PDA

View Full Version : Story of the game is...meh



MaksySM
02-28-2016, 09:48 PM
Hi i just finished the game or i think so..Because after the last boss Izila i didn't have the last VIDEO CINEMATIC and ENDING CREDITS for some reason and i have done all in this game...(sry for my english)
Talking about the story,didnt liked it so much,it's too basic!!At the end of the game you got nothing...

Aluhandri
03-08-2016, 03:53 AM
You need to upgrade the specialist`s huts to receive the final quest/journey and reach the end of the game.


Hi i just finished the game or i think so..Because after the last boss Izila i didn't have the last VIDEO CINEMATIC and ENDING CREDITS for some reason and i have done all in this game...(sry for my english)
Talking about the story,didnt liked it so much,it's too basic!!At the end of the game you got nothing...

vic_must_play
03-11-2016, 01:58 PM
Well you get the satisfaction of setting up your tribe to hopefully survive into the future.

Personally I would like to see less of an end game more of a point of departure for further open world play in games that are sold as openworld. For example supporting the village beyond the 300 at the very least having a proper tally somewhere of all the people you save with no cap, and other reasons to go on playing inclduing more interesting continuing more random but also precedural in nature side quests and events.

The funny thing about games that have a skill based arc is that most of the time after earning the final skills they hastily reduce any opportunities to use them because you have done all the big plot missions. Sadly side quests are too often treated by developers as if they have to be very simplistic very secondary things to the big plot when they could and I think in an open world should be the real meat on the bones of gameplay. Deeper sidequests and deeper emergent procedural gameplay is the real openworld because they need not be one off events.

When sidequests start being smarter including being reactive to the players current in game status and so on to me that is the ideal target for open world game developers. Primal seems to be suggesting that Ubi see the potential of open world gameplay versus fixed plot limits but they did not go far enough to flesh out the sidequests and provide the player with plenty to do post credits. Instead strangely there is the return to the concept that players will want to do the same mission plots over and over to extend there play via reruns. Whilst there is unquestionably some fun to be had via playthroughs. Eventually plot missions become boringly predictable just because they offer up few surprises for a start you get tired of the same progression the same dialogue. Whilst earning then losing then earning the same skills over and over and over again well we all know that line about repeats and madness. At least sidequests have the potential to be far more randomised gameplay although too few developers seem to do this instead they create a bunch of sidequests subtypes each of which becomes too familiar because each spawns for example the same number and type of foes often acting in the same ways without mixing it up. It astounds and amazes me that so many developers still use this staid bog standard approach to sidequests as if they are the scruffy orphans of plot gameplay whilst lavishing resources and attention on the main story missions with expensive voice acting sometimes CGI cutscenes and all of that to me this is a hang up from games that were not trying to be openworld.

jeannaq
03-19-2016, 04:34 AM
The main story line does seem to be a little light. Which I think was the entire point of it this time. I think it was kept more open ended and focused more on the side quests and the adventure of the game. Similar in concept as Fallout New Vegas, there was 2 main story line missions and the rest was side quests. Same here, there is more emphasis on your adventure and growth, not destruction.

I have 9 hours in the game and I just got that girl hunter, I still have the 2 others farther north.

omdunor
03-25-2016, 11:42 PM
Hi i just finished the game or i think so..Because after the last boss Izila i didn't have the last VIDEO CINEMATIC and ENDING CREDITS for some reason and i have done all in this game...(sry for my english)
Talking about the story,didnt liked it so much,it's too basic!!At the end of the game you got nothing...

You have done ALL in this game._.Just by curiosity how many hours did it take you and on PC or console ?
Bottom line I doubt you truly finished the game ._.lol
And Vic,write less and you will play!
188 posts in less than 24 days._.And 4 more in less than 24 hours ...WOW!!! I pity you. Get a life!

vic_must_play
03-26-2016, 11:24 AM
As an interjecting advisory, I would not be inclined to judge Primal too much by the length it took any individual player to finish it. That is a bit like asking someone how long a piece of string is to judge its breaking strength.

Truth is play duration depends greatly on whether you just rush from one iconed objective to another or whether you take your time. Also it is subjective whether you call finishing the game completing the plot missions as fast as possible and getting the end credits or something else altogether since the game plays beyond that point. This is not a liner plot focused game so to judge it that way I feel is rather missing the whole point of the thing. It does seem purposely structured in an attempt - at least to try - to be about the holistic experience of raising your tribe up as a journey rather than just completing a liner go here do that set mission arc although by necessity it also has some of that content.

Having said all of the above if you are a plot mission focused gameplayer it may seem content wise shorter than previous Far Cry games.

PS As to the OP stating the story is meh... as Takkar the primary protagonist in an open world setting in a way you are scripting the story too so if it is meh arguably in part that is a failure of your own imagination too. As with the best of good books you have to do a little work too it is not all just given to you in the text. I would have liked more content notably more interactions with the interesting npc characters but that is the thing about anything you enjoy - you always want more.

HorTyS
04-14-2016, 03:32 AM
As an interjecting advisory, I would not be inclined to judge Primal too much by the length it took any individual player to finish it. That is a bit like asking someone how long a piece of string is to judge its breaking strength.

Truth is play duration depends greatly on whether you just rush from one iconed objective to another or whether you take your time. Also it is subjective whether you call finishing the game completing the plot missions as fast as possible and getting the end credits or something else altogether since the game plays beyond that point. This is not a liner plot focused game so to judge it that way I feel is rather missing the whole point of the thing. It does seem purposely structured in an attempt - at least to try - to be about the holistic experience of raising your tribe up as a journey rather than just completing a liner go here do that set mission arc although by necessity it also has some of that content.

Having said all of the above if you are a plot mission focused gameplayer it may seem content wise shorter than previous Far Cry games.

PS As to the OP stating the story is meh... as Takkar the primary protagonist in an open world setting in a way you are scripting the story too so if it is meh arguably in part that is a failure of your own imagination too. As with the best of good books you have to do a little work too it is not all just given to you in the text. I would have liked more content notably more interactions with the interesting npc characters but that is the thing about anything you enjoy - you always want more.

Duration also greatly depends on the number of campaign missions, and FCPrimal barely goes into double digits. There are seriously only 13 main narrative missions. Can't say I agree with this logic here vic, especially considering that this game is SP only and has no other modes, they needed to have more to the SP campaign than previous games, not less. Being an open world game does not excuse skimping on the amount of story content they create. Look at the witcher 3 or GTAV, both massive open world games, both had long campaigns with many core narrative missions, they didn't have to make excuses for a short campaign by saying we didn't use our imagination enough....

vic_must_play
04-14-2016, 08:59 PM
If they were trying to make it more open world that change in focus does imo excuse some diffences in content - percent wise - between story and open world play elements.

As a design decision and a departure the end result may be imperfectly executed but I think I can see what they were striving to do. Cut off the fat so to speak.

Still I think, possibly like you HorTyS, that overall it came in a bit content light. My thoughts now veering towards the idea that it probably needed better side missions with more random, varied yet conditional to your choices and progress elements in them to fill out the play in an even more meaningfully progressive open world manner. Stuff you could get your teeth or spear or whatever into to really make more of your own in game actions. The problem with firmly plotted storyline missions being that they can restrict possibilities as much as promote them for example: important npc characters may need to survive to the end of their arc therefore the game will not let them be killed off early so you get stupid unkillable characters running around and so on.

It is easy to say a product like the Witcher 3 has a great story arc and branching choices too... but that was a game many long years in the making. I admit I would love to see a Far Cry game with the sort of time and effort that gets put into a big roleplaying style game. Overall however I still think the story is far from bad in Primal because it got me thinking about more than its content which also for me is about imagination. Also I do not play FC to follow a storyline other games do that sort of thing better. I usually struggle through parts of the plot in FC games because there are usually things I really would not want to do given any choice in the matter. Mostly I just get on with it to get the upgrades, to get out there and play with the open world stuff more as I please.

To me the story is therefore just jumping off points and unlocks for wider play and in a way that is almost how Primal is made far more than past Far Cry games.

Heavily scripted missions with no or few random interactions can be pretty dull because once you know them - that is that. Worse I find too often as a player I get crowbared into an ill fitting slot. Whilst arguably Primal, as I stated, could have benefitted from more content I would have been happy for that added content to land mostly in dynamic open world additions rather than in one off been there done that story stuff.

My arguement and it is just my position being can a story be judged meh if it does what it is trying to do rather than what you think it should do?

Seen as a set of mostly competent waypoints in the wider open world game I think it does a pretty good job even creating fast emotional attachments. Arguably it is not the same job as say the story in FC3 or 4 were a bigger part of the game was about large plot missions. The problem is that whilst making the story missions less important they needed to ensure the open world gameplay became deeper and richer and I think they did not quite do enough of that to make every player content with the content percent changes. Easy to critique Primal for not having a long intricate liner story but if that is not what the game is about it seems a bit of a waste of time like complaining an apple is not an orange.

HorTyS
04-15-2016, 03:36 AM
You do make a good point in that the game was pumped out in just over a year, so a lower mission count makes a bit more sense, however I think alot of the things you're trying to justify through the open world nature of the game is sort of a slippery slope when it comes to expectation and value. I agree that there should be more dynamic open world elements, but to say that that should counter the need for deeper, richer main narrative is where we don't quite see eye to eye. Your issue with the campaign missions is that they are linear "one-off" affairs, a fair point to be sure, but they don't have to be that either. If Ubi just switched up the structure a bit and made the core narrative missions less restrictive (as in no more "warning, leaving mission area" prompts when on a main mission) and designed the missions in a way that can be tackled at your own pace and discretion, I think that'd be a big step in the right direction.

I also prefer the open world exploration and mucking about to the core campaign, but find that the campaign missions are sort of what breaks up the eventually "what do I do next" situations that inevitably follow spurts of open world play. Rarely do I play for much longer after completing the campaign unless I have alot of side-quests left (which rarely happens with me). I find that when you're deprived of the main missions, the open world seems to get dull faster, as I suddenly don't have those missions to break up the time in the open world, and that is why I'd prefer to have more of them....

vic_must_play
04-15-2016, 09:36 AM
I do see your point, I also would prefer they remove the you are leaving mission area stuff and make the plot missions less restrictive less fixed with some branching and random elements.

As I said overall I think Primal did come in a bit content light but I think they were trying to make the main missions more part of the open world campaign play but that integration was probably too ambitious for the short development time seemingly involved.

If they only partly succeeded imo it was because when seeking to make the open world a bigger focus they needed to flesh that side of it out as much as possible far more than say FC4 and 3: including adding imo far more dynamic and varied side missions encounters etc between plot segments.Having greater animal density and so on is just not enough by itself to keep players happily invested. Players who have sunk many hours into FC3 and 4 I imagine at times ifeeling a bit jaded with the same overall random encounters set such as rescue a person from a couple of guards especially when each mini mission type is unbending in its nature for example: always a set number and type of guards.

I do still enjoy playing Primal even after plot completion, but sadly like you HorTyS not as much as I would like and I too in a way eventually miss the added variety that missions be they plot or side quests can add. I must reiterate though that the plan was probably to enourage - some - players who ignored these to do more open world actions between the wider scattered segments of plot thus getting them to create their own additional content and story.

Sadly I fear with some justification some folk probably found the inbetween stuff too repeditive and so went through the story quicker than Ubi might have wanted to encourage. Whilst to those of us that habitually do all the side missions in FC that incentive structure may have made little difference so compared to FC3 and 4 the game just seems content light with not enough new happening. However I know some people out in internet land have complained that Far Cry games - are too long - but to me if they feel that way they really ought to be playing something other than an open world style game as long goes with that genre.

In FC I would like to see some time put into tailored side missions with randomised elements that spawn even after the main plot is completie I am odd that way. I would enjoy keeping playing until such a point as I missed doing some of the old plot missions and felt eager for a replay rather than a replay being the main option once complete.

Before I was just arguing they were not focusing on making - a story based game - in the old sense were that is the meat and bone of gameplay.

I worry myself it is too easy with hindsight to criticise but I still think the game needed more development time if it was to truly begin breaking new open world game design. Here I agree the open world action not quite rich enough to excuse the reduced size of the plot again just my opinion, but the story that is in there - is still good - for what it is. Sadly I often feel they hint at great ideas but just do not seem to develop them far enough - again just my opinion.

I know my argument seems a bit contradictory here but that is because I see a general hasty critique of the story when compared to making an evaluation of the gameplay including the various contents percentage of length as slightly different issues. (Sorry horrible sentence).

Ulimately I do not think the story of the game is... meh, I do not doubt it could be improved upon and have gone deeper with some of the excellent npcs but I just do not see it as bland and boring. I found it quite amusing and dramatic at times and by the end I felt sorry for Ull and the Udam and hated Batari with a passion - to me that is not meh whatever its length.

briangade
06-01-2016, 06:56 PM
I also prefer the open world exploration and mucking about to the core campaign, but find that the campaign missions are sort of what breaks up the eventually "what do I do next" situations that inevitably follow spurts of open world play. Rarely do I play for much longer after completing the campaign unless I have alot of side-quests left (which rarely happens with me). I find that when you're deprived of the main missions, the open world seems to get dull faster, as I suddenly don't have those missions to break up the time in the open world, and that is why I'd prefer to have more of them....
I have played all open world games just like that. The only open world game I have ever continued playing for a long time after finishing all story and side missions was Black Flag,but that was more about living my boyhood pirate dreams :D But I would like to know how much time people spend in the open world after the credits with the different games

Lysette88
11-30-2016, 05:40 PM
How long the game is depends as well on how many features of the hud you are using. If you go with a minimal hud, just health/stamina bar, don't use fast travel and avoid to look at the map beside finding the next object marker - but then memorizing it's whereabouts and not look at the map again until this mission is done - then you get a more realistic gameplay, where navigation alone is already a challenge. Then you get a real feel for the size of the game and you will need more resources, because you will come across more events and have more interaction with wildlife. If the game is played more in a hunter/gatherer style and unrealistic gaming aids like compass, minimap and hud features avoided to the most part, then the game experience will be long-lasting and be intense. But if you just walk or fast travel to the next mission icon, you reduce the game to a set of locations, instead to have a seamless landscape where landmarks and distances actually matter. Just switch off most of the hud, the aiming aids and the reticle and it will be a different experience.

I use these rules for myself:

1. minimal hud - just health/stamina bar
2. no aiming aids, no reticle
3. no fast travel
4. looking at the map just in the wenja village and claimed outposts, bonfires and at owned camp fires
5. whenever I use hunter vision, I eat 1 meat - if I have no meat anymore, I don't use hunter vision - so I use it actually rarely

the last point makes it a real challenge, because I have to actually spot game to hunt it - and their camouflage fur pattern is hiding them quite well. Try it out, it is by far harder to hunt any real predator with it, they are so well camouflaged and blend into their surroundings.