1. #1

    Hours of Darkness DLC - why so negative?

    I did not buy FC5, but just started playing it with UPlay+. So I am way far behind the discussions of the time. Especially the release of Far Cry 5's DLC "Hours of Darkness".

    After playing it, I was curious about other people's opinions and was surprised that for example on Steam, the user reviews were utterly negative.

    "Short" and "boring" were the most used words.

    While I can understand the "short" argument in theory - after all, this DLC was called "Hours" of Darkness, not "Hour of Darkness" - the way the majority of people seem to play is running and gunning through every FPS they come across? Speedrunning through every shooter.

    I myself, embraced the setting and was deliberately playing slowly, enjoying my walks from point to point, the way I would play ARMA2/3 or older Far Cry games … or enjoy a war movie, building up the tension before the next gun fight. It took me an hour plus to get to clear the first prison camp and AA gun. And there is more to do. It was the length of a Vietnam movie, I was able to play in.

    So, 'short' might not apply to all players. Yet, people tag this DLC as short. Someone said, he finished everything in 2 hours on their first playthrough. I do not know how this is possible.

    About the boring part...

    This DLC offers the same kind of gameplay I know from previous Far Cry games and DLCs. How is this 'boring', when - mechanically - it is in line with everything prior? You get to 'liberate' people and places. You get to play stealthy and or 'loud' (stationary machine guns, explosives...). While it encourages stealth gameplay, it does allow you to play the way you want.

    It is always discouraging to read people's personal opinions using the royal "we" as if they speak for everyone else. "We want …" is irritative to read. Equally, some flaws in any game is taken out of context and nailed on the wall as that single thing is 'ruining the game'. There are so many nauseating tropes players writing reviews seem to fall back to: "I wanted to like it …", "boring gameplay …", et cetera, et cetera - we all read our fair share of these vanilla 'reviews'.

    Of course, with every game sold, there is the 'silent majority', which never write reviews, never create accounts on reddit or visit game forums of the publisher. They are literally millions and just play the game.

    For someone like me, who bought Battlefield Bad Company 2 Vietnam Rising Storm 2 Vietnam and never was satisfied with the multiplayer nonsense that occurs in these type of games, "Hours of Darkness" offers what I was always looking for: a Vietnam game experience, where I can stealth kill and or shoot people and play my own Rambo movie. It is that kind of cinematic experience which this game does offer … for me at least.

    I really do not understand what those negative Steam reviewers imagine these DLCs would offer to them.
    Share this post

  2. #2
    I was one of the negatives.

    The idea itself and sound of what Hours of Darkness presented sounded fantastic and just what I was looking for in a Far Cry set in a war. Unfortunately many including myself didn't like it because it offered too little with very little variety. Much of the map was very empty and most of the time enemies would spawn almost every 10 seconds, not really giving players much time or opportunity to gather themselves and figure out what to do or where to go.

    The weapons added were mainly just model changes. The M16 sounded and functioned exactly the same as the AR-C. It just didn't feel unique and just felt like a massive reskin made in FC Arcade. Much of the environment was copy-paste, there was no reward for completing all the objectives in any mode and it felt like one massive chore that wasn't fun. There were no tanks, Huey attack helicopters, napalm, APCs, or other stuff you would expect in a massive armed conflict.

    For me, the only redeeming factors were the alligators, agent orange, and airstrikes from the F4 Phantoms.
    Share this post