If it isn't clear because my Youtube account has a different name: This is my video. Far Cry 5 (FC5) is a game that has haunted me for a long time. 8 years ago, while sitting in a boring lecture...
If it isn't clear because my Youtube account has a different name: This is my video.
Far Cry 5 (FC5) is a game that has haunted me for a long time. 8 years ago, while sitting in a boring lecture and reeling from having recently played it for the first time, I wrote a rant here on Tildes about this game that flowed easily from my finger tips, even if it may be tough to read and so specific it sparked no discussion. No harm done, really. Some time later during Covid, I found myself in one of those late night online discussions and somehow we ventured into the topic of this game and I began ranting with such vigor that it took me about 40 minutes to finish. A friend in the discussion literally left their chair, went to the toilet, grabbed a drink and returned 10 minutes later and I didn't even notice and was still going.
I'm now out of university, my life is quite different, and it's been 10 years since I've played it for the first time. Indirectly, FC5 is one of the reasons I try to engage with media on a deeper level now, simply because of abysmally dogshit the story is. I've begun learning the complicated skill of video editing, and have found essay writing and editing to be a fulfilling hobby. I'm not looking to turn it into a job, because I am not interested in having Google and Youtube's recommendation algorithm become my new masters. To be this is purely my own creative expression, and while I strive to improve with every video, I don't want to make them differently to have broader appeal. If they change, it's because I want to. This is my stuff, and I'm proud of it.
In a way, despite it's absolutely terrible messaging, FC5 is responsible for that. Maybe I would've found my way towards this hobby without it too, but I think it would've been much later. Either way, I owe a strange thanks to this piece of art, no matter how despicable its message might be.
FC5 lost me forever at the second "suddenly these guys, who you've been slaughtering by the hundreds, overpower you and capture you because we need to show you this cutscene" event. I think there...
FC5 lost me forever at the second "suddenly these guys, who you've been slaughtering by the hundreds, overpower you and capture you because we need to show you this cutscene" event. I think there are a couple more after that.
I didn't watch the video, I just wanted to say that FC5 is one of the few Far Cry games I've actually finished. If the writing in FC5 was dogshit, the writing in FC: New Dawn is raw sewage. And...
I didn't watch the video, I just wanted to say that FC5 is one of the few Far Cry games I've actually finished. If the writing in FC5 was dogshit, the writing in FC: New Dawn is raw sewage. And then FC6 I played for several hours and realized I wasn't actually having any fun, just going through the motions, so I uninstalled it and never looked back.
I have attempted both of them but didn't make it very far. In fact I think I have at least played some of every FC game. Primal is the only other one I finished, and I did enjoy that one although...
I have attempted both of them but didn't make it very far. In fact I think I have at least played some of every FC game. Primal is the only other one I finished, and I did enjoy that one although I remember nothing about it at all.
I've never played FC6, but apparently, even though the writers are different, they follow the same sort of theme, because you defeat the dictator and nothing really changes. FC5 really does feel...
I've never played FC6, but apparently, even though the writers are different, they follow the same sort of theme, because you defeat the dictator and nothing really changes.
FC5 really does feel like either writers wanted to creat the worst "gotcha!" moment of all time or they were done working on the series and wanted to burn it to the ground.
All of Ubisofts "main" games are series that comes across as "lab grown fun". And Far Cry best illustrates that. I remember in the before times of 2005 where Far Cry 1 was more of a linear...
All of Ubisofts "main" games are series that comes across as "lab grown fun". And Far Cry best illustrates that.
I remember in the before times of 2005 where Far Cry 1 was more of a linear immersive sim that was pretty fun... until it got weird and then it lost me with the mutants and the volcano. Interesting ideas that didn't stick the landing.
I like that Far Cry 2 went into a more gritty and realistic direction. Some interesting systems with the gun quality, malaria and messy map. I think it was actually held back by the open world and could have benefited from more focus on the interesting elements and less long, pointless drives.
Far Cry 3, like the first, was interesting for the first half and then just felt pointless. I think this was the game that really started to lean into the Assasins creed tropes and it got very boring after the good villian dies and you have to do it again. Blood dragon was a blast though.
And from there, it's all games I dropped after a few hours.
Far Cry 4 had an annoying environment to traverse and forgettable plot/villain.
I think Far Cry 5 would have played much better if they leaned into supernatural elements and made it a horror game. It was clear that they wanted to do social commentary. But corporate safe commentary that did nothing.
Far Cry 6... Not going to lie, I saw gameplay and a few reviews and didn't feel a thing. This was on the back of AC Valhalla, Watchdogs Legion and The Division 2 all falling flat next to Ghost of Tsushima, Death Stranding and Sekiro. Ubisoft managed to hit the lowest possible point of customer sentiment, complete indifference.
And I had to ask myself, when did I ever enjoy Ubisoft games. I loved the original Prince of Persia trilogy and was very excited about the reboot. Played the entire AC2 saga with my siblings and Black Flag really hit on something special. Beyond Good and Evil was an interesting adventure. Might and Magic strategy games was cool in concept but never seemed to update. Dark Messiah is still my favorite physics game. Anno 1701 and 2070 were cool semi-narrative city builders that paved the way for games like Frostpunk and Ixion. Still love Splinter Cell being the dollar store Solid Snake and the Tom Clancy Universe had some real bright spots before it was all Siege, all the time. South Park Stick of Truth was incredible, even if the second fell short. Trackmania was a lot of fun but the whole Live Service thing killed some of the magic. My favorite "lost" game, Blazing Angles 2 was developed by Ubisoft. The hand drawn Rayman games are gorgeous with incredible soundtracks.
Ubisoft really had a ton going on for a long time. A robust portfolio where a lot of small wins covered big losses and big wins covered small losses. I can't think of anything after 2015 that had me genuinely excited. The same year Vevendi tried to buy them out.
I really want to know who informed Ubisofts strategy after that. It wasn't a perfect company before with all the toxic leadership and institutional bloat. But they had a diverse strategy that allowed them to hit multiple niches and offset risk. Then they adopted the universal big media strategy of putting every egg in a few big name IP baskets and expect the market to reward them with exponential returns.
This was the same sort of resource consolidation that hit every big media company from Disney to Netflix to even YouTube. Over invest in the biggest name or latest trend and expect the market to respond with exponential returns. I'm very curious if this was a natural convergence of ideas or if there was a third party consultanting house driving this narrative across the industry. This was also around the time Embracer started paying top dollar for IP rights and just before platform services like GamePass were offering massive payouts to be on their services. Was the plan to artificially drive up IP value and expect a business client or subscription charges to foot the bill?
This is because across like 10 to 15 years of gaming becoming a really big market, analysists detected a pattern in the way games succeed, and that was fairly simple: middle of the road...
Then they adopted the universal big media strategy of putting every egg in a few big name IP baskets and expect the market to reward them with exponential returns.
This is because across like 10 to 15 years of gaming becoming a really big market, analysists detected a pattern in the way games succeed, and that was fairly simple: middle of the road "mid-budget" or "AA" games never became huge successes. Huge successes either came from indie developers that created something truly unique (which these companies didn't own) or huge AAA games like Call of Duty or GTA. So from the perspective of a publisher, who's going to pay these developers for 5 years anyway, you can run the numbers: given the previous performance of AA games across the market, is it better have them make 2 or 3 smaller games, or spend 5 years on one huge game? You are spending the cash either way, because game development budget is just salary, so there is functionally no difference to those holding the money.
This was the same sort of resource consolidation that hit every big media company from Disney to Netflix to even YouTube.
For streaming the effect was similar, but for a different reason. Streaming completely transformed the television industry. Royalties became functionally worthless, which were the backbone of old movie and tv projects. You used to be able to star in a movie for a shit payday because it used to bring you in money every time a television station showed it. This is no longer the case on streaming services, so actors are asking for bigger salaries upfront, which balloons the budget and killed the mid-size movie.
Now, Ubisoft pulled in a similar direction, but they added a weird company theme to it, where there was creative office full of old french dudes in Paris where every creative director pitching a game had to go and convince them that this game is worth funding. This creative office also oversaw specific gameplay decisions which is why for a while every Ubisoft game from Assassin's Creed over Far Cry to Ghost Recon turned into an RPG (probably also because an RPG makes the mictrotransaction easier to sell).
The issue is ultimately that the Far Cry series became a game about the protagonist being a one-man army defeating evil despots that has a really strange fetish for telling the player that this doesn't solve any problems. FC5 is just the most extreme variant of this plot, because the world literally ends if you try to save the day. Like literally. Nuclear war means the world is done and we might get intelligent cockroaches in a couple million years.
I did enjoy 3 and 4 quite a bit. I wanted to enjoy 2, but gods almighty, those road checkpoints were aggressively anti-fun. Few games I've played were so relentlessly self-sabotaging.
I did enjoy 3 and 4 quite a bit. I wanted to enjoy 2, but gods almighty, those road checkpoints were aggressively anti-fun. Few games I've played were so relentlessly self-sabotaging.
If it isn't clear because my Youtube account has a different name: This is my video.
Far Cry 5 (FC5) is a game that has haunted me for a long time. 8 years ago, while sitting in a boring lecture and reeling from having recently played it for the first time, I wrote a rant here on Tildes about this game that flowed easily from my finger tips, even if it may be tough to read and so specific it sparked no discussion. No harm done, really. Some time later during Covid, I found myself in one of those late night online discussions and somehow we ventured into the topic of this game and I began ranting with such vigor that it took me about 40 minutes to finish. A friend in the discussion literally left their chair, went to the toilet, grabbed a drink and returned 10 minutes later and I didn't even notice and was still going.
I'm now out of university, my life is quite different, and it's been 10 years since I've played it for the first time. Indirectly, FC5 is one of the reasons I try to engage with media on a deeper level now, simply because of abysmally dogshit the story is. I've begun learning the complicated skill of video editing, and have found essay writing and editing to be a fulfilling hobby. I'm not looking to turn it into a job, because I am not interested in having Google and Youtube's recommendation algorithm become my new masters. To be this is purely my own creative expression, and while I strive to improve with every video, I don't want to make them differently to have broader appeal. If they change, it's because I want to. This is my stuff, and I'm proud of it.
In a way, despite it's absolutely terrible messaging, FC5 is responsible for that. Maybe I would've found my way towards this hobby without it too, but I think it would've been much later. Either way, I owe a strange thanks to this piece of art, no matter how despicable its message might be.
Thank you for watching.
FC5 lost me forever at the second "suddenly these guys, who you've been slaughtering by the hundreds, overpower you and capture you because we need to show you this cutscene" event. I think there are a couple more after that.
There is like 3 or 4 of those for every region. It's so dumb
I didn't watch the video, I just wanted to say that FC5 is one of the few Far Cry games I've actually finished. If the writing in FC5 was dogshit, the writing in FC: New Dawn is raw sewage. And then FC6 I played for several hours and realized I wasn't actually having any fun, just going through the motions, so I uninstalled it and never looked back.
Try Far Cry 3 or 4, those are the best in the series
I have attempted both of them but didn't make it very far. In fact I think I have at least played some of every FC game. Primal is the only other one I finished, and I did enjoy that one although I remember nothing about it at all.
I've never played FC6, but apparently, even though the writers are different, they follow the same sort of theme, because you defeat the dictator and nothing really changes.
FC5 really does feel like either writers wanted to creat the worst "gotcha!" moment of all time or they were done working on the series and wanted to burn it to the ground.
All of Ubisofts "main" games are series that comes across as "lab grown fun". And Far Cry best illustrates that.
I remember in the before times of 2005 where Far Cry 1 was more of a linear immersive sim that was pretty fun... until it got weird and then it lost me with the mutants and the volcano. Interesting ideas that didn't stick the landing.
I like that Far Cry 2 went into a more gritty and realistic direction. Some interesting systems with the gun quality, malaria and messy map. I think it was actually held back by the open world and could have benefited from more focus on the interesting elements and less long, pointless drives.
Far Cry 3, like the first, was interesting for the first half and then just felt pointless. I think this was the game that really started to lean into the Assasins creed tropes and it got very boring after the good villian dies and you have to do it again. Blood dragon was a blast though.
And from there, it's all games I dropped after a few hours.
Far Cry 4 had an annoying environment to traverse and forgettable plot/villain.
I think Far Cry 5 would have played much better if they leaned into supernatural elements and made it a horror game. It was clear that they wanted to do social commentary. But corporate safe commentary that did nothing.
Far Cry 6... Not going to lie, I saw gameplay and a few reviews and didn't feel a thing. This was on the back of AC Valhalla, Watchdogs Legion and The Division 2 all falling flat next to Ghost of Tsushima, Death Stranding and Sekiro. Ubisoft managed to hit the lowest possible point of customer sentiment, complete indifference.
And I had to ask myself, when did I ever enjoy Ubisoft games. I loved the original Prince of Persia trilogy and was very excited about the reboot. Played the entire AC2 saga with my siblings and Black Flag really hit on something special. Beyond Good and Evil was an interesting adventure. Might and Magic strategy games was cool in concept but never seemed to update. Dark Messiah is still my favorite physics game. Anno 1701 and 2070 were cool semi-narrative city builders that paved the way for games like Frostpunk and Ixion. Still love Splinter Cell being the dollar store Solid Snake and the Tom Clancy Universe had some real bright spots before it was all Siege, all the time. South Park Stick of Truth was incredible, even if the second fell short. Trackmania was a lot of fun but the whole Live Service thing killed some of the magic. My favorite "lost" game, Blazing Angles 2 was developed by Ubisoft. The hand drawn Rayman games are gorgeous with incredible soundtracks.
Ubisoft really had a ton going on for a long time. A robust portfolio where a lot of small wins covered big losses and big wins covered small losses. I can't think of anything after 2015 that had me genuinely excited. The same year Vevendi tried to buy them out.
I really want to know who informed Ubisofts strategy after that. It wasn't a perfect company before with all the toxic leadership and institutional bloat. But they had a diverse strategy that allowed them to hit multiple niches and offset risk. Then they adopted the universal big media strategy of putting every egg in a few big name IP baskets and expect the market to reward them with exponential returns.
This was the same sort of resource consolidation that hit every big media company from Disney to Netflix to even YouTube. Over invest in the biggest name or latest trend and expect the market to respond with exponential returns. I'm very curious if this was a natural convergence of ideas or if there was a third party consultanting house driving this narrative across the industry. This was also around the time Embracer started paying top dollar for IP rights and just before platform services like GamePass were offering massive payouts to be on their services. Was the plan to artificially drive up IP value and expect a business client or subscription charges to foot the bill?
This is because across like 10 to 15 years of gaming becoming a really big market, analysists detected a pattern in the way games succeed, and that was fairly simple: middle of the road "mid-budget" or "AA" games never became huge successes. Huge successes either came from indie developers that created something truly unique (which these companies didn't own) or huge AAA games like Call of Duty or GTA. So from the perspective of a publisher, who's going to pay these developers for 5 years anyway, you can run the numbers: given the previous performance of AA games across the market, is it better have them make 2 or 3 smaller games, or spend 5 years on one huge game? You are spending the cash either way, because game development budget is just salary, so there is functionally no difference to those holding the money.
For streaming the effect was similar, but for a different reason. Streaming completely transformed the television industry. Royalties became functionally worthless, which were the backbone of old movie and tv projects. You used to be able to star in a movie for a shit payday because it used to bring you in money every time a television station showed it. This is no longer the case on streaming services, so actors are asking for bigger salaries upfront, which balloons the budget and killed the mid-size movie.
Now, Ubisoft pulled in a similar direction, but they added a weird company theme to it, where there was creative office full of old french dudes in Paris where every creative director pitching a game had to go and convince them that this game is worth funding. This creative office also oversaw specific gameplay decisions which is why for a while every Ubisoft game from Assassin's Creed over Far Cry to Ghost Recon turned into an RPG (probably also because an RPG makes the mictrotransaction easier to sell).
The issue is ultimately that the Far Cry series became a game about the protagonist being a one-man army defeating evil despots that has a really strange fetish for telling the player that this doesn't solve any problems. FC5 is just the most extreme variant of this plot, because the world literally ends if you try to save the day. Like literally. Nuclear war means the world is done and we might get intelligent cockroaches in a couple million years.
I did enjoy 3 and 4 quite a bit. I wanted to enjoy 2, but gods almighty, those road checkpoints were aggressively anti-fun. Few games I've played were so relentlessly self-sabotaging.