I've probably listened to the FC5 soundtrack for more time than actually playing the game. Even the pause and loading screens music have tens of millions of listens on YouTube+Spotify. Then I actually played the game and you just get snippets in the background. But it's fun to sneak up on bad guys and hear them singing along to it. The classic:
The Seed family is a brilliant subversion of psych and tropes. I don't think anybody on the planet appreciates them more than me. Other than that FC5 is fine. I liked shooting planes with the MG42.
Far Cry is one of those games where you have such a massive potential to make a fun game, but they dropped it completely. I only played through the 5th one (in coop) and most of the 2nd one. I tried 3 and 4 (~4h each) and got bored since they really are just the same game with a new map. Can't bother to collect perks again and so on... which Far Cry 2 doesn't have, since it doesn't even has perks and XP.
Far Cry 2, if we account for the hardware at the time is the most impressive one. The fire physics i one of the best ones in vidya and they removed it in the 3rd game, same with the jamming mechanics (I liked it! They should have added gun oil logistics or something...). What a shame. The one thing they should have included was Co-Op campaign from the start, it would have been a very nice game. By the 5th installment they did implement it, you could already tell that anything after the 2nd game, it was just a butchered "better graphics" version of the 2nd game (play one, and you have played them all). Still to this day this bothers me (that, and the inserted pozzed politics). I don't like playing a "new map" only to restart collecting weapons and perks over again. That sucks!
They also have this cucked map editor where you can't pick enemy models to spawn, so already in Far Cry 2, Ubisoft knew that they had to remove settings in the map editor so people don't make TND hoard maps. Far Cry 5 also had jannies deleting maps if they thought the maps where "copyrighted" too. Which is a shame again, because the map editor is pretty easy and fast to make fun maps if someone wants to do that.
Also, Far Cry New Dawn made this game into an even more XP grind game (from what I saw on gameplays on Youtube), which made me never touch a single Far Cry game ever again. Never played Primal, since I want a free roam gun game, not a toddler FPS version of Kenshi and I just don't care about Far Cry 6 since these games are too pozzed in general.
Far Cry should have keept the "sandbox" approach that the 2nd game had and made it into a coop game with a more "loose" campaign. But they had to make it about "muh cool reddit villains" and make slop out of it.
In short: Far Cry 2 is the best game (objectively). But it seems like most answers are that the first Far Cry game they played since you probably already got a perk collection fatigue after that one.
Now mention the Ubisoft towers, clunky UI, and harder difficulty.
I've played Far Cry 5. I like the Montana setting but I have Ubisoft fatigue with the massive open world, level/world progression and shoehorned gameplay elements.
Now mention the Ubisoft towers, clunky UI, and harder difficulty.
I've played Far Cry 5. I like the Montana setting but I have Ubisoft fatigue with the massive open world, level/world progression and shoehorned gameplay elements.
Yes? That video shows FC2 to have far more attention to detail than FC5. It's an answer to OP asking why some people prefer Far Cry 2
I'm not entirely sure what point you're making
That was just after-the-fact cope from the devs, appropriating proto-woke ideology when everyone hated their catastrophically unlikeable characters and terrible plot.
I hear Far Cry 7 is going to be on timer ala Majora's Mask where you only have a limited time to complete it before game over. I can get how some games would be good under those circumstances but I don't think the Far Cry series is the one to try that on.
That was just after-the-fact cope from the devs, appropriating proto-woke ideology when everyone hated their catastrophically unlikeable characters and terrible plot.
I liked Jason Brody. Intentional or not, serious critique or not, a California trust fund kid becoming Rambo but still having the voice of a California trust fund kid is incredibly funny.
Also the only time Skrillex has ever gone hard:
Edit: Video replaced with a better one. What kind of cuckold stealths that mission?
I liked Jason Brody. Intentional or not, serious critique or not, a California trust fund kid becoming Rambo but still having the voice of a California trust fund kid is incredibly funny.
It might've have been funny if they'd played it for laughs or made it exaggerated enough to actually feel like it was satirizing something, but part of what made it so insufferable was how po-faced the entire thing was from beginning to end.
It might've have been funny if they'd played it for laughs or made it exaggerated enough to actually feel like it was satirizing something, but part of what made it so insufferable was how po-faced the entire thing was from beginning to end.
I think it being so earnest makes it funnier. Plus, I was a youth untouched by the homosexuality of internet discourse at the time, so I just unironically accepted Brody as a badass instead of being all "woah, he looked into the abussy and it looked back, so deep".
I might dislike Far Cry 5 the most of any game I have played in my adult life. It's an obvious sign the series is dead. I gave it a chance a while back because they offered it to me for almost nothing and I liked Far Cry 3 and 4...
I have never played through another game, saw the final cutscene, then immediately exited and deleted it off my system with 0 hesitation.
This was my fault tbh. I figured they weren't going to capitalize on the reasons 4 were good especially gameplay wise, because a lot of it was emergent elements of how the system worked that made playing it so cool, and this was obviously an even more soulless AAA endeavor. Still it reaffirmed that I was right to never play modern AAA games (except Doom Eternal, that's actually pretty great).
Gameplay:
I could write an entire essay on all the things they changed gameplay wise to make this less enjoyable. A few off the top of my head:
- There are no special gun unlockables, you can see all of them from the start and all the ones in the special category (which are unlocked from the beginning) are better than the standard ones you'll unlock over time, so there is nothing to look forward to or draw you along.
You can affix silencers to any gun so none are special, basically there's never going to be a cool, unexpected gun unlock that modifies how you approach outposts or the game overall like in the prior 2 games.
- On that note, side quests aren't interesting and don't actually unlock anything of value, just money or cosmetics, so they're worthless.
- Climbing exists in this game because it existed in the last game. It's not interesting. It already wasn't super exciting in the last game, but it was a hoot compared to 5.
- Hunting quests exist in this game because it existed in the last game. They're not interesting. They WERE pretty cool in the last game, but they suck in this one and, again, give you nothing.
- No more gyrocopters, now you fly around in purchased planes or helicopters with awkward bespoke weaponry because everything has to be plasticy and on-rails. No more zipping around the skies raining molotovs and explosives down on the helpless populace.
- The introduction of breakable melee weapons is retarded and makes the game feel much worse. You have throwing knives which stick in enemies, so even on a character level there's no reason to toss your pipe at a guy's head like grog the troglodyte when you're doing a throw chain kill.
- In this game instead of using the enemies' sidearms to do gun chain kills, you use your own sidearm, which is a straight up nerf that only further narrows combat, because it functions roughly the same but requires you to use your own ammo and have a gun that's capable of doing it (see next point).
- Greatest Crime: the little faggot developers clearly had some type of vendetta against the best weapon in the game, the sidearm grenade launcher. Just that weapon alone is a shining beacon in 3 and 4. Meanwhile in 5 they nerfed the absolute hell out of it, it takes two direct shots to vehicles to blow them up, it feels like when you shoot this explosive ordinance at enemies you're just giving them a fine misting, AND it barely works for gun chain kills.
Everything feels like shit honestly, you shoot a heavy wearing a riot helmet in the face with a 50 cal rifle and it just bounces off his mask. Dude's head should be pulp.
I was really not liking the game but thought to myself "Eventually I'll buy my one handed grenade launcher, then it'll at least be tolerable" and then I finally did, and I was crushed to realize it sucked ass, because everything in 5 sucks ass.
In the previous games you were regularly alternating between rifle/shotgun, sprint jumping off scenery for death from above, leading into chain kills, launching explosives, when it worked it was extremely fluid and varied.
Why did they feel the need to kneecap that? Was it to try to balance the game? Who was clamoring for nerfs to balance the gameplay of god damned Far Cry? Was it because of the shoehorned multiplayer garbage? I don't understand.
Story/themes:
- In 4 (and 3 I want to say) there are significant themes of foreign mysticism that I think provide great motifs and give the games an identity beyond "shoot things in the jungle".
Meanwhile, in 5 any spiritualism is completely paralyzed by centering the story on Christianity. There is no way to make a major media product, center it on the predominant western belief system, then say anything of any value without it turning into an issue.
Loads of people have pointed out that the game doesn't do anything with its story, it just points at a christian cult and says "Hey, look at that", but the fact is that's all someone could do with this setting.
- It's clearly neutered by corporate garbage.
Look at the drug presence as an example: in 4 the push of the game revolves around the opium trade in Kyrat and the issue of whether it's better to do the more "moral" thing and shut it down, or simply take over the profits from drug trafficking and use it to help the struggling country.
You shoot enemies and find dirty needles and used meth pipes on them, same in 3, there isn't much shyness when it comes to drugs, sex, and violence.
Meanwhile 5 is very timid about doing or saying anything that might be too extreme. They actually call the item that's obviously weed "oregano" probably because they can't be promoting drug use in any way shape or form.
The only "drug" in the game is the made up one bliss (?) with effects that are really vague, and include hallucinations because 3 and 4 had really well recieved parts where the character trips so we need one too.
The psychadelic elements of 5 are an embarrassment compared to the previous games, where they were real standouts.
I halfway suspect the introduction of blunt melee weapons was because graphically shoving a machete through people's necks was too violent for this modern corporate product.
- The decision to make the main character in 5 player-created is an obvious corporate sacrifice at the expense of the story.
In 3 you've got that Brody fellow, in 4 obviously you've got Ajay Ghale, to both of which the story bears significant personal themes. In 5 the character is just an anonymous sheriff with no real backstory or ties to the setting. You're just a person.
Pros:
Joseph Seed is the sole redeeming trait in this game. I like the cult angle. The antagonists are more interesting than 4, although they're no Vaas.
In conclusion: Just go back and play previous entries, 5 has everything they have but executed worse, in a worse setting, and more soullessly.
It might've have been funny if they'd played it for laughs or made it exaggerated enough to actually feel like it was satirizing something, but part of what made it so insufferable was how po-faced the entire thing was from beginning to end.
I found Jason Brody a little patronizing, maybe I'm not media literate but it felt like the devs were going "Hey you player, this is you! A soft little bitch! Don't you want to imagine going to a jungle and being a jungle warrior who bangs hot native women?"
It's like the anime effect where they make the protagonist really pathetic then expect the viewer to identify with them.
You could read far into it and imagine it was intended to make some type of statement, especially in light of the Alice in Wonderland themes, but I'm not that charitable.
I found Jason Brody a little patronizing, maybe I'm not media literate but it felt like the devs were going "Hey you player, this is you! A soft little bitch! Don't you want to imagine going to a jungle and being a jungle warrior who bangs hot native women?"
This but with the brainwashing in 5. It was like baby's first Spec Ops: The Line and the fact that I had no agency over it made me feel strong negative emotions that I don't have names for. "SEE? IT'S JUST LIKE VIDEO GAMES GUYS DO YOU GET IT?"
Hell, all of the little interludes where you get railroaded into getting tranqed and have to sit around while some Jonestown reject does their amateur theatre impression of Vaas felt somewhere between embarrassing, boring and insulting.
There are no special gun unlockables, you can see all of them from the start and all the ones in the special category (which are unlocked from the beginning) are better than the standard ones you'll unlock over time, so there is nothing to look forward to or draw you along.
You can affix silencers to any gun so none are special, basically there's never going to be a cool, unexpected gun unlock that modifies how you approach outposts or the game overall like in the prior 2 games.
Maybe I'm retarded, but I have to go with the Far Cry 2 mechanics as the best system and improve it from there. This would have been a "more fitting" gun logistics for a Far Cry game
Guns are purchased to be in you inventory, with very low jamming risk. Guns you pick up are a wild card.
If a gun breaks you can repair it, or you can collect/buy gun grease to lower the risk of jamming.
If you don't apply gun grease after some time/usage, the gun might break when jamming. If you own it you can repair it (for cheap at a store or repair it DIY in you safe house for free, add some cool animation for this). if it was a picked up gun it's more expensive to repair it at a store.
In this way, the player can use any gun without the grinding (I really don't like games that uses XP and perks "hide" the fun part), but if the player want a reliable gun the player may collect and do missions to achieve that.
5 is the weakest of the "good" group, for certain. But if someone told me they liked it a lot and enjoyed the story, I would understand their point while still knowing in my soul that 2 is superior
I liked Far Cry 2 and 3 the best. Though honestly my favourite part of all of them is attacking outposts. I thought 4's story kinda sucked and the main character pissed me off. 3's character was kind of douchey but not as bad as 4's. When I first played Far Cry 2 it reminded me a lot of the Mercenaries games on ps2. I never played 5 or the caveman spinoff or any of the other Far Cry games except the first one but I remember that one felt more like a demo than an actual game. I don't really like open world games very much any more though and the Far Cry games are part of the reason why.
