🛈 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. #11
    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???
    Share this post

  2. #12
    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..."
     1 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  3. #13
    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.....
    Share this post

  4. #14
    HorTyS's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    5,227
    Originally Posted by GameGuru2018 Go to original post
    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.
     2 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  5. #15
    Originally Posted by HorTyS Go to original post
    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
    Share this post

  6. #16
    HorTyS's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    5,227
    Originally Posted by Sabotur Go to original post
    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.
    Share this post

  7. #17
    HorTyS's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    5,227
    Originally Posted by Sabotur Go to original post
    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.
    Share this post

  8. #18
    HorTyS's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    5,227
    Originally Posted by Sabotur Go to original post
    Me too. And no, videogames are not just for fun.
    What videogames do you play that give you no pleasure whatsoever?
    Share this post

  9. #19
    "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!
    Share this post

  10. #20
    HorTyS's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    5,227
    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!
    Share this post