From what began life as a tech demo, the series has endured for over 16 years, producing 14 games (including Far Cry 6) that have sold over 50 million copies and spawned an utterly atrocious movie. This is the story of Far Cry.
17 Years of Far Cry: From tech demo to successful video game franchise
- Thread starter midian182
- Start date
R00sT3R
Posts: 805 +2,478
Got to be honest, I just feel that once you've played one Far Cry, or Assassins Creed for that matter, you've played them all.
They've just become Ubisoft's go-to, cookie cutter franchise, to keep the revenue's coming in. There is way too much filler in them and they're a poster child for quantity over quality approach to game development.
I'd only ever consider picking one up with some steep,steep discounts in a sale, and by that I mean, less than $15. They're not worth a penny more than that, IMO.
They've just become Ubisoft's go-to, cookie cutter franchise, to keep the revenue's coming in. There is way too much filler in them and they're a poster child for quantity over quality approach to game development.
I'd only ever consider picking one up with some steep,steep discounts in a sale, and by that I mean, less than $15. They're not worth a penny more than that, IMO.
Actually quite an enjoyable read.
Despite the Ubisoft copy-and-paste mechanics across franchises, I really enjoy Far Cry gameplay. The combat is smooth and refined with options for stealth and for when I inevitably screw up, the loud options.
I see the game as fun mechanics in a beautifully crafted world, the campaigns range from decent to good, but are more of an excuse for me to play than genuine investment.
Despite the Ubisoft copy-and-paste mechanics across franchises, I really enjoy Far Cry gameplay. The combat is smooth and refined with options for stealth and for when I inevitably screw up, the loud options.
I see the game as fun mechanics in a beautifully crafted world, the campaigns range from decent to good, but are more of an excuse for me to play than genuine investment.
Shadowboxer
Posts: 2,074 +1,655
That was a bit of a journey. I remember buying Far Cry 1 on release and being blown away with how good the graphics were on my 1290x1024 monitor. I’ve played almost every pc release since, except Far Cry 2 (I lived on a beach in Thailand between 2007 - 2013. Might come back to it at some point next time I’m stuck in a hotel for a week with only my laptop (when will this happen!?).
Hoping Far Cry 6 doesn’t get delayed too long. I’d imagine that unlike movies developers would
not be averse to releasing titles during a pandemic.
Hoping Far Cry 6 doesn’t get delayed too long. I’d imagine that unlike movies developers would
not be averse to releasing titles during a pandemic.
arrowflash
Posts: 584 +696
I really enjoy talking about early Far Cry titles.
Far Cry 1:
"FC was one of the first games where players could point at something in the far-off distance and say to friends, "See that, I can actually go there.""
For me, GTA San Andreas and TES 4: Oblivion were the first games where you could actually do that. Far Cry, not quite. Sometimes you could, but FC1 still had plenty of places that I saw in the distance and wondered if I could get there, only to find invisible walls when trying to reach them. Understandable given the technology at the time, but not quite like Rob says.
The sudden and unexpected introduction of Trigens and mutants was really disappointing and ruined the game for me. I would rather keep fighting human mercenaries until the ending, and that's what I was expecting the first time I played Far Cry. The non-human enemies are massive bullet sponges and throw away any tacticool gameplay style out of the window. The game is still tolerable, but it could have been great and in the end turned out just acceptable, thanks to its second half.
FC Instincts and Instincts Evolution are still pretty good though. I happen to like them a lot more than the original, and would love to see a remastered re-release of Far Cry Instincts Predator for PC so I could play them with KB+M (and improved remastered graphics since they didn't age too well). These games still have non-human enemies but I find them less annoying and less frustrating to fight than in the original.
I know everyone loves to diss Wii's Far Cry Vengeance but I don't think it's that terrible. The real problem is the graphics and performance - the Wii was just too underpowered for CryEngine, even with all the downgrades in resolution, detail, lighting and draw distance. But if you could tolerate the PS2-level graphics and low framerate, the Wiimote controls are actually pretty novel and fun to use.
Far Cry 4 is just Far Cry 3 with a different skin, so much that I think it would have been better off released as a DLC or expansion rather than a fully new game. I noticed this in the first 30 minutes. 4 and Primal are the only Far Cry games I never finished.
Far Cry 5 has become my favorite in the franchise. Loved the map, the reworked AI and the gunplay with reworked gun physics and simulated projectile drop for all guns.
Far Cry: New Dawn has pay-to-win in-game microtransactions for the single player campaign, and that alone makes this game garbage. While it is possible to obtain all microtransaction items by playing the game normally, the game was obviously balanced to encourage players to pay real money for these items by demanding absurd amounts of grinding, just like many mobile games with optional microtransactions. While single player in-game microtransactions were actually introduced with Far Cry 5, in FC5 they were only for cosmetic skins and a couple of vehicles.
If Far Cry 6 has pay-to-win in-game microtransactions, I won't even pirate it.
Far Cry 1:
"FC was one of the first games where players could point at something in the far-off distance and say to friends, "See that, I can actually go there.""
For me, GTA San Andreas and TES 4: Oblivion were the first games where you could actually do that. Far Cry, not quite. Sometimes you could, but FC1 still had plenty of places that I saw in the distance and wondered if I could get there, only to find invisible walls when trying to reach them. Understandable given the technology at the time, but not quite like Rob says.
The sudden and unexpected introduction of Trigens and mutants was really disappointing and ruined the game for me. I would rather keep fighting human mercenaries until the ending, and that's what I was expecting the first time I played Far Cry. The non-human enemies are massive bullet sponges and throw away any tacticool gameplay style out of the window. The game is still tolerable, but it could have been great and in the end turned out just acceptable, thanks to its second half.
FC Instincts and Instincts Evolution are still pretty good though. I happen to like them a lot more than the original, and would love to see a remastered re-release of Far Cry Instincts Predator for PC so I could play them with KB+M (and improved remastered graphics since they didn't age too well). These games still have non-human enemies but I find them less annoying and less frustrating to fight than in the original.
I know everyone loves to diss Wii's Far Cry Vengeance but I don't think it's that terrible. The real problem is the graphics and performance - the Wii was just too underpowered for CryEngine, even with all the downgrades in resolution, detail, lighting and draw distance. But if you could tolerate the PS2-level graphics and low framerate, the Wiimote controls are actually pretty novel and fun to use.
Far Cry 4 is just Far Cry 3 with a different skin, so much that I think it would have been better off released as a DLC or expansion rather than a fully new game. I noticed this in the first 30 minutes. 4 and Primal are the only Far Cry games I never finished.
Far Cry 5 has become my favorite in the franchise. Loved the map, the reworked AI and the gunplay with reworked gun physics and simulated projectile drop for all guns.
Far Cry: New Dawn has pay-to-win in-game microtransactions for the single player campaign, and that alone makes this game garbage. While it is possible to obtain all microtransaction items by playing the game normally, the game was obviously balanced to encourage players to pay real money for these items by demanding absurd amounts of grinding, just like many mobile games with optional microtransactions. While single player in-game microtransactions were actually introduced with Far Cry 5, in FC5 they were only for cosmetic skins and a couple of vehicles.
If Far Cry 6 has pay-to-win in-game microtransactions, I won't even pirate it.
QuantumPhysics
Posts: 6,306 +7,258
Best Far Cry experiences for me were INSTINCTS and Far Cry 4.
INSTINCTS was on Xbox and it looked good, played good and was a lot of fun. I really enjoyed getting the "instincts" and becoming so strong I could slap/scratch people into the air.
Far Cry 4 was technologically better than Far Cry 3 and had more choices (siding with Sabal or Amita). It would have been even BETTER if you could side with Pagan and then go to takeover Golden Path outposts - maybe even live a story with Pagan as you hunt down Sabal and Amita.
FC5 was good, but it was just too easy and definitely not well thought out.
INSTINCTS was on Xbox and it looked good, played good and was a lot of fun. I really enjoyed getting the "instincts" and becoming so strong I could slap/scratch people into the air.
Far Cry 4 was technologically better than Far Cry 3 and had more choices (siding with Sabal or Amita). It would have been even BETTER if you could side with Pagan and then go to takeover Golden Path outposts - maybe even live a story with Pagan as you hunt down Sabal and Amita.
FC5 was good, but it was just too easy and definitely not well thought out.
Avro Arrow
Posts: 3,721 +4,821
I'll start with a little nit-pick.. Far Cry 4 takes place in Kyrat, not Kryat (I'm sure it was just a typo). 
This is one of my all-time favourite gaming franchises. I've played 3, Blood Dragon, 4, 5 and New Dawn. I don't understand people complaining that they're not "different" enough from a gameplay standpoint. I personally like the fact that when I sit down to play a Far Cry title, I don't have to go through a new learning curve with controls every single time.
Few things annoy me more than control schemes that have been modified just for the sake of it to keep the whiners from whining about "too similar" mechanics. I had to hear the same stupid crap from dumb people about the Ace Combat series. The game controls are part of what makes the game great and Far Cry is no exception to this. As far as I'm concerned, Ubisoft Montreal does control schemes really well and I find that both Far Cry and Assassin's Creed have control schemes that are very intuitive.
I think that UM might have listened to a few too many whiners and screwed a bit with their control scheme (or it may have been an Xbox emulation problem) because in FC5, flying a helicopter (which is even more fun than flying a plane) has exactly the same controls as the little gyrocopter in FC4 except that for some reason, you can't descend or land without using a keyboard because pressing the crouch button has no effect in FC5. Descent and landing was not an issue with FC4. That was something that drove me absolutely nuts because I like to play games like this on my sofa with a controller so I can enjoy the game on a 55' 2160p TV. It was especially fun during the drug-addled missions of Far Cry 4 (those two Brits were a real scream).
For those who say that they don't want the games to be more or less alike, they should probably consider that they're the SAME SERIES. If you like how Far Cry plays, then you're probably not going to want it to change all that much from title to title because you already like it. If you DON'T like how Far Cry plays then go play something else like Doom, Resident Evil, God of War, Deus Ex, Devil May Cry, Wolfenstein, Tomb Raider or some random EA title. I'm fairly certain that Ubisoft won't suffer much over it.
Changing core features of Far Cry would result in it not being Far Cry anymore and that would piss off its massive fan-base which is its bread-and-butter. It didn't work with Star Wars, it didn't work with Star Trek and it won't work with Far Cry either. I don't understand people who come out only to piss on a game franchise that people love. If I ever saw an article covering a gaming franchise that I didn't really care for (like when Tetris came out, ugh!), I wouldn't dump on it, I'd just let the people who love it talk about it.
This is one of my all-time favourite gaming franchises. I've played 3, Blood Dragon, 4, 5 and New Dawn. I don't understand people complaining that they're not "different" enough from a gameplay standpoint. I personally like the fact that when I sit down to play a Far Cry title, I don't have to go through a new learning curve with controls every single time.
Few things annoy me more than control schemes that have been modified just for the sake of it to keep the whiners from whining about "too similar" mechanics. I had to hear the same stupid crap from dumb people about the Ace Combat series. The game controls are part of what makes the game great and Far Cry is no exception to this. As far as I'm concerned, Ubisoft Montreal does control schemes really well and I find that both Far Cry and Assassin's Creed have control schemes that are very intuitive.
I think that UM might have listened to a few too many whiners and screwed a bit with their control scheme (or it may have been an Xbox emulation problem) because in FC5, flying a helicopter (which is even more fun than flying a plane) has exactly the same controls as the little gyrocopter in FC4 except that for some reason, you can't descend or land without using a keyboard because pressing the crouch button has no effect in FC5. Descent and landing was not an issue with FC4. That was something that drove me absolutely nuts because I like to play games like this on my sofa with a controller so I can enjoy the game on a 55' 2160p TV. It was especially fun during the drug-addled missions of Far Cry 4 (those two Brits were a real scream).
For those who say that they don't want the games to be more or less alike, they should probably consider that they're the SAME SERIES. If you like how Far Cry plays, then you're probably not going to want it to change all that much from title to title because you already like it. If you DON'T like how Far Cry plays then go play something else like Doom, Resident Evil, God of War, Deus Ex, Devil May Cry, Wolfenstein, Tomb Raider or some random EA title. I'm fairly certain that Ubisoft won't suffer much over it.
Changing core features of Far Cry would result in it not being Far Cry anymore and that would piss off its massive fan-base which is its bread-and-butter. It didn't work with Star Wars, it didn't work with Star Trek and it won't work with Far Cry either. I don't understand people who come out only to piss on a game franchise that people love. If I ever saw an article covering a gaming franchise that I didn't really care for (like when Tetris came out, ugh!), I wouldn't dump on it, I'd just let the people who love it talk about it.
Last edited:
harm9963
Posts: 128 +69
Have FarCry6, got it with my 5800X , just have to wait , but FarCry2 is my favorite.
This!
FarCry for me is a bizarre franchise that has a weird following. FarCry1 was great fun for its time, it was a huge world, a bit Just Cause like, it did feel large, and for me the water was oooh. Graphically it was nice, well to me.
But the end was just WTF no... I never went further as far as I remember. Ruined.
FarCry2 I remember hate for, maybe an issue with saves. Progression issues? But I skipped it.
FarCry3, decent enough again. 4 and Primal I skipped. Playing FC5 and I can't say I am a fan.
Like people have said, if you played 1, you have played them all.
Just surprised they have managed to make a franchise out of a game with a nonsense plot change.
Stingy McDuck
Posts: 300 +268
Rob, you forgot to mention the Farcry 3 shorts, featuring Michael Mando and Christopher Mintz-Plasse.
arrowflash
Posts: 584 +696
Good to see that at least someone still remembers! Yes, Far Cry 2 has a serious game-breaking bug that affects all versions (PC, Xbox 360, PS3) and was never patched (even the most recent GOG and Steam builds still have it).
Here's the bug: If you complete all side missions, side objectives and collectables on the first map before unlocking the second half of the map, you become forever locked out and unable to finish the game. When you finally try to start the main storyline mission that unlocks the second map, you'll find out that the door that's supposed to open so you can meet the quest giver NPC, never opens. In case you don't have an older save from before completing all optional stuff (just 99% completed is enough, as long as it's not 100%), you're sh1t out of luck and the only way to unlock the second map and seeing the ending is cutting your losses and starting a new game.
When the first reports and complaints came, Ubisoft initially refused to acknowledge the bug, and only begrudgingly admitted so more than a month later when the complaints kept coming and piling in. Still, they flat out said they wouldn't ever fix this bug because it would be too much work since the game's entire scripting engine would need to be revamped (yes, to my astonishment they actually said that, and the gaming public actually let it pass).
Neatfeatguy
Posts: 1,633 +3,078
Loved the original entry - still have the physical copy and even installed and played again it about a year ago.
Hated the second - they can take the stupid malaria pill idea and shove it up their asses.....
Third was okay.
I have the fourth, but I don't remember playing through the campaign. How lack luster must a game be that the time played shows up as 10 hours, but you cannot remember playing the game at all?
Fifth wasn't very good. I only have a copy due to my brother buying it so we could play co-op. The QTE that would magically pull you from wherever the hell you may have been (could be on opposite sides of the map and if 1 play triggers a QTE you're both magically pulled into it) was awful.
Hated the second - they can take the stupid malaria pill idea and shove it up their asses.....
Third was okay.
I have the fourth, but I don't remember playing through the campaign. How lack luster must a game be that the time played shows up as 10 hours, but you cannot remember playing the game at all?
Fifth wasn't very good. I only have a copy due to my brother buying it so we could play co-op. The QTE that would magically pull you from wherever the hell you may have been (could be on opposite sides of the map and if 1 play triggers a QTE you're both magically pulled into it) was awful.
spydercanopus
Posts: 897 +156
Great article. Played all the PC versions and 5 is great. The rest, eh.
Thanks you for linking to the Far Cry 5 short film. I had never seen or heard of it.
Thanks you for linking to the Far Cry 5 short film. I had never seen or heard of it.
EClyde
Posts: 2,404 +950
FC 2 was fun and FC 3 more fun. Blood Dragon blew chunks. FC 4 is FC 3 so I quit cause I had played 3 twice
Even though Far Cry 2 had it's problems I still remember playing right through the whole game and really loving it, Far Cry 3 even though I enjoyed it the multiplayer aspect was a let down after it was hyped up before release, multiplayer in 4 was even worse. Just thought if they could have got the multiplayer right the game would have more lasting appeal and be worth getting each release just because of this. After Far Cry 4 I'd just had enough of the same old same old so haven't touched one since, maybe 6 will draw me back.
Ultraman1966
Posts: 194 +116
Yup, every Ubisoft game is about the same and you can predict all the mechanics after they perfected it in Far Cry 3-ish time point (didn't play many of the AC games).
On a separate note, I'm disappointed that we didn't get to revisit fighting the Trigens in Far Cry 1, I actually rather enjoyed it when the island started to get overrun.
trgz
Posts: 479 +241
Not long deleted that tech demo from from my PC, and I've just replayed FC2 solo and New Dawn in co-op, so this article was well timed.
Not sure which was my favourite (I tired quickly of Blood Dragon) but I did have a lot of love for the original on the PC having played it through a couple of times or so (apart from that last bit) and spent many a fun evening in a cyber cafe (remember them?!) play PvP - I even remember trying to create a mod for scent trails but didn't really get anywhere.
I must re-install Primal...
Not sure which was my favourite (I tired quickly of Blood Dragon) but I did have a lot of love for the original on the PC having played it through a couple of times or so (apart from that last bit) and spent many a fun evening in a cyber cafe (remember them?!) play PvP - I even remember trying to create a mod for scent trails but didn't really get anywhere.
I must re-install Primal...
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
AMD's cancelled RDNA 4 GPU could have doubled the 7900 XTX's performance- Athlonite replied
-
Hellish winds, liquid rock clouds and more discovered on this "hot Jupiter"- GodisanAtheist replied
