77 thoughts on “Why does no one talk about Far Cry 1?”

  1. There’s not much to say about it really, it had the rotten misfortune of coming out the same year as two highly anticipated sequels to absolutely legendary games and just didn’t enjoy the same level of success

    A shame because I absolutely love its particular style of sandbox commando gameplay and the reactive ai, I really wish there were more shooters like it

    Reply
  2. the cockfighting minigame in 6 is by far the best feature in it, who would’ve thought Ubi would put something like that in the game. the fact it makes journos seethe is a good bonus

    Reply
  3. Because this board is infested with zoomers and the game isn’t exceptionally good, it’s just difficult even at lower difficulties.

    Reply
  4. Farcry 1 and instincts are the only good Farcry games. I dropped 2 after i found out that scrotes were the only enemy type in the whole game.

    Reply
  5. [log in to view media]

    Played it. It was very good, but kind of bullshit in the hardest difficult since most enemies have snipe like capabilities even while using submachine guns.
    Still a fun and solid game, despite some people claiming it’s only a tech demo for the Cryengine.
    How’s the rest of the saga? Because is actually the only one I’ve played.

    Reply
  6. Every time I’ve played a Far Cry game I’ve seen so much potential, yet it always feels empty. The graphics are really good. The stories seem like they were written by new grads. The gameplay is like a really big puddle. What I mean is you can operate vehicles, aircraft, boats, etc and you can do stealth or go ham, but only a little bit each. Each system was designed to work rather than to be fun or engaging. The games are designed to look nice and check off a lot of boxes but there is always one mysterious but essential thing lacking.

    Reply
  7. I will forever resent the final arena where you go through the doors into this wide-open space full of rocket monkeys and also monkey snipers who spawn outside your max view range and you just get fucking bodied every time. I’m sure there’s a legit way to get through it, but I just cheated to fly through and shoot the final target in the face and be done with things after bashing my head against it for far too long. The monkeys in general really just felt like obnoxious bullshit (that mission where you fall off a waterfall and have like one bullet or some shit in a jungle full of them, for example) and I liked fighting the humans a whole lot more. They died far more easily while still being a solid threat you could manage to actually deploy stealth and such against.

    Reply
    • I did the same fucking thing
      I don’t know how the fuck you’re supposed to do that legit but I had lost my patience by that point so I cheated
      I think the furthest I got was like halfway in

      Reply
  8. It was okay, wasn’t anything too special. It’s problem is that it’s the first in a long running series and you can tell Far Cry 1 is very much trying to find it’s footing in what it wants to be so it tends to be all over the place. Plus the setting and the story itself is nothing to write home about, nothing really memorable. There’s the mutants which could’ve been cool but they don’t do a whole lot with them either so the game just meanders about.

    Reply
  9. Probably because it’s the most forgettable. Not bad, but nothing special. The new one will probably meet the same fate.
    2 is a piece of crap so you can remember that.
    3 has Vass
    Blood Dragon because it’s wicked
    4 has the best gameplay and environment
    Primal because stone age
    5 because nuke

    Reply
      • the worst part was all of the hinting about power corrupting even rebels, shady deals with the CIA, etc. you had this sense it was going to be one of those far cry games where the victory is short lived when the new boss comes in and does the same shit in the name of "the revolution" or shit like that, but no, everybody holds hands at the end and sings kumbaya.

        Reply
        • Blood Dragon’s brilliance is in the fact that it takes the greater Far Cry gameplay concept and condenses it down into a game that’s just long enough without getting truly tedious. The story is fairly short, the world is big but not too big, you get enough outposts and side quests, that sort of thing. It still doesn’t solve the issue of being all that compelling once you’ve done everything, but that’s endemic of open world games anyway.

          Reply
          • This. BD is FarCry 3 distilled into a product with zero excess and fat. Modern technology aside, It feels more like a product of 80’s game design on than it does of the 2010’s. It doesn’t take itself seriously and rarely takes control away from the player. Its brief, its cool, the music is good, the gameplay is solid. It feels like a video game and not an online marketplace like modern ubisoft games.

        • Not much, it’s pretty boring. In practice it’s more of 3 but with mecha dinos and neon lights that got annoying very soon I played it before far cry got "big" and while I liked the initial idea I was already burned out by 3 and never finished it. It still surprising to me that this franchise even got popular.

          Reply
          • >It still surprising to me that this franchise even got popular.
            i like playing it stealthy. it sorta scratches that same itch that MGSV did: plan your assault, pick your equipment, sneak in, kill the alarms, get clutch headshots, shit like that. unfortunately every outpost in Far Cry is like 10×10 meters so there’s really not much challenge. just wish someone would make a good open world infiltration game

  10. Most people have only played the fully-patched version, which breaks the AI. Play the early versions with no saving (checkpoints only) and it’s a GOAT fps experience.

    Reply
  11. Because it was a prototype Crysis.

    Remember that back in 2003, you couldn’t go two feet without how the graphics of this game looked on PC. The visuals aged soulfully (poorly).

    Reply
  12. Far Cry is among the franchises that didn’t really begin until their third entry. The Witcher is another example. I’m sure more exist.

    Reply
    • [log in to view media]

      Shame because 3 was the last decent game in the series. I might play 4 again but I couldn’t enjoy it as much. I prefer Vaas and Citra. 5 was just meh.

      Reply
      • I always think it’s cool how with Far Cry everyone’s ratings vary so widely. For me, 4 was the worst and 5 remains the best. I still love 2, 3 is overrated as fuck.

        So far, Far Cry 6 isn’t measuring up to 5 for me. I’m only maybe 3 hours in so it has plenty of time to match it, but FC5 was just the perfect game for dicking around imo. I rarely finish games so to me that is all that really matters. I don’t know how, but the graphics in 5 were also better somehow.

        Reply
        • I think 5’s the best as well. Even though it’s the same game as all the others, I think they did the American setting well and the story was interesting; definitely one of the best endings in a game.

          Reply
    • F I L T E R E D

      […]

      sad seeing shills like gmandies review FC6 and say things like
      >ah, the third person cutscenes are a welcome change for the series!
      homosexual posers, the lot of them

      Reply
  13. struck blind by the fluorescent hawaiian shirt and can’t find the keyboard. I remember walking through that first sewer pipe and thinking graphics could never improve lol

    Reply

Add to the conversation