Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Far Cry review

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 5:25:05 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

I know I'm a bit late to be reviewing this since it came out a little
while ago, but I'm only just getting around to it.

1. This is so *incredibly* derivative. I've seen it all before. Mad
scientist conducts research operations on a secluded island involving
aliens that eventually turn on the humans. He has a private army funded
by his infinitely rich private corporation. At one point a bad guy was
being hauled up by one of the Half-Life Barnacles and gibbed. My *God*
surely there are other scenarios from which to construct a first-person
shooter? Deus Ex had it all.

2. (In some parts) the textures, gameplay, and ideas are ripped
straight from Quake/Doom. In fact, this could be Quake 4. I bet at one
point I lose all my weapons after being knocked unconscious. I haven't
got there yet, but I'll put money on it. The melee aliens that swipe me
and take all my hit points in one hit... why would I consider this fun?
I've done it all before.

3. There *are* some original concepts. For example, the jungle island
scenario at the start is an entirely novel setting for a game of this
type, and very well executed. It could almost be Hidden and Dangerous,
since the hunting/sniping element is strong. Why has it now turned into
Doom?

4. The binoculars and sniper weapons are very well done. A tad
unrealistic (since sometimes enemies far away are clipped altogether
from your view until you zoom in), but it works.

5. On that point, the idea of giving more detail to objects as they get
closer leads to significant artefacts. Also, the island is clearly
larger than the viewbox, meaning that distant features get clipped.
It's annoying when using binoculars etc.

6. A lot of the 'puzzle' element of the game is as simple as this: You
try the obvious route, and you get corraled into dying. So next time
through, you take the non-obvious route, and a new path is revealed.
Whenever it saves the game for you, you know you solved it.

7. It has extensive indoor and outdoor elements. The outdoor elements,
by logic alone, should have way more polygons, but they are smooth while
the indoor scenes chug occasionally. Is it the case that the engine is
struggling with indoor scenes? (eg computing geometry outside the
viewable room?)

8. Save-game is rooted. It continually plays with my mouse
sensitivity, and the audio set pieces, etc


My verdict: It had the potential to be revolutionary, but it turned out
okay.

More about : cry review

Anonymous
May 1, 2005 5:25:06 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

I thought it stunk.
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 5:25:06 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Richard Cavell wrote:
> I know I'm a bit late to be reviewing this since it came out a little
> while ago, but I'm only just getting around to it.
>
> 1. This is so *incredibly* derivative. I've seen it all before. Mad
> scientist conducts research operations on a secluded island involving
> aliens that eventually turn on the humans. He has a private army funded
> by his infinitely rich private corporation. At one point a bad guy was
> being hauled up by one of the Half-Life Barnacles and gibbed. My *God*
> surely there are other scenarios from which to construct a first-person
> shooter? Deus Ex had it all.
>
> 2. (In some parts) the textures, gameplay, and ideas are ripped
> straight from Quake/Doom. In fact, this could be Quake 4. I bet at one
> point I lose all my weapons after being knocked unconscious. I haven't
> got there yet, but I'll put money on it. The melee aliens that swipe me
> and take all my hit points in one hit... why would I consider this fun?
> I've done it all before.
>

Ridiculous assertions.

You sound like your jaded with FPS period.
Related resources
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 5:25:06 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sun, 01 May 2005 01:25:05 +1000, Richard Cavell
<richardcavell@mail.com> wrote:

>I know I'm a bit late to be reviewing this since it came out a little
>while ago, but I'm only just getting around to it.
>
...........specifics deleted............

>
>
>My verdict: It had the potential to be revolutionary, but it turned out
>okay.

So glad to have your professional opinion. Would be nice if you gave
it earlier. Might have prevented EA from signing a joint
development/distribution agreement with Crytek for a new series
of action-games. Could have saved them a lot of money...

OTOH, maybe you missed the point entirely in your review...
Far Cry is an action game with a well-worn story-line wrapped around
brand-new single-player game-engine technology, with AI capable of
handling wide-open-space decisions pretty well. No longer
AI-constrained to corridor shooters ( overt as in Splinter Cell,
cleverly concealed as in Doom3 and HL2 ) or hopeless open-space
attempts with floundering AI as in Unreal 2. EA signed on for the
CryEngine, the Far Cry AI and the creativity of the Crytek team. This
was Crytek's first attempt at wrapping a complete game around their
revolutionary game-engine. The future should be very interesting
indeed.

John Lewis
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 5:25:06 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sun, 01 May 2005 01:25:05 +1000, Richard Cavell
<richardcavell@mail.com> wrote:

>3. There *are* some original concepts. For example, the jungle island
>scenario at the start is an entirely novel setting for a game of this
>type, and very well executed. It could almost be Hidden and Dangerous,
>since the hunting/sniping element is strong. Why has it now turned into
>Doom?

If you play FarCry like Doom, you will not survive long. I didn't have
to recon the environment closely before proceeding, or use lots of
crawling, stealth tactics and sniping in Doom. Lots of that is needed
in FarCry in order to survive, at least in the highest difficulty
level I was playing.
May 1, 2005 5:25:07 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On 30 Apr 2005 08:37:43 -0700, flightlessvacuum@lycos.com wrote:

>I thought it stunk.

I like your review style :-)
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 5:25:07 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"John Lewis" <john.dsl@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:4273d111.3523837@news.verizon.net...
> On Sun, 01 May 2005 01:25:05 +1000, Richard Cavell
> <richardcavell@mail.com> wrote:
>
>>I know I'm a bit late to be reviewing this since it came out a little
>>while ago, but I'm only just getting around to it.
>>
> ..........specifics deleted............
>
>>
>>
>>My verdict: It had the potential to be revolutionary, but it turned out
>>okay.
>
> So glad to have your professional opinion. Would be nice if you gave
> it earlier. Might have prevented EA from signing a joint
> development/distribution agreement with Crytek for a new series
> of action-games. Could have saved them a lot of money...
>
> OTOH, maybe you missed the point entirely in your review...
> Far Cry is an action game with a well-worn story-line wrapped around
> brand-new single-player game-engine technology, with AI capable of
> handling wide-open-space decisions pretty well. No longer
> AI-constrained to corridor shooters ( overt as in Splinter Cell,
> cleverly concealed as in Doom3 and HL2 ) or hopeless open-space
> attempts with floundering AI as in Unreal 2. EA signed on for the
> CryEngine, the Far Cry AI and the creativity of the Crytek team. This
> was Crytek's first attempt at wrapping a complete game around their
> revolutionary game-engine. The future should be very interesting
> indeed.

We'll see. My opinion of Far Cry was "terrific engine, too bad it was used
to build such a mediocre game." Especially when they built this
revolutionary outdoor engine and wasted at least a third of the gameplay on
tired indoor-based levels.

If they can combine the Far Cry technology with the gameplay and atmosphere
of a Deus Ex, that would be something worth looking forward to.
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 5:25:08 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 19:48:27 GMT, "SpammersDie" <xx@xx.xx> wrote:

>
>"John Lewis" <john.dsl@verizon.net> wrote in message
>news:4273d111.3523837@news.verizon.net...
>> On Sun, 01 May 2005 01:25:05 +1000, Richard Cavell
>> <richardcavell@mail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>I know I'm a bit late to be reviewing this since it came out a little
>>>while ago, but I'm only just getting around to it.
>>>
>> ..........specifics deleted............
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>My verdict: It had the potential to be revolutionary, but it turned out
>>>okay.
>>
>> So glad to have your professional opinion. Would be nice if you gave
>> it earlier. Might have prevented EA from signing a joint
>> development/distribution agreement with Crytek for a new series
>> of action-games. Could have saved them a lot of money...
>>
>> OTOH, maybe you missed the point entirely in your review...
>> Far Cry is an action game with a well-worn story-line wrapped around
>> brand-new single-player game-engine technology, with AI capable of
>> handling wide-open-space decisions pretty well. No longer
>> AI-constrained to corridor shooters ( overt as in Splinter Cell,
>> cleverly concealed as in Doom3 and HL2 ) or hopeless open-space
>> attempts with floundering AI as in Unreal 2. EA signed on for the
>> CryEngine, the Far Cry AI and the creativity of the Crytek team. This
>> was Crytek's first attempt at wrapping a complete game around their
>> revolutionary game-engine. The future should be very interesting
>> indeed.
>
>We'll see. My opinion of Far Cry was "terrific engine, too bad it was used
>to build such a mediocre game." Especially when they built this
>revolutionary outdoor engine and wasted at least a third of the gameplay on
>tired indoor-based levels.
>
>If they can combine the Far Cry technology with the gameplay and atmosphere
>of a Deus Ex, that would be something worth looking forward to.
>

Agreed 100%

Deus Ex 1, of course..............

John Lewis

>
>
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 1:47:01 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 20:55:58 +0200, Walter Mitty <mitticus@gmail.com>
wrote:


>Ridiculous assertions.
>
>You sound like your jaded with FPS period.

They were'nt ridiculous at all. They were spot on. I've stated in here
in the past that FarCry is overrated. It's OK but nothing special.
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 1:51:17 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 19:00:44 GMT, john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis)
wrote:


>
>So glad to have your professional opinion. Would be nice if you gave
>it earlier. Might have prevented EA from signing a joint
>development/distribution agreement with Crytek for a new series
>of action-games. Could have saved them a lot of money...
>
>OTOH, maybe you missed the point entirely in your review...
>Far Cry is an action game with a well-worn story-line wrapped around
>brand-new single-player game-engine technology, with AI capable of
>handling wide-open-space decisions pretty well. No longer
>AI-constrained to corridor shooters ( overt as in Splinter Cell,
>cleverly concealed as in Doom3 and HL2 ) or hopeless open-space
>attempts with floundering AI as in Unreal 2. EA signed on for the
>CryEngine, the Far Cry AI and the creativity of the Crytek team. This
>was Crytek's first attempt at wrapping a complete game around their
>revolutionary game-engine. The future should be very interesting
>indeed.
>
>John Lewis
>

The final verdict on the sequel remains to be seen. I agree with the
OP's review though. It was just ok and nothing special. Just because
it has more open terrain doesn't automatically make it a better game.
Just because I wear a mini dress doesn't mean I have nicer legs.
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 4:30:35 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Codex" <no@email.here> wrote in message
news:722a71htg0nu923nfcn845lvckj9ap488p@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 19:00:44 GMT, john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis)
> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>So glad to have your professional opinion. Would be nice if you gave
>>it earlier. Might have prevented EA from signing a joint
>>development/distribution agreement with Crytek for a new series
>>of action-games. Could have saved them a lot of money...
>>
>>OTOH, maybe you missed the point entirely in your review...
>>Far Cry is an action game with a well-worn story-line wrapped around
>>brand-new single-player game-engine technology, with AI capable of
>>handling wide-open-space decisions pretty well. No longer
>>AI-constrained to corridor shooters ( overt as in Splinter Cell,
>>cleverly concealed as in Doom3 and HL2 ) or hopeless open-space
>>attempts with floundering AI as in Unreal 2. EA signed on for the
>>CryEngine, the Far Cry AI and the creativity of the Crytek team. This
>>was Crytek's first attempt at wrapping a complete game around their
>>revolutionary game-engine. The future should be very interesting
>>indeed.
>>
>>John Lewis


I am playing Far Cry for the first time and have noticed several things that
remind of the game Chrome I played quite awhile back. I'm certain it's the
same lead character voice. Wonder if Crytek cut their teeth on Chrome?
May 1, 2005 8:51:49 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Richard Cavell" <richardcavell@mail.com> wrote in message
news:D 5079f$pfs$1@nnrp.waia.asn.au...
>I know I'm a bit late to be reviewing this since it came out a little while
>ago, but I'm only just getting around to it.
>
> 1. This is so *incredibly* derivative. I've seen it all before. Mad
> scientist conducts research operations on a secluded island involving
> aliens that eventually turn on the humans. He has a private army funded
> by his infinitely rich private corporation.

That's actually sort of the point... the setting, the music, the cheezy
voice acting, the sci-fi channel plot... it's all on purpose to give the the
look & feel of a straight-to-video 'B' movie or a cheap sci-fi channel
movie.
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 11:40:49 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Cleverly concealed" corridor shooter? Doom3 was more of a corridor shooter
than the original DooM! My god the original Doom had levels that were more
wide open than anything seen in Doom3 (one of the Hell levels in Doom had
several buildings spread out over an area larger than anything seen in
Doom3).

Now that I'm replaying Half Life 2, I'm really seeing your point about Half
Life 2 being nothing but a corridor shooter. The outdoors areas in Half Life
2 are nothing but wide unusually wide corridors w/a skybox. The beach levels
weren't even as good as Halos (you can't drive in the non-existent surf
because you die instantly). The lame AI in both Half Life 2 and Doom3
doesn't bear repeating here but I've just noticed that in Half Life 2 I can
snipe (HA!, with a 9mm pistol no less) from 200 yards and the Combine
soldiers just stand there and die. At least in Far Cry the AI isn't THAT
bad.

--
Remove nospam to email
"John Lewis" <john.dsl@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:4273d111.3523837@news.verizon.net...
> On Sun, 01 May 2005 01:25:05 +1000, Richard Cavell
> <richardcavell@mail.com> wrote:
>
> OTOH, maybe you missed the point entirely in your review...
> Far Cry is an action game with a well-worn story-line wrapped around
> brand-new single-player game-engine technology, with AI capable of
> handling wide-open-space decisions pretty well. No longer
> AI-constrained to corridor shooters ( overt as in Splinter Cell,
> cleverly concealed as in Doom3 and HL2 ) or hopeless open-space
> attempts with floundering AI as in Unreal 2. EA signed on for the
> CryEngine, the Far Cry AI and the creativity of the Crytek team. This
> was Crytek's first attempt at wrapping a complete game around their
> revolutionary game-engine. The future should be very interesting
> indeed.
>
> John Lewis
>
>
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 11:43:49 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Don't forget System Shock (the garden levels would be awesome w/the Far Cry
engine, don't know about everything else though).
--
Remove nospam to email
"SpammersDie" <xx@xx.xx> wrote in message
news:fiRce.675789$w62.163263@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
>
> If they can combine the Far Cry technology with the gameplay and
> atmosphere of a Deus Ex, that would be something worth looking forward to.
>
>
>
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 12:14:11 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Gsquared" <ggmediaNOT@myway.com> once tried to test me with:

> I am playing Far Cry for the first time and have noticed several
> things that remind of the game Chrome I played quite awhile back. I'm
> certain it's the same lead character voice. Wonder if Crytek cut
> their teeth on Chrome?

The Chrome website says the developer was Techland.

"Techland is one of the most influential leisure software publishing and
distribution companies in Poland. We have been on the market since 1991 and
have been developing our own software for five years now. Our most popular
games are Crime Cities, Extermination (Mission: Humanity), Pet Soccer, Pet
Racer, and the official game of the FIM, our Speedway Grand Prix series
based on the Chrome engine.

For two years we have been working on Chrome, a tactical FPS game."

--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 8:08:52 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

riku wrote:

> On Sun, 01 May 2005 01:25:05 +1000, Richard Cavell
> <richardcavell@mail.com> wrote:
>
> >3. There *are* some original concepts. For example, the jungle island
> >scenario at the start is an entirely novel setting for a game of this
> >type, and very well executed. It could almost be Hidden and Dangerous,
> >since the hunting/sniping element is strong. Why has it now turned into
> >Doom?
>
> If you play FarCry like Doom, you will not survive long. I didn't have
> to recon the environment closely before proceeding, or use lots of
> crawling, stealth tactics and sniping in Doom. Lots of that is needed
> in FarCry in order to survive, at least in the highest difficulty
> level I was playing.

Another point that should not be overlooked about the AI...supressive fire,
which I believe to be pretty revolutionary. You can play run-and-gun Doom
style(against mercs) if you have enough ammo, using bullets to basically lay
down a shield of lead to protect yourself while you maneuvre to get good
shots.
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 1:49:26 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

SpammersDie wrote:

> We'll see. My opinion of Far Cry was "terrific engine, too bad it was used
> to build such a mediocre game." Especially when they built this
> revolutionary outdoor engine and wasted at least a third of the gameplay on
> tired indoor-based levels.
>
> If they can combine the Far Cry technology with the gameplay and atmosphere
> of a Deus Ex, that would be something worth looking forward to.

I didn't mind the use of indoor levels, but that's because it needed a
mix of environments.

But if anyone wanted to take the Farcry engine, and work up a mod that
use DX 1's gameplay and atmosphere, I would _love_ to work on it. I like
the level editor, and a project like that'd would be worth learning some
serious programming for.
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 2:09:20 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Richard Cavell wrote:

> I know I'm a bit late to be reviewing this since it came out a little
> while ago, but I'm only just getting around to it.
>
> 1. This is so *incredibly* derivative. I've seen it all before. Mad
> scientist conducts research operations on a secluded island involving
> aliens that eventually turn on the humans. He has a private army funded
> by his infinitely rich private corporation. At one point a bad guy was
> being hauled up by one of the Half-Life Barnacles and gibbed. My *God*
> surely there are other scenarios from which to construct a first-person
> shooter? Deus Ex had it all.

This is one of those valid criticisms that, strangely, isn't of great
consequence. No, the game's story isn't terribly original or
"ground-breaking." But games with complex storylines are kind of rare;
games provide experiences, and any story they have is usually a
rationale for the experience. (Half-Life's story wasn't much more than a
rationale to have monsters zapping in around you.)

> 2. (In some parts) the textures, gameplay, and ideas are ripped
> straight from Quake/Doom. In fact, this could be Quake 4. I bet at one
> point I lose all my weapons after being knocked unconscious. I haven't
> got there yet, but I'll put money on it. The melee aliens that swipe me
> and take all my hit points in one hit... why would I consider this fun?
> I've done it all before.

It's in there. It was in _Half-Life_, too.

> 4. The binoculars and sniper weapons are very well done. A tad
> unrealistic (since sometimes enemies far away are clipped altogether
> from your view until you zoom in), but it works.

That's more of a glitch of the game engine. But as for "realism," you're
better off citing the binoculars zooming in on _sound_, and the whole
business with the tracking devices, neither of which is terribly
realistic. (I sort of wonder how the game could play if your binoculars
behaved like real binoculars-- no sound, no tracking reticles zooming in
on the mercenaries, and no blue dots telling you where to go.)

> 6. A lot of the 'puzzle' element of the game is as simple as this: You
> try the obvious route, and you get corraled into dying. So next time
> through, you take the non-obvious route, and a new path is revealed.
> Whenever it saves the game for you, you know you solved it.

That's not really a problem-- it's part of damn near every other game as
well. You're basically saying, "You keep trying different things until
the game autosaves, or the next level loads."
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 1:36:58 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Mon, 02 May 2005 10:09:20 -0400, Brian Siano <siano@mail.med.upenn.edu>
wrote:

>Richard Cavell wrote:
>

>
>> 4. The binoculars and sniper weapons are very well done. A tad
>> unrealistic (since sometimes enemies far away are clipped altogether
>> from your view until you zoom in), but it works.
>
>That's more of a glitch of the game engine. But as for "realism," you're
>better off citing the binoculars zooming in on _sound_,

http://www.google.ca/search?q=Directional+Microphone&bt...

Of course, the items listed on that page don't go to the ranges used in Far
Cry, but the technology exists for remote collection of sound.

It's best to consider the binoculars to be an updated version of those
microphones. While those binocs model don't look like they its designed to
zoom in on sound, it's a quick fix to change those binoculars to a
directional microphone.

> and the whole
>business with the tracking devices, neither of which is terribly
>realistic.

Tracking devices are plausable, as we are currently at that technology
level. I know that for sure because it's in use to help prevent animals
from getting lost - and my local government is giving discounts for pet
owners that get the chip implanted on their pet.

>(I sort of wonder how the game could play if your binoculars
>behaved like real binoculars-- no sound, no tracking reticles zooming in
>on the mercenaries, and no blue dots telling you where to go.)

Removing the blue dot could make the game next to impossible unless you had
some other form of reference. Operation Flashpoint did this once, where
Sam Nichalos got captured,

Other than that, towning down those binoculars could make the game rather
challenging - although it will make it more difficult to hear the mercenary
converstions...
!