I’m as annoyed by the rivet-counters as anyone; I once told my advisor in college that the reason I didn’t want to go to grad school to study traditional military history was that I had no patience for people whose life’s ambition was to figure out how many buttons were on Stonewall Jackson’s coat when he was shot.
Close behind that annoyance though is the realization that truth is stranger than fiction (I made that up, you can quote me! :)), and that there are so many real-world examples to draw on for most things that making crap up out of whole cloth is just unnecessary, and unproductive. You see the same damn thing in pseudo-medieval setting RPGs, where designers feel compelled to create all sorts of weird and completely implausible weapons, pieces of armor, and the like, when human history has a nearly limitless supply of amazing and often totally out there things that were actually used by real people.
But really, the turning point for us, when we felt we were on to something, was when we thought of this idea of Antón as a dictator. He’s in charge of the country; he believes he’s doing the right thing by enslaving his population. But you take someone like that, and then you couple that with having a teenage son – Diego is 13 years old – and I think, for us, that’s something that Far Cry has never really had. It allows for a complex dynamic.
We’ve had some great times together, but the Far Cry formula is starting to lose its luster. They are going to have to really shake things up for this one to be on my radar.
The only, and I do mean ONLY, reason I’m kind of interested in this is that the ersatz Cuba setting provides actual tall buildings and a developed city area to play around in, which is a first for Far Cry.
I love the mechanics of the games, and the beautiful playgrounds Ubi builds. I long ago stopped paying any attention to the story, because they pretty much all suck.
They also seem to be fixated on tropical or at least “exotic” locations, even though what passes for a plot could easily play out, say, in parts of central or Eastern Europe. I guess the threat of Bulgarian hackers was enough to send them back to palm trees and beaches.
Far Cry 5 was horrible story-wise, my least favorite of the series in terms of stuff they did to make you hate the game. So you didn’t miss out. I did like it better than FC2 , which I was just bad at playing, and hated it because of that.
Hmm I shall make a list from best to worst!
FC:Primal
FC:4
FC:New Dawn
Far Cry Blood Dragon
FC3
FC1
FC5
FC2
I only rate it low because it shows its age a lot more than any other game in the series. I’m a bit of a gaming snob about the look and feel of older shooters. Unlike most other genres, I need a more modern feel. For me this doesn’t apply to quality retro-shooters that just have a retro aesthetic and gameplay loops.
Primal is the best Far Cry ,and one of the finest open world themed games, especially after the Survival update which totally changed it. Then comes Far Cry : New Dawn, which is a tighter experience than anything Ubisoft has done in the open world space for quite a while.
Far Cry 5, which was awesome in its storytelling is a close second. At the bottom of that list is Far Cry 3 and 4 which were just horrible games full of silly stuff and half baked concepts.
I don’t really rate Far Cry as part of the series since it was…well, a totally different kind of game that deserves its own listing. I guess it was fine until the aliens arrived.
I want to see what they do with the kid. Will the PC be able to influence him to be less of a dictator?
And there is always one thing Ubisoft does well: production value. Gameplay may be suspect, but their art is always at least good, sometimes “visually stunning” (hahaha). They get how art matters in a game. Like the golden fields in Odyssey, or realistic looking piles of garbage in the Division.
I agree. Far Cry forked into Crysis and Far Cry 2, but Crysis is the true spiritual successor of Far Cry.
Yep. FC1 and 2 are completely different games. FC3 defined the current gameplay, from which Ubisoft really doesn’t meaningfully deviate at all. They’ve layered RPG mechanics on top and refined exploration in FC5 to eliminate the horrid “run to the nearest icon” bit, but the core stuff of revealing the map and conquering outposts remains unchanged.
Oh man! I am very excited! I only got into the Far Cry series in the last year and a half or so and am still super pumped for a new one!
I played 2 a long time ago and it left me cold. The respawns and gun jams were offputting and I also seemed to suck at the game. A bunch of years later I picked up 4 for cheap and bounced off that too. Around the time 5 came out I reinstalled 4 and finally found the Far Cry groove! I fell in love HARD! At this point I’ve played through 3, 4, 5 and New Dawn. I had a great time with each, New Dawn being my fav. I’ve played a bit of 2, Blood Dragon and Primal.
I don’t normally go with special editions but I may just be hyped enough to get one for this. I am amped up!
I love the basic gameplay loops they have run with since FC 3. The stories are all crap, and the details often induce some serious head-scratching, but the basic kill-loot-level mechanics are fine, and the worlds are stupendous. They all have the same sorts of problems, like weapon progression being hella uneven and eventually meaningless, but I continue to enjoy them.
Can anyone explain to me why Ubi is so adamant to keep coop & single game progress seperate? Only the host player gets the mission unlocks / credits and the coop “guest” will need to replay all missions on his own again. Why does the game not register that he completed said mission on his campaign?
