Chicken tarafından yazılan son incelemeler

Too much violence. People die a lot. Lots of pain and bullets and stuff. Was very difficult to get the kids to play this. Gameplay is good, the driving is terrible, graphics are good, and the multiplayer already went to sh*t but otherwise would be decent.

Solid game, lots of guns and violence but otherwise enjoyable. I dislike the part where blood is visible and people are killed. It's brutal and sends the wrong message in terms of how people should solve problems. I think the terrorists and CT should work out their differences.

Otherwise, gameplay is good, graphics are stale but competitive, and it's very fun to f*ck over my team.

Having played Far Cry 3 and 4, I thought Far Cry 5 did overall a mediocre job. I'll list some good things they did and where they lacked. I bought this on sale, and looking back, I'm glad I did rather than for full or even half price. Here are the details of why I say that. All my opinion, of course.

Good things:

The graphics are great, which pairs up well with the scenery. Most animations feel very smooth. There are a lot of vehicles to choose from, and I think the new helicopters and small planes make a nice addition to the game; one of the things I thought was a little strange of previous games was that enemies could have helicopters but you could not ride one apart from scripted missions. Unfortunately, they didn't add hang gliders, but I think the planes and helicopters covered it, so that's a sacrifice I'll take.

The story is very open, with only a handful of cutscenes to take away gameplay. Objectives can often be begun and finished later, so you aren't restricted to a mission once it's begun, with only a few exceptions. This means you can explore and save game while you are also maintaining your objective. Apart from the very beginning and the very end, you can do anything in virtually any order.

I liked the revamped weapons system and the new line of weaponry. Perks are a bit simpler, without the required animal skins and such. It does take away an element of the game, but for a returning Far Cry player, I think this is a good thing that we don't have to once again grind out, killing a certain number of a certain animal repeatedly. The challenges are also nice because it gets you to be more creative and involve yourself in different things to get points. At first I didn't love the new system, but getting used to it, I think it's pretty good.

The buddy system is nice. Getting to call in a plane or a bear or whoever to help take down an outpost or even just ride along and help seems like a nice addition. Gives you more in terms of approaching a fight in-game.

Downfalls:

While the scenery was done very well along with the better graphics, the setting of a county in Montana is somewhat isolated, sure, but does not have quite the same effect of remoteness or isolation as the Rook Islands of the extreme terrain and geopolitical isolation in Kyrat from Far Cry 3 and 4. Being within the US, it doesn't seem at all realistic to me that a cult can essentially be a sovereign state in the US and go unchecked for so long. Even for its size, one national guard call is basically all that would be required to stop the cult. There's little reason for this not to happen, and I think the story does a very mediocre job of trying to justify it.

The history and culture of the setting is very narrow. The cult props up out of nowhere, so there is little to discover other than the antagonists' own stories behind their involvement. The main character (rook) is basically just a medium for the you to play the game, with only a small amount of real involvement in the story beyond being the guy that kills a lot of people. This is in contrast to FC3 where the player changes in terms of values and goals and all that stuff, as well as 4 where the player is thrown into a war where his own presence is of major importance. In 5, there is none of this. There are some posters up of yourself that you are wanted and such, but it doesn't feel meaningful. I can basically summarize the goal of the entire game being this: You are an American, you like freedom and stuff, you don't like cults, you kill cultists. No depth to it at all, and the ending only confirms this.

The player's character is a complete mute. In 3 and 4, they were quiet but occasionally had some lines. Given they probably didn't want to script both a male and female voice, but it still takes away from the character being involved in the story in any way other than being the medium for you to play the game.

This might just be me, but the AI still feels very awkward when interacting with you as well as other things. The enemy AI is fine, because that's the focus, but it's the friendly and civilian AI that just doesn't sit right with me. They look awkward when they drive and when they run and shoot. If you talk with someone, even story characters, outside of a cut scene, their body seems out of sync with their mouth. It might be a symptom of the open world, but this problem has been persistent for years, so even minor improvements aren't really an excuse. I'm willing to enter a cut scene if it means they aren't awkwardly out of sync with the world around them.

Although arguably limited by the setting, I thought the cultural or historical context behind the game was a lot narrower than 3 and 4. Instead, the feel of the game was very nationalistic, and the enemy basically appeared out of thin air within a few years. I understand it, but it also made me lose interest in the significance of the cult as well as the resistance.

Although there are a couple special animal hunts, there is much less of this, and there overall feels like there is less biodiversity than in previous games. The wildlife as a whole feels just a little toned down; most animals are wolves, bears, deer, birds, or moose, with only a few exceptions. While I understand that they can't start adding very exotic animals to this setting, it doesn't quite have the same exotic and isolated feel as previous games.

The ending (spoiler) could've been improved in my opinion. There's a choice to be made, but one choice is basically just complete abstinence, rendering everything that you, as the main character, have done as useless. The other is a more respectable ending, but the writers decided to enter nukes, and in a sudden twist, you and the main enemy are stuck in a bunker together. There is no satisfaction because you never truly win or defeat the enemy. Where in Far Cry 3 or 4 it made sense to progress as normal beyond the main story, in 5 there essentially is no more story after you confront Joseph. Secret ending, I know, but Easter eggs are for people who are going to get the game anyway, so they are not of significance to anybody that's legitimately contemplating this game.

To be honest, it's not an outstandingly bad game or anything. Gameplay, as I said, pretty good. However, in the Far Cry series, the game never began and ended on gameplay. The setting and the story is vital to the series; it's where the other games shined, and this one fell behind, which is why I don't think it's lived up to the same reputation as its predecessors.

pretty sick

big factory big explosions big profit