Far Cry 5

[rabidtictac]

I'm curious as to what's the difference in your mind between FC4 and FC5, as far as being fed up with them. Just fatigue with ubisoft sandboxes, or something more specific?

I had a lot of fun with just cause 2 as well, but that was some years ago, before the open world sandboxes were as prevalent as they are now. I remember I would play saints row 2 or just cause 2 to fuck around in a sandbox world. GTA5 and SR3 weren't even out yet iirc.

[VoiceOfReasonPast]

The only real gripe I had with Just Cause 2 was the lack of car radios and the fact that piloting a plane felt like playing IL2 Sturmovik while drunk (I've prepared a pimped-up helicopter just to beat the mini-games intended for planes).

Still, dat grappling hook. A shame that one isn't in Saints Row 2.

[Auli]

I really enjoy this game so far.

Might be the Lyrica I'm taking, though xD


Edit: The best thing, though, is that it confuses SJWs xD

[Some Sick Fuck]

I see majority of Ubisoft games as overall experiences, as I've mentioned previously with Ass Creed - I would never play those games to enjoy them mainly on mechanical level. Far Cry works similarly, it's somewhat competent shooter at it's core, but it's no Wolfenstein TNO - that was a shooter that I've enjoyed through and through.

I do like open world games done right (fuck Mirror's Edge 2), because I like exploration and freedom to choose my own pace. That's just something you either have some disposition towards, or not, I suppose. Also, I haven't played the game too much, I am waiting for a friend, because he had a fantastic idea to go on a vacation for three weeks, still one left for him to be back. So this is mainly coming from reviews and bits of gameplay I have seen.

Now, a summary of notable differences between FC4 and FC5 I can come up with right now:

1. Companions, animals and people that can accompany you all the time. This was in previous games, but it's quite robust here, it was bare bones in FC2 and only animals in Primal.
2. A less linear approach towards story, in FC4 it was straightforward, FC5 takes more of a Wildlands approach where you choose which missions you want to do and which main parts of the story you want to tackle first. Based on that, the enemy also "kinda" react to you with some story based moments, so it can lead to somewhat different experiences in terms of pacing - don't expect different outcomes, but being able to choose the order is nice.
3. No minimap, instead you have compass to make you cheat slightly less. I still wish they would get rid of that tagging bullshit, it makes firefights really easy and clutters the screen.
4. You don't reveal bigger portions of the world by climbing towers (not that I did mind), but more organically by exploring around. Certainly a step forwards.
5. More natural progression on optional quests and stories, where completing one thing leads to another, so it feels more meaningful than getting money or a new gun.
6. A proper COOP. This game was begging to be played with friend, and finally it's a full coop where everything is accesible to a second player. FC4 only allowed you to do secondary stuff.
7. Over all more creative missions and side stuff, and more interesting - I especially like the exploration based "hunting for caches", which is an improved cave exploration system from Primal, which basically replaced the towers - instead of climbing something over and over without it really changing, it adds platforming and using enviroment to hunt for stuff, which is a nice break from all the shooting. I do like it and I wish there was more of it.
8. Much better music. This might not seem like a big thing, but you really notice when a game has either great soundtrack or great sounds in general compared to when it doesn't. The presentation is a big thing to these games.

It's a lot about the content, not the mechanisms necassarily - some things do change over time, but the basics remain similar. When I play Far Cry game, I tend to immerse myself in the world and story - it's not great, mind you, I know that, but it contributes to my overall experience - so if a story takes a shit on me, like it did with FC2, and in later parts in FC4, it makes me less inclined to enjoy myself.

What made me annoyed about FC4 could be summarized in not so great settings (I didn't care much for it) and what annoyed me towards the end was whiny protagonist (he keeps ranting about how he doesn't wanna do bitch work for others, then he continues doing it) and shitty supporting characters. You basically end up turning the country around for two shitty revolutionaries that end up treating you like shit despite you being their main trump card, with no fucking payoff.

Some might say it's symbolic, which it is, but if there is no other payoff than you still doing what they want, and then just leaving the land in their hands with some petty treats, that's really annoying. This happens through hours and hours of gameplay. That's why I felt annoyed about FC4. Primal was simplier, I had simple goals, my character wasn't a bitch and the world felt better. In FC5, your character is mute, which is sad and awkward, but at the same time, better than being a whiny bitch that doesn't even want to be there.

You could perhaps say that I like being manipulated by those games to an extent, and as long as they deliver, I don't mind. FC3 did deliver, FC4 not so much, I liked Primal, and so far I am liking this one as well.

[Kugelfisch]

You should consider writing for IGN with your intense level of apologetics you're readily immersing yourself in.
Seriously, you're sounding like a fucking automaton. Read back your stuff. It sounds like you've got an obligation to play anything new and try to seek for the modicum of betterment that the new title, hopefully, brought.

Forget the usual rationalization and memes you're thinking of right now. Bla bla, you're open-minded and shit bla bla we're old, grimy fucks. Spare me that shit. Be introspective for once. Do you seriously, thoroughly enjoy that shit? Lots of defensive words and strained rationalisation for liking a game. "Experience" and not really liking the "mechanics" and so on. Red flags more over the place than Russia during UDSSR days.

[Some Sick Fuck]

Do you seriously, thoroughly enjoy that shit?

Of course! You think that I'm talking to some strangers on the internet to justify my taste? I like the banter and I find it interesting to measure our tastes in games, especially since they are so different.

If you can take one thing from my rambling, it's that I differentiate between games that I play mostly for mechanisms and games that might not have as satisfying core gameplay, but the overall presentation and content (like story, characters, atmosphere and mood building, aka the stuff germans don't understand because they lack soul) works well for me to just relax and enjoy the games on a different level.

For example, I don't care about any of the story based cinematic bullshit they're trying to put into Battlefield right now, I only play that for the sake of gameplay. Epic falling airships and heroism nonsense does nothing for me. But I don't mind that in a single player shooter that allows me to relax and not play competitively. I am aware that Far Cry for example has a lot of things I would've liked to be different, but those things simply aren't so severe for me to lose interest.

got an obligation to play anything new

I play what I want - there are usually over 100 releases every month, and I get to play like 5-10 new games every year? Your argument doesn't hold a lot of weight, grandpa, I am very selective. And I play a lot of stuff, old and new, but I really don't play that many games when they release. I don't stray from anything except fighting, sport and driving games. They do nothing for me.

try to seek for the modicum of betterment that the new title, hopefully, brought

If you play a certain series, you get a better insight than others who just briefly touch them or only see trailers, and these differences matter so much more to you - surely you are aware of that, give me an example of your favourite series, and I am certain I won't be able to tell how different these games are.

old, grimy fucks

Your words, I'll always give you benefit of the doubt, you're not that grimy

[Some Sick Fuck]

Oh, and one more thing about FC5, because it's really not an issue, but it keeps coming back - I keep seeing assholes saying how this is the best looking game they've ever seen. It's fucking not, not even close! These bitches need some bleach to their eyes pronto!

It's really not that good looking, it's ok even on ultra. Battlefield 1 (or Battlefront 2, but I am not touching that) still looks far more impressive and even Ubisoft's Division has much better visuals. I have no idea what any of these cucks are on if they think this game is somehow the pinnacle of visual fidelity.

Also, couple more observations since I've actually played the game now a little bit longer - unlike FC4, FC5 is far bigger and more open. I always felt like everything in FC4 was really condensed in a small area, it was rather weird. Here, you can comfortably drive around in big, open areas and it feels good. The map is actually good this time, unlike the confusing mess that it was in previous games, big improvement. Also, the different regions have some unique features so it looks different when you visit other leader's lands. So far, it's very enjoyable - it's no wonder cucks like Spergling and others dislike it.

[Kugelfisch]

I'm not really into game series. The only one I really care for is Monster Hunter.

I will never understand why mediocre graphics get hyped so much. Currently, people are jizzing their pants to that upcoming Bioware game, Anthem. There's no way in hell it will look like it does in the pre-rendered "gameplay" trailer when it's released. Since you've mentioned The Division, that game also looks only half as good as it did in the trailers and has some moments where the performance is wonky.

[rabidtictac]

Have any of you played ace combat games? I was thinking about trying one. I never played any of the games, ever.

[Some Sick Fuck]

I'm not really into game series. The only one I really care for is Monster Hunter.

Well, that's not surprising to me. If I find something I like, I usually want more of it, unless I get bored of it. And unless they change the formula too much, I usually stick around with series I am comfortable with. But I suppose some people have enough after first game.

Division certainly looked better in trailers, but on itself, it is a pretty damn good looking game, certainly has better attention to detail than Far Cry 5. Good graphics sell of course, but this has really not been the staple of FC series for some time, so I just don't know where this stupid shilling comes from, aside from bad eyesight and inability to compare better looking games.

Have any of you played ace combat games? I was thinking about trying one. I never played any of the games, ever.

For a long time, I've been thinking about Ace Combat Assault Horizon - I've heard that it apparently simplified the formula too much and it was received poorly, but eventually, I'll be willing to give it a try. Aren't they making a new one?