Source
Those who have not played it can try for free to see how boring it is.
For a moment I thought you were going to reference Far Cry 2 or STALKER. Now those games are truly boring.
Far cry 5 took stale far cry formula and put it into most boring and bland setting that is unfun to explore.
Far cry 2 was immersive game compare to it.
@ghosts4ever: You're not from the US, I love Montana yet never been. Better than Far Cry 4's setting by far.
Its not the worst. Every Ass Creed IS the most boring of this generation (with the newest ghost recon). At least FC5 has a nice setting and reasonably good villain going for it.
Far cry 5 took stale far cry formula and put it into most boring and bland setting that is unfun to explore.
Far cry 2 was immersive game compare to it.
Far Cry 2 flopped hard. The same cannot be said about Far Cry 5. Far Cry 2 was painfully boring and that boredom was shared by many gamers, thus the reason it flopped. Your taste in gaming is simply not shared by the masses no matter how often your spam it.
One of the best shooters this gen ( not saying much though) so would definitely recommend everyone to give it a spin!
One of the best shooters this gen ( not saying much though) so would definitely recommend everyone to give it a spin!
its saying much because Doom and Doom Eternal are 2 of among the greatest FPS of all time.
Far Cry 5 on other hand is pretty bad.
Far cry 5 took stale far cry formula and put it into most boring and bland setting that is unfun to explore.
Far cry 2 was immersive game compare to it.
Far Cry 2 flopped hard. The same cannot be said about Far Cry 5. Far Cry 2 was painfully boring and that boredom was shared by many gamers, thus the reason it flopped. Your taste in gaming is simply not shared by the masses no matter how often your spam it.
Far cry 3 to onwards are step back compare to far cry 2
also
the difference between game made with passion and games that are copy paste rehash.
All Ubi open world games have been boring since AC1, but i have to say they are getting better: no more towers, less checklist side stuff, etc. FC5 and the last 2 AC games actually have a more organic exploration system, which for me is an improvement.
Towers were replaced by a hawk/any other bird/drone.
Far Cry 5 was OK. I enjoyed the setting, was like going to visit an unknown part of the world. The ending was super cool.
Could have been much better if it wasn't the same old Unisoft formula and if it had something to say considering the setting. Unfortunately we are in an age where snowflakes left and right get offended by everything and everything has to be as bland and spineless as possible.
@davillain-: What makes new dawn better? i have yet to play it.
To me, New Dawn feels like a totally new game and it is much much better than FC5, the PC settings are improve, the game itself feels like its Borderlands for its cute bright colors in the grass, buildings, and guns. The story was so much better. It had interesting characters with actual personal motivations that were integrated into one big story instead of 3 small boring ones. The mission structures, every mission including the side quests felt unique. I don't remember once doing the same objective twice in FC5.
New Dawn felt like the classic FC3 experience. Linear missions, each with a great cutscene. As far as villains goes, FC5 villains were a hell of a lot more developed and interesting, the Twins were just full of cliches but still okay to say the least.
Edit: I only paid half price for it from CDKey at the time and never full price. I think it's still on sale if you want to try it out for yourself. It was $40 at the time of release.
Mad Max, Just Cause 3, Farcry 4, NFS Payback, Dragon Age Inquisition.
There's some of the ones I have played this generation that were too boring for me to complete.
@hardwenzen: And i'm still not a fan of Ubi open world games. But, in my opinion they used to be much worse last gen.
Far Cry 3 is probably the worst example of their checklist formula, not to mention that it ran at 20fps on consoles, with pop in and screen tearing everywhere.....curiously people loved that game!
4 is the first and only Far Cry I've played. I like it just fine. It does suffer from open-world-itis, but I think if you aren't a Far Cry junky for whom this is your 53rd game it's perfectly fine and not nearly so stale. Cool setting, and I like the emergent gameplay with the wildlife. I'm sure similar can be said for 5
Far Cry 5 was OK. I enjoyed the setting, was like going to visit an unknown part of the world. The ending was super cool.
Could have been much better if it wasn't the same old Unisoft formula and if it had something to say considering the setting. Unfortunately we are in an age where snowflakes left and right get offended by everything and everything has to be as bland and spineless as possible.
I was actually OK with the....I don't know, social representation? in the game. Whatever you want to call it.
When I heard it was taking place in Montana, I was like "Oh boy, a French company is going to depict rednecks. This is going to be interesting" but I thought they did a good job. They showed a lot of patriotic Americans--not nationalists, not Trump voters--and depicted that region of the country well. Game hunting, fishing, outdoorsmanship, and all that stuff.
I get really alienated by SJW's and social commentary and I was not alienated at all by FC 5
Far cry 5 took stale far cry formula and put it into most boring and bland setting that is unfun to explore.
Far cry 2 was immersive game compare to it.
Far Cry 2 flopped hard. The same cannot be said about Far Cry 5. Far Cry 2 was painfully boring and that boredom was shared by many gamers, thus the reason it flopped. Your taste in gaming is simply not shared by the masses no matter how often your spam it.
Far cry 3 to onwards are step back compare to far cry 2
also
the difference between game made with passion and games that are copy paste rehash.
The difference is a game not made with gameplay being the core focus but focused on trivial shit that could not make up for the shitiness of the game. 😎
The difference is a game not made with gameplay being the core focus but focused on trivial shit that could not make up for the shitiness of the game. 😎
gameplay in far cry 3 to onwards,
tag enemies, see through walls, arrow show where enemies are.
in Far cry 2, your weapon jam that give you challenge and immersion, you have map on hand and dont tag enemies there and they can hide behind bushes. far cry 3 is casual dumbed down game and then it got copy and paste till far cry 5.
far cry 2 also never interrupt for cutscene and never have QTE elements there. neither painfully unskipabble long cutscene.
@hardwenzen: And i'm still not a fan of Ubi open world games. But, in my opinion they used to be much worse last gen.
Far Cry 3 is probably the worst example of their checklist formula, not to mention that it ran at 20fps on consoles, with pop in and screen tearing everywhere.....curiously people loved that game!
Interesting. In my opinion, nothing has changed, they even wen't full ******* with Ghost Recon Breakpoint, and that's one of their recent open world games. This company doesn't get it at all.
The difference is a game not made with gameplay being the core focus but focused on trivial shit that could not make up for the shitiness of the game. 😎
gameplay in far cry 3 to onwards,
tag enemies, see through walls, arrow show where enemies are.
in Far cry 2, your weapon jam that give you challenge and immersion, you have map on hand and dont tag enemies there and they can hide behind bushes. far cry 3 is casual dumbed down game and then it got copy and paste till far cry 5.
far cry 2 also never interrupt for cutscene and never have QTE elements there. neither painfully unskipabble long cutscene.
We went from Far Cry 2 and 5 to Far Cry 3. Last I checked the conversation was about Far Cry 5 and 2. I can't even recall Far Cry 3. Far Cry 2 failed. All of this immersion that you speak of, didn't impress gamers enough to make it not a flop. The game was forgotten, except for folks like you who believe it was a great game.
RDR2 is getting ROBBED!
Rockstar did everything they could to design the most boring OW game of all times. And here you are claiming Ubi outdid them with FC5. Outrageous!
Some of you people should just stick to linear crap. You seem to not like open world games and spent an inordinate amount of time whinging about them even though they are very popular.
RDR2 is getting ROBBED!
Rockstar did everything they could to design the most boring OW game of all times. And here you are claiming Ubi outdid them with FC5. Outrageous!
RDR2 has one of the deepest worlds in gaming. The level of interaction is bar none.
If you call the gameplay boring, that's your call.
But the world itself? Hell nawh
Way better than doom Or stalker for sure.
Agree
of course if you prefer easy games where you tag enemies.
STALKER is real FPS that neither interrupt you and also exploring zone never being tedious or boring like one in Far cry.
Thats the difference between Ghost games and other games. Ghost games are very hardcore and challenging and never interrupt you for having cutscene after cutscene.
RDR2 is getting ROBBED!
Rockstar did everything they could to design the most boring OW game of all times. And here you are claiming Ubi outdid them with FC5. Outrageous!
RDR2 has one of the deepest worlds in gaming. The level of interaction is bar none.
If you call the gameplay boring, that's your call.
But the world itself? Hell nawh
Totally this fully agree. RDR2 is a slow burn open-world game which in turn makes it the best western game around and because of it, the level interaction design is hell of a better then the typical Ubi open world were all used to. Comparing RDR2 to any FC games is an insult to RDR2.
Way better than doom Or stalker for sure.
Agree
of course if you prefer easy games where you tag enemies.
STALKER is real FPS that neither interrupt you and also exploring zone never being tedious or boring like one in Far cry.
Thats the difference between Ghost games and other games. Ghost games are very hardcore and challenging and never interrupt you for having cutscene after cutscene.
Your name is Sniper not Ghost and you like to post dick pics to other guys on this forum.
Nah, that goes to Dynasty Warriors 9. And if that one's too much of an easy answer, I'll go with Watch Dogs.
Your
yes my games has never been cinematic walking in straight line.
my friend, you complain about console shooters but you disliked STALKER and praise Far cry a console shooter. thats out of place.
Way better than doom Or stalker for sure.
Agree
of course if you prefer easy games where you tag enemies.
STALKER is real FPS that neither interrupt you and also exploring zone never being tedious or boring like one in Far cry.
Thats the difference between Ghost games and other games. Ghost games are very hardcore and challenging and never interrupt you for having cutscene after cutscene.
Your name is Sniper not Ghost and you like to post dick pics to other guys on this forum.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment