My thoughts on Far Cry (PC, 2004) a review
Apr 20, 2018 0:26:23 GMT
winnersdontusedrugs, Cervantes, and 2 more like this
Post by MeleeMonk on Apr 20, 2018 0:26:23 GMT
Having played through Far Cry two times now, and having fallen madly in love with the game, I thought it would be fun to give my thoughts on it. This review is purely my opinion, and I know a lot of people would disagree with me on many points, so please view this subjectively.
As someone who played Far Cry 2 first, I was surprised to learn that Far Cry for PC is not a true open world game, and is in fact a radically different game from 2 in many ways, from the plot to the gameplay. Far Cry one is actually a completely linear game, with each of the 20 levels taking place in a completely different loading zone, unlike Far Cry 2 which deals all of its missions out in the same massive environment. That's not to say that Far Cry 1's levels aren't large in scale, because the majority of levels offer more than enough open space to allow numerous ways to approach each objective. I say majority of levels because there are a significant number of levels that take place entirely indoors. These levels seem to be almost universally considered inferior to the outdoor levels by fans, but personally speaking I loved both the indoor and outdoor levels equally, because regardless of the setting Far Cry 1's gameplay is mostly the same. And how is the gameplay? Fucking scrumptious.
As I said, I absolutely love Far Cry's gameplay. It's a mix of slow movement speed and old-school shooting mechanics, both things I unironically love. Yeah, I'm not like most people when it comes to preferences for FPS games, But I don't care. Any FPS that has an alt-fire mode for weapons is a good thing in my book, but the variety doesn't stop there. Far Cry also has a good enough number of weapons available to the player (as well as three grenade types), and each weapon feels distinct and very pleasurable to use. This is largely thanks to Far Cry's outstanding audio design, which is truly first rate. Every weapon sounds like butter to the ears, and the other sound effects are also very well implemented. The music, while repetitive, is well composed, and the various background tracks perfectly set the mood. Unfortunately, unlike the excellent audio design, Far Cry's voice work is not uniformly excellent. Despite the main cast all having smooth radio voices, the delivery of lines can be awkward, and most of the enemy soldiers (as well as the main antagonist) have laughably unconvincing accents. Far Cry's plot is thrilling, but its intro and resolution unfortunately both offer minimal explanation and outcome. This wasn't a big problem for me personally, but some gamers might take issue with Crytek's neglect to the game's storytelling. Just don't go into it expecting Half Life 2 level quality writing & acting.
One clear advantage Far Cry 1 has over 2 is in vehicle handling. The automobiles in Far Cry 1 handle FAR more realistically than 2's. Where as 2's vehicles acellerate far too quickly with a poor top speed and all feel the same, the vehicles in 1 all behave exactly how they should; the buggy accelerates quickly and has the highest top speed, the hummer has the gradual acceleration level of a standard car but with good speed, and the big truck moves like a slug. But the important thing to note is that all of them accelerate realistically, unlike 2's, which is a significant pro since vehicles are one of the most important aspects of open world games.
One thing that is objective about Far Cry 1 is the incredible amount of work that went into the graphics. Far Cry is hands down one of the best looking games released at that time, and cemented 2004's legacy as one of the strongest years for showcasing PC gaming technology. Even today the game world looks delicious to the eyes. Aside from some understandably simplistic model geometry in some areas, everything looks great, from the smooth undulation of the ocean relecting the beautiful skybox above, to the dynamic lighting casting real time shadows, to the (then) high resolution textures, Far Cry was undeniably ahead of its time in this respect, and with the subsequent Far Cry games never attaining the same level of graphical ambition, this makes it all the more noteworthy.
Far Cry 1 is also noteworthy for its high difficulty level. The default difficulty setting is unusually hard, and scattered throughout the game are many ridiculous difficulty spikes, with the final level often being cited by gamers as one of the most frustrating of any FPS game. This aspect would probably put off most gamers, but I LOVE a good challenge to my shooters, which makes Far Cry all the more delectable for me.
In conclusion, I absolutely love Far Cry, and having played through it 2 times, I can confidently say that it's one of the best shooters I've ever played. It laid the groundwork for the subsequent Far Cry games, and still holds the distinction for being the most ambitious game in the series. And for that it has my full respect.
How I would rate Far Cry's individual aspects:
graphics: 10/10; given the time it looked incredble and it still looks nice today
sound: 10/10; first rate audio design
story: 8/10; premise is cool and I liked the mutant twist (don't judge!), but overall the storytelling is not exceptional when compared to a series like Half Life
gameplay: 9/10; nearly perfect in my opinion, love that the guns have multiple firing modes and variations to the scopes. All the guns feel orgasmic to fire!
length: 10/10; perfect length, being long enough BUT without dragging on or feeling repetitive
multiplayer: NA; haven't tested it
difficulty: 10/10; sure, some gamers will bitch about it being too hard, but that's precisely what I look for in FPS games. Plus, work clearly went into making the difficulty levels all feel noticeably different.
OVERALL: 10/10 I absolutely love Far Cry and consider it a near-perfect game. Anyone looking for a challenging PC shooter should look no further than Far Cry. It earns the Maestro seal of approval.
Now, I'd like to hear what you guys have to say about Far Cry.
As someone who played Far Cry 2 first, I was surprised to learn that Far Cry for PC is not a true open world game, and is in fact a radically different game from 2 in many ways, from the plot to the gameplay. Far Cry one is actually a completely linear game, with each of the 20 levels taking place in a completely different loading zone, unlike Far Cry 2 which deals all of its missions out in the same massive environment. That's not to say that Far Cry 1's levels aren't large in scale, because the majority of levels offer more than enough open space to allow numerous ways to approach each objective. I say majority of levels because there are a significant number of levels that take place entirely indoors. These levels seem to be almost universally considered inferior to the outdoor levels by fans, but personally speaking I loved both the indoor and outdoor levels equally, because regardless of the setting Far Cry 1's gameplay is mostly the same. And how is the gameplay? Fucking scrumptious.
As I said, I absolutely love Far Cry's gameplay. It's a mix of slow movement speed and old-school shooting mechanics, both things I unironically love. Yeah, I'm not like most people when it comes to preferences for FPS games, But I don't care. Any FPS that has an alt-fire mode for weapons is a good thing in my book, but the variety doesn't stop there. Far Cry also has a good enough number of weapons available to the player (as well as three grenade types), and each weapon feels distinct and very pleasurable to use. This is largely thanks to Far Cry's outstanding audio design, which is truly first rate. Every weapon sounds like butter to the ears, and the other sound effects are also very well implemented. The music, while repetitive, is well composed, and the various background tracks perfectly set the mood. Unfortunately, unlike the excellent audio design, Far Cry's voice work is not uniformly excellent. Despite the main cast all having smooth radio voices, the delivery of lines can be awkward, and most of the enemy soldiers (as well as the main antagonist) have laughably unconvincing accents. Far Cry's plot is thrilling, but its intro and resolution unfortunately both offer minimal explanation and outcome. This wasn't a big problem for me personally, but some gamers might take issue with Crytek's neglect to the game's storytelling. Just don't go into it expecting Half Life 2 level quality writing & acting.
One clear advantage Far Cry 1 has over 2 is in vehicle handling. The automobiles in Far Cry 1 handle FAR more realistically than 2's. Where as 2's vehicles acellerate far too quickly with a poor top speed and all feel the same, the vehicles in 1 all behave exactly how they should; the buggy accelerates quickly and has the highest top speed, the hummer has the gradual acceleration level of a standard car but with good speed, and the big truck moves like a slug. But the important thing to note is that all of them accelerate realistically, unlike 2's, which is a significant pro since vehicles are one of the most important aspects of open world games.
One thing that is objective about Far Cry 1 is the incredible amount of work that went into the graphics. Far Cry is hands down one of the best looking games released at that time, and cemented 2004's legacy as one of the strongest years for showcasing PC gaming technology. Even today the game world looks delicious to the eyes. Aside from some understandably simplistic model geometry in some areas, everything looks great, from the smooth undulation of the ocean relecting the beautiful skybox above, to the dynamic lighting casting real time shadows, to the (then) high resolution textures, Far Cry was undeniably ahead of its time in this respect, and with the subsequent Far Cry games never attaining the same level of graphical ambition, this makes it all the more noteworthy.
Far Cry 1 is also noteworthy for its high difficulty level. The default difficulty setting is unusually hard, and scattered throughout the game are many ridiculous difficulty spikes, with the final level often being cited by gamers as one of the most frustrating of any FPS game. This aspect would probably put off most gamers, but I LOVE a good challenge to my shooters, which makes Far Cry all the more delectable for me.
In conclusion, I absolutely love Far Cry, and having played through it 2 times, I can confidently say that it's one of the best shooters I've ever played. It laid the groundwork for the subsequent Far Cry games, and still holds the distinction for being the most ambitious game in the series. And for that it has my full respect.
How I would rate Far Cry's individual aspects:
graphics: 10/10; given the time it looked incredble and it still looks nice today
sound: 10/10; first rate audio design
story: 8/10; premise is cool and I liked the mutant twist (don't judge!), but overall the storytelling is not exceptional when compared to a series like Half Life
gameplay: 9/10; nearly perfect in my opinion, love that the guns have multiple firing modes and variations to the scopes. All the guns feel orgasmic to fire!
length: 10/10; perfect length, being long enough BUT without dragging on or feeling repetitive
multiplayer: NA; haven't tested it
difficulty: 10/10; sure, some gamers will bitch about it being too hard, but that's precisely what I look for in FPS games. Plus, work clearly went into making the difficulty levels all feel noticeably different.
OVERALL: 10/10 I absolutely love Far Cry and consider it a near-perfect game. Anyone looking for a challenging PC shooter should look no further than Far Cry. It earns the Maestro seal of approval.
Now, I'd like to hear what you guys have to say about Far Cry.
