Funny, after seeming the screens and reading the summary, I think the exact opposite.Had no interest in FC3, but this caught my attention instantly. I love the bold direction.
I don't know who we have to thank for the 80s revival, but thank you.
I wasn't an '80s baby, so maybe this just isn't for me.
How does this game tie from Far Cry 3 that we know to this game?
I am so confused.
But Im still buying it.
I think they misjudged how awesome this was going to be. They should have gone all out and made a giant full priced game.
Since it's a downloadable title, I'm wondering just how big the game is gonna be. No way it's gonna be the size of FC3.
This is all very exciting.
Yea, This should've been FC3 from the beginning.
"This is the most badass game ever!"Its gonna be funny when this is released and some people take it seriously. Its quite obvious to us but some people will hate it.
Don't get too hyped folks or they'll charge 1600msp/$20.
I'm from '92 and I understand why this is awesome. Of course, most of the movies I grew up with as a kid were '80s sci-fi and action, so maybe I'm just '80s at heart.
Generic doesn't mean what you think it means.this game reads like an awesome fanfic, but with generic screens.
Am dissapoint.
We'd need to see who exactly developed it, but I imagine it's in the same engine and by the same people, and likely deemed so meaty it'd be better sold as a stand alone campaign than something that required FC3. Would be nice if on PC it'd at least share the same folder and assets where relevant to cut down on space, similar to Valve and Source games.So it's labeled "FarCry3" only for marketing purpose?
Generic doesn't mean what you think it means.
So it's labeled "FarCry3" only for marketing purpose?
Well, if it's sufficiently different in terms of people responsible and whatnot I'd think just calling it "Far Cry" would be enough. Which is why I'm speculating this is basically planned DLC growing so much they wanted to sell it alone instead, rather than slapping it on something that was never related. We'll see when it's out I guess, but this usually is around when we'd see meatier DLC hitting popular games, just look at Skyrim and Dishonored.It likely plays like Far Cry 3, so why not call it Far Cry 3?
We'd need to see who exactly developed it, but I imagine it's in the same engine and by the same people, and likely deemed so meaty it'd be better sold as a stand alone campaign than something that required FC3. Would be nice if on PC it'd at least share the same folder and assets where relevant to cut down on space, similar to Valve and Source games.
So it's labeled "FarCry3" only for marketing purpose?
Well, if it's sufficiently different in terms of people responsible and whatnot I'd think just calling it "Far Cry" would be enough. Which is why I'm speculating this is basically planned DLC growing so much they wanted to sell it alone instead, rather than slapping it on something that was never related. We'll see when it's out I guess, but this usually is around when we'd see meatier DLC hitting popular games, just look at Skyrim and Dishonored.
Well, if it's sufficiently different in terms of people responsible and whatnot I'd think just calling it "Far Cry" would be enough. Which is why I'm speculating this is basically planned DLC growing so much they wanted to sell it alone instead, rather than slapping it on something that was never related. We'll see when it's out I guess, but this usually is around when we'd see meatier DLC hitting popular games, just look at Skyrim and Dishonored.
Oh yeah, that. Actually I checked again, and the times DO overlap (AC3:L taking a smaller portion), and the game came out at the same time, seemingly intended to be the portable tie in much like the CoD games on DS. It does indicate that Ubisoft IS prone to just lumping them together for the sake of sales, but I can't help but think Blood Dragon reminds me too much of a normal DLC release, except it sliced out the "requires the main game" part. I imagine someone's going to say something eventually in an interview whether it was planned as DLC or a separate game they couldn't rationalize as a full title.Oh yeah? Explain this then. It doesn't even play much like AC3. It isn't by the same team at all. It doesn't feature the same characters. It's not even set in the same time period!
Yeah, if the intent is just tying in they could've been clever there by making it LOOK like the 3 followed Far Cry, only for it to really be following Blood Dragon. The reaction might be hilarious/painful too.i would have called it FAR CRY: BLOOD DRAGON 3 for maximum Straight to Video -effect.
Oh yeah, that. Actually I checked again, and the times DO overlap (AC3:L taking a smaller portion), and the game came out at the same time, seemingly intended to be the portable tie in much like the CoD games on DS. It does indicate that Ubisoft IS prone to just lumping them together for the sake of sales, but I can't help but think Blood Dragon reminds me too much of a normal DLC release, except it sliced out the "requires the main game" part. I imagine someone's going to say something eventually in an interview whether it was planned as DLC or a separate game they couldn't rationalize as a full title.
The soundtrack is amazing. Terminator vibes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHVXIkVOlKQ
Well I guess this means I'll be buying farcry 3 at last.
Took a physical disc for the former, but point. Although come to think of it Festival of Blood does seem to be along that line of thought I was having, but I guess when it comes to a fairly sizable chunk of content they stop and consider whether it's REALLY worth having the barrier of entry of getting the original game when they could just include the extra relevant data and sell it alone instead. And given you can charge more AND sell to more people potentially it really doesn't make much sense to require that base game when you think about it.Or... they just decided to make a stand alone expansion which is already getting rather common? Take2 did it with Episodes from Liberty City. Sony did it with Festival of Blood. Not really new.