🛈 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
    and it would be pretty pointless if they were gonna spoil the whole game as soon as it's revealed buy answering every question about it and pointing out every feature it will support and not.
    The lengths some of you guys go to defend them is pretty absurd. We should know what we are getting before playing the game, at least in the fundamentals. Legacy of the Void isn't coming out for 6+ months and we already know everything they have currently planned for release. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/star...void-announced The difference here is that they have announced everything just for the damn beta, they update the community for a single patch change weeks in advance. They are doing some massive fundamental changes to how StarCraft is played, (mostly to make it more casual friendly,) but get this, we didnt have to wait till a bloody leak just days away from release to know.

    Originally Posted by Ghost_Fart Go to original post
    I don't doubt the SP capabilities are awesome in the editor, but the devs have been dodging the #1 question asked to them. The response has always been crickets. A simple no would have suffised. You tell me how are they being honest? I believe they just want us to buy it and then find out we can't make mp maps but oh well, they got our money once again!
    Yes, the problem is that they have stayed silent only to limit the amount of negative feedback prior to the games launch. It is dishonest. We've been asking the same questions for so long, only to be answered with "soon" or "the editor will be better than ever" and "we learned alot from fc3's mp and fc4 will be a vast imporvement." Stuff like that is shady, and these forums are a joke for interaction between developers and the community.

    Its probably not the best idea to attack this Alex guy, but he comes off as a pompous schmuck, and he deserves at least some of the blame.
    Share this post

  2. #12
    Farcryisdead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    DapperHayden is a LIAR AND CANT BE TRUSTED
    Posts
    2,409
    Ubisoft stood by and let us all talk to each other about how we cant wait to make multiplayer maps with the fc4 map editor. they let us carry on thinking we would have what all fc games have had in the past. they kept this up for months and months. but all along they knew that we will never make mp maps and they kept silent. we asked, they ignored we asked again they ignored, we kept asking we kept getting ignored. this is the reason i refuse to purchase fc4. it's not just the fact that the editor is now pointless. even worse was the way they kept it hidden from us for as long as they could up to release date. if i purchase fc4 it will be like saying to ubisoft, thanks for doing that to us. i wont rant or swear it's pointless. all i will say is UBISOFT YOU DISAPPOINT ME
    Share this post

  3. #13
    The map editor is definitely a feature that makes the series stand out, and it has given us a tool for infinite longevity and fun in the game, even though our community has not grown very big compared to the following some other games have.
    If the game were given more attention marketing-wise, this would not be a problem. The campaign portions get seemingly 90% of the marketing attention, while the PVP and Editor are still sitting at the bus stop, waiting to be picked up. It's no wonder the features dont perform well. Barely anybody knows about them.

    We all know Far Cry 3's PVP mode wasn't a big success, and so does Ubisoft, so obviously some changes had to be made for Far Cry 4 (what does anyone have to lose from that, right?). So they decided to not let us create multiplayer maps in the editor, and even though I think that sucks, I don't think we have the right to call them out for doing something wrong. It's their game, and they have to do what they think is right.
    They are going by "Data" from FC3. The reason FC3 multiplayer failed is because of the terrible design choices that they made for it (IE gimped sharing, no vehicles.) Meanwhile, the community is attempting to communicate with them, stating that they should look at how FC2 did it. Look at Far Cry 2. It's multiplayer was bland, controlled terribly, and was worse compared to FC3 IMO. But the EDITOR is what gave that game's muliplayer for YEARS after it's launch. So what that says to me is, they blame US for it's failure, because we did not conform to their broken features. After FC3 launched, an Ubi mod launched a thread dedicated to feedback: (http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php...POILERS-PLEASE) and stated: "Your feedback will be read by the team, so please be constructive, concise, and respectful. " claiming that Ubi was open to that feedback, and how it can improve the game, and the NEXT game. At least that is the perception they gave us. And in this industry, Perception = Reality. So instead of using our feedback for improvement, they tore out the feature altogether, and left FC3 to die, without any further response other than "We're listening".

    And to your second point, about having a right to calling them out for it. Remember, that Perception = Reality here. When the same feature has been in the game for FOUR STRAIGHT ENTRIES, Far Cry continues to be great, because the FANS allow it to be. If the game did not receive any kind of success, Ubisoft would abandon it like an orphaned child (See ZombiU). Publishers like Activision and EA sell WAY more because they have an open dialogue with the folks that give them their money. The job I work in real life is in customer loyalty. I handle customers (or rather train people to handle customers now, since I've been promoted :P) that are displeased in some way with the service we have provided for them. If we did not have an open dialogue with those customers, even though it's a minority of the interactions with customers we get, we would lose all of those customers so somebody that can do it better. Then bad word spreads. Then the loyal customers get word, which creates a bad image. Ubisoft has had a pretty bad image this year because of those things. Just look to any games media outlet. If we as customers (AND FANS) don't have a voice to help them understand what it is they're doing that we are displeased with, then how will they know? How can they improve? How can they be a better publisher than the others in this industry if they can't keep their fingers on the pulse of their consumers for that guidance?

    Alex says they talk to the community and they all dont agree (https://twitter.com/BangBangClick/st...39872166813696) But WHO? Who are these fans they're talking to? Why dont WE see that HERE on their very own forum? Where we are SUPPOSED to discuss these things? Where is our ComDev?

    And in my eyes, there are two ways for me as a customer to do this.
    ONE. Choose not to buy the game. This way I will be a part of the statistic that indicates a change in sales after they released Far Cry 4.
    TWO. Make videos where I express my thoughts on the game and decisions like these, and let the developers know what I think of the game, and what I think could be done differently or what they have done right.
    Do you really want your industry to be built on a foundation where your only voice is your wallet? What does that do to the industry? How does it grow? Improve? Games like Call of Duty and Battlefield sell BILLIONS of dollars in games because they have an open dialogue with the people that purchase it (again, customer loyalty). Of course you get some really bad apples, and some trolls, but when you filter that, and get down to the real, genuine feedback, you get WONDERFUL incite to what can make you better. My boss says "Feedback is a gift" and he's right. CONSTRUCTIVE feedback makes us grow, and be better. Does Ubisoft really wanna leave a legacy on this industry of inot wanting to improve and be better in the eyes of the world?

    And of course I was considering making a video about this as well (Which I still might).

    Another question here is this. Are they wrong not to inform us that they removed the ability to make PVP maps in Far Cry 4?
    I don't think so. Again, this is a big company with millions of customers, and everyone have their individual opinions of the game. I don't think it's right of us to demand them to answer to our questions, where "us" are just one tiny minority of the Far Cry fanbase.
    They have their own advertising campaign and plan for the game, and it would be pretty pointless if they were gonna spoil the whole game as soon as it's revealed buy answering every question about it and pointing out every feature it will support and not.

    What WOULD be wrong is if they told us we could make PVP maps before launch, and then sell a game that didn't allow us to do this! That would have been false advertising, and that would definitely be to do wrong against their consumers.
    Perception = Reality. When you have a feature in your series for pretty much every entry in the franchise, people begin to make safe assumptions. Sure they are a big company that have millions of customers, but do you REALLY want to ignore that 30%? 20% even? That is a HUGE chunk of change. It's not like we want the ending to the story. It's mean to have somebody (with safe assumptions) be hyped for MONTHS prior to launch, with the incorrect understanding that their beloved feature is there. People are PASSIONATE about this feature. And for Ubisoft to not in any way correct their understanding. That's like giving somebody a gift that Wrapped in paper, where you can't see what it is, telling them they cannot open it for 1.5 years, and then when the time comes, you take away from them, not allowing them to have the gift at all. How should one feel about that?

    No quelling those safe assumptions that they as a company instilled within us, while it may not be "WRONG", it's certainly not nice.

    This also happened to the Splinter Cell franchise. With their Spies Vs Mercs multiplayer mode (Which, if I understand correctly, is a bigger community than the FC MP community.) Where, since the feature was in THREE games before it, people built natural safe assumptions about it, and Ubi refused to confirm that it wasn't there until just before launch when the Community had had enough. When it was finally confirmed that their beloved mode wasn't there, that community RIOTED worse than this one did. Of course, what happens next? Blacklist gets the mode back.

    It's a matter of understanding. And when people are under the incorrect understanding, and you dont do anything to help them with that, it grows their customer loyalty automatically, when seeking answers. And when they go months with this misundertanding, and then finally let down after it all (It wasn't even Ubisoft that gave the news, but it took a leak happening for it to get out.) it destroys your loyalty. In my field of work, you have to give customers information they dont like some times. We're required by law (though I'm sure Ubi isn't). But we dont just tell them what we can't do, but we also tell them what we CAN DO. If Alex and Ubi were up front about it, I as well as other would have been mad, but anticipated this new direction, if only they would have been honest and gave proper justifications.
    I just don't think it's wrong of them to keep us in the dark even though we may want to be informed, as long as they don't spread misinformation.
    If you decide to pre-order a game based on how you interpret Ubisoft's silence, I think that mistake is on you as an individual person.
    Keeping people in the dark about these things inherently makes misinformation grow, weather the company is facilitating that misinformation or not. And how many individuals have to carry this misunderstanding, before they become a collective, and it becomes an even bigger problem?

    Personally I have been accused of defending Ubisoft just because they were kind enough to fly me out to Montreal to try the game. If you think this makes me biased, then that's fine, you all have the right to form your own opinions, but let me just say this. The three of us were picked because we were vocal, honest and constructive. If you go back and see my old videos, you can see that I have always given both negative and positive feedback to Ubisoft without attacking them, and this will continue. Just because I decide to defend them in this one debate doesn't ruin my credibility. At least not in my eyes.
    It's an odd defense. This coming from the person that celebrated like a madman in their own video after vehicles were confirmed. Like it was some kind of COMMUNITY VICTORY. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNKe...r8GgUijtnrOUtA) Like it was US that pushed them to make that change. (During a FC2 video no less) Like we have captured the beast and slayed it. How do you feel now, knowing that you can't even BUILD MAPS for multiplayer, using those vehicles. Screaming "GAME OF THE YEAR!" Because of this announcement.

    Again. PERCEPTION = REALITY. No disrespect, but knowing that you probably have a free copy of the game, provided by Ubisoft, were provided insider information based on HYPE (that you weren't even allowed to tell us, because you were gagged by NDA, and they NEVER allowed you to talk about. I mean, why did they even do this for you three? Seems pointless), given room and board, etc. It just doesn't look good, and seeing your tune change, knowing all of that, it's just doesn't look good. Just sayin. "We won like )&#)($%^@# soldiers." Etc Etc. It's strange that your tone changes. PERCEPTION. I still love you though.

    TL;DR:

    BAIT. AND. SWITCH.
    Share this post

  4. #14
    Fallen-Champ's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    North East England
    Posts
    5,420
    The Fortunes Map Pack failed because we could not use the vehicles and the weapons in the editor for our maps to play in MP, if we could have done then it would have done better - and yes the 4 maps that came with FC2 Fortunes pack were bad (1 was ok)

    Also the part where one of you mentions the Ubi Ranked maps not been popular - If you look back to Predator on 360 then anyone and everyone that played FCIP Stock Maps (Ubi Ones) will know that those on Ranked were dominated by Clans and these clans were damn good, the maps worked fine on that game but with FC2 the games pace was slower so Dirty Work and Bastion were the main maps played which were mostly designed for 4 players.

    The other maps took a lot of traveling with not many slow vehicles but if they had a slightly quicker pace or more vehicles which took say 25% more damage and were 25% quicker then FC2 Ubi Maps would have been more popular.
    Also a lot of players stacked up on one team and it was rarely fair in standard MP on the Ubi Maps.

    FC3 had some good maps, Sub Pen and Mud Slide I thought were great.

    Look at it this way if FC4 had a good MP (we have no idea at this point because none of us have played it yet it seems most hate it without even a game) but say that somehow they delivered on the MP side and had some cool maps.

    Now if they put together a Map Pack with several new themes / items / Vehicles / Weapons etc then they made 4 maps from the themes they could break it all down and sell things at an individual price or all as one Package and I guarantee the map builders would purchase the map pack if the price was right, If the MP was good then others would like the Maps and there would be a bit of stuff for everyone.

    I have to say that a lot of competitive clans on Console are not really big fans of User Made Maps - I found that out with FC2, the clan oSo who dominated Pred and FC2 on Xbox 360 did play some User Made Maps but found that a lot of them were unbalanced in areas, with some fixes some of the maps they had seen could have been really good - Problem is a lot of us map makers don't like to admit that sometimes our maps might not be that great.

    Another things is that some map makers believe the hype way too much because of map stats and stuff - at the end of the day it's a game, these are supposed to be enjoyed so we have an issue.
    Lots of us want to enjoy the game in a way that we can't so we have to try and find a solution - Some might go back to Far Cry 2 or GTA5 I can play the SP Maps but would love them to become COOP and would even like to see 1v1 maps where I and a friend invited can go for it and kill each other, maybe that can be done through a modifier which could be added.

    We all have different opinions and will ***** that we are right but here we want a solution on MP Map Editing - Could it be that the easiest way would be for them to see if the FC2 Editor can be upgraded and add another few game modes, make some slight adjustments to the pace of the game, iron out a few glitches etc etc (I am basically saying that we don't give a crap what the game is just as long as the editor is really cool and the game modes / MP and lobby options are there)

    Really everyone wants the same thing, not much more I can say really - If they do give it at some point will everyone then start a fit because they want more and more and more - People already complain about DLC so it seems we want everything to be perfect for us but look at the games industry as a whole, even Halo Collection is having issues - dedicated Servers I hear are costly - How many of us would pay a small fee to get something where we can host the way we want (I don't want to hear that answer)

    Lets just see what gives if anything, be patient and lets see what comes our way if they ever open up to offer any solutions.
    Share this post

  5. #15
    It is dishonest for this reason:

    They knew that they had a passionate group of fans that bought this game in large part because of their map-making feature. They touted it heavily in previous games. They were leading on the map-making community with a calculated decision to remain quiet about the feature, but knew full well that it was a back-burner feature for them in this game. All they had to do to remain honest was to say this at the beginning:

    "I direct the game but I don't set budgets or timelines. We always squeeze in as much as we can, but we're always prioritizing. No promises, but we will try." --Alex Hutchinson

    By not saying anything they are stringing along the customer like a girl keeping a backup boyfriend on her beckon. She wants to keep him around for the benefit to herself, but is not being upfront with him about the situation and it obviously isn't a good for him.
    Share this post

  6. #16

    This is false advertising !

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_advertising PLEASE READ THIS GUYS ! SERIOUSLY ! ALL IS HERE !
    Share this post

  7. #17
    Originally Posted by Ghost_Fart Go to original post
    I believe that if everyone wants to know if mp maps can be made, and the creators say the editor is back and better than ever, then they are being deceptive.
    True

    @Lillestoel:
    I know that you're trying to keep us calm, but this decision affected us all.
    SInce FC1, series always focused on the single player and IMO they are the best at creating an fps single player.
    But, just because they are not good at making multiplayer, they are allowed to let it go. It's like saying that Jason should have put a bullet in himself, while he had chance, instead of striving to survive, instead of fighting for his friends. Giving up is not the answer.

    AC multiplayer isn't a big deal, but people got used to it. Devs working on it and it turned to be fun.
    However, ACU devs decided not to bring back the mp, but they brought co-op. They replaced it with something better.

    Map editor is a big deal, for me and for everyone else.
    Sure I was crushed when I saw that our maps will not be playable online. What a let down, but let's not forget about objects limitations.
    Meanwhile, in Far Cry 2, I've made a building out of bricks. Sure, I needed 10 000 to make it look realistic and I'm glad editor allows me to build as much as I want.

    If we are just minority, as you said, then why did they create this forum? We can make a video, we can request anything we want, but they'll never listen to us.
    I thought they wanted to atone themselves for leaving us with broken FC3, but they only care about money.

    I'm glad to see people standing up, canceling their pre-orders. I can't wait for the day when this 60$ mod will appear on pirate bay, but even then I won't get it.
    I have Far Cry 2.
    Share this post

  8. #18
    Originally Posted by FALLEN CHAMP Go to original post
    Now Ubisoft knew that the mappers and multiplayer side wanted dedicated servers and they chose not to give us that, it's their choice and they would also know it would leave people unhappy.
    And BOOM. You, in just one sentence, nailed down why I, as well as many others are displeased. I also assume that they know we would be non-too happy with this decision, and NEGLECTED to come straight with us, and tell us their new direction. Mean while, since June (reveal) most of us have been thinking "Man, can't wait to get that editor. I really hope they read THAT thread with all the FC3 Multiplayer feedback.

    And sure. Alex is not the decision maker, however, he (as well as Dan Hay) are the face of this project, and they use their twitter accounts as such. He responds to a lot of questions and such via his twitter. If he's good enough to start a debate on Resolutions in games, and then continue that debate on Twitter (which he did, and I think that created an even BIGGER witch hunt than this issue), then he's ok to do this too.

    And I really take issue with people saying I'm on a witch hunt. I've been nothing but respectful to Alex. I've just been persistent. You want to see disrespectful? Check this out. (WARNING: Mean tweet with vulgarity: https://twitter.com/Vortex_Sync/stat...63938502942720)

    There's the difference.
    Share this post

  9. #19

    Is silence dishonest? Ask a politician that.

    Here's my two cents worth. The FC "mapping community" have vested a lot of time and resources into the FC series. This ownership of the game brings with it a lot of pride and emotions. For some original mappers they remember the good ole days of FCIP, for newer ones they've become just as excited with the franchise as others. The common thread that most of us "mappers" share (IMO) is that it has become a passion/commitment that no other game can match/offer. Also, please take into account, the loyalty and dedication to promote the franchise to others as if you were part of it. Now take this feature away and listen to someone say, "They have every right to take it away". You're correct in that statement, but for some of us, it's a slap in the face. Hence the frustration/feeling of being forgotten.

    Second, take all the great friends that were made because of the MP IGE, put them into a room, and I bet most of us would come up with the same wishlist as everyone else as to what we want in a "mapping community". We get it! We do. The potential is there to have (IMO) a game that can fulfill the singlegamer and multiplayer gamer alike. What's frustrating about this, is the pieces to please the "mapping community" have already been done before in the series. If FC3 had the lobbies of FC2, then we wouldn't be in the situation we're in now. As a mapper, I scratch my head when you see these things and say to yourself, "What were they thinking?" This is why the frustration levels run high on this forum. It's so simple to fix.

    Lastly, take the dedication/promoting/passion that we have for this series and to say, "Ubisoft is under no obligation to our small/tiny "mapping community". We might be small/tiny, but to "isolate" the one group of your franchise that's been there with you (from the onset for some) throughout the series, is not a smart way of doing business. The internet is a powerful tool and to dismiss us as "not important enough" to fix the one thing we're passionate about is a hard pill to swallow. Note: Nothing was said that crossed the line, but hopefully the point I'm making comes across loud and clear.

    Shinytapestry71
    Share this post

  10. #20
    Originally Posted by bastos_429 Go to original post
    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_advertising PLEASE READ THIS GUYS ! SERIOUSLY ! ALL IS HERE !


    False advertising or deceptive advertising is the use of false or misleading statements in advertising, and misrepresentation of the product at hand, which may negatively affect many stakeholders, especially consumers. As advertising has the potential to persuade people into commercial transactions that they might otherwise avoid, many governments around the world use regulations to control false, deceptive or misleading advertising. "Truth" refers to essentially the same concept, that customers have the right to know what they are buying, and that all necessary information should be on the label.

    False advertising, in the most blatant of contexts, is illegal in most countries. However, advertisers still find ways to deceive consumers in ways that are legal, or technically illegal but unenforceable.

    Saying "The Editor is better than EVER!" without even a hint that the ONE feature we want in it, isn't even there, KNOWING that's what we want (According to Alex, they DO talk to the community.). THAT is misleading.
    Share this post