Far Cry 5

I still remember boating from one island to the next, stopping to scope out an enemy filled island in the distance, sniping them down to a few without discovery, then swimming to a "clear spot" and knifing the rest. Good times. Honestly the rest haven't been as memorable. Though, riding an elephant was a nice distraction in 4.
 
talk2troy said:
Far Cry 1 = the best Far Cry
Click to expand...
It really was something. The tropical island atmosphere and insane draw distances for the time. I remember my girlfriend at the time getting pissy because I wasn't even bothering to answer phonecalls for several days, I was so damn enamored with that game. It set the stage for Crysis, another monumental leap forward only a year or two later.
 
talk2troy said:
Far Cry 1 = the best Far Cry
Click to expand...

FC1 was outstanding (until towards the end), but I've always found 3 and 4 more fun over-all. FC1 is a special game for everything it did and just how good it looked for the time.

DPI said:
It really was something. The tropical island atmosphere and insane draw distances for the time. I remember my girlfriend at the time getting pissy because I wasn't even bothering to answer phonecalls for several days, I was so damn enamored with that game. It set the stage for Crysis, another monumental leap forward only a year or two later.
Click to expand...

Pity Crysis was nothing more than a showcase for pretty graphics attached to a medicore game that doesn't remotely fulfill all of Crytek's promises.
 
One thing I liked about Far Cry one was the music and how it changed one enemy spotted you or lost interest in you. Also, the selective rate of fire too, from single to full auto depending on the weapons.
 
VF31Tomcatters said:
One thing I liked about Far Cry one was the music and how it changed one enemy spotted you or lost interest in you. Also, the selective rate of fire too, from single to full auto depending on the weapons.
Click to expand...
3 and 4 had great soundtracks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Q-BZ
like this
ghostwich said:
3 and 4 had great soundtracks.
Click to expand...

Brian Tyler and Cliff Martinez. Very good music and I do agree about part 1's music as well.

I also agree that FC1 is still the best of the series by far.

I went around searching and can't find out who is composing the music on 5 yet. Hopefully this trend of good music will continue.
 
Q-BZ said:
Brian Tyler and Cliff Martinez. Very good music and I do agree about part 1's music as well.

I also agree that FC1 is still the best of the series by far.

I went around searching and can't find out who is composing the music on 5 yet. Hopefully this trend of good music will continue.
Click to expand...

It's not a surprise as to the reason. Crytek made FarCry and they sold everything off to Ubisoft which effectively just used the name. All the games past the first one are something totally different. FarCry 2 was a piece of shit and I haven't touched the series since.
 
Dan_D said:
It's not a surprise as to the reason. Crytek made FarCry and they sold everything off to Ubisoft which effectively just used the name. All the games past the first one are something totally different. FarCry 2 was a piece of shit and I haven't touched the series since.
Click to expand...

I hated 2 as well.

These are dumb, fun, over the top romps with solid FPS gameplay mechanics. A complete lark.
 
We'll see how FC5 fits into my list of best FC games (in order):

1. FC3
2. FC1
3. FC4
4. FCP
5. FC2

I have Blood Dragon, but I haven't played it yet, therefore I can not provide an opinion on it yet.
 
I'd go with:

FC3
FC4
FC2 / FC1
FC BD - Got dull quick, looked ugly and wasn't funny


Derangel said:
Pity Crysis was nothing more than a showcase for pretty graphics attached to a medicore game that doesn't remotely fulfill all of Crytek's promises.
Click to expand...

Crysis, to me, was one of the best shooters I've played. I loved the suit functions, shooting mechanics, weapon customization that wasn't full retard, the destruction to shacks and whatnot. Taking different routes that were practical and not forced to complete a mission was fun to. Take the harbor mission as an example. I stole a boat, cloaked, and silently took down bad guys from a distance while on the boat with a suppressor. Or you can rush in across the bridge in speed/armor mode with rocket launchers. The maps were great and offered real gameplay differences.

Now days we're stuck with shitty fetch quests, running back and fourth through sterile open worlds to repeat 20 copy/paste missions, spend half the game searching for sticks and garbage wrappers to construct interesting weapons. You name it. I'd be happy if we got another Crysis.
 
Last edited:
Flogger23m said:
I'd go with:

FC3
FC4
FC2 / FC1
FC BD - Got dull quick, looked ugly and wasn't funny




Crysis, to me, was one of the best shooters I've played. I loved the suit functions, shooting mechanics, weapon customization that wasn't full retard, the destruction to shacks and whatnot. Taking different routes that were practical and not forced to complete a mission was fun to. Take the harbor mission as an example. I stole a boat, cloaked, and silently took down bad guys from a distance while on the boat with a suppressor. Or you can rush in across the bridge in speed/armor mode with rocket launchers. The maps were great and offered real gameplay differences.

Now days we're stuck with shitty fetch quests, running back and fourth through sterile open worlds to repeat 20 copy/paste missions, spend half the game searching for sticks and garbage wrappers to construction interesting weapons. You name it. I'd be happy if we got another Crysis.
Click to expand...

My biggest problem with Crysis is that I ended up seeing through a lot of the little tricks they used to make the game look and feel bigger. The combat was excellent, for part of the game. Crysis has the same problem Far Cry 1 did, it falls apart later on when it tries to change things up. Though, I think Crysis fumbles a lot harder than FC1 did. As soon as the (absolutely stunning) ice section starts the game just collapses. It strips away even the illusion of freedom of movement, the combat turns into a pretty basic arena shooter experience, the aliens are never fun to fight, and that last level is just terrible. I felt like Warhead ended up being a better experience over-all as it was more contestant, even if its high points didn't reach the first half of its predecessor. I do agree with you though, I'd be down for another game like Crysis. I enjoyed Crysis 2 for what it was and thought 3 did a decent job trying to bring the series back to what the original game was.
 
Derangel said:
My biggest problem with Crysis is that I ended up seeing through a lot of the little tricks they used to make the game look and feel bigger. The combat was excellent, for part of the game. Crysis has the same problem Far Cry 1 did, it falls apart later on when it tries to change things up. Though, I think Crysis fumbles a lot harder than FC1 did. As soon as the (absolutely stunning) ice section starts the game just collapses. It strips away even the illusion of freedom of movement, the combat turns into a pretty basic arena shooter experience, the aliens are never fun to fight, and that last level is just terrible. I felt like Warhead ended up being a better experience over-all as it was more contestant, even if its high points didn't reach the first half of its predecessor. I do agree with you though, I'd be down for another game like Crysis. I enjoyed Crysis 2 for what it was and thought 3 did a decent job trying to bring the series back to what the original game was.
Click to expand...

I agree that the ending of Crysis and FC1 were the least interesting parts. But as a whole I didn't find it bad in Crysis. I did replay the entire game a number of times but I did play the earlier chapters many more. But it added a nice cinematic touch and rush to the game, yet was linear so it didn't lend itself to replaying much. Like most other linear shooters. Crysis 2 was indeed designed with consoles in mind, but it actually felt and played great. Not as good as Crysis overall, but not bad. Crysis 3 was similar but too short. While not as good as the first I think they were certainly under rated games.

Far Cry wise, I think they need to go back and re-examine the game for the next installment. I wanted them to do it with FC5, but with luck they will do it for FC6. Otherwise it may be the next Assassin's Creed Unity for Ubisoft. Crammed development cycle while feeling too similar to past games. Plus I just find the setting and environment of FC5 (what we've seen so far) to be dull. Unlike 3/4 I just don't find it to look pretty, but that may vary for others.
 
2 was awesome aside from a few nitpicks. I know it received a lot of hate but there are a number of people who have spoken out in favor of the game in recent years. With that said, I can see why some people didn't appreciate it.

If the plan going forward is to keep rehashing FC3 with new locations then I agree with Flogger. I don't want to see the series turn into Call of Assassin's Creed of Duties. Hopefully they take it in a new direction or at least come up with enough new ideas that it differentiates itself from previous games in a substantial way.
 
I liked a lot about FC2. There was a lot broken, like horrifically broken, but the settings and a lot of the game play was great. I didn't even mind the malaria aspect.

I had issues with a lot of FC1 as well though, the game was really good, then they went stupid with the mutants. I disliked the mutants in FC1 as much as the respawning checkpoints in FC2.

I agree with what a lot of others have said though, I am concerned that FC5 will be more of the same with a new location.
 
Lateralus said:
2 was awesome aside from a few nitpicks. I know it received a lot of hate but there are a number of people who have spoken out in favor of the game in recent years. With that said, I can see why some people didn't appreciate it.

If the plan going forward is to keep rehashing FC3 with new locations then I agree with Flogger. I don't want to see the series turn into Call of Assassin's Creed of Duties. Hopefully they take it in a new direction or at least come up with enough new ideas that it differentiates itself from previous games in a substantial way.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Ironically the biggest complain of FC2, the respawning checkpoints, have been in countless games since that have received a lot of praise. Examples are Borderlands 2 and Nier Automata. And neither of those games had combat as good as FC2, and neither really had anything new or innovative. At least Far Cry 2 had (at the time) unique fire mechanics. Plus, the mortar with marking rounds was awesome. Could have been better story wise but I played it twice and enjoyed it both times.
 
FC1
FC4
Blood Dragon (I loved this damned thing. I need Blood Dragon 2)
FC3
Primal (not a bad side game. A glorified expansion)
(doesn't matter/jury out on 5)

^^ I could see alternating 3 and 4 on that list because they are similar enough it almost doesn't matter.







Flogger23m said:
Crysis, to me, was one of the best shooters I've played. I loved the suit functions, shooting mechanics, weapon customization that wasn't full retard, the destruction to shacks and whatnot. Taking different routes that were practical and not forced to complete a mission was fun to. Take the harbor mission as an example. I stole a boat, cloaked, and silently took down bad guys from a distance while on the boat with a suppressor. Or you can rush in across the bridge in speed/armor mode with rocket launchers. The maps were great and offered real gameplay differences.

Now days we're stuck with shitty fetch quests, running back and fourth through sterile open worlds to repeat 20 copy/paste missions, spend half the game searching for sticks and garbage wrappers to construct interesting weapons. You name it. I'd be happy if we got another Crysis.
Click to expand...

Two threads in a row I'm going to sign off with you in agreement. ;)


Crysis felt more like an unofficial sequel to the first Far Cry than any of the successors in that series. For obvious reasons of course. Crysis 2 and 3 weren't bad games in their own rights but 1 was the best for me.
 
Ubisoft announced the composer for the game. Dan Romer, the composer for Beasts of No Nation and Beasts of Southern Wild, He will also be writing some original songs for the game.
 
Q-BZ said:
Crysis felt more like an unofficial sequel to the first Far Cry than any of the successors in that series. For obvious reasons of course. Crysis 2 and 3 weren't bad games in their own rights but 1 was the best for me.
Click to expand...

yup, that's because both were made by Crytek...the Far Cry series continued without Crytek (still decent games but FC1 is still tops to me) while Crysis went on with Crytek still the lead developer...I've said it many times but I never understood why CryEngine was not used in a lot more games...it's one of the Top 2-3 gaming engines (along with Frostbite)...way better then Unreal Engine but that gets way more support (I guess because it's easier to use?)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Q-BZ
like this
polonyc2 said:
yup, that's because both were made by Crytek...the Far Cry series continued without Crytek (still decent games but FC1 is still tops to me) while Crysis went on with Crytek still the lead developer...I've said it many times but I never understood why CryEngine was not used in a lot more games...it's one of the Top 2-3 gaming engines (along with Frostbite)...way better then Unreal Engine but that gets way more support (I guess because it's easier to use?)
Click to expand...

UE has better support. Also, at least a few years back, Cryengine had a lot more hidden charges in the free engine, for plug ins and whatnot. Whereas UE was really 100% free to try. That is how someone explained it to me anyways. And UE4 looks like it can do amazing things, although so few AAA games have released with it. Gear of War 4? Can't recall what else. Ace combat 7 is coming up... something else to. We'll see what some semi big games will do with the engine soon I suppose.
 
polonyc2 said:
yup, that's because both were made by Crytek...the Far Cry series continued without Crytek (still decent games but FC1 is still tops to me) while Crysis went on with Crytek still the lead developer...I've said it many times but I never understood why CryEngine was not used in a lot more games...it's one of the Top 2-3 gaming engines (along with Frostbite)...way better then Unreal Engine but that gets way more support (I guess because it's easier to use?)
Click to expand...

crytek made it so that it was effectively unaffordable to use.. the cost up front was some where in the relm of a million dollars just to use the engine with crytek support. modifying the engine was a no-no either without crytek's blessing.. but ultimately outside of graphics the engines total garbage.. all you have to do is play Mechwarrior online for a few hours and you'll understand why people went with the UE4 engine over cryengine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Q-BZ
like this
Ubisoft has released a few details, and a new trailer, about online co-op in Far Cry 5...dubbed ‘Friends for Hire,’ it’ll allow pretty much the entire game to be played in two-player co-op

Immediately after the tutorial, all of the rest of Far Cry 5 is open to online co-op...all earned experience and inventory items (except quest-specific stuff) will carry over between co-op sessions, and each player will collect their own loot...story progress will only continue for the host of the co-op session, however...so if you hop into someone’s game you can earn a bunch of experience and find some neat items, but you won’t advance the story...

https://www.neowin.net/news/far-cry-5s-cooperative-system-detailed-only-host-keeps-story-progression

 
polonyc2 said:
Ubisoft has released a few details, and a new trailer, about online co-op in Far Cry 5...dubbed ‘Friends for Hire,’ it’ll allow pretty much the entire game to be played in two-player co-op

Immediately after the tutorial, all of the rest of Far Cry 5 is open to online co-op...all earned experience and inventory items (except quest-specific stuff) will carry over between co-op sessions, and each player will collect their own loot...story progress will only continue for the host of the co-op session, however...so if you hop into someone’s game you can earn a bunch of experience and find some neat items, but you won’t advance the story...

https://www.neowin.net/news/far-cry-5s-cooperative-system-detailed-only-host-keeps-story-progression

Click to expand...



Pretty cool.

Are we sure that FarCry 5 is using it's own graphics engine? CryEngine or something? This looks VERY similar to the AnvilNext 2.0 engine that Ubisoft has used in Wildlands, Assassins Creed Origins, For Honor....etc.
 
long as FC5 isn't like wild lands or whatever where you have to have those AI tards with you at all times.

I liked all the Far Cry games so far so I hope 5 is good. I just want one man army kill shits blow up shit fun times.

and yes they needf a blood dragon 2.
 
Sprayingmango said:
OMG yes...Blood Dragon was such an unexpected good time.
Click to expand...
It was a good spin-off of the series with the 1980s vibe and cheesy dialog. The soundtrack really helped drive the game and might have been the best part of it.

Blood Dragon 2 might be happening if you do a search.
 
Derangel said:
FC1 was outstanding (until towards the end), but I've always found 3 and 4 more fun over-all. FC1 is a special game for everything it did and just how good it looked for the time.



Pity Crysis was nothing more than a showcase for pretty graphics attached to a medicore game that doesn't remotely fulfill all of Crytek's promises.
Click to expand...

I found Crysis to have a great open world about it. I literally climbed a mountain which took 30 real minutes just to see where it took me. I was watching My buddy play another time and he shot down a chopper which crashed into a house crushing it in an event that was not scripted at all. I could chop down a tree with a gun. I could throw a turtle or chicken at people. I could throw people through a house wall. Those are just some experiences few other games have ever given me.
 
Simmonz said:
I found Crysis to have a great open world about it. I literally climbed a mountain which took 30 real minutes just to see where it took me. I was watching My buddy play another time and he shot down a chopper which crashed into a house crushing it in an event that was not scripted at all. I could chop down a tree with a gun. I could throw a turtle or chicken at people. I could throw people through a house wall. Those are just some experiences few other games have ever given me.
Click to expand...

QFT. I think I spent the entire first month with that game just screwing around on that first island, admiring the graphics and the physics. Throwing oil drums up hillsides and watching them roll back down and disrupt the vegetation. Or how rolling grenades under things revealed the weight of a vehicle or object - the heavier, the less displaced by the explosion. May not sound impressive, but it was uncanny how closely a videogame reproduced real life physics, and that was the hook for me.

Can't believe its already been 10 years. Built a new Triple-SLI 8800GTX rig just for that game. I dragged the whole rig to work just to show off how crazy the explosion from the portable nuke launcher looked and sounded. Retrospectively, it wasn't an amazing 10/10 game in terms of continuity and well-rounded story and everything, but it was certainly the best sandbox ever made.

These Far Cry games are great, but with games like them I always wonder if I'm not just chasing that Crysis high. In terms of graphics and physics, I don't think there's really been a game since that has made "the next big leap" forward in graphics and physics on the same scale Crysis did it in '07.
 
Last edited:
DPI said:
QFT. I think I spent the first month just in the first level on that island just admiring the physics - throwing oil drums up hillsides and watching them roll back down and disrupt the vegetation. Can't believe its already been 10 years. Built a new Triple-SLI 8800GTX rig just for that game. Hell I dragged the whole rig to work just to show off how crazy the explosion from the portable nuke launcher looked and sounded. Overall it wasn't that amazing of a game in terms of continuity and story and everything, but it was certainly the best sandbox ever made.

These Far Cry games - 2 (yes even 2), 3, 4 and soon 5 are great, but with each of them I wonder to myself if I'm not trying to recapture that Crysis high. In terms of graphics and physics, I don't think there's really been a game since that has made "the next" big leap forward in graphics and physics, the way Crysis did it in '07.
Click to expand...


Built me an 8800GTS SLi rig for Crysis. Wanted the GTX but they were out of stock and I didn't wanna wait. Also upgraded to a Q6600 for it but sadly quad core support was not as good as I hoped at launch. Far Cry 2 and 3 were also very enjoyable for their scenery and environments. 2 and 3 also had memorable main villains (3 more than 2) and 2 had a great last 4 missions. 4 I haven't played through but Primal doesn't look like my cup of tea.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DPI
like this
DPI said:
In terms of graphics and physics, I don't think there's really been a game since that has made "the next big leap" forward in graphics and physics on the same scale Crysis did it in '07.
Click to expand...

The closest , IMO, is BF3. Even that is fairly old now, about 6 years? Crysis 2 and 3 were very amazing for their time to, but not the massive leap like the first game. Honorable mention to Metro 2033. Some games do come out which look amazing in some ways, but they never come with the "whole package". Take Assassin's Creed Unity/Syndicate, amazing environment but the characters still looked dated. Same with explosions and other special effects.

I'm not sure if we will ever see another game that just blows everything else out of the water graphically.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DPI
like this
Flogger23m said:
The closest , IMO, is BF3. Even that is fairly old now, about 6 years? Crysis 2 and 3 were very amazing for their time to, but not the massive leap like the first game. Honorable mention to Metro 2033. Some games do come out which look amazing in some ways, but they never come with the "whole package". Take Assassin's Creed Unity/Syndicate, amazing environment but the characters still looked dated. Same with explosions and other special effects.

I'm not sure if we will ever see another game that just blows everything else out of the water graphically.
Click to expand...
You know what, you're right. First time I finally loaded into 64p Caspian Border on the last weekend of the BF3 beta, mind was blown. It wasn't just graphics but the combo of graphics, amazing sound, and combined vehicle/infantry warfare happening all around - first time a game world really felt alive. Definitely a milestone. I'd played lots of Bad Company 2 MP, but those first moments of BF3 was whole 'nuther level.

Anyway I'm already getting impatient for FC5 - 4 more months feels like a long way off.
 
Last edited:
the next big milestones may be things like unlimited view distance with no pop-in, no load times, completely destructible/dissect-able/physics-based worlds with fluids, VR reaching human eye resolution/color-depth/response-rates... beyond that things like hap tics or neural interfaces will be exciting and feel like new gameplay/realism jumps
 
Dan_D said:
FarCry 2 was a piece of shit and I haven't touched the series since.
Click to expand...

You are missing out on some great games then my friend. I remember upgrading my graphics card for the original FarCry and loved it just as much as the other folks here, but FarCry 3 and especially 4 refined the gameplay along with stellar controls to a point that makes it actually re-playable. FarCry 3 was great, but 4 is by-far my favorite and offered a lot to do and I always had fun doing it.

I think a lot of people here are in their 30s like myself and we tend to look at older games such as FarCry with rose-tinted glasses. The original FarCry was great WHEN it came out because there was nothing like it, but all the games in their own ways since then have improved upon what made 1 so memorable. If you actually try and replay the original FarCry (like I did recently) I doubt you'd be able to sit through the game and play it through to the end. I remember it fondly and loved it at the time because it was a FPS sandbox that I hadn't experienced before with incredible graphics that brough my videocard to its knees, but it just is not comparable to the modern FarCry games. It's like trying to compare Half Life to Half Life 2, or Goldeneye to Halo. It's impossible to do because those games when released were the pinnacle at the time. I loved the older games as much as everyone else and still do, but we definitely see things from back then through a filter and with a different set of experiences.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top