PDA

View Full Version : Comfort kills!



GameGuru2018
07-28-2017, 03:22 PM
Friends, there is an old chinese proverb - "More important not to run fast, but to run in the right direction." It seems that we, all together, are running in the wrong direction.....and running only faster and faster! I mean......we all want to make FarCry more comfortable, in all directions. Comfort is good in life. But not in the game! So much weapons, quick saves.....and so on........it will only makes the walkthrough easier. Easy walkthrough is death for the game! No challenge, no overcoming. Just ask yourself....do you want comfort in the game??? No! We need PAIN, SUFFERING and OVERCOMING! No need in so much weapons. My FarCry nightmare - arm shop full of weapons, different types. It is so far from reality - to have so much weapons in a difficult situation as we always find ourselves in FarCry stories. We want to have the game closer to reality. Not some - "christmas arm shop" full of all these toys. Your point - the more weapons the better, my point - the less weapons the better! Just give me one rusty knife and old Ak-47......I'll take all other necessary weapons from the dead bodies of my enemies! Enemies.....must be strong in the game. They must have better weapons. We must not have a weapon that give us big tactical advantage over the enemies! If we have some advanced weapon - our enemies also must have it! Our life....must have value in the game! We should not die like the flies - without consequences. Loss of life should cost something (may be points). Like in real life - we are afraid of death, so in the game we should be afraid of death! It is very important to stay Vulnerable in the game! Comfort, some kind of invulnerability, and everything that makes walkthrough easier - is death for the game!

GameGuru2018
07-28-2017, 04:27 PM
Sometimes I am not even upgrading myself in the games! When you are upgraded - game is dead! :(

GameGuru2018
07-28-2017, 07:43 PM
We are always hunting in FarCry, as usual. But it would be great if we would be hunted. If we being hunted. As man hunting, for example. When armed group of people will hunt us. In the forest. We are only with a knife. Forest is big, full of wild animals and gunmen. Something like it was in Outlast2 (Great game! I think - Game of the Year!).....in the corn fields, do you remember? But in FarCry it will be in the forest.......and we can attack enemies. Day, evening, and especially night.....I think in the future, all FarCry games should have Man's hunting. (Imagine being hunted in the jungles and swamps full of crocodiles)

HorTyS
07-28-2017, 08:28 PM
It would be cool if one of the things the "resistance meter" ( I'm not fully sure how that works) but it'd be cool if one thing that it did was once you reached a certain threshold, it would be cool if the game sent out a "kill squad" who are a group of tougher, high level combatants that actively searched the map for you. So if you went somewhere and started causing a ruckus, this kill squad might show up and give you a big, tough fight. They should be very challenging, but something that you could run away from. So maybe you take one or 2 out, lets say they're a group of 8 soldiers of various classes but they're better than standard grunts. Maybe you kill 1 or 2, but the rest are proving to difficult and you decide you can't take them all on so you bail out of there. You can escape, potentially, but the remaining squad will still be hunting and could surprise you later.

Maybe a few hours later you're just out hunting, or fishing even, and all the sudden the kill squad shows up and starts takin' shots at you. That would certainly be a nice, dynamic, stress inducing element that would layer the game with an underlying sense of tension until you know you've taken out the whole squad.... and maybe a few hours later an outpost liberation goes sideways, causing a huge battle, which escalates to the point of activating another kill squad... It sounds like they have a simpler version of this, with "the chosen" but I don't think those enemies continually hunt you....

HorTyS
07-29-2017, 08:24 AM
How about a difficulty level where if you get shot you die? One shot kills player might actually put some grit back into gaming.

If grit was the new word for intolerable frustration. One shot? So we could get sniped by an enemy we never saw and die and just have to go back to the last save or checkpoint? That sounds like zero fun to me. I'll concede that our characters can far too much damage to be really challenging, but a single shot being our demise would be to me one of the most frustrating, tedious and annoying difficulty settings I can imagine...

GameGuru2018
07-29-2017, 06:16 PM
Hunting us may be something like that.....(I've extended a bit with music)
https://youtu.be/_QdHsTrhY_8

GameGuru2018
07-29-2017, 08:03 PM
One shot death - No Way! Sniper should kill us with two shots. First shot - we are wounded......and very very nervous because next shot will be the last. It will bring much tension! Imagine....saving was long ago.....it took a great effort to get to this point.......still there is no next saving.......and you've got the shot......first.......you even don't see where is sniper......but you know that the next shot will be the last......and you are hiding in the bushes, for example.......you are crawling......heart pounding in your chest.......suddenly one more bullet whizzed close.....

Ubi-Zoro
07-29-2017, 08:12 PM
Great feedback everyone, thanks for sharing your thoughts!

A "one-shot death" difficulty sounds excruciating, but I personally would try it, even if only for laughs at how frustrating it could become.

I'm looking forward to seeing more on what you guys are expecting/hoping for from the difficulty in the game!

usmovers_02
07-29-2017, 08:33 PM
I play games to have fun, to to experience pain and suffering. I want a ton of fun weapons to play with. I do not want perpetual frustration.

HorTyS
07-29-2017, 08:59 PM
If the game has no sort of dynamic difficulty then i think that it's mostly in the hands of the player - if you request guns/fangs for hire it'll be much easier than if you don't.
And thanks for jumping in Zoro.

It sounds like with the resistance meter mechanic that there is a level of dynamic difficulty in the game since as you fill that meter the enemy reacts and changes accordingly. I think Dan Hay said doing enough damage to the cult could result in them sending in "the chosen' which seem to be tougher, harder fighting enemies that are a real challenge...


I play games to have fun, to to experience pain and suffering. I want a ton of fun weapons to play with. I do not want perpetual frustration.

I'm guessing you meant to say "not to experience pain & suffering" but when I read your post I wondered if you were a masochist! haha. I agree though, I play videogames to enjoy myself, not to load up a save, make my way to a group of enemies, get spotted, shot, and have to reload and do it all over again. I want to have fun, not be restarting at checkpoints half the time from one hit kills FFS...

GameGuru2018
07-29-2017, 09:04 PM
Guys, what do you think about "Fast Travelling"s? My point is Fast Travelling = Open World Killer! Don't you think that open world and fast travelling are mutually exclusive? O.k, you may say - "Don't use it if you don't like!" And I can, not to use it (like I did in the "Witcher3").....but it will be a sort of masochism....It would be better not to have Fast Travellings as organically integrated into the game. Developers were working so hard to create such a big and beautiful open world.........and we are using "Fast travellings"! No good! But how to make a gamer to get from point A to point B many times......and it still should be interesting for him to travel???

GameGuru2018
07-29-2017, 09:46 PM
Yes. Something new should always happen on the way! It can be some people, situations,......may be new little path with "treasures". Map should not be very precise! There must be always "white spots".......unexplored zones......unknown places and treasures. Map must be approximate. "Who knows may be this time going from point A to point B you will find something...?! Territories and lands should attract and call....! "Come here, there are much and much interesting things that you may miss..."

GameGuru2018
07-29-2017, 10:00 PM
Frankly speaking, I think map should open Post-Factum! When you have explored most part of the Land yourself. We will feel like first pioneers that came to America.....Vast unknown land.......No map......Everything is mysterious and enticing.....What is beyond the mountain?....What is beyond the horizon?.....Great desire to look everywhere and everything to explore.....

HorTyS
07-29-2017, 10:15 PM
Guys, what do you think about "Fast Travelling"s? My point is Fast Travelling = Open World Killer! Don't you think that open world and fast travelling are mutually exclusive? O.k, you may say - "Don't use it if you don't like!" And I can, not to use it (like I did in the "Witcher3").....but it will be a sort of masochism....It would be better not to have Fast Travellings as organically integrated into the game. Developers were working so hard to create such a big and beautiful open world.........and we are using "Fast travellings"! No good! But how to make a gamer to get from point A to point B many times......and it still should be interesting for him to travel???

P!$$ on that. It would not be "better" to remove the option for fast travel. What would be better about it? How would that improve or change anything? As you yourself said, if you have negative feelings about it, simply choose not to use it, there is nothing masochistic about that. All that is is playing the game in a way that is exactly like if it were not an option, but removing that option and denying it to players who would prefer to have that option from time to time is pointless & unnecessary.

Gr4nt8r0dy
07-30-2017, 03:59 AM
P!$$ on that. It would not be "better" to remove the option for fast travel. What would be better about it? How would that improve or change anything? As you yourself said, if you have negative feelings about it, simply choose not to use it, there is nothing masochistic about that. All that is is playing the game in a way that is exactly like if it were not an option, but removing that option and denying it to players who would prefer to have that option from time to time is pointless & unnecessary.

same here it does not make sense to remove a feature that you are not forced to use like someone said if you dont like it dont use it why take it away from the people who would rather not take the time to explore but would rather just do the next mission if you dont want to do that you never have to but some people would rather use it it does not seem like a big deal and has no effect on anyone who chooses not to use it

HorTyS
07-30-2017, 10:36 AM
LOL. I think GameGuru means to have a default difficulty setting which is actually harder and doesn't allow fast travel which makes perfect sense to me.

Fallout 4 has Survival mode - you cannot fast travel in Survival Mode. You would probably hate it. Also, you can only take a few hits before you are seriously injured or killed. I'm guessing you wouldn't like that either?

Why do you think that though, because it isn't at all what he said. What he did say was "It would be better not to have Fast Travellings as organically integrated into the game." mentioning nothing about tying it's omission to a difficulty setting. I still don't even understand why anyone feels the need to have disabling it tied to a difficulty setting in the game. Simply do not click fast travel, and boom, you didn't use it! "Problem" averted....

You are right in assuming I wouldn't enjoy FO4's survival mode though. I find those "survival" systems all these so-called survival games utilize to be time-consuming, tedious & dull affairs that force you to manage hunger, thirst & stamina in such a manner that to me strips all joy from the experience. I'm a player who prefers to just get right to it, not have to stop & rest or eat to replenish some "hunger" meter on the screen or some such. Managing meters to me isn't what I'd consider a hardcore veteran experience, it just slows everything down and calls that an increase in difficulty.

HorTyS
07-30-2017, 11:45 AM
Well I actually agree that Fast Travel could be done away with completely - but I respect that other players prefer to have an easy time and um.. have 'fun" while playing. Probably wouldn't do very well for sales if it was omitted completely either. I'm sure GameGuru is simply advising you of his principle about fast travel - in reality a difficulty level without it would be a good result for him.

As you said, you find more realistic environments tedious and dull. I don't and obviously a huge chunk of gamers don't either otherwise they wouldn't be incorporated into a AAA game such as Fallout. Time-consuming they definitely are - that's what I find so excellent about it - its travelling around. You know in FC2 I hardly even used the cars. I preferred walking across the whole map.

So I guess we are just different gamers buddy. You like to mess around and have fun with convenient game mechanics and I prefer realism and immersion, serious gaming, not gaming for fun.


Wow, uh, couple of things. For one, lets not put words in my mouth. I never said I find realistic environments tedious and dull. I said that is what I find most survival game's meter management mechanics to be. Playing games for "fun" is literally what videogames are for. It is called interactive entertainment. Far Cry 2, was fun. To imply that "serious gaming" isn't about fun or that quality of life mechanics are some how beneath "experienced players" is the most self absorbed outlooks on the issue I can imagine. We're different types of gamers for sure, and currently I couldn't be more glad about that.

HorTyS
07-30-2017, 11:56 AM
Me too. And no, videogames are not just for fun.

What videogames do you play that give you no pleasure whatsoever?

GameGuru2018
07-30-2017, 08:44 PM
"I play games to have fun" - write one of the gamer. Very good, fun - is great! But you can't only have fun and laugh in the game. Yes, you can ......but the game will be shallow! There will be no depth in the game. There will be no entirety. It's like in life - you can't always laugh.....sometimes you need to feel blue.....and even cry. Sun can not shine always.....nature needs rain also. Always shining sun makes desert! So in the game.....fun and laugh is good, but you also need another side - tears, pain and suffering. Like two sides of a coin, like day and night, like life and death. Man - who always laughs and never feel blue - is shallow and narrow. So the game. My point is - we must experience all kind of emotions in the game! Laugh - tears, love -hatred, fear - trust, cowardice - bravery, admiration and disgust........all possible feelings should be connected in one bundle , all emotions should be united in one creation - FARCRY! And this unity of emotions and feelings, this orchestra, will make the game realy Great!

HorTyS
07-30-2017, 08:58 PM
Well I wholeheartedly disagree and believe that I can enjoy the game and have fun start to finish and be completely satisfied by that. I'll concede that not all games are designed to be fun. Titles like Gone Home or whatever do not seem like their purpose is fun but rather to tell a story through interactive means or whatever, I don't quite know, I never played it. Games like that are not designed to be fun, but FarCry (and all ubisoft titles for that matter) are designed to be fun & engaging experiences. The game can have dark themes with serious tones (as serious as Far Cry can get anyway) and still be fun during that. It seems like people are confusing my use of the word fun with laughing and amusement. Perhaps I should just say entertained. I play videogames to enjoy myself and escape the suffering that is life in the modern world. I certainly would never cry because of a videogame... nothing makes me cry, except perhaps if I were to stop and think about my soul-crushing loneliness & bone deep depression, but I play videogames to avoid thinking about those things! :cool:

HorTyS
07-31-2017, 06:53 AM
I wondered about that myself. They've referred to it as the resistance meter, so I imagine it is visualized as such, but I don't know if that is a HUD element or something seen in a menu (hoping for the latter). I don't think there's been to much said about it other than the cult sort of counter attacking once certain thresholds are met or something along those lines...

GameGuru2018
07-31-2017, 08:22 PM
Everything that moving the game away from reality is bad! EVERY THING! For example - time managing, when we choose what time better to play: evening, morning, day or night. In real life we can not manage the time, if it is morning- it is morning and if we need evening we have to wait. It is reality. In the game, if we can manage the time and choose the preffered time - it is unreality. It is not real. And our subconscious know that very well. May be it is more comfortable for us to play.........but our subconscious says - "It's a lying!" and gives a minus. And step by step the number of minuses is only increasing! And how do we call computer gaming? We call it "Virtual Reality"! We don't call it "Virtual Unreality". Computer games and our brain are very interrelated! Games strongly influence our subconscious. Game industry needs new science - computer game psychology (may be it already exists) or something like that. This science will tell developers how to make a game very exciting and interesting till the last seconds. And today FarCry is standing at the crossroads......what way to choose ......way of "gaming comfort", way of satisfying "lazy gamers" or way of "closer to reality" and " closer to real life"! And this choice will determine the fate of the series in the future! As for me.....I can only add - " In the end....reality always wins!"

HorTyS
08-01-2017, 06:02 AM
I don't agree with any of that at all. Videogames are entertainment. Since when did the idea that realism means games have to be tedious affairs where options are stripped away or withheld. Since when did difficulty become about the omission of accessibility features? Now even deciding to have our character sleep until a specified time of day and not having to sit through that in real time is considered a "minus" in our subconscious? Give me a f*(king break. Preferring to play the game I want to play and not have to spend 30 minutes at a time running from one end of the map to the other, or sit and wait for 20 minutes while the in-game day night cycle runs until the time I'd rather it be is not being a "lazy gamer" it is being a person who would just rather get on with it than spend futile time waiting for conditions in the game to be a certain way.

GameGuru2018
08-01-2017, 06:05 PM
HorTyS, can you imagine video -games of the future??? They will be all close to Reality! And for FARCRY better catch this wave now, in the beginning! And be in the forefront! Realism - is the future! And ......it will take you. Willingly or not.....And some "lazy gamers" may even fight.....But in the end you will thank us!:)

HorTyS
08-01-2017, 07:52 PM
If I imagine the future of videogames where they are all just trying to replicate reality as closely as possible it makes me want to throw up with how boring the landscape of gaming would become. Thankfully I don't believe that that is the future of games, so I'm not worried about such a mundane and bleak potentiality. Nothing about such a one note gaming world would deserve thanks. And I do not believe that people who do not want only realistic games are lazy inherently, I see that as a flawed and narrow minded perspective to even have.

Gr4nt8r0dy
08-02-2017, 02:34 AM
HorTyS, can you imagine video -games of the future??? They will be all close to Reality! And for FARCRY better catch this wave now, in the beginning! And be in the forefront! Realism - is the future! And ......it will take you. Willingly or not.....And some "lazy gamers" may even fight.....But in the end you will thank us!:)

i would not thank the people who deprive the world of games like gears of war or horizon or dishonored or the witcher or 100s of other games that are not realistic but are great that sounds like a dystopian future for games to me

GameGuru2018
08-02-2017, 07:43 PM
Reality in the game and Fantasy games are not contradict each other! They comlement each other! Fantasy will be looking more juicy....when it stands on the background of reality. I'll explain it in one phrase - The Witcher horse was not flying!

GameGuru2018
08-02-2017, 08:39 PM
I think developers can not jump into "closer to reality" immediately. So I propose ....to make it as a level of walkthrough. As usual in video-games we have 3 levels of walkthrough: easy, normal and hard. (sometimes more) I propose to make one more level - "Reality". But you must explain to the gamers that it is not some kind of "insane" level, or super-hard! It is not some kind of mazohistic level - but just closer to reality, that's all! Everything, more or less, will be closer to real life! There will be no Fast Travellings, no time managing, no auto-aiming, no armshops full of weapons ( may be some black-market dealers can offer you some simple weapons ) ,you can take weapons only by looting enemies or their arsenals (it should be hard to do), no "911" or some helping squads..... and so on and so on. But life is not one! (in real life it is one, but this is the exception we Must Have! And this is very important! Otherwise it will be not interesting to play! It is shooter and we will die many times. But life must have high prise for us! (losing life we should lose or money, or points, or progress or something else. Losing life must hurt us! It should be very valuable.)

HorTyS
08-03-2017, 06:12 AM
Fast Travel - optional, just don't use it & it's like it's not even there
Time "managings" - optional, see above
Auto-Aim - Disable-able in the options

So really the only thing you new mode needs is to lock off weapon procurement and disable GFH? I'd play it if they make it so enemies carry a larger variety of weapons and not just a specific set of 8 like 3/4....

GameGuru2018
08-03-2017, 08:43 PM
Optional or not - they should not be at all in the "reality" level. One more: Avanposts' ridiculous big holes in the walls. Avanpost should be well protected and walls should be without huge holes . We must have only 3 variants - 1) digging under the wall, making some kind of tunnel 2) jump down from the tree.( on the walls should be a barbed wire) 3) To jump on the moving track's body, that is going toward avanpost and reduces the speed on some rough part of the road. We should wait for a track in ambush and running smoothly from behind that the driver did not see us. Being in the avanposts, in reality level, we won't be able to tag or mark enemies with the camera. We must not see them through the walls! ( sound of their steps (coughing, spitting on the ground...) or their talking - will help us more or less to determine their position.

Gr4nt8r0dy
08-04-2017, 01:29 AM
what the hell are avenposts even

HorTyS
08-04-2017, 06:15 AM
Yeah, what do you mean avanposts? Are you talking about the fortresses?

GameGuru2018
08-04-2017, 08:27 PM
In the game should be all kind of avanposts! From the most easy 2-3 enemies protecting.... to the most well-fortified fortress! Protecting by dozens of well armed men. Step by step, gamer will be more sophistcated in capturing them. But armed enemies should be not our biggest problem when we are stealthing in the avanposts.......but Dogs! We can easily hide from a human - but to escape a dog is not so easy. Dog knows very well how is smelling every men, protecting the avanpost.....and to smell an outsider is not a problem. Frankly speaking, dogs - are underestimated in the game! It can be said a lot about possible variations of dog escaping......but I know one good recipe. It can be made as ointment - it is mixture of shag(or green) tobacco,pepper, pounded garlic and bear's ear. Or another recipe - just the mixture of pepper and tobacco. As usual it is kept in the matchbox. Everything that has very strong and persistent smell can be used against dog's sense of smell - acetone, kerosene......I suggest in one's of the missions - to be chased by dogs in the forest. Several men with many dogs should chase us. It will be real hardcore and challenge for a gamer! One thing - to escape humans but it is quite another thing to escape dogs! (But we must not have that ointment during the escape!) Just your intuition, acumen and wit. It should be the river on our way to escape.....it will help us more to cover tracks.

GameGuru2018
08-04-2017, 09:22 PM
Now I tell you what else will help us to escape and disorientate dogs! 1) Anthills. Stepping on the anthills will lubricate our shoose with ant's acid and it will make harder for a dog to smell us. 2)Mashrooms. Also. 3) Cow dung. Or some animal's manure. 4) skunk. B) Tricks will help - 1) Take off our stocks or other smelly thing and digging it in the ground. Dog inevitably will start digging it out and will lose time. 2) Taking of some clothes and throw it the opposite direction of our running. 3) Trick called - "Broken circle" - when you find an obstacle on your way (broken tree, stump or chute) ....run one circle from the side....and on the second circle just jumping on the obstacle and further jumping far outside. Our chasers will definately not notice it and will continue to move in a circle trampling our traces. 4) "False coming out of the water" - when you you coming out of water ....few metres....and then returning to the water using the same traces. You are doing this trick several times then can do one big circle......and circle enemies from behind.

Gr4nt8r0dy
08-05-2017, 02:00 AM
the less dogs i have to kill the better for some reason i have no problem killing insane cultists or military commandos but i hate having to blast those sweet rotwylers when the run at me

HorTyS
08-05-2017, 08:13 AM
It kinda bugs me that the guard dogs in the games are always Rottweilers. Rotties get a bad rep and them being the defacto "attack dogs" in the FC games ain't helpin'!! It makes sense, they are a protective breed with aggressive capabilities, but still, I love rotties. We used to take care of one when I was a kid in Alaska and he was the kindest most gentle doggo you could ever hope for. Don't get me wrong, I don't wanna see a cocker spaniel comin' out at me from an outpost, but at least they could mix it up and have german shepards or some other type of dog once in a while... In any case, based on the last supper art it seems domesticated wolves would be more likely anyways...

GameGuru2018
08-05-2017, 05:13 PM
Killing is always bad but our purpose will not be to kill dogs but escape the dog-chase. Dogs are our friends but in the hands of enemies it is serious danger. Missions of hunting us and chasing us - is Must Have Missions in FarCry. Children all over the world, of every nation, are playing hide-and-seek game. It is in human blood - to seek and to hide.

GameGuru2018
08-05-2017, 06:12 PM
O.k! Let's talk about alarm system of the outposts! I think we must have a mobile telephone in the game.....and our enemies also. There are should be "dead zones" where we won't be able to have connection with the world. As in real life. May be even must be some kind of devices - that is blocking the signal. It can be used as "weapon" - I mean against enemies. And our enemies should also use it against us. All alarm-signalizations must be in the buildings. We should not be able to disable them by shooting with a sniper rifle from the distance! Sometimes it must be even impossible to avoid coming of reinforcement. (Game without real Challenge - is dying!) Reinforcement should come only after some time (10 - 15) minutes, for example. It would be great if we could make an ambush, and wait them. On the hill above the road, for example, or to mine the bridge. We would feel like Rembo during some special operation. Just imagine.....we've just neutralized all enemies in the outpost (it was not so easy) and now waiting for a strong reinforcement coming.....Tension is increasing, every second of waiting only increases it......We are staring into the distance.....First track is appearing.....then next vehicle.....(only when reinforcement is neutralized - outpost liberated) Don't underestimate how cool reinforcement may be in the game!

HorTyS
08-05-2017, 06:42 PM
O.k! Let's talk about alarm system of the outposts! I think we must have a mobile telephone in the game.....and our enemies also. There are should be "dead zones" where we won't be able to have connection with the world. As in real life. May be even must be some kind of devices - that is blocking the signal. It can be used as "weapon" - I mean against enemies. And our enemies should also use it against us. All alarm-signalizations must be in the buildings. We should not be able to disable them by shooting with a sniper rifle from the distance! Sometimes it must be even impossible to avoid coming of reinforcement. (Game without real Challenge - is dying!) Reinforcement should come only after some time (10 - 15) minutes, for example. It would be great if we could make an ambush, and wait them. On the hill above the road, for example, or to mine the bridge. We would feel like Rembo during some special operation. Just imagine.....we've just neutralized all enemies in the outpost (it was not so easy) and now waiting for a strong reinforcement coming.....Tension is increasing, every second of waiting only increases it......We are staring into the distance.....First track is appearing.....then next vehicle.....(only when reinforcement is neutralized - outpost liberated) Don't underestimate how cool reinforcement may be in the game!

If our character or any other characters in the game were openly using mobile phones it would create the most blatant & irreconcilable plot hole the world has ever known, i.e. why doesn't he call his superiors to send in armed forces. No, mobile phones are not an option if there is to be any semblance of believability in the scenario of the game. At the moment I have to think he has a short-wave radio to call in his GFH allies, but mobile phones should have no part in the game, talk about the most immersion shattering thing they could do, it would demolish any suspension of disbelief possible.

Forced / mandatory reinforcements to me also diminishes the whole point of trying to be stealthy about it. Even if it was only some outposts or random that a forced encounter with reinforcements took place the fact that it can or would happen would make attempting to take the outposts without detection less impactful & less satisfying. I think instead they should improve upon the outpost raids. Those happen after you liberate an outpost, and are basically reinforcements attempting to re-take it, but they never do regardless of if you fight them or not. They just need to make it so that the raids can succeed and the enemy re-gains control of the outpost and now we have to take it again, but it should be harder/ better guarded every time it is re-taken by the enemy so it doesn't become a matter of memorizing enemy patrols/ positions.

GameGuru2018
08-05-2017, 07:20 PM
"why doesn't he call his superiors to send in armed forces" Who must call the superiors to send in armed forces? There are no hopeless situations in this world! Always there is some Exit! We can't hide forever from the mobile phones in the game under the pretext that it will violate some credibility or accuracy! GTA5 used it without any fear of creation blatant plot. Mobile telephone will never spoil good plot. It will make the plot only more realistic and lifelike!

GameGuru2018
08-05-2017, 07:30 PM
As for "re - take" ing outpost.........I don't like it! It was only annoying! And it was realy bad idea! It is making the game very bustling and fussy! "Re -taking" only making the game more nervous! Didn't like it in Fallout4 also.

HorTyS
08-05-2017, 10:48 PM
"why doesn't he call his superiors to send in armed forces" Who must call the superiors to send in armed forces? There are no hopeless situations in this world! Always there is some Exit! We can't hide forever from the mobile phones in the game under the pretext that it will violate some credibility or accuracy! GTA5 used it without any fear of creation blatant plot. Mobile telephone will never spoil good plot. It will make the plot only more realistic and lifelike!

The scenario of GTA5 is not that you're trapped and isolated, cut off from the outside world, vastly outnumbered & under attack either, so mobile phones being present and available does not break the the entire premise of the game like it would in FC5.


As for "re - take" ing outpost.........I don't like it! It was only annoying! And it was realy bad idea! It is making the game very bustling and fussy! "Re -taking" only making the game more nervous! Didn't like it in Fallout4 also.

Failure to defend a liberated outpost from an enemy raid resulting in it being re-captured by the enemy is far more realistic than just nothing happening as in FC4. And so long as it is balanced and not happening every 5 minutes but rather on rare occasions it would not be "bustling and fussy", and to me seems like just as valid a suggestion as forced, unavoidable reinforcements being sent to an outpost you cleared undetected.

GameGuru2018
08-06-2017, 08:04 PM
Do you know such a word - CORRUPTION? You may call even to God.....nobody will help you! All are linked by hundreds of corrupt threads. Police, law enforcement, local authorities.....No one will help you. You can rely only on yourself : your wit, acumen, resourcefulness and luck! So I don't think that mobile phone wiill spoil the game. And....there should be "dead zones" for a signal and opportunity for our enemies to block the signal (signal jammers). I think we can also have some kind of radio interception device - it will let us to overhear sometimes enemies' conversations. They can speak about arm, money or documents delivery, for example, coordinates and time of delivery. Having heard this we will be able to reach the place before them and prepare an ambush. Radio and mobile signals will open new opportunities for developers in the game! I think all this should be thought about.

HorTyS
08-07-2017, 06:07 PM
A public network communication on your hands would make the story a little dumb. A walkie talkie is fine.

Exactlly, a short-range radio would be fine, that makes sense, but once you give the character a mobile phone, the second he has a signal it would beg the question why he doesn't call his superiors and frantically yell "Hey you gotta send in the national guard over here! Seed is converting everyone into raving lunatics and killing people send help!' and then... yeah, game over. A mobile phone is a plot breaking device to have access to, thats my point. It would be one of the most lazy dismissals ever to justify it by saying your CO is just corrupt, that doesn't even make much sense because they couldn't have known our CO would be the one sending us in...

GameGuru2018
08-07-2017, 07:21 PM
NOTHING should make a story dumb! What is the value of the story if one little mobile phone can make all the story dumb?! Such story costs nothing! Everything should be thought about by developers and the author of the story. Mobile phone is integral part of our life and we won't be able to escape it in such a big open world game, modern time game, as FarCry! GTA 6 and other games will use even more modern devices......and FarCry? We will all the future FarCrys running only with walkie-talkie??? Not good!

GameGuru2018
08-07-2017, 07:42 PM
I want to talk about forced stealth in the game! I think it would be better not to force gamers doing something in the game. Any coercion is not good for the game. I mean there were missions where stealth was inevitable. I've heard many times from gamers - "I hate forced stealth". Give them a choice. Everything that forces gamers doing something against their will is not good. Open world = freedom of choice.

Gr4nt8r0dy
08-08-2017, 02:44 AM
As for "re - take" ing outpost.........I don't like it! It was only annoying! And it was realy bad idea! It is making the game very bustling and fussy! "Re -taking" only making the game more nervous! Didn't like it in Fallout4 also.

how was it annoying if it didnt happin the outposts in far cry 4 didnt actually get retaken if you didnt defend them from the raids nothing happined how does it make the game more nervous whatever thats supposed to mean


NOTHING should make a story dumb! What is the value of the story if one little mobile phone can make all the story dumb?! Such story costs nothing! Everything should be thought about by developers and the author of the story. Mobile phone is integral part of our life and we won't be able to escape it in such a big open world game, modern time game, as FarCry! GTA 6 and other games will use even more modern devices......and FarCry? We will all the future FarCrys running only with walkie-talkie??? Not good!

well if the main character had a cell phone it would make the story dumb because it is a huge plot hole if he had a phone he would just contanct the goverment to send in the army or something instead of raising a resistance and takin them on with the locals dont you get what a plot hole is a phone would make the story not beleevable at all but no one said anything about not having one in every far cry game just this one set in modern america where having one and not calling the national guard would not make any sense at all



I want to talk about forced stealth in the game! I think it would be better not to force gamers doing something in the game. Any coercion is not good for the game. I mean there were missions where stealth was inevitable. I've heard many times from gamers - "I hate forced stealth". Give them a choice. Everything that forces gamers doing something against their will is not good. Open world = freedom of choice.

there should be no fail states in any of the missions you should only fail if you die or your objective becomes impossible there should not be conditions for success like no detection no kills or anythin instead they should make it clear that stealth is advised and not doing stealth will be very difficult but not always impossible

say the mission is rescuing someone if you are spotted the person will be killed within one minute so you have to save them before that but if you go steallth you can sneak all the way to them and they dont get killed because the baddies never saw you coming

scrapser
08-08-2017, 03:07 AM
Friends, there is an old chinese proverb - "More important not to run fast, but to run in the right direction." It seems that we, all together, are running in the wrong direction.....and running only faster and faster! I mean......we all want to make FarCry more comfortable, in all directions. Comfort is good in life. But not in the game! So much weapons, quick saves.....and so on........it will only makes the walkthrough easier. Easy walkthrough is death for the game! No challenge, no overcoming. Just ask yourself....do you want comfort in the game??? No! We need PAIN, SUFFERING and OVERCOMING! No need in so much weapons. My FarCry nightmare - arm shop full of weapons, different types. It is so far from reality - to have so much weapons in a difficult situation as we always find ourselves in FarCry stories. We want to have the game closer to reality. Not some - "christmas arm shop" full of all these toys. Your point - the more weapons the better, my point - the less weapons the better! Just give me one rusty knife and old Ak-47......I'll take all other necessary weapons from the dead bodies of my enemies! Enemies.....must be strong in the game. They must have better weapons. We must not have a weapon that give us big tactical advantage over the enemies! If we have some advanced weapon - our enemies also must have it! Our life....must have value in the game! We should not die like the flies - without consequences. Loss of life should cost something (may be points). Like in real life - we are afraid of death, so in the game we should be afraid of death! It is very important to stay Vulnerable in the game! Comfort, some kind of invulnerability, and everything that makes walkthrough easier - is death for the game!

I'm responding to the original post above. I have not read all the other replies on purpose so I can be responding only to the OP. I agree with this post 100%. Make the game a painful challenge so the player must overcome hardships and unforeseeable problems in order to advance. Without realizing it, the feeling I get imagining what such a game might be like brings me back to how fun FC2 is with its bare bones environment and "earn what you need" approach to equipment. I'm not going to rehash all the FC2 stuff all over again. I'm just here to say I support this post and I think it's on the right track.

Ubi-Salvenius
08-08-2017, 11:26 AM
Going to put my spin on this with a personal opinion (Just want to make sure that no one takes this as an official response as I would like to contribute and discuss things with you all, also helps to get a better understanding and to refine points for feeding back to others :) You can also look at it is a way to see it from another point of view, which then allows you to further explain your point. )

So from what I can gather, most seem to be in agreement with a game being challenging...that's fine but what about those that just want to experience the story or don't fancy being stuck in one area or on one objective for longer than one hour?

I mean I'm all for challenging game-play but I am also for giving players a choice. For example: I was playing some Ghost Recon Wildlands last night with a friend, we did a couple of story missions, where one basically allowed us to do what we wanted (We generally use the rule of, we try stealth approaches first and if the alarms go, we make our own decisions on how to continue, such as whether we run and hide to re-stealth or jump up and go full assault mode) after that we had a mission where we MUST go undetected...failure is not an option.

So...as you can imagine, we failed it 3 times, first time was due to clumsiness, second time was due to not being fully aware of the guard's movements (One came from behind while I was in drone mode) and the third was due to missing a shot with the sniper rifle (Which turns out after switching to another sniper rifle, I was happier)

My point is, sometimes forced objectives aren't a bad thing. personally I do prefer where you can choose your additional challenges such as maybe for replay-ability you complete a mission as intended then you can go back and add "handicaps" to the challenge such as "Only use this weapon", "Go undetected"

I understand that some people aren't interested in game-play inspired by rogue-like games/hardcore mode (where you have one life, get as far as possible etc.) but I am also aware that some aren't interested in games that hold your hand either (believe me, I found this particularly painful considering I went from Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind to Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion)

I guess in a way, I do like the best of both worlds...allowing a player to customise their experience by toggling/turning on and off settings, especially since personally I will play a game a number of ways (usually as intended firstly to get a feel of the game then hardcore after just to give that challenging aspect)

So for example and I know this will come back to bite me: Splinter Cell: Conviction...played the game to death, resurrected it and played it again all because of co-op and the game modes like Hunter and Infiltration. The game as intended provides the player with silenced weapons but also with loud weapons and sonar. My friend and I played the game for several hours learning the mechanics and once we felt confident enough or that we played through all the content, we switched it up by handing out our own handicaps....so, melee only, this quickly escalated to "shotguns only", which in turn created a new way for us to play, which was called "Rollie Rollie Shotgun"...where you simply roll towards your target and blast them with the shottie.

In short what I am trying to say is....games are coming to a point where they have to cater for many various play-styles but those play-styles also have to fit within the world and the world's reality. My "run and gun" friend for example doesn't necessarily like forced stealth missions and will avoid them the best he can but he's also not exactly a person that likes to do side missions

Difficulty in games is somewhat relative I find, I will always play a game first-time in Normal mode, mostly to experience the story with a slight challenge. Those that go straight from hard or insane...hats off to you but not for me until I know the game a little :P

GameGuru2018
08-08-2017, 05:56 PM
Yes. Every gamer has its own taste and its impossible to satisfy all of them. And there is no need in that. But we know what every gamer wants - to enjoy the game! But how to make them enjoy the game? Gamers themselves don't know the answer. They want to enjoy the game......but what is needed to achieve the goal? And on this way I can judge only by myself. №1 - Atmosphere. One of the most important conditions! It may sounds weirdly - but story is not so significant. Of course the more interesting story the better for a game itself. But atmosphere of the game drags the whole game. If you like the world in which you are existing in the game.....if this world mysteriously beckons you..... the game has all chances. It can be not only beautiful atmoshere of nature with mountains,lakes and forest......or beautiful atmoshere of cities with buildings, streets and people.....It can be also atmoshere of a horror, disgust and despair.... some horror or postapocalypse game. As for me, I don't play because of the story of the game......but I play because of that almost existantial experience I can get being in this world......

scrapser
08-09-2017, 08:59 PM
In response to Ubi-Salvenius:

I completely understand and agree with what you're saying. The fact that people have different reasons for playing a game, different expectations, focus or what have you...this is my argument for providing the means to customize the realism and difficulty. I've been gaming since the 70's. I have had an enormous amount of exposure and experience to all sorts of games and simulations. I'm definitely a realism gamer. But I do enjoy the fantasy and science fiction genres as well so long as whatever is built into the game doesn't go "over the top" and makes sense within the context of the game. Sometimes games are constructed so the way they behave while playing surprises the player in a negatively unexpected way. And this goes beyond any bugs...all games have those issues to deal with. A good game simply "clicks" with the player. Making it possible for people to adjust the game parameters makes a game appeal to a broader spectrum of players. Simulations are known for having this feature. I think it is a good investment from the publishing side of the equation.

MikeJDRW
08-26-2017, 10:28 PM
P!$$ on that. It would not be "better" to remove the option for fast travel. What would be better about it? How would that improve or change anything? As you yourself said, if you have negative feelings about it, simply choose not to use it, there is nothing masochistic about that. All that is is playing the game in a way that is exactly like if it were not an option, but removing that option and denying it to players who would prefer to have that option from time to time is pointless & unnecessary.

I have to agree with HorTyS on this.



Going to put my spin on this with a personal opinion (Just want to make sure that no one takes this as an official response as I would like to contribute and discuss things with you all, also helps to get a better understanding and to refine points for feeding back to others :) You can also look at it is a way to see it from another point of view, which then allows you to further explain your point. )

So from what I can gather, most seem to be in agreement with a game being challenging...that's fine but what about those that just want to experience the story or don't fancy being stuck in one area or on one objective for longer than one hour?

I mean I'm all for challenging game-play but I am also for giving players a choice. For example: I was playing some Ghost Recon Wildlands last night with a friend, we did a couple of story missions, where one basically allowed us to do what we wanted (We generally use the rule of, we try stealth approaches first and if the alarms go, we make our own decisions on how to continue, such as whether we run and hide to re-stealth or jump up and go full assault mode) after that we had a mission where we MUST go undetected...failure is not an option.

So...as you can imagine, we failed it 3 times, first time was due to clumsiness, second time was due to not being fully aware of the guard's movements (One came from behind while I was in drone mode) and the third was due to missing a shot with the sniper rifle (Which turns out after switching to another sniper rifle, I was happier)

My point is, sometimes forced objectives aren't a bad thing. personally I do prefer where you can choose your additional challenges such as maybe for replay-ability you complete a mission as intended then you can go back and add "handicaps" to the challenge such as "Only use this weapon", "Go undetected"

I understand that some people aren't interested in game-play inspired by rogue-like games/hardcore mode (where you have one life, get as far as possible etc.) but I am also aware that some aren't interested in games that hold your hand either (believe me, I found this particularly painful considering I went from Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind to Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion)

I guess in a way, I do like the best of both worlds...allowing a player to customise their experience by toggling/turning on and off settings, especially since personally I will play a game a number of ways (usually as intended firstly to get a feel of the game then hardcore after just to give that challenging aspect)

So for example and I know this will come back to bite me: Splinter Cell: Conviction...played the game to death, resurrected it and played it again all because of co-op and the game modes like Hunter and Infiltration. The game as intended provides the player with silenced weapons but also with loud weapons and sonar. My friend and I played the game for several hours learning the mechanics and once we felt confident enough or that we played through all the content, we switched it up by handing out our own handicaps....so, melee only, this quickly escalated to "shotguns only", which in turn created a new way for us to play, which was called "Rollie Rollie Shotgun"...where you simply roll towards your target and blast them with the shottie.

In short what I am trying to say is....games are coming to a point where they have to cater for many various play-styles but those play-styles also have to fit within the world and the world's reality. My "run and gun" friend for example doesn't necessarily like forced stealth missions and will avoid them the best he can but he's also not exactly a person that likes to do side missions

Difficulty in games is somewhat relative I find, I will always play a game first-time in Normal mode, mostly to experience the story with a slight challenge. Those that go straight from hard or insane...hats off to you but not for me until I know the game a little :P

I tend to be the type of player who likes to tweak his settngs on any game. So your comments on {I guess in a way, I do like the best of both worlds...allowing a player to customise their experience by toggling/turning on and off settings, especially since personally I will play a game a number of ways (usually as intended firstly to get a feel of the game then hardcore after just to give that challenging aspect)}, work for me. I hope your listening devs.