This topic is painful to read. I have played Far Cry since 2005, and the main selling point for the exact reason why I wanted to purchase the game was from one simple video:
I played the single player first for all Far Cry games. However, the map editor in Far Cry Instincts allowed players to create their imagination and playground, leading to thousands of downloading user made content. The most popular game on the original Xbox is Halo 2, and I played that game a lot. However, I played Far Cry Instincts far more than I ever did with Halo 2. The single player for Far Cry Instincts and Far Cry Instincts Evolution were both linear and short. When Halo 2 first introduced downloadable maps with a price tag, I realized that many players playing Far Cry Instincts can make better maps than Bungie ever did for Halo 2, and they are all free.
Far Cry 2 also had a video giving emphasis on the map editor:
Far Cry 3 also has a map editor, but Ubisoft Massive ruined the multiplayer, which left the map editor and multiplayer result of so many untapped potential. Halo 3, Halo Reach and Halo 4 may have Forge, but they are so far behind in terms of how powerful the map editor is from any Far Cry game that features the map editor.
If you think Far Cry is all about single player, you're wrong. You think that developers should focus a lot more on single player? They are already achieving that for Far Cry 4. Remember, Ubisoft usually have separate branches work on different projects. Ubisoft is a huge company, and they can develop multiple games at the same time time. Take a look at Splinter Cell Blacklist, the single player and co-op portion of the game was developed by the new studio Ubisoft Toronto. The multiplayer for Splinter Cell Blacklist was developed by Ubisoft Montreal, and their vision of Spies vs Mercs. In my personal opinion, both Ubisoft Montreal and Ubisoft Toronto did an excellent job. Ubisoft Montreal is currently working on the single player and co-op for Far Cry 4, while Ubisoft Red Storm are working on the multiplayer side of the game.
I hate it when people believe Ubisoft are wasting their resources on different parts of the game, and expects that all branches working in one game should have a single project of developing only the single player. It's very selfish to say that Ubisoft should disregard multiplayer and keep single player, or the other way around. That means you believe that Ubisoft should only make one crowd happy while leaving another crowd disappointed. It happened to Far Cry 3, the single player crowd love the single player, while the multiplayer crowd are tremendously disappointed of what happened. Now there are people expecting that multiplayer shouldn't exist because its "just a bonus". No, it's not a bonus to me, it's an enormous section of the game that is a must have. As for me, I want both single player and multiplayer to be impressive and amazing.
I agree with youOriginally Posted by KrAzY1337 Go to original post![]()