This game had me so excited to play that the wait was intolerable. I get the game and to much disappointmentioned it was by far the shortest far cry game ever. Not worth the 80 bucks for the deluxe editions which I'm not even sure there was really much of difference between the basic or not. Not much creativity put into this game. Go back to making them like 3 and 4.
Welcome to the forums, STGnar3. Sounds like you played through really quickly! Did you complete all the side quests, get all the collectibles, etc? Did you try playing on the Expert setting?Originally Posted by STGnar3 Go to original post
He has a point though Booma, the campaign in this game is super short. Side-quests, collectibles and difficulty settings shouldn't be the determining factors in a game's length & value wouldn't you agree? Fact of the matter is there are 13 main narrative missions, with grindy-fetch quests required to unlock access to them in order to progress. With games out there like the witcher 3, there is a higher standard expected. The open world nature of the game shouldn't be an excuse to reduce the central narrative content IMO... just sayin'.... I'm not as bummed on it as STGnar3 here is, but he's got a point...Originally Posted by UbiBooma Go to original post
This, I'd also like to throw in my two cents and say that crafting upgrades and animal taming was far too easy, I'd completed my trees within the first 30 percent of the game. In no way would I say the game was disappointing though, just short.Originally Posted by HorTyS Go to original post
Originally Posted by Porkipine19Hatlo Go to original post
It has it's shortcomings but I am enjoying it.... Playing on Expert now...
we experienced batari AND ull even on lesser occasions than we experienced pagan min, no? well, feels like it anyway. i really thought they were gonna add a convictive characterization to the antagonists. thought that we might get a good plot out of each asset but it was short, dull and itself lacked conviction as a full campaign. the fact of the matter is, get this game if you like the mesothilic era and love to dandle about for hours on end, not for a developed storyline.
I havent completed it yet so this is just my opinion..
Its a stone age game guys.. what did we really expect? Deep dialouge? Society?
Hunters grunted basic commands and gathered.. in this sense i see the story quite beliveable.. this is what i imagined the stone age to be like...voilent,densley populated with animals and horrible people that have no value of life.
Maybe a bit rough around the edges but i think its not as bad as people are saying
The story although not bad is just ridiculously short. A game focused on singleplayer should have a story twice the length primal has. I know we've been spoilt by the witcher 3s 50+ hour story, but this just takes the piss.
Also most of the upgrades where achieved within the first few hours of the game. I never used club upgrade 3 or spear upgrade 3, because I had the resources to upgrade past them.
My only other downside was the lack of more ice/stone age animals. and the repetitiveness of the tameable beasts.
Oh, I would also like to add I'm not a fan of this new language, I didn't get a stone age vibe from it, i cant put my finger on it, but it just felt off.
Video games serve as a medium for us to experience situations we never can.Originally Posted by BAPTISTE121 Go to original post
Developers have a creative license to make these situations entertaining. Using the setting - 10,000 bc- as an excuse to cut corners becomes void the moment you instruct an Owl to fire bomb a settlement full of cannibals. Is it okay to accept that in game but suggest that deep characterisation has no place because its the stone age?