🛈 Announcement
Greetings! Far Cry forums are now archived and accessible in read-only mode, please go to the new platform to discuss the game.
  1. #1

    Far Cry has become a Virtual Barbie Doll

    For my money, Far Cry 2 was the last (and arguably the best) Far Cry experience. Now I know there are tons of people who would disagree with that statement and from their perspective I can understand why they say negative things about it. But let's leave that debate aside for a moment and think about FC3 onward.

    Far Cry 3 and its supermod (aka FC4) are the exact same game in essence. Now we have Primal coming out and again it has the exact same structure. All three games are just wearing different clothes...just like a Barbie doll. UbiSoft has released a behind the scenes video where the staff claims this is an example of flexibility. Is this what everyone is so jacked up about and willing to fork over 50 or more dollars?

    Far Cry has become a glorified theme park with so many unrelated activities it's practically impossible to ever feel immersion. If all a person wants is the ability to run around in a virtual world and do heavily repetitious stuff then this series is for you. But if you want real immersion and the need to think before executing a plan then you will be sorely disappointed.

    The Far Cry franchise has become one of the many AAA titles on the market that are nothing more than an interactive movie released in a series. COD, Assassin's Creed, Star Wars and Battlefield are just the same. Major publishing houses are now working the gaming crowd with a formula for making money. Now I understand it's imperative to make money in order to continue producing product. But why must it be such that games boil down to the same old same old endlessly?

    I don't enjoy playing a game where my ability to interact (or act at all) is reduced to screen prompted QTE's. That is very obviously a development shortcut as it would take much more coding to give the player the ability to do detailed actions instead of watching a short video depicting pre-recorded options from a menu (aka "takedowns") take place. I think if you take this trend to its natural conclusion you will see games becoming more and more automated while keeping the customer distracted by claiming visual realism (graphics) as being the hallmark of realistic gaming...which is completely false.

    Clearly I will not be buying this game but wanted to make these points to hopefully raise people's awareness of what's going on. I have been gaming since computer gaming was invented so I think I can draw on experience here.
    Share this post

  2. #2
    Ya this is disappointing and it's maybe getting worse with Assassins creed and watch dogs floating about. It's starting to fell like all ubisoft games play the same.

    I also kind of wonder about the cost of it too because it can't be cheap to remodel the same game over and over. Wouldn't it be smarter to do less visual changes and more gameplay changes?
    Share this post

  3. #3
    Originally Posted by Viragoxv535 Go to original post


    I want to point out that Far Cry 2 is much more repetitive if you compare the plethora of activities you can engage with.
    That being said, i also preferred Far Cry 2 style over Far Cry 3/4 but i still have enjoyed 3 (using various mods to enhance realism). I have mixed feelings about primal: while i like the overall environment i actually dislike the taming side as it looks quite ridiculous to me to be believable; I just hope that the taming is an optional and not a mandatory choice and should be removed altogether by playing the highest difficulties.

    I understand your point. For me FC2 was always more about getting to a goal and what would be necessary to do so. The goal was just a way point so to speak. I'm attracted to games that are based on realism and are not overblown with bells and whistles. Little things like being able to open the map in-game with the game is still playing make a big difference. It is a Spartan type of game and had its drawbacks but that could have been improved without destroying the immersion it created by turning it into what FC3 is.

    Also, my first reaction to the beast control thing in Primal was basically the same...reminded me of the movie, "The BeastMaster" in the 80's. If you watch the trailer carefully you can tell the game is executing a take down sequence with the animal charging while the player's character goes up behind a guy with a knife.
    Share this post

  4. #4
    HorTyS's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    5,227
    There really doesn't seem to be much to the whole "taming" mechanic, it seems to simplistic if all you have to do is throw meat down and you can tame any beast by holding square or x or whatever. Theoretically once you progress to the point where you can tame animals you could run around taming all the animals right away, and that seems like a balance issue. I'm most disappointed in how basic and underwhelming the combat looks. the bow works like the last few games, no surprise there, using a spear is either throwing it or doing the most basic of stab motions, but the club combat i've seen is nothing more than generic swipes, there doesn't seem to be any sort of intuitive back and forth to the combat. I didn't see a block mechanic or some sort of counter system, it's just swinging it randomly and having to take hits from your attacker from the looks of it. Pretty unsatisfying looking.

    Personally I still enjoy the formula they've created for these FC games, but it's definitely wearing thin and the fact that this game barely differentiates itself from that formula is just going to make it get old even quicker. I got over FC4 alot faster because of how much like 3 it was, Primal will probably be even quicker than 4 was...
    Share this post

  5. #5
    Originally Posted by HorTyS Go to original post
    There really doesn't seem to be much to the whole "taming" mechanic, it seems to simplistic if all you have to do is throw meat down and you can tame any beast by holding square or x or whatever. Theoretically once you progress to the point where you can tame animals you could run around taming all the animals right away, and that seems like a balance issue. I'm most disappointed in how basic and underwhelming the combat looks. the bow works like the last few games, no surprise there, using a spear is either throwing it or doing the most basic of stab motions, but the club combat i've seen is nothing more than generic swipes, there doesn't seem to be any sort of intuitive back and forth to the combat. I didn't see a block mechanic or some sort of counter system, it's just swinging it randomly and having to take hits from your attacker from the looks of it. Pretty unsatisfying looking.

    Personally I still enjoy the formula they've created for these FC games, but it's definitely wearing thin and the fact that this game barely differentiates itself from that formula is just going to make it get old even quicker. I got over FC4 alot faster because of how much like 3 it was, Primal will probably be even quicker than 4 was...
    In FC2 if you try to kill an enemy with the machete and they see you coming they will push you away if they can and then attack. This cannot happen in the later Far Cry releases because the close combat is all pre-recorded QTE's. So in essence all you need to do in FC3 onward is just get close enough for the screen prompt to appear. That's the sum total of close combat in terms of player interaction. From there the rest is automated.
    Share this post

  6. #6
    HorTyS's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    5,227
    Originally Posted by scrapser Go to original post
    In FC2 if you try to kill an enemy with the machete and they see you coming they will push you away if they can and then attack. This cannot happen in the later Far Cry releases because the close combat is all pre-recorded QTE's. So in essence all you need to do in FC3 onward is just get close enough for the screen prompt to appear. That's the sum total of close combat in terms of player interaction. From there the rest is automated.
    Ok, whoa, the takedowns from FC3/4 are not QTEs, they're a single button press stealth kill, and you couldn't do them if you were to far away by the time they saw you. FC2's machete was worthless AND it took up a permanent weapon slot. I LOVE the takedowns in these games, thats not what I'm talking about here. The setting neccesatates the removal of guns, but the combat they've put in it's place is rudimentary at best. It looks like the most basic, un-fleshed out core system I've ever seen, there looks to be NO depth to it what-so-ever.

    Originally Posted by Viragoxv535 Go to original post
    Well, at least this time they have removed the takedown if the enemy is aware of your presence
    You could only takedown enemies aware of you in FC3/4 for a very short window once you were spotted before the enemy could callout or react, that system doesn't look any different in primal...
    Share this post

  7. #7
    Originally Posted by HorTyS Go to original post
    Ok, whoa, the takedowns from FC3/4 are not QTEs, they're a single button press stealth kill, and you couldn't do them if you were to far away by the time they saw you. FC2's machete was worthless AND it took up a permanent weapon slot. I LOVE the takedowns in these games, thats not what I'm talking about here. The setting neccesatates the removal of guns, but the combat they've put in it's place is rudimentary at best. It looks like the most basic, un-fleshed out core system I've ever seen, there looks to be NO depth to it what-so-ever.



    You could only takedown enemies aware of you in FC3/4 for a very short window once you were spotted before the enemy could callout or react, that system doesn't look any different in primal...
    I'm not sure what your point is about takedowns so I will describe the experience from my perspective using FC2 versus all the later releases. In FC2 I can sneak up on an enemy. There is no screen prompt for when to attack. You have to judge if you're close enough or not just like in real life. You can then choose where to hit the enemy (head, arms, body, waist area, legs). If you get too close, no matter where you aim the attack produces a sequence where the enemy falls on his back and you plant the machete in his chest. But if you strike just outside that limit then the sequence produced is a strike to the area you aimed for resulting in a (usually) stealthy kill. And if not close enough altogether it becomes a miss and the enemy is alerted to your presence.

    In all the later releases you sneak up on the enemy (which is not that difficult), get a screen prompt and press a button then watch the take down unfold. Where is the sense of immersion or realism in that? It may be fun to watch a few times but I don't buy games to watch them play themselves. Of course if you get spotted everything changes and you cannot do the stealth attack anymore but that's beside the point.
    Share this post