The Gaming Thread

[ArcadiaGP]

It's a Ubisoft game. That alone is reason enough for me to avoid it.

So far, I'm surprised with how well it runs. It's super smooth, feels good so far.

Typically try not to get Ubisoft games, but couldn't pass up the one that pissed off all the right people.

 

[OakRiver]

So far, I'm surprised with how well it runs. It's super smooth, feels good so far.

Typically try not to get Ubisoft games, but couldn't pass up the one that pissed off all the right people.

I was massively excited for it. Then I had a fault with another one of their games. Opened a ticket, got no resolution for my issue but plenty of attitude from their support staff. I even had my account banned from their forums for two weeks without cause, then they further threatened my account. Never did fix the issue, or attempt to make it right. So I don't see the need to give money to them.

 

[KLB]

Sounds like most big game publishers these days.

They set a release date, rush the game through development, release it on the date whether it is ready or not, and then do a half assed job of fixing the issues. Many of those issues were probably pointed out during testing.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

As far as controversy, the game is essentially apolitical. The "game journalists" walked around with tented pants for months because they thought Far Cry 5 was going to be some hat tip to the resistance... some sort of hit piece on flyover America, Christians, etc.

... And it turned out to not be that. Now they're salty about it and irresponsibly reviewing it poorly because of it.

 

[T.Lex]

Seems to me that Ubisoft brought that a bit on themselves. I've never been into Far Cry, so only followed this release passively. But, the whole 'start out in a militia cult' has the feel of a 'then turn against them' kind of theme that totally teased them into the tented pantsing.

Not sure whether I think more highly of Ubisoft for that, or less.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Seems to me that Ubisoft brought that a bit on themselves. I've never been into Far Cry, so only followed this release passively. But, the whole 'start out in a militia cult' has the feel of a 'then turn against them' kind of theme that totally teased them into the tented pantsing.

Not sure whether I think more highly of Ubisoft for that, or less.

You're a junior deputy being sent in with local law enforcement and a US marshal to serve a warrant to a cult leader. It unfolds from there.

The "religion" that the leader formed is based on the end of the world approaching, and they're waiting for the 'collapse' to begin. They have this town under their thumb, but there are plenty of resistance groups around.

So rather than "starting out in a militia", you get caught up in a series of events during this arrest that have you working with civilians and "preppers" (good guys) to fight back and reclaim the town after the cult decides it's time to bring upon the reckoning. The cult is very well armed, but not well-trained... their only advantage is arsenal and numbers.

 

[T.Lex]

Yeah, that's interesting. That's not really what I picked up on during the (extended) buildup.

But the premise of fighting against a... uh... militia-esque cult would make the SocJus types... uh... excited. I can see how their expectations would've been disappointed.

I may wait for the first couple of patches and try it out. I like the open-world type stuff.

 

[KLB]

Seems to me that Ubisoft brought that a bit on themselves. I've never been into Far Cry, so only followed this release passively. But, the whole 'start out in a militia cult' has the feel of a 'then turn against them' kind of theme that totally teased them into the tented pantsing.

Not sure whether I think more highly of Ubisoft for that, or less.

I've enjoyed them all. Have you actually tried them and not liked them, or not tried them?

 

[ArcadiaGP]

I've enjoyed them all. Have you actually tried them and not liked them, or not tried them?

If starting, I'd suggest 3. I think it's on a pretty deep sale right now, too...

 

[T.Lex]

I've enjoyed them all. Have you actually tried them and not liked them, or not tried them?

Not tried them.

I think the first was in the mid-2000s, when I was into flight sims and modding. After that, it was ArmA and modding that. After that, it was grownup-time and not enough hours in the day for that stuff.

Ok, confession time: I spent some late nights on GTA IV and Morrowind on the Xbox. Those games revealed how the console platform can be have a huge amount of control in the controllers for things like menus and options. But, I never played through them all the way because there weren't enough hours in the day.

 

[KLB]

If starting, I'd suggest 3. I think it's on a pretty deep sale right now, too...

Funny. I remember the first, but cannot remember the 2nd.

 

[KLB]

Not tried them.

I think the first was in the mid-2000s, when I was into flight sims and modding. After that, it was ArmA and modding that. After that, it was grownup-time and not enough hours in the day for that stuff.

Ok, confession time: I spent some late nights on GTA IV and Morrowind on the Xbox. Those games revealed how the console platform can be have a huge amount of control in the controllers for things like menus and options. But, I never played through them all the way because there weren't enough hours in the day.

Well, they are worth playing if you like the open world type games.

 

[thej27]

Funny. I remember the first, but cannot remember the 2nd.

Second one was set in Africa and had malaria, weapons failure, limited fast travel and constantly re-spawning enemy checkpoints.

 

[OakRiver]

Sounds like most big game publishers these days.

They set a release date, rush the game through development, release it on the date whether it is ready or not, and then do a half assed job of fixing the issues. Many of those issues were probably pointed out during testing.

No other publisher has stuck me with a game I paid $100 at launch for that erases my save file (a known issue) and can't guarantee a fix or do anything to make it right.

As far as controversy, the game is essentially apolitical. The "game journalists" walked around with tented pants for months because they thought Far Cry 5 was going to be some hat tip to the resistance... some sort of hit piece on flyover America, Christians, etc.

... And it turned out to not be that. Now they're salty about it and irresponsibly reviewing it poorly because of it.

Interesting approach by Ubi to go down that route and court controversy after chickening out of 'Rainbow Six; Patriots'. Of course no surprise that the game journalists did not understand the plot that Ubi had made public for quite some time.

 

[KLB]

$100? Ouch

 

[jamil]

Seems to me that Ubisoft brought that a bit on themselves. I've never been into Far Cry, so only followed this release passively. But, the whole 'start out in a militia cult' has the feel of a 'then turn against them' kind of theme that totally teased them into the tented pantsing.

Not sure whether I think more highly of Ubisoft for that, or less.

“tented pansing”

this must be 2018.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Another one...

Forbes published an article about Far Cry 5 urging people not to buy the game, written by someone who didn't play it and doesn't even own it.

It has nothing to do with gaming to them... all about agenda.

 

[OakRiver]

$100? Ouch

Gold Edition with the DLC pre-bundled to save money over time.

 

[JettaKnight]

Another one...

Forbes published an article about Far Cry 5, urging people not to buy the game; written by someone who didn't play it and doesn't even own it.

It has nothing to do with gaming to them... all about agenda.

It makes little sense without that comma.

 

[jamil]

It makes little sense without that comma.

well, sure, but, you, can have, too many commas, in a sentence.

I think it's pretty obvious that Far Cry isn't urging people not to buy it.