🛈 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

    Thoughts on reports that FC Primal is a reskin

    So a true reskin may be going to far. But after seeing the maps side by side its hard not to notice the similarities.

    Therefore I just wanted to find out what the fans in the forums thought of this development.


    My thoughts:

    We knew going into it that some assets such as animal models and animations would closely represent those of previous far cry games. But personally I did not expect to see the similarities in geography and topography between the 2 games.

    It almost feels like an expansion of sorts. Now to be fair to UBI I like this game so far. and to call it a true expansion does seem slightly unfair based on the amount of content that I have seen already in this game. (I am about 15 hours in) But I still can't help but feel slightly disappointed learning that the environments were similar.

    The saddest part is that if UBI was upfront from the start and said: "can you imagine what the world of Kyrat (I think thats what it was in FC4) would have been like 10,000 years ago...well we did!!!" This could have softened the blow for me...


    Once again I am still a fan of this game, but this did undermine my enjoyment to some extent.... stupid as that may seem.

    Thoughts.......
    Share this post

  2. #2
    The thing is that they just didn't do anything with it, which makes it feel like they did a lazy job.

    If Ubisoft would've created just some structures, some landmarks present in both games, then people wouldn't see it as a "reskin" but as a "easter egg". But by never mentioning the fact that they'd be using the same rough geography and even claiming that the game takes place in Central Europe (where as Far Cry 4 is in Asia) they just bit themselves in the arse.
    What could've been seen as a nice link between the two games is now seen as a lazy copy-paste.

    Personally I think people are overreacting, because:

    1. It's hardly a copy-paste. The only thing they re-used was probably the heightmap. Every single location in Primal is different from its counterpart in Far Cry 4 in almost every imaginable way. Vegetation is different. Slopes are different. Every rock, tent and cave has been placed by hand from the start and is unique to Primal. At no location in the game can you look around you and say "Wait a minute, this feels familiar" without checking the in-game world map to confirm. Which brings me to the second point...

    2. If there hadn't been an in-game world map available, people would never even figure out that Kyrat and Oros are roughly the same place. And that proves to me that Ubisoft did a great job at making Oros a distinctive location that does not feel familiar to previous games.
    Share this post

  3. #3
    Markaccus's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Newcastle, England
    Posts
    683
    Have to say, even before i read this, and not having read any reports elswhere..... i DID feel like I was wandering in kyrat once or twice. But it doesn't bother me to be honest.
    Share this post

  4. #4
    HorTyS's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    5,227
    People are over-reacting about it. In the thread I made earlier about this topic posting the maps themselves You can see that they actually changed a decent amount adding mountains and hills to cordon off some areas and open others up & such. I suppose it makes alot more sense about why they were able to get the game made as quickly as they did considering how much they available to them as far as game world...
    Share this post

  5. #5
    The increasingly obvious fact is that Far Cry Primal started life out as a spinoff expansion in the same vein as Blood Dragon, but some Ubisoft exec. saw the potential for a $60 price tag and dictated that the dev team was now packaging Primal as a stand alone Far Cry title. This is evident in every way, from the re-used maps, assets, and animations, and from the embarrassingly short main quest line.

    It's a shame, because Oros is quite beautiful and I have a lot of respect for a AAA title delving into a time period that's largely untapped in modern gaming, but this is just such an obvious rush job cash grab and frankly I'm bummed that I spent $60 on it.
    Share this post

  6. #6
    Originally Posted by flying_saucerz Go to original post
    The increasingly obvious fact is that Far Cry Primal started life out as a spinoff expansion in the same vein as Blood Dragon, but some Ubisoft exec. saw the potential for a $60 price tag and dictated that the dev team was now packaging Primal as a stand alone Far Cry title. This is evident in every way, from the re-used maps, assets, and animations, and from the embarrassingly short main quest line.

    It's a shame, because Oros is quite beautiful and I have a lot of respect for a AAA title delving into a time period that's largely untapped in modern gaming, but this is just such an obvious rush job cash grab and frankly I'm bummed that I spent $60 on it.
    The game cost me $100 i got the pre-order collectors edition i feel so cheated
    Share this post

  7. #7
    HorTyS's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    5,227
    Originally Posted by toadyshadow Go to original post
    The game cost me $100 i got the pre-order collectors edition i feel so cheated
    Only got yourself to blame for forkin' that much over, this being a re-skin/ expansion has been obvious for a while....
    Share this post

  8. #8
    I have no beef with them reusing the height map data as a starting point. Only beef is that the actual end map is smaller than FC4 and yet I am pretty sure some early comments claimed it was equal in size to FC4. Otherwise I think calling it a reskin given the amount of research and so on that has gone into the background is too harsh.

    What seems to be apparent at least from the vocal part of the online community is that the old Ubisoft HUD would have been better scrapped for this project with a new more period appropriate interface put in its place, or do you folks think I am putting too many words into too many mouths with that statement??

    Not telling the community that it was using the height maps of FC4 earlier is certainly bad publicity as that seems mostly what the internet is talking about right now in relation to Primal and I wonder how that blunder will affect future sales.
    Share this post