ACG on Far Cry 5

$47.99 from GMG for me, but even at $60 its a no-brainer - the game is a blast and so far my favorite of the ones since the original. The fishing aspect alone is worth at least half the price of admission in terms of time spent.

If you want a big pricetag, $60 for Sea of Thieves, a half finished, early access title with no content. Now that's a helluva pricetag.
 
Last edited:
i have enjoyed 3, 4 and primal. Have only gotten a few moments last night with this one but it was enjoyable as well. went full out and got the top version with the season pass. i know i will get my moneys worth. have on the others.
 
It all depends
If you have not grown bored of the typical Far Cry gameplay then 5 is actually better then the older entries

I'm enjoying myself, I even payed full price for it
No regret
Even my 1060 can handle it well enough (at 2560x1080) with TXAA

I'm only a few hours in, but I kinda know what to expect
Like an improved FC4, some ideas from Primal mixed in, no towers any more to climb


For me the only downside is that I'm kinda used to the weapons
There are only so many ways of doing realistic guns I guess, but it would be fun to throw that out of the window and add more ridiculous weapons into the mix (looking at games like saints row 3, 4 and Gat out of hell)
Maybe in a new game plus or something

It' a sandbox anyway
 
It's big explosiony stupid fun.

I've seen a lot of reviews pan it because it doesn't make a strong political or sociological point. WTF statement would this game make? Crazy cults of bearded dudes beating people is bad? No shit?

Sometimes, I want a semi-absurd story, good graphics, and a sandbox to play shootybang. It's really that simple.
 
It's big explosiony stupid fun.

I've seen a lot of reviews pan it because it doesn't make a strong political or sociological point. WTF statement would this game make? Crazy cults of bearded dudes beating people is bad? No shit?

Sometimes, I want a semi-absurd story, good graphics, and a sandbox to play shootybang. It's really that simple.

Looks like people's main point isn't that the story doesn't make a statement, its just bad. The whole thing looks like a bunch of writers with good ideas got everything completely smoothed over and flattened until there was nothing left. They wanted to make statements, and tried to be PC about it... In a game about beating and killing humans.
 
I'll likely pick FC5 up after the first post launch patch drops. I want to see if they respond to some of the issues like the respawning enemies. That was what made FC2 bad in my opinion, it was so annoying to have them respawn once you went out of the render/memory draw distance.

I have noticed in the videos that the vehicle physics for air are really meh. The planes turn on a dime and appear to fly slow enough to hover. The helicopters do a weird tilt of the whole body to aim the guns while maintaining their hover. Doesn't feel like you're actually in a plane/chopper because of it. So that's disappointing.
 
Looks like people's main point isn't that the story doesn't make a statement, its just bad. The whole thing looks like a bunch of writers with good ideas got everything completely smoothed over and flattened until there was nothing left. They wanted to make statements, and tried to be PC about it... In a game about beating and killing humans.

Don't leave out killing deer, badgers, bears, probably skunks, etc! That's how you make some new cool way of killing more chipmunks and dudes with beards and possibly women with beards.

The information I've seen from Ubi has been emphatically stating they are NOT making a point. Horrible writing is hardly a new thing for the series, and is quite consistent with the trajectory thus far.
 
Never played a Far Cry game before.

Would it be a good game for my wife and I to play together?
 
This is the first Far Cry that you can co-op the entire campaign so I would say absolutely.

Wife's machine had a G4440 and 1060 3GB, 1440 monitor.
Will it be able to play this game at low/medium?
 
Wife's machine had a G4440 and 1060 3GB, 1440 monitor.
Will it be able to play this game at low/medium?
You can forget trying to play a modern game like this on a 2 core/ 2 thread Pentium. I am almost positive the game will not even boot on a cpu like that. Really that 1060 is a massive waste with that cpu. Resolution is irrelevant if a game will not even be playable anyway.
 
You can forget trying to play a modern game like this on a 2 core/ 2 thread Pentium. I am almost positive the game will not even boot on a cpu like that. Really that 1060 is a massive waste with that cpu. Resolution is irrelevant if a game will not even be playable anyway.

Eesh. Looks like minimum requirements are a i5-2400 and a 670.

Guess I'll let her try it on my machine, and if she likes it, we'll get her a used i5-6400 or something
 
Couldn't make it through the whole video dude had an analogy on every thing "Well if you thought throwing a grenade down a hole was going to be seamless like your mothers britches on the 4th of july after you eat aunt mays peach cobler... well then you got another thing coming"

But what I did see when I skipped around, looked like FC4 just in a difference setting, and I'm ok with that.
 
Eesh. Looks like minimum requirements are a i5-2400 and a 670.

Guess I'll let her try it on my machine, and if she likes it, we'll get her a used i5-6400 or something

The gpu is fine, the CPU?
Well it might work

I' having a 1060 myself (3gb RAM) and it looks good, even best AA

Btw
There is a benchmark build into the game

Edit:
For the lulz

I could try to emulate the G4440 by using only 2 cores and going down to 3.3Ghz (from a 7600K @ 5.2)
Not apples to apples, but I'd guess it would be interesting

Gotta go to bed now though ;)
 
But what I did see when I skipped around, looked like FC4 just in a difference setting, and I'm ok with that.

Granted I'm only a few hours in, but I would say it kinda is, but refined
There is more exploring since there is no auto explore feature any more (climbing towers), no more hunting animals to upgrade stuff (using perk points, you gain perks by different challenges; found a book granting a perk point) and while there seems to be collectibles (I found a comic book) it' not as excessive as FC4 with stuff to hunt down/collect

Or so it seems at least
 
Wife's machine had a G4440 and 1060 3GB, 1440 monitor.
Will it be able to play this game at low/medium?
The CPU might be your biggest weakness, I'm playing at 1440P on a 1060 6GB, the game barely reaches over 3GB VRAM at Ultra... I get usually 50-55 FPS with dips and ups depending on the arena and how busy it gets. It's pretty fluid considering it's mostly a singleplayer game discounting the coop mode which is practically the same.

My screenshots
20180328121426_1.jpg

20180328115330_1.jpg

20180328121655_1.jpg


If you can get the CPU up and I've got no doubts you'll have a great time even with the 1060 3GB videocard. This game looks great on LOW even.
 
Wife's machine had a G4440 and 1060 3GB, 1440 monitor.
Will it be able to play this game at low/medium?

I say try it with what she has, maybe even with a downgrade in resolution to 1920x1080 or 1600x900 and see how it fares.

If you're not happy with the performance, then look at getting a CPU upgrade.

My Ivy Bridge with a 980Ti pushes around 90fps at 1080p. I'd guess that her system would be in the 40-60fps range at that resolution, depending on what's being rendered.
 
They did some non-tech stuff htat was interesting in this game. They actually wrote a "bible" for the cult. The guy who wrote the music created 10 full length songs used in the game as propaganda pieces played over the in game radio. There is some really good subtle details that unfortunately got masked less by a less than perfect story.
 
Would it be a good game for my wife and I to play together?


from what i have read, there is one big issue with co-op. the person who joins as guest to the other player does not "progress" through the game, in that if they try it solo, it shows no progress for them. Might not be a big deal though if you will always co-op through it.
 
Very happy with it. Performs and scales well up and down, too, in my non expert opinion.

Far Cry 5

and

Far Cry 5

^^

Seeing some bizarre disasters happening for a few people in our PC gaming thread for this. Not sure what to make of it.
 
from what i have read, there is one big issue with co-op. the person who joins as guest to the other player does not "progress" through the game, in that if they try it solo, it shows no progress for them. Might not be a big deal though if you will always co-op through it.

Not an issue, its by design. This isn't an MMO. Borderlands games work the same way - it's the Host's game and campaign progress since theres only one protagonist. Guest is just helping the host advance the campaign like the optional AI buddies.

It's the only way to facilitate drop in, drop out co-op. The alternative would require your campaign being locked in co-op mode start to finish, meaning you couldnt play solo and would always need both players present. Obviously people would scream about "broken co-op" if Ubi had gone that route.
 
Last edited:
Granted I'm only a few hours in, but I would say it kinda is, but refined
There is more exploring since there is no auto explore feature any more (climbing towers), no more hunting animals to upgrade stuff (using perk points, you gain perks by different challenges; found a book granting a perk point) and while there seems to be collectibles (I found a comic book) it' not as excessive as FC4 with stuff to hunt down/collect

Or so it seems at least
Oh? I'm ok with the lack of auto-explore (towers) as long as your "view" is reasonable for uncovering stuff, just looking in the pictures of this thread big wide open fields, better have at least line of sight exploring otherwise having to "mow the lawn" style of uncovering the map will be boring as all hell.

Also in the video I saw spot where the guy skinned a bear, and it said 1/3 bear skins etc etc... maybe that's a challenge?
 
^ Yes there are towers, and aircraft are everywhere, can just hop in and take off.

Exploration is the best of any FC title.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Q-BZ
like this
I could try to emulate the G4440 by using only 2 cores and going down to 3.3Ghz (from a 7600K @ 5.2)
Not apples to apples, but I'd guess it would be interesting

Gotta go to bed now though ;)

Man that would be a really interesting test.

If you have the chance, I'd be much obliged if you could share the results.
 
I say try it with what she has, maybe even with a downgrade in resolution to 1920x1080 or 1600x900 and see how it fares.

If you're not happy with the performance, then look at getting a CPU upgrade.

My Ivy Bridge with a 980Ti pushes around 90fps at 1080p. I'd guess that her system would be in the 40-60fps range at that resolution, depending on what's being rendered.
Why on Earth would he have to play at 1600 by 900 with a 1060? The issue is going to be the CPU so resolution is going to make no difference at all. I did see one review where the person said it did not even boot with a dual-core CPU. Now Far Cry primal ran just fine with a dual-core CPU but this game appears to need 4 threads.
 
Man that would be a really interesting test.

If you have the chance, I'd be much obliged if you could share the results.

These are the settings I play with

farcry5steam2018-3-29-20-40-3.jpg


My bench run

farcry5steam2018-3-29-20-32-47.jpg


And with 2 cores/ 2 threads at 3.3Ghz

farcry5steam2018-3-29-20-39-51.jpg


I tested with everything at low as well, but fps stayed the same

An upgrade would be worth it but it should still be playable as the normal game isn't as taxing as the benchmark
At least to get a feel for it


Why on Earth would he have to play at 1600 by 900 with a 1060? The issue is going to be the CPU so resolution is going to make no difference at all. I did see one review where the person said it did not even boot with a dual-core CPU. Now Far Cry primal ran just fine with a dual-core CPU but this game appears to need 4 threads.


I switched off 2 cores on my i5 in the bios, confirmed cores and freqemvy with cpu-z and all went fine (to run the test for craigdt)

Not as well as it could obviously, but it ran better than games I was used to when I still went to school and had no money on such hobbies
Man Half life 1 ran with 16 to 20 fps on my first system with that on board SIS graphics card

I say try it with what she has, maybe even with a downgrade in resolution to 1920x1080 or 1600x900 and see how it fares.

If you're not happy with the performance, then look at getting a CPU upgrade.

My Ivy Bridge with a 980Ti pushes around 90fps at 1080p. I'd guess that her system would be in the 40-60fps range at that resolution, depending on what's being rendered.

Resolution has no bearing on fps when your CPU limited that much

Your also comparing "ivy bridge", which to me means i5 or better, with a Pentium
Not only less cores but also less freqency, no boost, less cache
Even if you have an i3, that one would clock like at least a cool Ghz higher
I3 is better than a Pentium

Also tried to lower everything, but fps stayed the same for my simulated G4400
Now it might be interesting what Vulkan or DX12 might do for such weak CPU
 
Last edited:
Why on Earth would he have to play at 1600 by 900 with a 1060? The issue is going to be the CPU so resolution is going to make no difference at all. I did see one review where the person said it did not even boot with a dual-core CPU. Now Far Cry primal ran just fine with a dual-core CPU but this game appears to need 4 threads.

Ya know, now that you (snidely) mention it...I realized that a lower res would typically place more burden on the CPU.

I also did some web searching - Seems like people are able to run it on a dual core with HT (as long as at least 4 threads are avail to the game), but if just two cores/two threads is the limit, then FC5 will not run. craigdt will definitely need a CPU upgrade from a G4440, and I'd recommend a true quad core, just to eliminate all doubts.
 
The CPU might be your biggest weakness, I'm playing at 1440P on a 1060 6GB, the game barely reaches over 3GB VRAM at Ultra... I get usually 50-55 FPS with dips and ups depending on the arena and how busy it gets. It's pretty fluid considering it's mostly a singleplayer game discounting the coop mode which is practically the same.

My screenshots
View attachment 62783
View attachment 62784
View attachment 62785

If you can get the CPU up and I've got no doubts you'll have a great time even with the 1060 3GB videocard. This game looks great on LOW even.
thats low? WOW. just wow.
 
thats low? WOW. just wow.
No, that's on Ultra...

Let me pull some comparison of Low / Normal / High / Ultra at 1440p (AA Mode - TAA for all four enabled) They do look great even on Low so you've got nothing to lose here IMO.


20180329133854_1.jpg

20180329133909_1.jpg

20180329133922_1.jpg

20180329133941_1.jpg
20180329134608_1.jpg

20180329134620_1.jpg

20180329134632_1.jpg

20180329134655_1.jpg
 
Last edited:
No, that's on Ultra...

Let me pull some comparison of Low / Normal / High / Ultra at 1440p (AA Mode - TAA for all four enabled) They do look great even on Low so you've got nothing to lose here IMO.


Ok I was amazed if that were on low.
 
Ok I was amazed if that were on low.
The pictures in each spoilers are in the following order"
Low
Normal
High
Ultra

Pretty good, though if you look hard, there are some subtle differences around the broken glass up at the window and also the distance rendering of the hills. For the water, you can take a look at the river and see that on low it's pretty flat but else wise, it's pretty much visually appealing.
 
For anyone wondering, I loaded this up on my wife's Pentium G4440/1060 3GB rig.

It loads and runs just fine.

However,
Like the nice gentleman above who emulated a 2 core chip for me, it resulted in really low fps.

Processor was pegged at 100‰, GPU at about 35‰. :LOL:

This was with settings on low and 1440p. 1080p looked like crap.

Honestly, I'm impressed with the G4440, the game optimization and how good "low" settings look.

The FPS was just too low for my wife to be playable.
 
Back
Top