Far Cry Classic Abomination

Has anyone had a chance to play it? I downloaded the trial on the Xbox 360, and I'm surprised how god awful it looks. You'd think the Xbox 360 or PS3 would be capable of running a 2004 PC game at high settings. Turns out that a lot of settings look like they're lower than the lowest possible settings on the PC. The levels have been simplified - there are now less than 1/4th of the buildings, trees, foliage, background islands, and objects in the levels. They also managed to suck all the color out of the game.

I wish I could find some screenshots of the PC version at a higher resolution at high settings, but the game is old so they're difficult to find. Even in these low-resolution screenshots, it's abundantly obvious how minimal the console port looks compared to the original game. Worst of all - it feels like the game is struggling to maintain 30 FPS. The controls, as a result, as sluggish as sin. All the fun little details and interactive objects in the environments have been removed. The game just feels hollow and empty compared to what it was on the PC.

Sadly enough, Crytek is trying to sell it as the "ultimate version of Far Cry" with "improved HD graphics" over the original.

PC on TOP, Console port on BOTTOM

Meh, the first Far Cry sucked anyways

how much is it on 360?

10 bucks on pc and the platform doesn't seem to matter. http://www.cheapshark.com/search?q=far%20cry

I'd go for the gog version. no DRM.

Looks fine from what I see.

Damn,10 years later and consoles still can´t get a decent port of the original Far Cry,that´s a shame,it´s such an amazing game.

I played the first a little then sent it on its way, never to return.

yes it did. Crytek's only good games were Crysis 1 and warhead, now they are back to sucking.

It was one of the best FPS around at the time. And certainly better than Halo. All of them. At once.

Crytek pc only = 9.0-9.5 scoring games

Crytek pc + consoles = 8.5-7.5 scoring

Crytek console only = 4.5

The port is pretty good. It doesn't look as good as the PC version, but it runs well.

They also replaced zooming with iron sights, which is a good thing. It's pretty much the same game. 10euros is good. Crysis was 15, and actually lacked a level.

This one just doesn't have multiplayer, which is no big deal. I'm glad I'm playing through it again. Good for my blind nostalgia.

Definitely would be nice to have decent sized screenshots to compare. Either way, this is making me want to play Far Cry again. I have it around here somewhere. Think I might install it tonight and give it a go. I'll take some screens and post them here if the thread isn't dead by then.

Here's some of my original Far Cry (PC) images. They're at 1440x900 though. Friggin 5 CDs for installation.

Now I'm confused. Do I get it on 360 with achievements or do get it on steam for the same price?

No PC version?

Don't know why, but my pc struggle with the old one.

That comparison does not seem such bad to me. I never finish the game though because I did not like. Farcry 3 is one of my favorite however.

I did finish xbox version though. Was linear and everything different but you get cool super power at end of this game and jumping far like animal.

Will be downloading it later tonight.

I don't even think you're running it at highest settings. I swear Far Cry with SM 3.0 looks tons better than that. Is that with the latest patch (SM 3.0 enabled)? If not, you're not even maxing out the game. It makes the game look a LOT better.

Pretty please - go download the demo on the 360 or PS3 and compare the demo level to the PC. I promise you will be dumbfounded by how big the nerf is.

Look harder at the PC screenshot - see all those trees in the distance? And the island? And then look at the 360 screenshot...there are only 3 trees in the distance. If you actually play the 360 version, ENTIRE sections of levels are missing and completely missing objects where objects used to exist. It's as if they completely re-did the game and stripped it down for the console version.

That is weird. I'm on a laptop from 2009, which obviously struggles a lot with Crysis, even at mostly medium settings, with some low, but it crushes Far Cry, maxed out, no problem. Speaking of, here's 3 screens I just took 5 minutes ago, after reinstalling Far Cry. Max settings, 1920x1080, 2x AA. Unfortunately they're jpegs, rather than PNGs, since Fraps doesn't seem to like FC right now, and I used the built-in screenshot function.

And here's links to the images on Minus, in case anyone wants to see them without Gamespot's compression.

Image 1

Image 2

Image 3

The quality of the jpegs are already bugging me. If I can get fraps to work, I'll post some high quality PNGs later.

That's exactly what they did. Did the same thing with Crysis 1.

Also, you mentioned the latest patch having SM 3.0, and making a big difference. What's that version number? Does it look like my screens (in the previous post) have it?

It might be something you have to enable in the console. Here's a link. It's a pretty big difference - there should be HDR and the foliage should look much better (and less flat). Also - it makes a lot of the shaders and textures better. Here's a comparison between the shaders and HDR On/Off.

The shots in the OP don't do your argument justice cos the 360 version doesn't look half bad there. Certainly not "God awful"

Um Far Cry 3 looked pretty good on consoles. Obviously nowhere near as good as on Ultra in 1080p on PC. But still pretty damn good. Way better than Far Cry Classic, which was probably just a extremely low budget/low effort port to try to cash in on the new found mainstream popularity of the Far Cry series. I wouldn't be surprised if they just had a couple of college interns handle the entire port without pay, and they cut objects out and compressed textures out of the game just to make the download size small so they didn't have to pay Micro$oft and $ony as much to host a bigger file download.

Either way, this is one of the stupidest topics I've ever seen on SW simply due to the fact that there's been countless games on the PS3/360 that make Far Cry 1 look like dumpster trash.

Didn't they do that with Crysis 1 on consoles as well ?

"reworked lighting engine" or something ?

@jun_aka_pekto said:

Here's some of my original Far Cry (PC) images. They're at 1440x900 though. Friggin 5 CDs for installation.

I really miss the scale and draw distance Far Cry 1 has in most newer shooter campaigns. It gives you much more freedom to tackle situations differently. Had a lot of fun with Far Cry back in 2004.

Both 360 and ps3 should be able to handle this game well at 720p, since I recall that it runs without problems at max settings with a geforce 6800 ultra which is much slower than the GPUs in either ps3/360.

Here a video of the 360 version, a bit buggy but seems ok otherwise. However I fell that they could at least do some upgrades to the lightning and AI in the game.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyuX-bf37MA

Far Cry is easily the best FPS ever made, imo.

This is Ubisoft who is publishing/developing Far cry classic.

You have the worst opinions in the entire world

Looks like a rush job. Still got the OG one on PC tho!

prove it

So that makes Far Cry Instincts (Xbox), Far Cry Instincts Evolution (Xbox), Far Cry Instincts Predator (360), Far Cry Vengeance (Wii), and now Far Cry Classic (360 and PS3) that all suck :P

I liked Far Cry Predator, actually. I thought it was fun.

How is it compare to far cry 3? I doubt I'll play it though. I liked far cry 3 and loved blood dragon, but only played far cry 2 for an hour before never touching it ever again.

I guess you are a fan of AI with X-ray vision and laser accuracy. It looked amazing for its time and I liked the open environments but the AI made it pretty frustrating and pretty well made the freedom pointless since the AI would spot you no matter where you hid or how much you tried to sneak around avoiding dudes.

I didn't have any trouble with the AI seeing me in foliage. I did have to download a user patch to keep them from seeing me when I was sneaking through a tent, though.

@miiiiv: The draw distance is somewhat misleading. You can't really go too far before those blasted helicopters show up and turn you into pulp. Far Cry 3 is the way I like it.

Consolite scum don't mind.

Get off ur lazy arse and download it. Perhaps your eye just isn't particularly scrutinizing. There aren't any 360 screenshots floating around that would let me directly compare it to PC. I mean...can you not see in the 360 shot that 3/4 of the trees are missing? Or how muddy and dull the colors in the grass and trees are?

It's worse when you play it. The texture-work is PS2 quality. All the bump-mapped textures in the original have been replaced with poop textures.

I know that you can't go to the far off islands because of the helicopters. But distant terrain and mountains far away are real draw distance. Sometimes in the latter half of the game you can see action going on far, far away and you can actually go there and participate in the fight. Not many "modern" shooter campaigns have this. They lack both scale and draw distance (backdrops are just lame if used to give the illusion of draw distance) and the levels are to often designed as a half wide corridor. And I think it's a little sad. I also really liked Far Cry 3, haven't had so much fun from a game in years.

No shit? That's the point of the thread. Also, l2grammar.

If constant drips into the 20's is considered "running well" for you, I'd saying you're making more of a point of your standards rather than the quality of the port. The FPS dipped into the teens for me in the demo level. Lots of stuttering too. Terrible LoD issues with textures popping in 1ft in front of me.

Also, iron sights is completely out of place in this game. It's as if they thought it would sell better if they copied Call of Duty. Also, the knifing has been turned into CoD too. It'd be like Valve remastering Half-Life by putting iron sights and CoD-style crowbar. It's pretty fucking disgusting actually.

Far Cry 1 was an absolutely gorgeous game when released in 2004. Well ahead of its time on PC. Nothing, absolutely nothing looked better back then.

Then you probably didn't knew how to use the mechanic because I remember there was a level were you had to go through a base and get some item and get out, and in one playthrough I was a ghost.

To each their own. I was excited to play it when I got my 360 but thought it was garbage.

360/ps3 still can't? Its not like the ps3/360 hardware has upgraded since 2005/06 either. Why is this shocking?

I'm sure the PC version don't look much better. I remember how good Far Cry looked when it first came out. I just started PC gaming and it just blew me away with how good it looked, lol. I also remember when I first played a Nintendo 64 and saying to my friends "why would we need any better graphics than this"

I remember liking the "B" button for ripping people apart. Pretty sure it was akin to the feeling you get when you sword lunge in Halo 2. Only with more blood. And less receiving lunges.

Just downloaded the demo on my ps3. Damn it was way worse than I thought. The graphics are not as good as it was on pc 10 years ago and the frame rate feels like it's about 20 fps at times wtf. A really shitty port. PS3/360 could easily run this game better if more effort had been put into it.

So basically it's like the F.E.A.R. port, or does it reach Quake 4 port levels?