FarCry 4 Thread

Sweet i can ride an elephant! Looking forward to this one, glad they've changed the setting, whole jungle/sun/beach is a bit boring now!

 

Thanks for tempering my words a bit. You are right and I do think it is better to characterize FC2 as more of a "grounded" experience than one of realism. For some reason, maybe it's just a huge coincidence but I enjoy the H*LL out of FC2. FC3 with its "video gamey" approach just turned me off completely. I had been looking forward to what was coming next for so long and to see it turned into what it is was a huge disappointment.

I honestly believed the developers were going to enhance FC2...not replace it.

But as others here have already stated...if FC4 could be a melding of the best of all the previous offerings (and perhaps have selectable realism settings for people like me) it would be wonderful.

I can do without the screen prompts, scripted takedowns, scripted boss levels, fantasy elements (like the giant demon with the funny hair). Fighting major characters as if I'm hallucinating on drugs or having a bad dream. Games of skill on the side (we are not visiting a carnival folks). Those damn hobby activities! Little things like that.

I want a big map with lots of exploration set in a realistic story with as much control to interact in the game/story as possible. FC2 was heading in that direction. I don't think anyone can argue against that point at least. It had its own problems but also had enormous potential that did not get realized with FC3. Okay, I'm done.

 

First, thank you for basically labeling me as a "casual gamer". I really dislike such terms myself, casual... hardcore... blah, blah, blah.
Gamer is a gamer. We all play games because we enjoy them, there shouldn't be any reason to break it up just because someone feels they are more worthy in some odd way.


And personally, the only good qualities I feel FarCry 2 had was some great graphics, and solid combat.
Both are things that were present in FarCry 3. And personally, I liked FC3 visually more. The wider color pallet helped keep it interesting, were the constant brown of FC2 became a chore.
And the combat in FC3 was much more enjoyable, specially since stealth actually worked (unlike FC2) and made it a viable way to engage enemies.

I know some people really like FC2, and that's good. For them.
But, the least they can do is understand that no matter how much they try and push it out there... there are those that don't like it.
And no amount of trying to describe how it felt when they played it... is going to change how I (or other people who didn't like it) felt when we played it.
FC2 was tedious, boring, flawed... with awful voice acting, a terrible story and completely blank, forgettable characters.
Fun combat was flawed by broken stealth... and what could've been an interesting world dwindled down to tedium due to constant back and forth driving and rinse and repeat missions.

 

Oh come on now. You can't tell me the things Frank Bilders would say didn't crack you up! I can't repeat most of them here but I thought his "colorful" stories and expressions were a nice touch.

As to the rest of your post, I agree with a lot of it (solid combat...no amount of describing my experience is going to change the minds of others). The stealth thing though. I know it was a problem with mortars but I never had a problem hiding from individuals (behind a tree or a rock, things like that).

I know what you mean about the casual gamer thing. I apologize to you personally. I guess that's my lashing out at how dumbed down FC3 was made. The screen prompts and QTE's really poured salt on the wound for me. It made me feel like I was watching the game instead of playing it...and this after the years of anticipation and knowing there was nothing to be done about it.

 

There were some well written characters in FC2... the problem was the voice acting was terrible.
Everything sounds as if the actors speed read everything in one setting. All the dialog is spoken way too fast, it gives no room for them to really add any emotion or depth to what they are saying.
So, no matter how well something is written... it still comes off as crap. Presentation counts.

And stealth... it just doesn't work.
I've heard that it "kind of" works with some of the unofficial patches/mods... but meh.
Stabbing someone with the machete only to find the three guys on the other side of the camp, behind a building... "heard" it and are now looking for you is crap.

 

Hmmm...I can vouche for the machete kills not always being stealthy. But the silenced pistol (needs to be a head shot) always works for me unless the target is standing right next to another enemy.

The rapid dialect...I know what you mean but I only noticed it with the guy asking for the tapes to be returned to him. He had the longest dialogs in the game.

Sometimes I would knock off a guard and the others would eventually stumble upon the body. One would say, "Oh Sh*t, they got the new guy!" And the other would say, "TJ...his name was TJ." That was good for a chuckle the first time or so.

Did you ever catch a guard unaware and have him put his arms up in surrender? The first time I had that happen was a big surprise. Unfortunately you can't get him to move or anything and he will attack as soon as you let your guard down.

 

Well i guess we can disagree on that. I think FarCry3 is inferior in every way to #2, you think otherwise.

Hopefully FarCry4 delivers a good experience, one way or the other.

 

There was potential in FarCry 2, but I think they completely missed it.
It's just a matter of the story wasn't gripping enough to keep me interested, the constant back and forth and lack in mission variety didn't help.

FarCry 3 did go for a more "arcadish" combat design, but it worked IMO. More varied missions, a more interesting island... the addition of hunting and crafting to give you a reason to explore the world.
And ultimately, better writing... better characters. Of course, Vaas... was beyond great. But, there were so many other amazingly crafted characters in the game. Like Buck... and the Doctor...
And the fact that they intentionally designed your "friends" to be people don't really like. It's supposed to make you question why would I want to go back with them?

I loved FarCry 3. My only complaint is that the story peaks too soon, leaving the second island feeling rushed.

 

I reckon fc3 would have made a better liner shooter, like metro not cod style. Fc3 just feels like the island and open-worldness was tacked for the sake of fc tradtion of exploration.

 

sucks to be you.

 

Considering I have been to himalayas and Everest Basecamp, im all in for this game just for some nostalgia

 

I'm going to go with scrapser here concerning the stealth mechanics in FC2, they worked just fine if you approached it correctly. I once took out an entire enemy camp without alerting anyone with my silenced pistol and single headshots on every single enemy without any issues. Yet I always hear how stealth in the game was completely broken or just plain none existent and folk are far too eager to chalk it up as just another aspect FC2 failed with. Oh and I only attempted this after visiting a safe house and setting the time of day to night time so I could enter under cover of night, something else FC3 was severely missing.

The combat in FC2 was just far more visceral and believable IMO and the exploding weaponry added an extra layer of unexpectancy that kept you constantly on your toes. I often felt like a Terminator in FC3 and hardly felt under pressure whereas in FC2 I always felt I was properly fighting to survive with every single enemy engagement.

As scrapser rightly said though for those of us who prefer FC2 nobody is ever going to listen to our opinions and utterly change their minds concerning its merits and that's just fine by us really. We still look back on it as a true genre changer in spite of some of its drawbacks as what it helped deliver no other shooter has come close to matching since its release back in 2008.

 

Why are you so agressive ? He is entitled to his opinion.

 

Thanks for making the case for FC2. I don't just agree with you because I share the same enthusiasm...I agree because your description of what makes FC2 significantly unique is spot on. I have no problem admitting to its failings but "whoever" designed the game play really hit upon something. Maybe it only appeals to a small segment of the gaming community...or perhaps as you say, the focus on its problems caused many to throw up their arms and walk away prematurely. We'll probably never know for certain.

What I am continually drawn to in the game and also why I jump into these conversations is the contrast between my personal experience playing it and how most people characterize it. They simply don't match up. If you play the game in a certain way (and that's the only way I can describe) FC2 is a LOT of fun. The missions and characters become inconsequential. The fun is simply making your way from point A to point B, executing your own plan and what you encounter along the way. The mission goals just give you a star to head towards more or less. It's the journey...not the destination.

I think that's what I wanted out of FC3. But it's hard to...recreate? The map is certainly large enough but the control system is disappointing and there's too much "noise" in the game. Maybe it's the island culture. I feel more like a tourist than somebody on a mission.

FC3 is a different approach to entertainment. I'm certain the people who designed and developed FC3 were not part of the FC2 team. I bet the same will be true for FC4, so we'll just have to wait and see what they come up with. Hopefully not just a bunch of endless mountain caves to explore (a la Doom).

 

I pre-ordered FarCry 2.
Was very excited to play it. And, after I first installed it... I made it maybe four hours in. I got so bored I had no desire to play anymore.
So, I stopped... left it installed on my PC but didn't touch it for easily a couple months.
I later went back to it.
Tried again. Different playstyle, trying to mix things up... stealth here, action there... explosives... and again, just got so damn bored.

And, I forced myself to continue this time. But, while forcing myself to continue... playing even though I was beyond bored, that's when the various issues with the game's design started to really dig at me.
I really enjoyed the combat... but having a weapon explode in your hands a few minutes after you pick it up. Driving through a checkpoint, realizing you made a wrong turn... going back and finding everyone you killed, everything you blew up... replaced.

And stealth. Yes, I know people say it works... and you two are not the first that say "silenced pistol". But that as well is very hit and miss. At times, yes... it will work. At others, shoot someone in the head... he drops perfectly. Everyone on the base is alerted.


BUT, I could get past that. I could easily over look the respawning checkpoints, the (incredibly stupid) weapons exploding in your hands, the pointless malaria... if not for the tedium of the game.
Start here, drive to this point... get phone call, decide to either go to point A, or safe house B. Then go to mission. Kill everyone, blow something up. Return. Repeat.
That, coupled with the complete lack of friendly/indifferent characters outside of the main city or the bar... every single person you see in the open world instantly shoots at you.
And no dangerous animals. There's no threat from the world itself. I had no worries when wondering around the world because I knew jumping in the water, there wouldn't be anything in there.
I knew crouching in a bush... nothing was going to sneak up behind me and attack.

I'm glad you enjoy it, honestly I am. I'm always happy when people find and enjoy a game. Even I don't.
But, to me, FarCry 2 is the weak point in the series. And it honestly almost made me not buy FC3 simply because I was worried it was going to repeat the same mistakes.
That and the main character and his friends were douches... but, then playing the game and realizing, "I'm not supposed to like these people. They are idiots.", made up for it.

And yes, the bulk of FarCry 3's team is different people. But mostly because a lot of people on FC2's team were moved around, left the studio and went on to different things.
FC3's team was built up specifically for it, with a few people from FC2 remaining. That's why they talked about issues in FC2 that they wanted to address, things they wanted to change.

And so far, FC4 is said to be being made by the same team.

 

Thanks for sharing. It really contributes to the conversation. I got FC2 as a bundle with my BFG GTX 295 graphics card. At first, I ignored it because all I had was the paper envelope containing the disk and it seemed cheap and incomplete. But curiosity finally won and I installed the game.

Once I started playing it, the first thing that struck me was the sandbox freedom. I had never played a FPS with such flexibility. I diligently followed the missions I was given and ran into the same issues you mention. But it never got boring and the malaria thing just seemed like a wildcard thrown in to make things interesting during combat. The weapons thing seemed like an incentive to go get store bought weapons as soon as possible. I also developed the habit of replacing my weapons each time I passed an arms dealer. I kept a mental note of how long it had been since refreshing them so I never had the exploding weapons problem that often.

The one thing I did do wrong was assume the M40 grenade launcher would not wear out too fast since you only could carry 4 shots (one chambered...three extras). But I found out the hard way when I fired a grenade and it only went a few feet in front of me and blew up! I didn't make the connection at first...then realized that was the wearing out behavior I was seeing.

I'm not sure exactly how I got to the point where I enjoy playing it so much. I like long games to begin with and I like the feeling I'm on my own and only have to deal with the immediacy of my surroundings. FC2 creates that environment for me. It's not too simple (you can't take things for granted in combat) and also not too complex (you don't get overwhelmed with too many things happening at once).

At some point I had played it enough to get a feel for what I enjoyed most and tailored my play and strategy to achieve those goals. For example, I try to take out the entire junkyard with only the machete and silenced pistol. It becomes a game in itself. There are 17 enemies to deal with and as soon as they realize you are attacking they converge from all directions. So what I do is start making a circle of movement around the perimeter hiding here and there when I can to find a target of opportunity and take a guy out...maybe two if I'm lucky. But often I will simply slip away until they give up looking for me (which they will do eventually). Then I sneak up on the nearest unsuspecting guy with the machete or if possible a head shot. Rinse and repeat. It can take a couple hours but its fun. The railroad yard is fun with the sniper rifle. The lake with the village on pilings can be very challenging as can the shanty town. This is how I enjoy FC2. The checkpoints are just obstacles in my way as I move to these various locations.

Edited to add:
I guess I should mention FC2 was my first FC game. After playing FC2 I bought and played FC1. It was fun but my impression from FC2 colored my experience of FC1. I wonder if this made a difference in my experience?

 

Thought I would take a moment to apologize to anyone who might feel like this thread was hijacked. FC is a great franchise and many of us are passionate about it. I have tried to minimize FC2 discussions of late but this thread brought up some uncommon thoughts worthy of consideration.

So now...onwards to FC4 and hopefully more fun to be had!

 

Why would Fallout4 be set in India?

 

Aye? Fallout 4...:3eyes:

 

No idea.
But... that's news to me.