re openly helping some sort of Native American resistance group. Which means hundreds of them would get gunned down too in the emergent gun battles.
Well, a different segment of society would be complaining at that point. This isn’t very difficult to grasp and it parallels the ongoing real world struggle with fundamentalism giving the other billion people a bad name.
White Christians are easier because it’s a segment that is less sensitive and less aware of its identity. That is, until the recent rise of white identity politics that might make people crankier about it. I suspect we’ll get some moaning and groaning and then not much will come from it in the end. No one really cares.
In games like this, where you’re gunning down, stabbing, blowing up, and generally killing fanatics wholesale… who is the real fanatic? Hm?
Well, Im out, and not because Im overly sensitive (Well, I am that at times, but this isn’t the reason THIS time), but the setting and conflict leaves me cold. Its the kind of stuff I get enough of reading about in the daily papers, or here for that matter.
I’d much rather we’d see a Far Cry - Feudal Japan for instance, or Primal 2, where Survival mode made it kinda the greatest open world game ever, or heck, even just Far Cry, Fantasy!
If there is one thing I enjoy about Ubisoft games, its there incredible world building skills. I don’t think I’ve ever seen as lush and interesting a world as Primals.
From the Ubisoft forums:
Why not Islam? Ubisoft appealing to liberals
Does Ubisoft really believe that chrisitan fundamentalists are a bigger threat than ISIS or Islamic Terrorism seeing what we just saw in Manchester
talk about lack of any insight[/quote]
I 100% agree. They could have made the group the GOOD GUYS vs the GOV…but no. They demonize Christians, turn them into cultists and drug dealers, and tie them in with preppers and patriots. Ubi has their head up their asses.
On the flip side, there is a P-51 Mustang dog fighting with a sea plane, so how bad *** is that???[/quote]
Guess I would be a bad guy based on my avatar lol[/quote]
I’m still in.
Compound Bow of Strumpet Slaying (+5 vs Alt-Right clan)
I guess for me it doesn’t matter who the evil guys are or how close to current events it is. It’s a game where we are killing people, I don’t over think it. Plus I think it being set in Montana is kind of neat.
Now if it was a realistic setting/events, I would probably be out, but it’s Far Cry, I expect it to be over the top and fun.
Ubisoft developers probably don’t want to die, for starters.
They’d also like to preserve their social media profiles and a chance to work in the games industry.
Don’t assume the objections are based on killing religious fanatics. Ubisoft is the only company I know that can make killing fascists, authoritarians, et al rote and uninteresting. Sure it may be an objection for some. But Ubicry has gotten pretty rote of late.
I’m not really seeing this. Or maybe I should say “this might be ballsy but let’s wait and see the game”. I don’t have faith in Ubi to allow this to be an actually interesting game. I could be wrong, certainly. But if it’s just Far Cry 4 re-skinned (which was itself already a re-skin, arguably), and I don’t think it’s unreasonable to wonder if this is just a stunt and nothing more. All sound and fury, etc.
But like I said, I will be happy to be proven wrong.
A rural setting with inbred moonshining cultish hicks has been so underused in games lately.
Maybe I am misunderstanding people, I assumed people saying they saying they were out was because of the subject matter, not because Far Cry was unimaginative and boring.
I haven’t played 4 or Primal, but I thought 3 was great fun.
I still haven’t even gotten around to 2 yet!
There are many reasons not to play Far Cry 5. We shouldn’t limit ourselves!
And there are many reasons to play it!
That’s not true. Don’t confuse the issue.
You guys are shitting on the game after one non-gameplay trailer and some early leaked info. Jumping the gun unless you just dislike Far Cry/Ubisoft.
3 has it’s detractors - and there’s lots to of reason to criticize it. I liked it too. If I was being uncharitable, I would call 4 a reskin of 3. It’s not really that far off the mark It’s the exact same gameplay with a little more leeway in terms of how many yellowy-blue flowers you can carry per level of container you have crafted. The new villain was ok and a bit different but otherwise the gameplay was the same. Primal wasn’t really much different (there were some mechanical tweaks). Some continue to enjoy that, and there’s nothing wrong with that. But I don’t think anyone is really playing Far Cry X for the story.
Or let me put this another way: if this is yet another game where I have to collect critter gall bladders to make wallets while shooting the enemy and taking his towers so I can shoot more of the enemy and take more of his towers until I paint the lands with the color of FREEDOM I mean no more enemies, isn’t this particular skin just a cheap attention grabber and nothing more?
I would like for it to be something more, I’m just really jaded.