🛈 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
    LaMOi's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    3,650

    So, Ubisoft - when we getting some Dinosaurs?

    Everyone has seen the suspect 'no comment' interviews.......


    When are we getting some Dinosaur DLC?
    Share this post

  2. #2
    HorTyS's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    5,227
    I don't know that there was really any more to the suspicion of dino DLC beyond the single "no comment" reply in that one interview. I hope they do add it, but there is certainly not enough evidence to believe that it will at this point. Depending on what they did, that would be DLC I'd be willing to pay for.... Also a great opportunity for them to add a new game + mode along with it, wink wink...
    Share this post

  3. #3

    Dinos...

    Hi guys,

    I honestly hope that Dinos will not implement this game. Basically I dislike them, but the main reason not to implement them is that "few" millions years that separate humans from dinos...

    I would like to see instead some more hystorical Far Cries, Like oriental edition around 1000 AC (for example a ninja has very wide arange of weapons, just like any for cry games)
    Share this post

  4. #4
    HorTyS's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    5,227
    Originally Posted by gmezei76 Go to original post
    Hi guys,

    I honestly hope that Dinos will not implement this game. Basically I dislike them, but the main reason not to implement them is that "few" millions years that separate humans from dinos...

    I would like to see instead some more hystorical Far Cries, Like oriental edition around 1000 AC (for example a ninja has very wide arange of weapons, just like any for cry games)
    Far Cry is not a historically accurate franchise that has to conform to actual timelines, so that negates your point about the discrepancy with the actual co-existence of man and dinosaur, and you disliking dinosaurs isn't really a valid reason not to do what would arguably be the most interesting DLC Ubi could do for this particular game. Your suggestion of other historical settings for FarCry also seems much more suited to Assassin's Creed, as that is the IP about historically accurate time periods, with ninjas meshing well with the established gameplay of that franchise far better than with FarCry, which up until this game, had been a modern day shooter set in exotic locales, a premise I hope they return to...
    Share this post

  5. #5
    LaMOi's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    3,650
    Originally Posted by HorTyS Go to original post
    Far Cry is not a historically accurate franchise that has to conform to actual timelines, so that negates your point about the discrepancy with the actual co-existence of man and dinosaur, and you disliking dinosaurs isn't really a valid reason not to do what would arguably be the most interesting DLC Ubi could do for this particular game. Your suggestion of other historical settings for FarCry also seems much more suited to Assassin's Creed, as that is the IP about historically accurate time periods, with ninjas meshing well with the established gameplay of that franchise far better than with FarCry, which up until this game, had been a modern day shooter set in exotic locales, a premise I hope they return to...
    Totally agree. Realism has nothing to do with it.

    Ubisoft did the research they did the customer feedback survey -- EVERYONE voted for a FAR CRY game with Dinosaurs, I would find it very strange for Ubisoft to ignore their own survey! Plus I totally agree with Hortys it would totally make sense in this setting.... I would love to hunt Dinos!!

    I would pay (you hear me Ubisoft, PAY cash!) for Dino's DLC
    Share this post

  6. #6
    Have to admit the idea of someone in the neolithic finding a lost world of surviving dinosaurs might be almost original as I do not think that has ever been done before.

    Sure there has been lots of lost worlds but they are all modern or american civil war period adventurers or some such, no one has thought about cavemen era folk somehow encountering creatures surviving from an even earlier age. Sure you get poor films with dinosaurs and cave men thrown together in them and so on but again usually the central cast are intrepid modern day people. You have to wonder what culturally tribal people like the Wenja, Izila and Udam would make of the Terrible Lizards. How far could the Beast Mastery go?

    I think if they were to do this OTT stuff some crazy underground world or under ice world would be the way to do it. Keeping the more historical purity of the standard game area and the madcap a bit removed.
    Share this post

  7. #7
    HorTyS's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    5,227
    Originally Posted by vic_must_play Go to original post
    Have to admit the idea of someone in the neolithic finding a lost world of surviving dinosaurs might be almost original as I do not think that has ever been done before.

    Sure there has been lots of lost worlds but they are all modern or american civil war period adventurers or some such, no one has thought about cavemen era folk somehow encountering creatures surviving from an even earlier age. Sure you get poor films with dinosaurs and cave men thrown together in them and so on but again usually the central cast are intrepid modern day people. You have to wonder what culturally tribal people like the Wenja, Izila and Udam would make of the Terrible Lizards. How far could the Beast Mastery go?

    I think if they were to do this OTT stuff some crazy underground world or under ice world would be the way to do it. Keeping the more historical purity of the standard game area and the madcap a bit removed.
    Nah man, just plop some dinos into Oros. If this DLC were to happen, Ubi wouldn't make an all new landmass for it, thats too much work. Imagine taming raptors, or those little ink spitters that got Newman in the first jurassic park...
    Share this post

  8. #8
    Originally Posted by HorTyS Go to original post
    Nah man, just plop some dinos into Oros. If this DLC were to happen, Ubi wouldn't make an all new landmass for it, thats too much work. Imagine taming raptors, or those little ink spitters that got Newman in the first jurassic park...
    As much as I think a far cry with dinosaurs would be cool, I just don't think Primal is the place for it. Ubi did go to some decent effort to retain some sense of realism (though the Udam resembling neandertals is pretty suspect considering they were long-gone by 10,000 BCE). I really would have a hard time swallowing dinosaurs just thrown into Oros, or even some 'lost world' as some have suggested. As has been mentioned, about 60 million years separates the homo genus from dinosaurs.

    Primal is all about the Mesolithic era - humankind's revolutionary steps towards civilisation; it's a formula that works. Humans and dinosaurs together? Aside from sounding like a creationists wet dream, it really is a totally different game you're talking about.

    As far as the dinosaurs being implemented, Jurassic Park (surprise, surprise) was full of serious and deliberate misrepresentations.
    Velociraptors were generally pretty small, maybe about the size of a goose. They were basically flightless birds. Though I did read once that some fossils were uncovered of some bigger raptor, it still wasn't the nine-foot tall killing machine from Jurassic Park.
    Ironically, the dinosaur that got Newman in the book was a Dilophosaurus - which in reality is very similar to the way raptors are depicted in JP. These things were big, taller than a human if I'm not mistaken, and long. Now they were killing machines, but as far as I know, there is no evidence that they were venomous or had a frill.

    Then there's the issue of which period. Stegosaurus is often popularly depicted fighting with T-Rex, but in reality, more time separates those two than T-Rex from us.

    It's a game, I get it, but a lot of us like history and the attention to detail when real historical periods are depicted. Clearly Ubi thought so too when they hired anthropological-linguists to essentially reconstruct a long-dead language. And frankly, that is ****ing cool.

    It just brings me back to my earlier point - you guys really are talking about a different game that has some elements of Primal but is qualitatively different (much in the way FCP is similar but different to FC4).

    All that being said, Blood Dragon was totally ridiculous but a huge success and a whole lot of fun, so you might just get what you're hoping for
    Share this post

  9. #9
    HorTyS's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    5,227
    Originally Posted by mercuryspooning Go to original post
    As much as I think a far cry with dinosaurs would be cool, I just don't think Primal is the place for it. Ubi did go to some decent effort to retain some sense of realism (though the Udam resembling neandertals is pretty suspect considering they were long-gone by 10,000 BCE). I really would have a hard time swallowing dinosaurs just thrown into Oros, or even some 'lost world' as some have suggested. As has been mentioned, about 60 million years separates the homo genus from dinosaurs.

    Primal is all about the Mesolithic era - humankind's revolutionary steps towards civilisation; it's a formula that works. Humans and dinosaurs together? Aside from sounding like a creationists wet dream, it really is a totally different game you're talking about.

    As far as the dinosaurs being implemented, Jurassic Park (surprise, surprise) was full of serious and deliberate misrepresentations.
    Velociraptors were generally pretty small, maybe about the size of a goose. They were basically flightless birds. Though I did read once that some fossils were uncovered of some bigger raptor, it still wasn't the nine-foot tall killing machine from Jurassic Park.
    Ironically, the dinosaur that got Newman in the book was a Dilophosaurus - which in reality is very similar to the way raptors are depicted in JP. These things were big, taller than a human if I'm not mistaken, and long. Now they were killing machines, but as far as I know, there is no evidence that they were venomous or had a frill.

    Then there's the issue of which period. Stegosaurus is often popularly depicted fighting with T-Rex, but in reality, more time separates those two than T-Rex from us.

    It's a game, I get it, but a lot of us like history and the attention to detail when real historical periods are depicted. Clearly Ubi thought so too when they hired anthropological-linguists to essentially reconstruct a long-dead language. And frankly, that is ****ing cool.

    It just brings me back to my earlier point - you guys really are talking about a different game that has some elements of Primal but is qualitatively different (much in the way FCP is similar but different to FC4).

    All that being said, Blood Dragon was totally ridiculous but a huge success and a whole lot of fun, so you might just get what you're hoping for
    No offense, but you are way over thinking this. For one thing, Primal is the absolute best place for Dino DLC, secondly, the main game doesn't need to be altered, it can retain the "sense of realism" Ubi put "effort" into, DLC is where they can just experiment & have fun, like Blood Dragon as you mentioned, one of the all time best DLC / expansions Ubi hath ever produced. I don't think anyone is suggesting the DLC simply be in the form of randomly adding dinosaurs to the existing game, but even if that was the case, again, FC is not a super serious, ultra-realistic franchise that is bound to accuracy or historical realism. They could even swap around some character models and change the protagonists arms and say these are different cavemen from an earlier time, there is no reason why a DLC pack couldn't introduce dinosaurs. It wouldn't suddenly tarnish the historical depiction of the vanilla campaign, so there is honestly no reason to be against the idea, because if you've no interest in the concept, you could simply not buy this hypothetical, probably not actually happening anyway DLC.
    Share this post

  10. #10
    Originally Posted by HorTyS Go to original post
    No offense, but you are way over thinking this.
    Ha, I'm sure you're right - hazard of my job to over think things.
    Then again, if we can't discuss these things here, where can we?

    DLC probably is an appropriate place for the dinosaur addition but, in my opinion, not the most appropriate place.

    In any case, if it's done well, I'm sure I'll purchase it.
    Share this post