I liked 3 and 4 fine, but I loved 5. It had mediocre gameplay, but the story and missions were fun, with a lot of Easter eggs. Especially in multi player coop it was pretty fun.
I absolutely despised 6. It was bland and very broken on release. It also felt like 3 games shoved together that didn’t really fit or interact. I later found it this was because that was exactly what they did. Due to covid the people working on it didn’t really work together and the end result was a total mismatch. The story was very predictable and not worth it, even though they marketed the hell out of it. The side stories were mostly absent and not interesting at all. The game lacked any humor and wasn’t self aware like 5 was. The amounts of crashes and bugs made the game borderline unplayable when it came out. And these weren’t the funny amount of jank I enjoy kind of crashes, these were proper game breaking bugs. There was no enemy variation at all and a lot of copy paste assets. To the point that every checkpoint that needed to be liberated had the exact same layout and enemies, down to the spawn location. The weapons and enemy strength made no sense at all. You’d use a big ass gun upgraded with special armor piercing bullets, shoot a regular dude right in the head and he would just shrug it off and keep going. The AI was also a joke, with enemies not reacting at all to what you did, just milling about and shooting at random. The game would send out special forces, which would promptly give up once you rode down the street. Some random pleb enemy on a corner could however snipe you at 300m somehow. The whole game made absolutely no sense.
The only interesting part was the firework backpack, but even this one fell pretty flat. There was one that was pretty OP, so that’s the one most people used. Which is a shame, because fucking around with different packs could have been interesting. These were also broken on release, where most of the times the rockets would clip into the character model and just explode. So instead of doing damage and helping in a fight, you’d just blow yourself up.
I played a good amount of Far Cry 5, 100% completing it a couple of times. I did the story for Far Cry 6 and some of the side stuff in about 12 hours, then uninstalled the game and never played it again. I was so disappointed, Far Cry is dead to me.
I’ve been thinking about picking up 6 since the setting looks interesting but you’re not getting my hopes up lol. Then again I haven’t played a Far Cry game since FC2 so maybe I’d still be fine and just not know what I’m missing out on.
Any idea if they’ve fixed any of those things in patches, since you mention it being broken on release? Though I guess the point about copy paste assets still stands, as well as fundamental problems related to the design.
The side stories were mostly absent and not interesting at all.
Then
I did the story for Far Cry 6 and some of the side stuff in about 12 hours, then uninstalled the game
Come on pal, I don’t disagree, it felt the weakest of the series… But this feels like you wanted to dislike the game before even playing it. Plus, you can’t really criticise something as being absent if you just chose not to engage with it.
You’d use a big ass gun upgraded with special armor piercing bullets, shoot a regular dude right in the head and he would just shrug it off and keep going.
Yeah? I had the opposite problem. Using the first rifle you get with a silencer and some armour piercing rounds you could one shot every enemy with a head shot. Took away a lot of the fun by making me have to ignore that and use different guns that were substantially weaker just for some fun firefights.
Something a lot of people miss (and actually Far Cry 6 forgot/discarded) is most Far Cry games end with a very deconstructive and sad message towards the violence you’ve achieved through the game.
They tend to miss since people that care about writing skip these games. I’m curious what they could do with it though.
I was so disappointed at the mechanics they brought in with FarCry 3. The ability to tag an enemy and have them be visible through walls until they’re dead is ridiculous. I was horrified when I saw it repeated in 4, and then realized it was a permanent part of the franchise.
I remember reading that bosses just scale to the amount of players so my guess is solo is actually solo. This would make the solo or trio only decision even stranger…
IGN: Sure. [Laughs] Back to the game, one thing that wasn’t clear to me yesterday. Do you have to play it online in a group of three, or can you also play it solo or in a duo?
Junya Ishizaki: The game is designed to be played as a three-person team, but you can play it as a solo player.
IGN: Oh, great. Or in a pair?
Junya Ishizaki: No, it’s either one-player or three-player.
That’s so weird. Why not give an option for two? What if a lot of players only know one other player? What’s the reasoning for “one, or three players”?
Just their artistic vision and game design philosophy, which I can both respect and go WTF at the same time. Like with their steadfast refusal to provide the option to turn off invasions.
Turning off invasions while still playing coop you mean? Cause offline mode turns off invasions (duh). I guess invasions are part of the thrill in their mind and after a random coop sunbro and I were invaded by a phantom while super low health and outta potions way into a dungeon in Dark Souls and managed to survive by hiding away together with no voicecomms, it‘s hard for me to disagree with them lol
I don’t know, I usually play duo and 5-6 is overtuned, and nearly impossible. Especially on automatons, because it just spawns infinity low levels. But then diff 9-10 feel like diff 3-4 because even though they spawn the big enemies, for some reason it spawns less of the low levels.
The game feels like it has automatic scaling, but it always feels like it is set up wrong.
I think I just did automatons back then because that's where the rewards were but it was a completely overwhelming number of enemies spawning in non-stop. Combined with the sort of time limit I just did not enjoy that experience at all. Maybe you can kinda get better and grind through it I feel I'd rather waste my time and money on something that's balanced around singleplayer, even if just optionally.
I don’t know what it is with Japanese devs and arbitrary multiplayer decisions. The way Capcom handles Monster Hunter’s multiplayer continues to baffle me.
From a PC gaming perspective, it feels like Western developers decided to just give players multiple options to play together all the way back in the 1990’s. This sort of thing always feels badly regressive to me.
Well, this is misleading. My mind goes to the likes of Sony first party titles in reading this headline, but the examples that the article uses as a metric for “PlayStation exclusive” are more like the games that either were paid to not go to Xbox or didn’t see the fiscal sense in doing so. It doesn’t rule out first party titles, but that’s far from the most likely. Of Sony’s first party games, the ones most likely to come to Xbox, if at all, are the live service games, and that’s looking increasingly like a strategy that Sony regrets anyway, so why even bother with Xbox when it’s not going to move the needle?
Holy shit gaming outlets are really desperate for clicks. How, just how are these people better paid than garbage collection crews or entry level nurses. We need to make it impossible to make a living wage creating click and ragebait. Just mandate adblocking by default in all browsers, ffs.
PS to Xbox?.. Yeah…okay uh no. They don’t have to negotiate their brands as that is what gives them power. Something Microsoft is significantly lacking
insider-gaming.com
Najstarsze