spindoctor
Member
Any design decision that is anti-Far Cry 2 makes this game a fucking winner.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Far Cry 3 seems to take one step forward, two steps back (RPS impressions inside)
- Thread starter Ledsen
- Start date
Everything he's mentioning sounds like it comes down to taste. He says the design is safe, but my take away is it's also solid. "Interesting" as an element of design, I like. I really do. But the problem with that approach and what understandably turns people off (and no, I'm not typically one of those people) is interesting =/= fun. In fact, it can = annoying or even infuriating.
So, I sympathize with those for and against. I like what I just read though. Sounds very MGS3 to me. Very good
Well, everything doesn't have to be fun and smooth all the time. Every game these days seems to want to tap into the reward loops and addictive elements that MMOs took to the extreme. I don't need a reward for everything I do. I don't need achievements, XP, medals, numbers counting up or huge explosions everytime I press the right trigger. I'm not a rat in a skinner box, I want an interesting and unique experience. Sometimes these types of games can be frustrating, unintuitive or annoying. But I don't care. I don't play games to have my ego stroked, but to experience new aspects of the medium and creative uses of interactivity.
I forgot to say: I am so goddamn tired of "Design feels stilted; DUMBED DOWN BY THE MAN!" Seriously RPS? That part of his preview reads conspiracy theory bullshit on a fucking... Well, forum, to be completely honest.
It's Far Cry. I really doubt there's this strict agenda being forced, but whatever.
If you read my post, I see your stance. I very much agree, but I think the people who feel the opposite are also very much in the right. Again: tastes. I like interesting experiences, but it's also GREAT to be constantly rewarded and even, yeah, have my ego stroked. That brings some people enjoyment. That's ultimately what it's all about.
It's Far Cry. I really doubt there's this strict agenda being forced, but whatever.
If you read my post, I see your stance. I very much agree, but I think the people who feel the opposite are also very much in the right. Again: tastes. I like interesting experiences, but it's also GREAT to be constantly rewarded and even, yeah, have my ego stroked. That brings some people enjoyment. That's ultimately what it's all about.
That part seems mostly in jest, but I'm sure that Clint Hocking leaving has a lot to do with the direction the series has taken.
you sound like XP is just XP and not a tool to unlock perks. STALKER had artifacts instead of perks, it's difference only in the name. And hunting animals to make a bigger bag isn't that different than finding money in STALKER games to get a bigger bag.
More Fun To Compute
Member
So this game is boring after a few minutes instead of boring after a couple of hours like Far Cry 2? What a tragedy.
I don't hate XP or rewards in video games, I just don't want them all the time for everything I do which is what many games seem to be moving toward.
I'd be happy to learn it just went over my head. Definitely right about Clint.
Experience points in a game that has RPG like progression in single player are not the same as experience points in multiplayer games used to entice people to keep playing.
I definitely prefer peacefully being able to explore than hearing a VROOOM and a hail of bullets every minute.
While I don't like the idea of "It didn't work? Chuck it!" rather than improving mechanics, and the terrible linear QTE missions, or needing to unlock simple mechanics like cookng a grenade, I'm still hopeful of the game.
While I don't like the idea of "It didn't work? Chuck it!" rather than improving mechanics, and the terrible linear QTE missions, or needing to unlock simple mechanics like cookng a grenade, I'm still hopeful of the game.
this.
Goodfeedback, constantly rewarding the player; that's always a good thing, I think. That's a design element we do need to see incorporated more often. It's games that really respect your time that do that. In MMOs or F2P titles it can become sinister because the idea is to entice you to spend more, naturally. But in a game like Saint's Row 3 - you get XP for EVERYTHING. Stuff you get punished for in other open-world games! - it's absolutely wonderful.
I hated that and would really enjoy a Far Cry game that would get rid of it.
Some complaints are, I think, also linked to the fact that the game is less "hardcore" in it's approach (no weapon damage, more UI interference to indicate targets etc...) but I don't mind too much, I always knew they would never reach the level of S.T.A.L.K.E.R games in this area anyway -for marketing reasons mainly-. Honestly, I came to see Far Cry 3 as a Just Cause 2 in FPS form...and you know what, I smiled at the idea.
I'd say it's essentially the same thing. A constant stream of rewards in the form of XP, skills, achievements, unlocks etc affects your brain in the same way no matter if you're playing single- or multiplayer. Sure, these mechanics were perfected in a multiplayer context, but lately we've been seeing more and more of them in strictly singleplayer games. Like I said earlier they are great tools to use if proper restraint and thought is put into it.
what? they trickled into MP games from SP games. You had experience from every fight in Baldur's Gate, you get XP for exploration in Fallout, also there was Diablo. In all these games XP was used to unlock abilities and various stuff.
What has changed? NOTHING.
A lot of people like it. I mean, it's not really a mystery or a tragedy of misguided design philosophy. Designing a game that makes you feel good while playing it seems like a wise course.
I think it should be more organic, rewards could be a weapon, ammo, vehicles, plants, animals, even a pretty view; sweet, sweet loot.
SJRB
Gold Member
Until you move to the southern map where vehicles are equipped with grenade launchers instead of machineguns and they blow you sky-high before you even know what the hell is going on.
As for this article - the fact that you could get run over by a random jeep at any given time was one of the worst things of the game, so if that is gone then that's good news. Still waiting for more impressions though, I need to know if they fixed the all-knowing hawkeye AI before I can start looking forward to this game.
Like I said, the prevalence and amount of feedback and rewards. I'm sure you know what I'm talking about, it's talked about quite a lot in the press, podcasts etc.
I actually don't get that one. Neither from the author nor from the people here.
FC2 was always fairly clear about when you were getting yourself into danger. I never felt like I was constantly under threat of getting jumped. When you're near an objective, a checkpoint or traveling on patrolled roads, sure, but there's a lot more space to work with so that you can chose when and how to engage enemies.
"Feel good" is only a smidgeon away from "fun". It's not quite as meaningless, but still excludes stuff like survival horror. There's more to enjoying an overall experience than getting your balls tickled every minute.
Then again, what I've remarked on above leads me to believe that I've had a very different experience with FC2 than a lot of other people.
you get XP for every action in Fallout (completed a quest, killed somebody, unlocked something, spoke with somebody successfully, found a location). You get XP for every action in Far Cry 3. Seems like "the prevalence" is on the same level with old games and nothing has changed.
Phaethon0017
Member
It seems they're misnaming "Making the game better" as "Playing it safe". Not read anything I didn't like from the article. Thank you Mr. Execushite, and you have a weird name.
So you see no difference between that and, for example, Peggle, where you click your mouse once and are rewarded with slow-motion explosions and an ecstatic choir singing Ode to Joy? That's an extreme example but it perfectly illustrates my point. It's very obvious that games in general are moving towards "less effort for more reward".
basic_text
Member
Admittedly I only got a short time with it, but I really enjoyed the time I had with it at Eurogamer.
It felt more like an expanded world from the original Far Cry (or even Crysis) given the brighter, less dense environment. The vehicle handling was as good as 2 but lacked those polished touches like being able to read a map whilst driving etc (instead it opened up a separate, more traditional map menu). The addition of vehicles such as the hang glider was ace too, being able to soar across the massive map was loads of fun, dropping in just prior to a base and wiping the place out. Gun handling was still up to scratch too.
Were there races in Far Cry 2? I can't remember, either way they're present in the 3rd, it was quite fun tazzing it round the island on a quad bike.
My only complaints were regarding the set up I played on, that the mouse sensitivity was set way to high (couldn't change it in the menus either) and that there was a 360 pad plugged in meaning that all prompts specifically related to that, even in the options menu.
I guess if it retains all of the engine qualities from 2 (vehicle handling, gun handling, physics etc) and adds in some new mission types, then I'll be happy. It just has that danger of treading the same ground and becoming a first person version of Just Cause 2.
It felt more like an expanded world from the original Far Cry (or even Crysis) given the brighter, less dense environment. The vehicle handling was as good as 2 but lacked those polished touches like being able to read a map whilst driving etc (instead it opened up a separate, more traditional map menu). The addition of vehicles such as the hang glider was ace too, being able to soar across the massive map was loads of fun, dropping in just prior to a base and wiping the place out. Gun handling was still up to scratch too.
Were there races in Far Cry 2? I can't remember, either way they're present in the 3rd, it was quite fun tazzing it round the island on a quad bike.
My only complaints were regarding the set up I played on, that the mouse sensitivity was set way to high (couldn't change it in the menus either) and that there was a 360 pad plugged in meaning that all prompts specifically related to that, even in the options menu.
I guess if it retains all of the engine qualities from 2 (vehicle handling, gun handling, physics etc) and adds in some new mission types, then I'll be happy. It just has that danger of treading the same ground and becoming a first person version of Just Cause 2.
No it doesn't, Peggle is an insanely easy game to get into as is. And ode to joy only plays when you clear the last orange peg.
Nitpicking doesn't disprove my point, it's still an overabundance of stimuli for practically no effort at all. You can look at Call of Duty instead if you'd like.
I haven't played Peggle so I can't make a proper comparison.
Nope, no races in FC2 and yes, I feel this might be a good compromise between emergent shooters (Crysis previous Far Cry's) and Just Cause 2 (un-realistic, out of proportion, but fun and free).
I loved Far Cry 2, definitely one of my favorite games of the generation. One of the biggest reasons I loved it so was the constant feeling of fear, having to plan my route to wherever I was going carefully, trying to avoid check points and patrols wherever I could. If that feeling of fear is gone then that is very, very disappointing to me.
I'll still give the game a chance, most definitely, but I can't say I'm too excited about it right now.
The stuff that makes me worry about the game's quality the most though is stuff like this video.
From this it looks like they're trying to turn it into an FPS Uncharted, but are doing it very badly with an annoying protagonist who won't shut up.
"There's fire everywhere!"
Yeah, no kidding.
I'll still give the game a chance, most definitely, but I can't say I'm too excited about it right now.
The stuff that makes me worry about the game's quality the most though is stuff like this video.
From this it looks like they're trying to turn it into an FPS Uncharted, but are doing it very badly with an annoying protagonist who won't shut up.
"There's fire everywhere!"
Yeah, no kidding.
You're criticizing Peggle for being a mindless game that feeds people egos and you didn't even get the details right, that sorta makes that point moot. Peggle doesn't take effort to begin with!
Your "Less Effort for more reward" isn't really sound because for all you know I'll need to kill 200 guys to get the same XP for doing one quest in Far Cry 3. I frankly don't care about the XP aspect in Far Cry 3 and I think it's largely a non issue.
eXistor
Member
No threat? I thought the lack of any kind of threat in FC2 was one of its main flaws. I love/hate FC2 and I'm sure I'll lament the lack of its uniquer features, but I'm willing to bet FC3 as a game will be far superior. It'll take a real asshole to come up with shittier missions and mission structure than the ones in FC2.
You can be damn sure it's gonna be streamlined as fuck. This is a AAA title for Ubisoft, they'll want to get as many people playing this as possible, by making this a hard game where you actually have to think things through to accomplish anything you'd scare away potential moneybags. But I think everyone here knows this. I know this and I'm still highly anticipating this simply because it looks phenomenal and it's kind of an open-world game and I'm a sucker for those. Also FC2 nailed the world design so I'm sure this'll be the same. I don't think FC3 pretends to be anything more than it advertises.
It'll be the Assassin's Creed of FPS's: pretty and huge, but ultimately shallow.
You can be damn sure it's gonna be streamlined as fuck. This is a AAA title for Ubisoft, they'll want to get as many people playing this as possible, by making this a hard game where you actually have to think things through to accomplish anything you'd scare away potential moneybags. But I think everyone here knows this. I know this and I'm still highly anticipating this simply because it looks phenomenal and it's kind of an open-world game and I'm a sucker for those. Also FC2 nailed the world design so I'm sure this'll be the same. I don't think FC3 pretends to be anything more than it advertises.
It'll be the Assassin's Creed of FPS's: pretty and huge, but ultimately shallow.
I'm with you in spirit, but between the Souls games, DayZ, FTL and now XCOM... I'm not seeing it. Or rather, that wave has already crested. People seem to be (re-)discovering/still seeing the value in failing spectacularly. Sure, mainstream stuff seems to be holding your hand more and more, to the point where they are scared to let go, but it isn't that bad.
I think that's his point. The amount of influence you have over success is minimal and the reward not proportional to it.
Peggle is a casually designed game though, games that have systems where the player receives XP can or can't be casual. Also ode to joy playing in Peggle is hilarious and awesome, being soured by that it just odd.
He did mention that it was an extreme example of what he's talking about. I think it's fairly clear about what his sentiments are, but I don't want to make his argument for him or put words in his mouth so I'll leave it off here.
I didn't find FC2 especially difficult or annoying, just more loose and free-form. The way I played that game makes me think that I won't notice the possibly worrying changes at all. I was blindsided by malaria maybe once and I learned to pick up a fresh weapon from the dealers or huts regularly, so those things didn't even really crop up for me. If the rest is still intact in FC3 then I see myself enjoying it, too. So far, I see nothing to suggest otherwise. This might end up feeling a lot like the Stalker games, minus the creepy atmosphere and roaming NPCs of Call of Pripyat.
brokenbeans
Banned
I loved fc2 I'm not likely to buy this on day one.
industrian
will gently cradle you as time slowly ticks away.
This was my FC2 experience in a nutshell.
When I got to the second map and realised I had to do it over again I stopped playing. (Well, that and Fallout 3 got the trophy patch I was waiting for.)
ymoc
Member
I was expecting a major dissapointemt after seeing the title....but then I started reading and thinking...
Let me tell you something:
- Saying how in Far Cry 2 you enjoy feeling threatened all the time...
It's not really the problem of feeling threatened. I love feeling danger around me. Let me fight for my survival (something STALKER does RIGHT). Make it hard for me! Sure. Threats, lots of them! See, but the problem with Far Cry 2 is that you are threatened ALL THE TIME.
You couldn't drive a mile down the road without a militia truck ramming you in the ass. And these motherf***** spawn out of nowhere, so there's really no approach to it except either making a break for it or painfully taking out every vehicle and soldier crossing your path, e v e r y t i m e you try driving around the country.
Another FC2 goldie:
See a bridge? "Cool" you think. Nope - AMBUSH.
See a little village? "Cool" you think. AMBUSH
See a crossroad? "Cool" you think. AMBUSH
"All right" you say, "I'll clear this outpost and mark it (you know after you've cleared an outpost and found the "goodies" it's "marked" and you might think you're done with this shit)
WRONG!
You can't clear out an area in Far Cry 2. This is the land of the undead. Making the characters into zombies would at least make it feel more realistic.
So you have to deal with the same stupid outposts every fucking time. It doesn't matter if you are trying to sneak past them. No sir. BUSTED! Not even at night. BUSTED! My guess is that your character has a big neon sign "SHOOT ME" hanging over his head. That's the only logical explanation I can think of.
Fine I say, then there must be a really cool reward waiting for me after going through the same shit over and over again....there really isn't. The side quests are so absurdly bad (even the main quest for that matter) that the "reward" couldn't possibly outweigh all the frustration (if a few diamonds is what you call a reward)
For that matter, did we even need lots of diamonds in the first place?! I don't think so since I didn't do much sidequesting and I could pretty much buy anything I wanted.
The developers gave yet another pointless chore to do. "Hey, why don't you go look for some more diamonds! We've hidden them all across Africa in black suitcases. We made sure not to put too many in each, just 1 or 2, so you don't get too many too fast. Gotta catch them all!" YAAAAAY !!! Chores chores chores!!!
Don't even get me started on the malaria mini game...that was purely an utter annoyance which, on more than one occassion, dettered you from progressing in the game. You had to drive ALL THE WAY BACK TO TOWN to get those stupid pills. BUT THAT'S NOT ALL! Every time you had to do the super duper SIDE QUEST to "earn" the drugs. You HAD to waste another 20 minutes of gaming every time you ran out of meds, just so you were forced to do go kill some more thugs at some random house in the savana (coupled with all the outposts and militia trucks up your ass on your way).
But here's the worst part (for me):
- The game was EMPTY
I'm not talking about the map. The map is GREAT, GORGEOUS. You've got all this scenery, all these places, but that's it. They are just places. Nothing more.
There's nothing to do in Far Cry 2 except driving from point A to B and killing XY number of people.
I still remember that quest about some king or whatever he was who was stationed at some castle near the dessert. What a cool location! What a cool setting. What a waste.
You take out the 2 or 3 guards at the top with your sniper rifle, then storm the place. The door was opened, barely any guards, there's no excitemet since the whole castle hardly reacts to your murderous rampage. It's like you just walked in on those dudes having a stoner's convention. The whole ordeal didn't last more than a few minutes. A WHOLE FREAKIN' CASTLE IN THE DESSTER!
Then it's back to the tedious and exhausting adventures of outposts and militia trucks.
The game has so many unique areas which are sadly almost completely neglected. You spend 3/4 of the game wasting your time with the most boring set of activities.
Such a shame.
I felt like the developers made this great sandbox and were just about to put some toys in there..... They didn't. All we were left with was a sandbox.
That said, I'm more optimistic about Far Cry 3 ! If they dropped all those side questing and choring from Far Cry 2, I'll be happy to purchase the sequel.
I also hope the lesson's been learned and we'll get a full game this time around.
Let me tell you something:
- Saying how in Far Cry 2 you enjoy feeling threatened all the time...
It's not really the problem of feeling threatened. I love feeling danger around me. Let me fight for my survival (something STALKER does RIGHT). Make it hard for me! Sure. Threats, lots of them! See, but the problem with Far Cry 2 is that you are threatened ALL THE TIME.
You couldn't drive a mile down the road without a militia truck ramming you in the ass. And these motherf***** spawn out of nowhere, so there's really no approach to it except either making a break for it or painfully taking out every vehicle and soldier crossing your path, e v e r y t i m e you try driving around the country.
Another FC2 goldie:
See a bridge? "Cool" you think. Nope - AMBUSH.
See a little village? "Cool" you think. AMBUSH
See a crossroad? "Cool" you think. AMBUSH
"All right" you say, "I'll clear this outpost and mark it (you know after you've cleared an outpost and found the "goodies" it's "marked" and you might think you're done with this shit)
WRONG!
You can't clear out an area in Far Cry 2. This is the land of the undead. Making the characters into zombies would at least make it feel more realistic.
So you have to deal with the same stupid outposts every fucking time. It doesn't matter if you are trying to sneak past them. No sir. BUSTED! Not even at night. BUSTED! My guess is that your character has a big neon sign "SHOOT ME" hanging over his head. That's the only logical explanation I can think of.
Fine I say, then there must be a really cool reward waiting for me after going through the same shit over and over again....there really isn't. The side quests are so absurdly bad (even the main quest for that matter) that the "reward" couldn't possibly outweigh all the frustration (if a few diamonds is what you call a reward)
For that matter, did we even need lots of diamonds in the first place?! I don't think so since I didn't do much sidequesting and I could pretty much buy anything I wanted.
The developers gave yet another pointless chore to do. "Hey, why don't you go look for some more diamonds! We've hidden them all across Africa in black suitcases. We made sure not to put too many in each, just 1 or 2, so you don't get too many too fast. Gotta catch them all!" YAAAAAY !!! Chores chores chores!!!
Don't even get me started on the malaria mini game...that was purely an utter annoyance which, on more than one occassion, dettered you from progressing in the game. You had to drive ALL THE WAY BACK TO TOWN to get those stupid pills. BUT THAT'S NOT ALL! Every time you had to do the super duper SIDE QUEST to "earn" the drugs. You HAD to waste another 20 minutes of gaming every time you ran out of meds, just so you were forced to do go kill some more thugs at some random house in the savana (coupled with all the outposts and militia trucks up your ass on your way).
But here's the worst part (for me):
- The game was EMPTY
I'm not talking about the map. The map is GREAT, GORGEOUS. You've got all this scenery, all these places, but that's it. They are just places. Nothing more.
There's nothing to do in Far Cry 2 except driving from point A to B and killing XY number of people.
I still remember that quest about some king or whatever he was who was stationed at some castle near the dessert. What a cool location! What a cool setting. What a waste.
You take out the 2 or 3 guards at the top with your sniper rifle, then storm the place. The door was opened, barely any guards, there's no excitemet since the whole castle hardly reacts to your murderous rampage. It's like you just walked in on those dudes having a stoner's convention. The whole ordeal didn't last more than a few minutes. A WHOLE FREAKIN' CASTLE IN THE DESSTER!
Then it's back to the tedious and exhausting adventures of outposts and militia trucks.
The game has so many unique areas which are sadly almost completely neglected. You spend 3/4 of the game wasting your time with the most boring set of activities.
Such a shame.
I felt like the developers made this great sandbox and were just about to put some toys in there..... They didn't. All we were left with was a sandbox.
That said, I'm more optimistic about Far Cry 3 ! If they dropped all those side questing and choring from Far Cry 2, I'll be happy to purchase the sequel.
I also hope the lesson's been learned and we'll get a full game this time around.
+1
FC2 was an excellent game marred by horrible design decisions - I wanted to love the game, but there are far too many infuriating flaws. It honestly depends on your tolerance for bullshit design decisions - some people can't stomach it for as long as others, and quit.
ps - i'm looking forward to fc3 more than ever in light of this news!